To be more specific you can't avoid politics in discussions exclusively about sending money to funders of white terrorist networks. The game being made by an active white supremacist was the contentful part of the discussion. It's not like we were talking about how bastard swords shouldn't cost an exotic weapon feat and somebody started shouting about Rand Paul.
The people asking to "leave politics out of X" are universally pretty far right and it's obvious bullshit. It's not actually wanting to avoid politics it's about not liking when people attack the unacceptable political beliefs they hold. Lets be honest Gnome you're posting both here and on RPGsite about the exact same topic and your responses are pretty different. When lamb posted his nazi shit over there you jumped on the bandwagon, over here you're pretending you're a sensible concerned centrist trying the same tired "It's both sides" bullshit that the right thinks is some kind of smoke bomb that no one can see through.
This was a conflict, however small, with two sides. One nazi and one anti-nazi. When posting on the nazi side you chimed in with attacks of your own. When posting on the anti nazi side you did a bunch of concern trolling and defended the nazi side.
Your desires to support people sending money to active white supremacists "without it being political" are noted and discarded. It is political, your politics just happen to be fine with that sort of thing. We're telling you that sucks because it does, not because we don't see the finer points of your argument.
Gnome I've enjoyed discussing RPG's with you. We can do that more. You're a poster who's style of writing and criticisms of 5e are something I have a positive impression of. However even during an enjoyable discussion about Dungeons and Dragons if you defend nazi's that's not just gonna slide, and if in a discussion about nazi's you defend nazi's that's not just gonna slide. If you want to talk D&D then talk about that but this is a talk about nazi's and you're defending them so that's what this is gonna be about.
OSSR: ACKS Heroic Fantasy Handbook
Moderator: Moderators
So, when I went to origins many years ago talked with a guy who was running one of the events where participants took various roles pretending to be the upper levels of government for the U.S. and NATO allies and others where the soviets and Chinese. This was in middle 00s and was apparently based on the 1983 REFORGER war games which, due to the intent for the President and the joint chiefs to participate directly almost caused WWIII.SeekritLurker wrote:In a world where orcposting exists, the idea that elfgames can be without politics is the real fantasy.
Anyway, the guy had said he had particpated in the real REFORGER 83 as a captain of tank platoon and now worked for the state department. He talked about how he deals with grey areas and politics all the time during his job so when he plays D&D he uses basically a saturday morning cartoon level of politics and good and evil. He doesn't want a lot of grey and deep politics in his escapist fantasy so he just doesn't do that...
Refusal to engage in politics is a thing you can do - obviously, people do it. But this refusal itself is a political action, one that favors the status quo.
Whoever says they don't engage in politics has their own boundaries for what counts as "political," and that decision itself is political. Comfortable centrists want to define "political" as, "Only the things done by elected officials or election campaigns." Horrible people want to include, "Acknowledging that trans people exist," as political, specifically when they're suggesting that a forum should exclude political speech. And commies think, "How much of a say you have over how your job is run," is extremely political, but they're also the ones who go around saying everything is political.
Whoever says they don't engage in politics has their own boundaries for what counts as "political," and that decision itself is political. Comfortable centrists want to define "political" as, "Only the things done by elected officials or election campaigns." Horrible people want to include, "Acknowledging that trans people exist," as political, specifically when they're suggesting that a forum should exclude political speech. And commies think, "How much of a say you have over how your job is run," is extremely political, but they're also the ones who go around saying everything is political.
If you want your D&D game to exist in a world of stark black and white because the real world is just exhausting with how bad guys keep showing up on every side of a conflict, that's reasonable. Like, this is a world where in a massive, globe-spanning clash of nations, the side that rounded up all citizens of a certain race and imprisoned them on the basis of unfounded accusations of collaboration with the enemy was nevertheless unambiguously the good guys because the other side was doing that and then also murdering the prisoners en masse. That's super depressing. It's okay to not want that in your elf games.
All of which would be relevant if this were a thread about designing a campaign setting or an adventure path and someone were demanding it directly parallel current politics, but we're not, so it isn't. We're talking about a guy who exists in the real world who spends money in the real world to affect the real world, and whether or not you should give that guy more money to spend. "If you pay money for this product, you will be funding an actual terrorist network that kills people" is a perfectly reasonable thing to include in a consumer-facing commentary on a product, because that is some pretty fucking vital information for a consumer to know.
