allorius

[allorius]

An overly elaborate comparison of Harley translations: The First World

[2nd World] [3rd World]

Note: Japanese is a very ambiguous and context dependent language, and this is written in very poetic Japanese which is EVEN MORE ambiguous. Two translations of the same line can be very different and still both equally valid.

Note 2: Literary translators have to consider style and effect, not just accuracy. Their work can sometimes be less accurate but that's in no way a criticism of their work from my part. I'm only evaluating these translations from the perspective of analysing the lore.

Note 3: I don't claim to be a fluent Japanese speaker, I'm just someone who's studied Japanese and engaged in Japanese media for a decently long time. I could make mistakes! Please correct me if you notice any!

The translations I compared are:

The official English translation by Stephen Paul (available on MangaPlus and the Shonen Jump app) [OFFICIAL]

LunaPienArt (a professional Japanese translator and native speaker who makes One Piece videos in English on YouTube on the channels LunaPienArt and Dawn & Dusk) [LUNA]

YUDE-RON (popular Japanese One Piece theorist, I don't actually know if the English subs are their own work but I assume so since there's no mention otherwise) [YUDE]

Library of Ohara (popular One Piece analyst) [OHARA]

TCB Scans (popular scanlation) [TCB]

OP Scans (the first scanlation that came out) [OPS]

Text summary [TS]

For reference, I also used:

The One Piece Podcast episode 854 (Harley analysis by Stephen Paul, the aforementioned official One Piece translator)

LunaPienArt's analysis video

Library of Ohara's "giga analysis" post

Formatting:

No formatting = no specific notes

Red [!] = incorrect or seriously misleading

Bold (?) = confusing or questionable

again, this is only for accuracy/preciseness, not overall translation quality which is subjective and allows for artistic licence

The First World:

地に炎あり

[OFFICIAL] Within the earth there was fire.

[LUNA] Fire razed across the land (?)

[YUDE] There was fire on the land.

[OHARA] Upon the Earth, there is flame.

[TCB] The earth is engulfed in flame, (?)

[OPS] There was fire upon the earth.

[TS] On Earth, there is flame.

This is a very simple sentence and it's structurally identical with the other opening lines for each chapter of the poem. They all start with "there was/is [X] in/on/within/upon [Y]". The preposition used in the original is に for all three opening lines. This can be translated differently depending on the situation.

The official is kind of the odd one out here, because it interprets it as "within" the earth, which if I understood it correctly, Stephen decided to do to match with the other opening lines. Despite being somewhat strange, this is a plausible translation! Especially if you consider the mural which could be interpreted as showing people bringing some form of metaphorical "fire" up from under the ground. The other translations went with the more intuitive option of assuming that the fire is on the surface. Neither are wrong! It could be either! Unfortunately it's hard to retain that ambiguity in English

The verb is in an ambiguous form which could mean "is" or "was", both would be correct; in this case "was" makes more sense.

Luna and TCB chose more poetic phrasing for the verb which evokes a much more specific vision of a great raging fire on the land. These aren't necessarily incorrect, but they do seem to make an assumption which is not in the original text. There's no indication that the flames are out of control.

The word for earth is 地, which is probably the most ambiguous possible word Oda could have chosen. It can mean earth, soil, ground, land, the Earth (the planet), a whole bunch of things. It's also the element of Earth in Godai (the Japanese five element system of Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Void) — as opposed to the element of Earth in Wuxing (the Chinese five element system of Fire, Water, Wood, Metal, Earth) which is 土

The other noun is 炎 which means "flame". It can be "flame" or "flames" because Japanese doesn't always distinguish plural and singular. Some translations chose to go with "fire" which is probably fine, but the specific word translates more literally as "flame". It's the same flame kanji as in "Flame Emperor". I think it's worth noting considering a particular word choice few lines later.

Conclusion: There [was/were] [a flame/flames] [upon/within] the [earth/land].

人は欲望に負け 禁断の太陽に触れた

[OFFICIAL] Mankind succumbed to greed and touched the forbidden sun.

[LUNA] People gave in to their desires / And reached for the forbidden sun

[YUDE] People succumbed to their greed and touched the forbidden sun.

[OHARA] People succumbed to desire. / As they seized the forbidden sun.

[TCB] and the hearts of men burn with desire. / They reach for the forbidden star. (?)

[OPS] Humanity succumbed to desire and touched the forbidden sun.

[TS] Mankind, overtaken by desire, touched upon the forbidden Sun.

