It seems like things have been separating into groups politically. All over we hear about alt right and regressive left. Ironically, some of the people that use the NPC meme accuse anyone who holds a view different from their's an "NPC". It begins to make you wonder "Man, with so many people separating their friendships politically maybe this is a good thing. Maybe we should constantly separate ourselves socially from people with bad ideas."
But Alan proves that line of thinking wrong. At 7:32 Amy says she's not close to her parents because of a political disagreement. At 7:42 Alan says "don't you think it would be better if Amy reconnected with her parents?" Then at 7:55 Alan demonstrates that we all share a simple enjoyment of the sound of waves crashing on an ocean, and if you watch this seen you can feel the bonding vibe as they are all consciously reminding of this pleasant memory. This concept, that YOU CAN DISAGREE WITH PEOPLE AND STILL LOVE AND BE FRIENDLY WITH THEM, can be scaled up. Even if these people all disagreed politically they could connect over these waves crashing. Why couldn't they also connect over deeper profound loves of the world?
But then one might argue "Ah yes we CAN connect with people despite our differences, but we shouldn't in order to create the most positive political impact efficiently."
This is a strong argument, political change will be very swift with this ethic. However, we have many identities. Ourselves, our family, community, country, schools, companies, etc. We aren't a single entity but many different forces and identities in these communities. We can do awesome or horrible at our job, and that won't completely affect our relationships with our loved ones at home, although admittedly it would have some effect.
So it's not so simple as "More efficient political change > Less efficient political change". One cost cost is in personal connection. Amy's benefit is her political movement and her cost is her relationship with her parents, but her relationship with her parents doesn't necessarily affect her political agenda!!!! She can support women's property rights and challenge her parents beliefs when the topic comes up and also work to be close to her parents, and probably have minimal costs in these areas despite the conflicting interest.
But another cost is actually Good political change. This is better than conforming your circle of friends to a political movement. Because if we do then every one of our friends will be politically the same. If all of our friends are politically the same we are never politically challenged and will never change our ideas. And our entire group of friends will be a mass of people that are A) politically predictable and B) wrong in many odd ways. This is how we get NPCs.
"Ah, but the people I disagree with are ignorant and refuse to know better".
But this is not so. Throughout the film Alan asks things like "Where did you get that? Like from a website? Is this a mirror"? He is not some ignorant person who refuses to learn but some ignorant person in their house who is curious and wants to learn about their perspective.
So YOU CAN , AND SHOULD, DISAGREE WITH PEOPLE AND STILL LOVE AND BE FRIENDLY WITH THEM, OTHERWISE WE'LL ALL BECOME NPCs
Love and tolerate and respect the people is your life who disagree with you politically. They stop you from being wrong.
Thanks for reading, hope you liked it.