All of which would be relevant if this were a thread about designing a campaign setting or an adventure path and someone were demanding it directly parallel current politics, but we're not, so it isn't. We're talking about a guy who exists in the real world who spends money in the real world to affect the real world, and whether or not you should give that guy more money to spend. "If you pay money for this product, you will be funding an actual terrorist network that kills people" is a perfectly reasonable thing to include in a consumer-facing commentary on a product, because that is some pretty fucking vital information for a consumer to know.
-
DSMatticus
- King
- Posts: 5271
- Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:32 am
So, politicization came up over in a similar thread on MPSIMS, and I'm just going to carry over something I posted there because it's very relevant.
In a South Carolina poll, 38% of Donald Trump supporters in that state believe that the Confederacy should have won the civil war. If that is even remotely representative of the rest of the country, that means millions of Americans believe that the Confederacy was a just and righteous cause which should have emerged victorious.
And with that in mind - "it was just and righteous that the south lost because the emancipation of the African people is a clear moral good, and opposing it a clear moral wrong."
That is a political statement, obviously. In truth, all things are political statements. Most political statements are invisible to us, because they do not challenge our own politics, and so we do not even consider them political. It's not political, it's just "normal," right? No one here is going to say that women shouldn't be allowed on stage, but in Elizabethan England it was illegal for women to join acting troupes. Casting women in media is a political act that is so universally accepted that it is invisible to us, but it's not universally apolitical - it's merely apolitical to enough of us that no one raises a fuss. But my statement about the defeat of the south isn't even in the category of political statements which are invisible. That is a divisive and contentious political statement for millions of people today. If people from therpgsite are still following this thread, then I will almost certainly have offended some of them. "Slavery bad, fighting to preserve slavery also bad" is a statement that challenges their own politics of supporting the confederacy. And so I cannot tell any stories about the civil war without offending them or glorifying the confederacy (which would offend... anyone with any moral principles whatsoever, honestly).
It is practically impossible to be apolitical with any sufficiently complex subject matter. You're welcome to put that to the test and start naming stories you think are apolitical, if you wish. The truth is, whether they know it or not, when people say, "I want things to be apolitical," they are actually saying, "please stop rocking the boat/challenging the status quo." But "I support the status quo" is as much a political choice as any other. The material is not apolitical, it merely doesn't challenge your personal views - but other people will have different views which are challenged by the same material. It is not possible to be apolitical to every possible audience unless your game is... I believe someone offered Tetris as an example, once. Yes, if your game is about geometric shapes being affected by gravity, you just might have managed it.
In a South Carolina poll, 38% of Donald Trump supporters in that state believe that the Confederacy should have won the civil war. If that is even remotely representative of the rest of the country, that means millions of Americans believe that the Confederacy was a just and righteous cause which should have emerged victorious.
And with that in mind - "it was just and righteous that the south lost because the emancipation of the African people is a clear moral good, and opposing it a clear moral wrong."
That is a political statement, obviously. In truth, all things are political statements. Most political statements are invisible to us, because they do not challenge our own politics, and so we do not even consider them political. It's not political, it's just "normal," right? No one here is going to say that women shouldn't be allowed on stage, but in Elizabethan England it was illegal for women to join acting troupes. Casting women in media is a political act that is so universally accepted that it is invisible to us, but it's not universally apolitical - it's merely apolitical to enough of us that no one raises a fuss. But my statement about the defeat of the south isn't even in the category of political statements which are invisible. That is a divisive and contentious political statement for millions of people today. If people from therpgsite are still following this thread, then I will almost certainly have offended some of them. "Slavery bad, fighting to preserve slavery also bad" is a statement that challenges their own politics of supporting the confederacy. And so I cannot tell any stories about the civil war without offending them or glorifying the confederacy (which would offend... anyone with any moral principles whatsoever, honestly).
It is practically impossible to be apolitical with any sufficiently complex subject matter. You're welcome to put that to the test and start naming stories you think are apolitical, if you wish. The truth is, whether they know it or not, when people say, "I want things to be apolitical," they are actually saying, "please stop rocking the boat/challenging the status quo." But "I support the status quo" is as much a political choice as any other. The material is not apolitical, it merely doesn't challenge your personal views - but other people will have different views which are challenged by the same material. It is not possible to be apolitical to every possible audience unless your game is... I believe someone offered Tetris as an example, once. Yes, if your game is about geometric shapes being affected by gravity, you just might have managed it.
Last edited by DSMatticus on Sat Oct 19, 2019 10:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Like I was going to cuss Gnomey out but I seems like my reserves goodwill are nearly maxed out for some reason. So another more diplomatic post it is.