The first word here is 人 which is another very ambiguous one. All of these different translations are correct. It could be one person or it could be multiple people or it could be the entire humankind. "Mankind" and "man" are fair translations because this is supposed to be an ancient text and those often use "man" as default (I could go on a tangent about how the word used to be more genderneutral before it came to mean male person specifically but let's not do that now...)

Every translation went with the assumption that this meant multiple people, which is fair. But it could also just be one person.

欲望 means "desire" but can also be translated "greed" or "lust".

TCB went with fancier wording, connecting this line to the previous one with the fire imagery. That's fine, but I do question their choice to replace "sun" with "star". The word is 禁断の太陽 which literally translates as "forbidden sun". There's nothing really ambiguous about this one. Yes, the sun is technically a star in terms of astronomy, but in a mythological text the distinction is important IMO.

触れた means "touched" or "came into contact with" or "to experience", or even "to touch on" (as in talk about) but I think that last one is probably not the case here. Some of these translations make it seem more purposeful than the Japanese wording, but I think that's justified considering the context of "desire".

Conclusion: [person/people/humankind] were overcome by [desire/greed] and touched the forbidden sun.

隷人は願い "太陽の神"は現れた

[OFFICIAL] The enslaved prayed, and the sun god appeared.

[LUNA] Slaves made a wish / And the sun god appeared

[YUDE] The enslaved prayed, and the Sun God appeared.

[OHARA] The slaves wished and prayed. / The Sun God appeared.

[TCB] From whispered prayers, the sun god rose, beckoned by the enslaved. (?)

[OPS] The slaves made a wish, and the "God of the Sun" appeared.

[TS] The Enslaved prayed. / "The Sun God" appeared.

願う can mean "to wish" or "to pray", either of them works. Ohara went with both lmao. TCB added the "whispered" for flair, I assume.

I think "the enslaved" is a good translation because it's the rare opportunity for English to be equally ambiguous as Japanese about the number of people. It could be one enslaved person or multiple. Probably multiple in this case though. "Slaves" is a perfectly fine translation too, but the word used in the original is not the typical Japanese word for slave but a more poetic expression.

現れる is "to appear".

The specific wording for the sun god is "太陽の神", including the western quotation marks. Some of the translations just kept the quotation marks but I think using something like italics would be more accurate because the point is emphasis. In English the quotation marks make it sound more dubious, but that isn't the implication in Japanese. Capitalising the phrase also works well. It actually literally translates as "God of the Sun" but it's the same term as has been used consistently for Nika, so translating it as Sun God makes sense.

(Sidenote: there could also be multiple sun gods. I think it's a fair assumption that there's only one, but in Japanese it's technically ambiguous.)

There is no "and" here in Japanese but it's implied (I can't be bothered to explain the grammar)

Conclusion: The enslaved [wished/prayed], and the Sun God(s) appeared.

地の神は怒り 業炎の蛇と共に 世界を死と闇で包んだ

[OFFICIAL] The earth god raged, and with its serpent of hellfire, shrouded the world in death and darkness. (?)

[LUNA] The god of the land grew furious / And alongside a serpent of raging fire / Wrapped the world in death and darkness

[YUDE] The Earth God became enraged, and with a serpent of blazing flames… / The world was engulfed in death and darkness.

[OHARA] The Earth God grew furious. / Along with the Hellflame Serpent, / it enveloped the world in death and darkness.

[TCB] The god of the land was enraged. / With a serpent of fire, / they cast the world into ruin. (?)

[OPS] But the god of the earth became enraged. / And, alongside the serpent of hell, enveloped the world in death and darkness.

[TS] The deity of Earth is enraged. /Together with the Serpent of Hell Flame, they engulfed the world with death and darkness.

The "earth" in "earth god" is the same word as in the first line of the poem, see above.

(For contrast: this is not the exact same wording as the other god of the earth (大地の神) mentioned in the Noland and Kalgara flashback by the Shandians. 大地 would be a bit more specific, I think? In Japanese dictionaries the definition seems to be "earth as opposed to the sky/heaven". My guess is that the distinction is that this word can't be used to just mean earth as in the material but as a larger entity. The earth god of the Shandians could still be the same divine figure as the earth god of the Harley, regardless of the slightly different name, but that's up to you to interpret.)

The format of the name for all these gods is the same as for the sun god, by the way.

