My question is regarding a specific case displaying Newton's third law.
In the diagram below, a man is shown exerting a force on the wall, which in turn causes an equal and opposite reaction force on the man. I understand that the reason the man doesn't fly backwards is due to friction with the ground - the man exerts an action force on the ground which causes a reaction force back on the man. Hence, there is a 0 net force acting on the man as the original reaction force from the wall cancels out the reaction force from the ground.
I am not confused about how objects move in general with respect to the third law since i understand that the action and reaction forces act on two separate objects. However, the logic behind this specific example would suggest that nothing on a plane would be able to move when a force is applied, since the friction from the ground would result in a 0 net force on the object.
For example, in the diagram shown below, a hand is exerting an action force on the brick. This in turn causes the brick to exert an action force on the floor which causes a reaction force on the brick. The action force on the brick and the reaction force on the brick exerted by the floor cancel each other out resulting in a 0 net force on the brick. Hence, the brick (or any other object on a plane like this) should not move and accelerate no matter how large a force is supplied.
However, we are clearly able to push objects like bricks across a surface like a table in real life. I don't understand how this could be achieved as my understanding tells me that you cannot ever overcome the frictional force of the floor.
The original YouTube video where i got my diagrams from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91QYouih4bQ