what are you talking about lmao. it literally talks about how their ancestors were enslaved by the western nation. the eastern nation is not evil, but what they are doing is bad. revenge on a country and killing many of their people because of something their ancestors did is wrong. its amazing that it doesnt compute that slavery=bad, just as well as attempted genocide=bad.
Ok, your comment led me to reread the chapter and after doing that, I still stand by my point. It might be good for you to reread it as well after reading mine.
Yes, they were escaped slaves BUT they did not seek revenge. They were prospering after escaping to the land no one wanted.
Because they were prospering, other countries started to see them as a threat and attempted to slaughter/get rid of them. Kanakta decided to attack these countries first, in order to protect their own land/lives. It is portrayed in the chapter that this turned Kanakta evil, as you could say.
This implication is especially prevalent in the following passage, which I'll split up into three parts.
1. "With the oil from the land and wealth it had acquired from other nations, Kanakta became even stronger."
2. "Kanaka got its first taste of invasion,"
3. "and the people began to desire Atlanta"
This passage clearly explains that they did not start attacking other nations for revenge, but out of their own greed, a common characterization for "evil" characters/nations. They chose to plunder/invade instead of trade.
part 1 explains the reason why they would want to do this. They gain wealth, their greed. part 2 is a word choice that is usually used to explain the awakening of villains and is used as such here. Other examples would be, for a murderer, "and they got their first taste of blood." Part 3 explains their next target for their greed.
This chapter clearly is attempting to portray Kankta as villains/evil. This is not acceptable because of where the author/artist most likely drew their influence from for both Atlanta and Kanakta.
I don't come on here to be negative, I don't think anyone does. I'm not trying to find things that are problematic either, but I will point stuff out if it's wrong. Since you saw my comments, you probably also saw the timestamps and how I rarely comment on anything at all. Because of that, I'm not sure why you framed it as if I'm only ever coming on here to cause problems/to call stuff problematic. Can you explain your reasoning?
I am not middle-eastern. I am poc though.
If you want to give your opinion on this, please do. I don't want to speak over/for other minorites. If this comment made you feel like I was, I'm so sorry, let me know what I can do differently.
as much as I love this manhwa, that last chapter did not sit right with me.
Once again, the country with western influence is put in a good light but one with middle eastern influence is portrayed as evil. That's not ok.