Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It’s not the game, or its background.

Whilst thankfully I never had to deal with such things directly, in my time as a till monkey it wasn’t uncommon to see older gamers be an influence on the younger ones.

That is the core issue. Young folk are impressionable. And that can be a truly wonderful thing. As I’ve said before, when you see a young geek, probably picked on at school, find their tribe and start to come out of their shell, it’s a great thing. To see social skills rapidly develop and happier, more rounded individual emerge is priceless.

But. That is dependant on those being the influence being a good influence. Politics entirely aside, stuff like demonstrating good manners, your pleases and thank yous. Being a good sport, discussing rather than arguing. Being polite and kind. Hell, even just being clean. That’s all categorically Good Influence.

Sadly, there are those out there of less wholesome intent, who might see impressionable young minds and take liberties.

That’s not something unique to wargaming or Games Workshop either. As Skunk Anasie wrote “you rope ‘em in young”. But it is something we as a society need to be aware of, and vigilant toward, regardless of the forum in which it occurs.

If you think people that boycotted hogwarts legacy were "far left" then I'd say your country is pretty far right as a baseline already .
And horseshoe theory fails everyday seeing how conservatives and Liberals copy neofascist politics every day right now in europe, neofascism is radicalized conservatism, there's nothing that connects it to left (that is socialist, communist or anarchist) views.

The horseshoe theory has less to do with politics itself and more that people that are highly radicalized are likely to become highly hateful, and hateful people change their political beliefs on a dime in the name of keep hating something.

And also the political "left-right" spectrum is a massive oversimplification of a multi-dimensional political space best exemplified by people believing communists and anarchists are both far left and thus the same.

Regardless of how GW presents the 40K setting***, it will always attract far-right extremists because Humanity, as a species, has always been fascinated by evil and by its "aesthetics". And some humans will look at it and say "This is what I want !". There's tons of examples and books about this subject : people are fascinated by true crime stories, by serial killers, by past dictators, by conquerors who were reviled by everyone during their lifetime.

One good example to this day is Roman von Ungern-Sternberg aka "The Mad Baron". The Soviet Union used him as propaganda (you didn't even need to lie about him because he was proud of his actions) and Hitler was fascinated by this man. He was an utterly insane lunatic even back then, during the Russian Civil War and the Chinese Warlords era but frankly, his story is indeed fascinating. There's novels about him (some even were written by far-right authors in the 70s or 80s), comics, songs, history books even though he achieved nothing. The vast majority are interested in this character in order to criticize him. But nonetheless he retains an undeniable power of seduction.

That reminds me a psychology book (I didn't read it) titled "Bad men do what good men dream".

*** Though I do agree that GW tries to downplay the evilness of the Imperium in order to attract a wider audience. However GW is smart enough to not retcon it. Instead, it focuses on other in-universe topics such as the threat of Chaos, the big bad wars, etc. Topics which allow a more superficial reading of the setting.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
If you think people that boycotted hogwarts legacy were "far left" then I'd say your country is pretty far right as a baseline already .
And horseshoe theory fails everyday seeing how conservatives and Liberals copy neofascist politics every day right now in europe, neofascism is radicalized conservatism, there's nothing that connects it to left (that is socialist, communist or anarchist) views.

So, quoting this, but also trying to bend it back to 40k.

Globalization is a leftist concept, as is human rights. In the real world, working together with other nations is the medicine for fascism. People forget that the World Trade Organisation, the World Health Organisation and our modern integrated supply chains were initially created in the post-war era, and while each organisation had its own "purpose," to some extent ALL of these organisations were also designed to promote peace by creating connections between nations which disincentivize hostility.

And for the 40k piece, it is the complete lack of peaceful solutions, mutual support and benefit or interdependence that defines 40k's fascism for me. Again, Artemis shooting Eldrad for no other reason than "he's an alien" WHILE Eldrad was actively involved in a ritual that literally could have ended Slaanesh is the perfect example of what I personally see as 40k's fascism... And I do not believe this was celebrated as "We did it because we had to" - I think it was done to highlight the problematic nature of the IoM.

I think I work with a different definition of left than a lot of people here.
I would not say Globalisation for example is inherently a left wing thing. It's a bit blurry but I see left wing politics as being about wealth redistribution and having more of a role for the state in society.

I think social stuff gets mixed in with it, but I don't see liberal vs authoritarian as being connected to right or left particularly. You can have liberal leftists and liberal rightists, and authoritarians of both flavours. Being a left wing social conservative is totally possible, as is being a right wing social liberal.