So imagine if you will you live in a small town with a game store. Now sadly Nazis hold a rally in your small town and people are hurt. After the dust settle during FNM or D&D night or whatever one of the patrons stands up and says that not only did the owner of the game store donate money to the Nazi's he helped organize their rally. When confronted with this the owner says that while he never intended anyone to be hurt and he personally abhors the Nazi's beliefs he did help them with their rally in the name of "preserving free speech." This does not satisfy most people and there is a mass walk out of the store. FNM or whatever is ruined for the forseeable future.
The question is not only "who are you going to hold responsible for "politicizing" D&D night or whatever?" (the owner who funded the Nazi's or the patron who blew the whistle on his funding of Nazi's) But also "in the aftermath of that event where are you going to be?" Are you going the to be with the people who walked out helping the find a new place for D&D night or whatever? Are you going to be with the people still in the game store and if so what are you going do about the guy now loudly saying the people who got hurt by the Nazis where crisis actors? Or are you just going to go home and sulk? No decision you make can restore the status quo that you were formerly comfortable with. That sucks I'll fully admit, none the less you have to make that decision and you personally seem to be deciding wrongly.
So imagine if you will you live in a small town with a game store. Now sadly Nazis hold a rally in your small town and people are hurt. After the dust settle during FNM or D&D night or whatever one of the patrons stands up and says that not only did the owner of the game store donate money to the Nazi's he helped organize their rally. When confronted with this the owner says that while he never intended anyone to be hurt and he personally abhors the Nazi's beliefs he did help them with their rally in the name of "preserving free speech." This does not satisfy most people and there is a mass walk out of the store. FNM or whatever is ruined for the forseeable future.
The question is not only "who are you going to hold responsible for "politicizing" D&D night or whatever?" (the owner who funded the Nazi's or the patron who blew the whistle on his funding of Nazi's) But also "in the aftermath of that event where are you going to be?" Are you going the to be with the people who walked out helping the find a new place for D&D night or whatever? Are you going to be with the people still in the game store and if so what are you going do about the guy now loudly saying the people who got hurt by the Nazis where crisis actors? Or are you just going to go home and sulk? No decision you make can restore the status quo that you were formerly comfortable with. That sucks I'll fully admit, none the less you have to make that decision and you personally seem to be deciding wrongly.
Last edited by Mistborn on Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ok, so let me be clear. I subscribe to the Indiana Jones philosophy on Nazis. Additionally, if I was DMing adventurer's league and a guy sat down with a "Pinochet did nothing wrong" T-shirt I would tell the organizer that either he leaves my table or I leave the event.
I personally hate the money as speech shit. In general I am willing to patronize a store whose ownership has personal politics I disagree with as long as they don't use their store to as an agent to advance those goals. Now, obviously being or supporting Nazis is different.
The politics within your elfgame, however, subject entirely to the decisions of the GM and players. Our good friends over at the theRPGsite have been spending a lot of words discussing a new 5e adventure that involves LGBT gnomes. Now, I cannot imagine a thing that honestly matters less. As written the intent is to be inclusive by the authors. That is good, but lets be clear, because this is a psuedo script for a game of the imagination this could be changed without even changing the characters names and probably 99% of players would never even notice. Further, how imaginary creatures use their imaginary junk will probably come up in less than 10% of games.
Clearly the poltics in an elfgame can be detached from who made the elfgame. Additionally, the politics of the game creator don't have to matter if they are not pushing them through their game. That said, their is a line for that as well and its a pretty bright line when it comes to eleminationist rhetoric.
I personally hate the money as speech shit. In general I am willing to patronize a store whose ownership has personal politics I disagree with as long as they don't use their store to as an agent to advance those goals. Now, obviously being or supporting Nazis is different.
The politics within your elfgame, however, subject entirely to the decisions of the GM and players. Our good friends over at the theRPGsite have been spending a lot of words discussing a new 5e adventure that involves LGBT gnomes. Now, I cannot imagine a thing that honestly matters less. As written the intent is to be inclusive by the authors. That is good, but lets be clear, because this is a psuedo script for a game of the imagination this could be changed without even changing the characters names and probably 99% of players would never even notice. Further, how imaginary creatures use their imaginary junk will probably come up in less than 10% of games.
Clearly the poltics in an elfgame can be detached from who made the elfgame. Additionally, the politics of the game creator don't have to matter if they are not pushing them through their game. That said, their is a line for that as well and its a pretty bright line when it comes to eleminationist rhetoric.