業炎 is very interesting. 業火 means "hellfire" or basically any kind of literal or metaphorical fire that burns the sinners or whatever, something along those lines. It very much has religious connotations but not necessarily in the Christian sense (although that works too). It can also just mean a literal raging fire that's particularly fierce, just like you might call a particularly bad fire an inferno or hellfire in English too.

But here it's not written 業火 with the kanji for "fire" but 業炎 with the kanji for "flame". And this is why I figured I should specify that the first line also mentions flames. I don't know if this means anything? But I think it's worth pointing out just in case it does. 業炎 does seem to be a word but I couldn't find it in any dictionaries that I checked. Most of the results seem to be from some sorts of games, especially some mobile game called Puzzle & Dragons. I mean I think it just means the same thing as 業火, but the choice to use "flame" seems deliberate to me.

I don't know why the official translation chose to use "its" to imply that the serpent belongs to the earth god? I mean it might be the case, but the Japanese doesn't say so.

Oh, also technically there could be multiple serpents because once again the Japanese text doesn't specify number, but I think we all assumed that it's only one because we only see one in the mural. (Also technically there could be multiple earth gods too)

と共に means together with

包む means something like "to wrap up" or "to cover" or "to envelop" or "to engulf".

死と闇 means "death and darkness", very straightforward. TCB is the only exception to this with "ruin".

Conclusion: The earth god(s) raged, and together with the serpent(s) of hellflame, enveloped the world in death and darkness.

彼らはもう会えないのだ

[OFFICIAL] And they will never meet. (?)

[LUNA] They will never meet again.

[YUDE] They would never meet again.

[OHARA] Those men would be unable to meet again. [!]

[TCB] They would not meet again.

[OPS] They could never meet again.

[TS] They can't be met again.

For such a simple phrase, this sure gives us a headache, doesn't it. The thing is, most of these translations are fine in my opinion, it's just a matter of interpretation... except for one:

Ohara is just wrong in my opinion. Yes, 彼 ("he") is generally used for men and by extension so is the plural 彼ら ("they"), but Japanese is not that particular about the gender thing. What's more, this is a poem and using a more neutral expression like あの人達 would be clunky in this context. Usually 彼ら refers to men, but it really doesn't have to, and even less so in this context.

From what I understand, 彼 being specifically masculine is also a relatively new concept, due to influence from European languages. Some of the Japanese dictionaries I checked didn't even mention the gender association at all, because it's more of a connotation than an explicit meaning. Also in older forms of Japanese there was no gender distinction for this word, and this poem is written in (somewhat) old-fashioned Japanese.

I don't know why the official didn't include the "again" or any indication of it. It seems like the most likely interpretation. Technically I think it's possible to interpret this as "now it's too late for them to meet" which could potentially imply that they never met in the first place? So maybe the better phrasing would be "They can no longer meet"? Which could possibly be read both ways? idk

English is very particular about the would/could/will/etc. but I don't think Japanese cares about it all that much

Also the text summary version does sound strange but technically it's a possible reading.

The のだ is an emphatic expression that could maybe indicate unexpected information or a clarification or a revelation of some sort. I don't know if this is all that important to convey in English, though, since it's just a matter of tone. Also I'm not sure what it's supposed to express here exactly. Maybe just regret or sadness.

Conclusion: They [can/will/would/could] no longer meet*

(* or something like that idk

To be continued

[allorius]

WIZARD WRAPPED

You casted 1,039,627 spells this year

You pondered your orb for 985 hours

You targeted 109 spells at someone other than yourself - that’s in the top 6% of wizards!

You gained 5 familiars

Your favorite focus for spellcasting this year was a staff

Your cup size is H

Your most cast spell was Spontaneous Snack Generation and you used it 576 times this year.

Your most summoned object was Ketamine Ape at 69 summons

You trapped someone within an amulet for 10,000 years

You were unwittingly haunted by the evil skull twice

[allorius]

Sssso! Let me introduce my personal project <3

That's planned to be a long long story, not a short one. I'll post new pages every month~

[Chapter 1, Pages 1-5]

[my carrd] [support me on patreon] [my discord server]

[allorius]

Which one though?

guy at work has his icon on the internal gitlab set to one of the skills from Disco Elysium lmao

[allorius]

Oh and by the way the soldiers being investigated are accused of raping inmates in detention camps. Inmates may or may not be associated with Hamas

okay YO what the FUCK is happening in Israel right now

[allorius]

I would ask for an ability to kill anyone I want with my mind, to prevent death of anyone with my mind, and to...uh, fly or telekinesis I'm not sure