Not really relevant to the thread, just makes it hard for me to follow what people mean sometimes.

 Da Boss wrote:
I just feel this line of discussion is really similar to the "videogames make children violent!" arguments we all heard back in the day.

This echoes my thoughts as well.

Selfcontrol wrote:
Regardless of how GW presents the 40K setting***, it will always attract far-right extremists because Humanity, as a species, has always been fascinated by evil and by its "aesthetics".

Spoiler:

And some humans will look at it and say "This is what I want !". There's tons of examples and books about this subject : people are fascinated by true crime stories, by serial killers, by past dictators, by conquerors who were reviled by everyone during their lifetime.

One good example to this day is Roman von Ungern-Sternberg aka "The Mad Baron". The Soviet Union used him as propaganda (you didn't even need to lie about him because he was proud of his actions) and Hitler was fascinated by this man. He was an utterly insane lunatic even back then, during the Russian Civil War and the Chinese Warlords era but frankly, his story is indeed fascinating. There's novels about him (some even were written by far-right authors in the 70s or 80s), comics, songs, history books even though he achieved nothing. The vast majority are interested in this character in order to criticize him. But nonetheless he retains an undeniable power of seduction.

That reminds me a psychology book (I didn't read it) titled "Bad men do what good men dream".

*** Though I do agree that GW tries to downplay the evilness of the Imperium in order to attract a wider audience. However GW is smart enough to not retcon it. Instead, it focuses on other in-universe topics such as the threat of Chaos, the big bad wars, etc. Topics which allow a more superficial reading of the setting.

This makes me think of all the folks cosplaying as storm troopers and Darth Vader. But everybody is fine with that. Even if they're a bunch of oppressive and murderous SOBs.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
I just feel this line of discussion is really similar to the "videogames make children violent!" arguments we all heard back in the day.

This echoes my thoughts as well.

Selfcontrol wrote:
Regardless of how GW presents the 40K setting***, it will always attract far-right extremists because Humanity, as a species, has always been fascinated by evil and by its "aesthetics".

Spoiler:

And some humans will look at it and say "This is what I want !". There's tons of examples and books about this subject : people are fascinated by true crime stories, by serial killers, by past dictators, by conquerors who were reviled by everyone during their lifetime.

One good example to this day is Roman von Ungern-Sternberg aka "The Mad Baron". The Soviet Union used him as propaganda (you didn't even need to lie about him because he was proud of his actions) and Hitler was fascinated by this man. He was an utterly insane lunatic even back then, during the Russian Civil War and the Chinese Warlords era but frankly, his story is indeed fascinating. There's novels about him (some even were written by far-right authors in the 70s or 80s), comics, songs, history books even though he achieved nothing. The vast majority are interested in this character in order to criticize him. But nonetheless he retains an undeniable power of seduction.

That reminds me a psychology book (I didn't read it) titled "Bad men do what good men dream".

*** Though I do agree that GW tries to downplay the evilness of the Imperium in order to attract a wider audience. However GW is smart enough to not retcon it. Instead, it focuses on other in-universe topics such as the threat of Chaos, the big bad wars, etc. Topics which allow a more superficial reading of the setting.

This makes me think of all the folks cosplaying as storm troopers and Darth Vader. But everybody is fine with that. Even if they're a bunch of oppressive and murderous SOBs.

The issue is one of false equivalence. The idea of promoting violence is one of direct action - the implication that it will make someone go out and kill or hurt people. That is not the same thing as normalising exclusionary ideologies because the latter is passive, internal and long festering. There is 0 effort for someone to take up intolerant ideologies, there is a lot more effort in someone going out and hurting people.

We have plenty of evidence that representation in society works for the marginalised. That is not a fringe idea. Because it's normalising the other to people who don't understand it. It not only makes the marginalised feel better to see representation, it also makes the majority less uncomfortable with them. It's a gradual thing, but it's a practical way to effect ideological change.

However, the normalisation of intolerance is exactly how certain historical ideologies rose up. They gave permission to believe these things, which if left unchecked spirals upwards into permission to do violence, which is where you get things like Kristallnacht.

Ironically, normalising intolerant ideology is a much surer way to lead to actual violent behaviour, than just flat out telling people they get to be violent. Most people need some internal logic to support their actions, they don't just get up and do something out of character. That's why social shift, normalisation of ideology etc is gradual, and you don't see the consequence until you're far enough along that you get total social structural change.

An appropriately 40k analogy is the fall of the eldar.

