Why forgets so many writer to give also positive characteristics in Grey vs Grey?
What I think OP is asking is why in situations of morality where both sides are varying 'shades of grey' authors so often forget to add good traits to characters and instead make everyone assholes.
The answer is >>43467501.
Otherwise, the presentation as to what is 'grey' is wrong on the author's part- ie: he writes everyone as complete and utter assholes but portrays them as if they were midding-to-average people.
Even then, I'd argue the author's portrayal of average has little to do with what the author considers grey. It could just be a story about assholes, and the reader is just projecting.
Basically, unless there's some really explicit "this is good, this is bad" morality play stuff going down, there's no reason not to call it like it is, and assume the author is doing so as well.
>this is what Americlaps actually believe
You're only on the edges of most countries' radars, kid. No amount of MUH EXCEPSHUNALISM tears are going to change that.
I'd tell you to kill yourself but some trigger-happy mass shooting nut will probably have already done it for you by the time I've finished posting.
>Why forgets so many writer to give also positive characteristics in Grey vs Grey?
Europe used to be awesome.
A long ass time ago.
>edge of most countries radars
Maybe if you're from Nepal, but most of the rest of the planet at least has major trade ties, let alone the amount of nations that cooperate with the US military.
Not really sure how to quantify "cultural power".
There are countries that don't like us, sure, but no country ignores the US.
Regardless of how over inflated the american ego is, they're still likely the most significant nation at this point in time.
It's just part of their culture.