Getting three genie wishes would honestly be kind of fucked because you'd think "oh as long as I'm careful i can get what i want" but realistically you've just become the most powerful person in human history and you're pretty much morally obligated to use those wishes for the benefit of humanity but then that only broadens the scope of things that could potentially go wrong like you can wish for an end to capitalism and that might get interpreted as "okay wish granted here's feudalism again for everyone" so you've got to be really specific but then there's no way even the most knowledgeable person can know every possible specificity to create the ideal society in 1-3 wishes and the potential consequences are so risky maybe it's almost better to keep your wishes only applying to yourself so you don't put everyone in the world at risk but then if you manage to get your wishes to work out overall beneficial then you'll know you probably could have made the world better without screwing up so you are now personally responsible for not saving the world and basically are history's greatest criminal and if your wishes do backfire then you'll know you probably prevented the collapse of civilization but also your wishes still backfired so it's a lose/lose.

[allorius]

One piece theory. The true power of devil fruits (spoilers up to 1118 chapter)

So, let's get to some more crazy theories.

What do you see above is a Giraffe, obviously. When a person eats a giraffe fruit they are able to get abilities of giraffes.

Let's take a look at another fruit ability:

As you can see, using your head to shoot projectiles is an ability given by a pteranodon fruit.

Does it make sense to you? It doesn't to me, really.

The power of imagination

Usually, when we read One Piece we brush stuff like this off as Oda being a wacky funny guy, and One Piece is a wacky funny manga. And while it is possilbe, i think there is actually an in universe explanation for it.

In the newest chapter we see Bonney assuming Nika's form. A feat thought to only be available to Luffy, the actual owner of Nika fruit. Possible explanation is that its just an ability of her fruit to do anything.

But what if actually any fruit can give almost any power?

Think about it, how many times have we seen a fruit doing something that makes absolutely zero sense considering the assumed power of a fruit? Couple of cases above are just something that comes to my mind the first, I am sure any of us can think of dozens of examples without even trying.

Luffy and freedom of creativity

I vividly remember how Gear 2 didn't actually make sense, neither did Gear 3. Nowadays we have an obvious explanation of Luffy never actually being a rubber man, but rather being Nika.

This is possible, but i feel it might actually be a misdirection by Oda. The true power of Luffy, from the very start, was his imagination. That was separated him and that's why he is also capable of using the power of Nika the way we see it.

I think its not actually about Luffy or the Nika fruit at all. I think this logic is applicable to any fruit. Any fruit can do anything its user thinks this fruit can do. We have seen it time and again.

Which is unacceptable to anyone, who wishes to control the world.

Fruit classification is a government hoax

In comes a fruit classification and the official narrative of how fruits work.

We already seen many times how WG controls the narrative by spreading misinformation. I think here we might actually have another example. As long as fruit users think that their powers are narrow they are much less dangerous to the government. And together with WG fooling the population, so does Oda.

I think fruits are like this as well. We(and people in the One Piece world) believe fruit abilities to be simple and narrow. Rubber is a rubber, fire is fire, that's all. If they don't think they can do wild things with their fruits, they won't do wild things.

Logia, Zoan, Paramecia? The more you try to make sense of the separation, the less it makes sense. Zoans don't just transform people into animals, Logias dont just transform users into the element, Paramacias can do almost anything, we have just seen the example with Bonney.

The conclusion

I think here we see a clear end game for the world liberation. Luffy and the Revolutionaries cant just free the whole world themselves, people should understand first that they are free, that they are actually capable to do MORE with their fruits and their freedom. I think in the future we will see more fruits having Nika-like powers.

The final nail in the coffin of WG is going to be everyone embracing freedom and imagination. And then the world will be truly free and everyone will be able to be as creative as they are capable of.

This story was always about creativity at the end of the day.

[allorius]

Lady Tilley Arnold theory

spoilers alert I guess

The main point of my theory is: Lady Tilley Arnold was her own "deceased" husband.

I know I know, but listen to me, the Bridgerton's makers do everything on purpose, every little detail of the clothes, environment, decor etc. And I have a bunch of prooves for my theory.

I don't know if that's a trans situation or just her wanting to be in that particular social role, but let's go.

1. Ok, the thing I noticed the first. Her cleavage zone looks unsual for the show. Her dresses look a little bit different than everyone's else. Less showing. And even when the cleavage aloows to show some boobs, that part of the dress often seems to be a little bit empty (which contrasts with the usual Bridgerton "push-up the boobies as much as possible" style a lot). Like the dress looks like a right shape, but her chest looks flat.