 PenitentJake wrote:
Again, Artemis shooting Eldrad for no other reason than "he's an alien" WHILE Eldrad was actively involved in a ritual that literally could have ended Slaanesh is the perfect example of what I personally see as 40k's fascism...

Eldrad had also orchestrated the invasion of an Imperial world... (...and was in the process of bringing about a genocide of Craftworld Eldar)
Artemis' reason for attacking Eldrad's force wasn't just because he wanted to kill some peaceful aliens with pure motives because fascism.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 PenitentJake wrote:
Again, Artemis shooting Eldrad for no other reason than "he's an alien" WHILE Eldrad was actively involved in a ritual that literally could have ended Slaanesh is the perfect example of what I personally see as 40k's fascism...

Eldrad had also orchestrated the invasion of an Imperial world... (...and was in the process of bringing about a genocide of Craftworld Eldar)
Artemis' reason for attacking Eldrad's force wasn't just because he wanted to kill some peaceful aliens with pure motives because fascism.

No, but the quote attributed to him certainly suggests as much....


Do not ask, ‘Why kill the alien?’ rather ask, ‘Why not?’” - Battle Brother Artemis, Deathwatch.

If that's the case Hellebore, do you think being an Eldar player makes you feel contempt for other humans and value their lives less?
Does playing Dark Eldar make you more likely to want to engage in torture?
Does playing Orks mean you'll think violence is fun?
Does playing Tyranids mean you see everyone as biomass?

Or is it specifically that the Imperium is the human faction that makes it likely to cause a social shift by normalising violent political ideas?

 Da Boss wrote:
If people have far right views, I don't think Warhammer is going to convince them one way or another. They might use the rhetoric in a jokey way to downplay their ideas, but people generally know the difference between fantasy and reality. I think only severely ill or developmentally disabled people would actually be radicalized by a tabletop wargame, and I'm not sure those people would be less likely to be radicalised if the game made the satire more overt.

"people generally know the difference between fantasy and reality" - Westboro Baptist Church, the Mormons, and Scientology have entered the Chat. Granted and argument could be made for these folks being "severely disabled" emotionally or in their ability to construe facts, but no.

The reason threads like this and the FSM debates go on and on and on, is because, clearly, a too large portion of the world thinks that the Imperium on Man, a made up construct of lore in a board game, is an HONESTLY good idea. They also wear badges of Rhodesia and draw incendiary markings on their tanks and whatnot, but I digress. Wizards first rule: People are stupid. They will sooner believe a lie, if it is convenient, rather than a difficult and painful truth. It wholly applies here.

But do you think those people ALREADY believed that stuff, and they like the Imperium because it seems to agree with them, or that being into 40K and the Imperium actually caused them to go off the deep end?

Because I'd say the group of people you're talking about in the former group vastly outweighs the latter group.

Your three chosen groups are very America centric, which is fine because you're an American, but I don't think it really scans or interfaces well with 40K which was developed by british guys in the 80s.

I did also say "Generally", and I'd say people mostly make an exception for religious belief. Otherwise we'd include everyone who believes in a higher power in your list, not just those who you've singled out.

I think the culture war stuff when it comes to warhammer is mostly a grift from people who want content on both sides now. The far right warhammer fan was kinda a thing 10 years ago but the community and the company have told them they aren't welcome now and the only places I see this discourse really is click bait. Your average warhammer "hobbyist" seems far likely to be progressive than not, which is good! Anyway this is prime thread locking discourse.

I think that when companies become overapologetic and majority-pleasing humor/satire is the first thing that is killed.

Good thing that when it comes to the miniature franchise.. it is entirely player driven.. Now I say that as someone who doesn't read any lore etc but writes his own.. and let's face it.. when you want satire.. kitbash some orks.

that's my two cents.

Dai wrote:
I think the culture war stuff when it comes to warhammer is mostly a grift from people who want content on both sides now. The far right warhammer fan was kinda a thing 10 years ago but the community and the company have told them they aren't welcome now and the only places I see this discourse really is click bait. Your average warhammer "hobbyist" seems far likely to be progressive than not, which is good! Anyway this is prime thread locking discourse.