2. Her room. It's dark colors. Green, brown. Do you know which rooms have the same color scheme in this show? Men's rooms. Anthony's cabinet, Colin's cabinet, Colin's bedroom, Lord Fetherington's cabinet and bedroom. Only the red curtains look a little bit too bright/a little bit off, like if someone added them without redecorating the whole room to just slightly change the mood.

3. "I was married. He died." she said. Not "My husband died" or "I'm a widow", but this interesting wording. Sounds a little bit odd and smooth to tell the truth not telling the truth. Like old me died, new me is here right now.

4. When Benedict meets her for the 2nd time, she's looking at the statue. Again, most things on this show are intentional and meaningful. And that scene took to long to be just random. She's looking at the statue, that looks like a Venus statue. And Venus is who? Feminity, all the woman things. If she was ment to be "not so feminine lady" that won't be a first thing to choose for her to stare at, u know. Then why is she looking at it? Because she's glad to be who she always felt she is. Just a suggetion. Or maybe it's connected to the Androgyny of Venus in some statues? Idk, I'm not a Greek mythology pro, but that seemed to be an interesting scene to me

5. "Well, then you have misjudged me. I am all for brute strength. In fact, I much prefer it to aimless talking" she says. Which is interesting too. And right after that their dance happens. And it feels to me that there happens a conversation without words between them. While they're dancing, at some point she takes the male role and leads the dance. Benedict looks condused at first, but accepts it and they dance like this. (all the females are to the right, all the males are to the left, except for them) Was it "an action" instead of "the words" to discuss something?

6. The music while they're dancing. I've seen some complains of the showrunners reusing the music from the season 2. People say like that was the family moment etc. etc. But I rewatched that scene from the 2nd season (during the Bridgerton+Shama ball when no one came and they danced with each other) and it was not about the family. It was about the harmony, the harmony with yourself and being whoever you feels right to be without looking at what is and what is not appropriate for the sosciety. Which suits Lady Tilley and Benedict's dance if my theory is correct pretty nicely.

7. During their making out scene in her bed, her chest is covered with the cloth. Bridgerton show is usually not too shy to show nudity and if they need to not show female body, they prefer to use pretty underwear, but not such trick as cloth. Interesting, that in a promo for the 2nd part of season 3 she's in the bed wearing the shirt. Which is again not too Bridgerton-y or feminine.

8. While in her bed, Benedict is on the righ side of the bed and she is on the left one. I was rewatching the older season and noticed that every time they show the spouses' bed there's the husband who's on the left side of the bed (Violet Bridgerton, Mondrich, Bassets, Kate+Anthony). Why? Because that's originally her part of the bed since you know... my theory.

9. "You're MY solicitor" she says to a solicitor when Benedict visits her. Usually solicitor works with male only. In the Queen Charlotte spin-off show Lady Danbury even says that solicitor would probably refuse to talk to her, so she decided not to sign her name saying "Better he think I'm an impolite man". And you know what? At the same time there's a person who looks at the inheritance documents and search for the frauds. What if he has questions to her "husbans"'s will papers and now her solicitor has to provide her some better papers to convince the inspector. "I shall retern with things in order" he replies. She also asks Benedict if he came to "overcharge her as well", so she either has a lack of money or she has to pay her solicitor an overcharged sum. What if it's the silence fee?

10. Well, and their first interaction with Benedict was "My apologies, I thought you were a... - A man?". And that's her first line ever in the show is. You may say "C'mon, teal, she's just a lady with male interests", BUT! the only scene that points at it is this one. She's pretty feminine all the other times and everyone of the ton talks to her like she's a lady. No shade. No judjment (like when they speak about Eloise during previous seasons or Anthony joking on Kate being able to shoot). If that was the point there would be more than one moment/line pointing at that.

I hope you enjoyed my little theory. Anyway, the 2nd part of the season is just in a week from now and we'll find out if I'm right or wrong UwU

Thank you for your attention~

[allorius]

The True dream of Luffy [big spoilers up to the Egghead arc]

There were many theories about what the Luffy's real dream is. And i know that my idea isnt actually unique, since i've seen other people mention it on reddit before. But I think with time I forget the best case yet for it, based on plot, character of Luffy and thematic significance. So, let's get to it.

There will be spoilers up to the latest chapters.

The dream

In the manga we have not been yet shown what Luffy's dream is (chapter 1060). The only thing that we were shown are reactions of the Straw Hat pirates. Those are:

Zoro, Jimbe and Nami: surprisied and worried

Brook, Franky and Sanji: laughing and amazed

Chopper: just amazed

Robin: misteriously thinking about something, probably drawing some historical parallels in her head

On the next page Jimbe and Nami aren't as worried anymore and we see Franky saying:"You need to be a pirate king to make it possible".

Another possible theory is going to the Moon but while I think Moon is going to be important, the Egghead arc mostly disproves this idea. I think so because if going to the Moon was that important to Luffy he would have asked the world greatest scientist about it.

So what is it actually? The idea needs to be something a child ideolising Roger and Shanks could come up with and also something you NEED to be a pirate king to acomplish.

Luffy wants everyone to be a pirate.

Let me explain why it makes a perfect sense.

Real significance of the pirate king

To get into it, we need to first understand what Luffy thinks the pirate king is, and what we saw pirate king to mean in the story so far.

At the very first page we see the following:

I think this is the ultimate proclamation of what The Pirate king is in the story. And this is what it also likely means to Luffy. Notice that we never actually see Roger rule anything, or enjoy his wealth, or to control anything much, really. But we see him inspire others to be pirates by declaring that he left everything in that place.

Since we know that Luffy doesn't actually care about Wealth, Fame and Power. He does not want to rule anyone. He wants to be the freest man in the world. But we also see time and again, that while Luffy is seeking freedom for himself, what he also does time and again, is inspire others to fight for their own liberation. He is "a warrior of liberation" but he doesn't actually free people all on his own. He actually helps each and every one of them discover their own self worth and to fight for themselves together with Luffy. He ispires other to also seek freedom. To be pirates(so far mostly metaforically).

Pirate King is the one who inspires others to also be pirates, to also be free.

Thematic sense and Doflamingo

This idea also makes sense thematically. Bear with me here for a moment, but I think there is a good reason why Doflamingo wasn't killed and why we still constantly see him in the manga even though he can't actually do anything physically. The reason here is that Luffy never actually defeated Doflamingo. Sure, he beat Doffy up, but Doffy never changed his ways and he still holds his ideology. Which is: "Justice always wins, because victors decide what justice is". Essentially, Doffy believes that whoever wins the great war will become a new ruler on the Empty Throne and declaring all his previous opponents vile pirates.

The only way to actually defeat Doflamingo once and for all, is to prove to him that nobody is going to ever sit on that throne again, and nobody is ever going to rule over others in a tyrannical manner. How could this be achieved? If nobody rules anyone at all. If its not possible, if every single person is a pirate forging their own path.

The clash of ideas and revolutionaries

Another thematic clash for which we don't yet know a real meaning is the fact that the revolutionary army and pirates are two different things, with both opposing the world government differently.

I think, there is a good reason why we don't know much about the figure of Dragon and what his plans actually are. And we also don't know what Oda is planning to do with this faction. We have to notice that Luffy didn't ever actually directly ally with the Army, besides some parts with Sabo, where it was more about brotherhood for Luffy, than anything related to the revolution. Why so?

I believe that's because Luffy as a pirate king and Dragon as a leader of revolutionaries don't actually have the same ultimate goal. Yes, both of them want to destroy the world government, but what is going to happen afterwards? Here there must exist a difference, something that might potentially even create a conflict between Luffy and his father.

If Luffy wants everyone to be a pirate, to be free and to decide everything by themselves, Dragon might want to create a more fair, just society, as opposed to World Goverment's regime of oppression. This is not good enough. As noted in the previous part, it would just continue a cycle of winners writing history and slowly descending into the oppressive regime.

The only solution is the Pirate's King way. Everyone being a pirate, everyone setting to sea...

The great flood

In the latest chapters we found out that the world is going to sink. Its important to mention that Vegapunk tends to speak like a scientist. He usually speaks in theories and probabilities. There is no doubt in him when he says that the world is going to drown. Many people already said that this is unavoidable, and that this will happen for one reason or another.

Obviously, people are not going to just die and drown because of it, they will need to be saved and they will need to live somehow even without their old homes. It might happen that other islands will appear instead, but i think it makes better sense thematically, for everyone to just move to live on ships or mobile floatins islands like Baratie or Water 7 or even Thriller Bark.

And who lives on ships? Why, pirates of course.

The conclusion

I am not the best theorist out there, and I also never even reread One Piece, so I am not going to break down every single important panel and page here, since i don't really remember where to find them and such. But I hope that i made a compelling point here.

Thank you everyone for reading.