I don't really get how people could possibly think that there ever was a so called far right warhammer fan base, as if politically invested people waste their time with a hobby-community.. so called nazi-orks etc .. cannot have been anything else but a form of edgy humor like any other. Heck I've personally been contemplating making jewish looking chaos dwarves, and I've been raised jewish. (sue me)
People may be afraid of mass backlash these days on the online-domain perhaps, I don't have that fear as I keep my digital life to such a minimum that it is hardly there (no socials, no smartphone, not even internet at home) so by that personal-experience I would say that that is the biggest source of satire-block; fear to be branded an extremist simply for a jest either misunderstood or made into a political vehicle, social vehicle or grudge vehicle to score points with.

edit: also I find it odd when people try to reflect their personal life or political ideas (again as a vehicle) into a hobby to begin with, I just cannot imagine it.. maybe it exists.. sure.. but if it does I cannot take it seriously.. it is satirical to begin with to me when that is being done..
Isn't fiction meant as an escape from the bleak serious and condemning reality?

Personally like to paint dwarves, but also nurgle and elves.. what does that make me.. a cavedwelling well poisoner with a superiority complex?

Dai wrote:
Anyway this is prime thread locking discourse.

As interesting as this line of conversation is, I agree. The mods have been quite permissive for politics directly infringing on the hobby space of late, but we probably shouldn't push it.

As it is, no one is going to be able to give a convincing explanation of their position on the current debate about the impact of media on individuals with how much we have to skirt around the politics, so it seems a bit pointless. That is a related but different debate as to whether 40k is still satire (although I grant that the logical next step in such a discussion is "does it matter if it isn't anymore?" which is where we are at).

It's a bit ironic that most people fear mongering about 40k being an gateway to the alt-right in this thread are basically following the same moral panic of the 80's when people claimed that DnD promoted Satanism and witchcraft which led to suicides/murder. Truly, if people do not know history they are doomed to repeat it.

 Haighus wrote:

Dai wrote:
Anyway this is prime thread locking discourse.

As interesting as this line of conversation is, I agree. The mods have been quite permissive for politics directly infringing on the hobby space of late, but we probably shouldn't push it.

You can also just not read the thread if it offends in some way..

 Da Boss wrote:


Or is it specifically that the Imperium is the human faction that makes it likely to cause a social shift by normalising violent political ideas?

Imho the imperium is textbook transhumanist, not human.

 Leopold Helveine wrote:

 Haighus wrote:

Dai wrote:
Anyway this is prime thread locking discourse.

As interesting as this line of conversation is, I agree. The mods have been quite permissive for politics directly infringing on the hobby space of late, but we probably shouldn't push it.

You can also just not read the thread if it offends in some way..

I mean what I've noticed is that usually one side tends to completely dumpster a thread in reports for mods to lock the thread or delete comments the moment the public opinion in the thread seems to push away from their idea of what is correct, but we'll see if we can continue a civil conversation or not.

 Grimskul wrote:


I mean what I've noticed is that usually one side tends to completely dumpster a thread in reports for mods to lock the thread or delete comments the moment the public opinion in the thread seems to push away from their idea of what is correct, but we'll see if we can continue a civil conversation or not.

Noticed that too everywhere on the internet incrementally since about 2015 or so, but worry not soon we will have AI mods that just autoblock messages like on discord.
Noone will have to ask for it anymore.

The thread doesn't offend me, I'd like to explore the current topic more. But I'd also like it to remain open. Name-dropping specific religious/political groups in an openly partisan way is definitely flying to close to the sun and risking a thread lock, regardless of whether I agree or not with the sentiment expressed.

 Haighus wrote:
The thread doesn't offend me, I'd like to explore the current topic more. But I'd also like it to remain open. Name-dropping specific religious/political groups in an openly partisan way is definitely flying to close to the sun and risking a thread lock, regardless of whether I agree or not with the sentiment expressed.

I never partake in any volatile mode of conversation, if the conversation is witty and contemplatory I like it.
Wouldn't know why I should be offended either, maybe that comes with age though.

The logic just escapes me why people think that fiction invokes some guilt by association.. like.. the examples Grimskul already gave of xenos don't make someone into that type of person..

And what would the ramifications have to be for it.. removing any faction that isn't shooting butterflies (instead of bullets) and drinking milkshakes?
I think most of us agree that forcing female spacemarines while we have sisters already is incendiary campaigning.. but where does it end..

 Leopold Helveine wrote:
I think most of us agree that forcing female spacemarines while we have sisters already is incendiary campaigning.. but where does it end..

They're not the same thing. And you bringing it up in this thread *is* incendiary.

No-one's being "offended" by this discussion, but it is gradually becoming more and more *against the rules of this forum* - and I don't think anyone wants to cause a thread lock. So, let's perhaps back down a little from some of these Real World Names that we're throwing around, and stick on topic of the Imperium as satire. Don't worry, you're not offending anyone, and this isn't some kind of crusade of censorship - but this is a forum with specific rules and expectations.

if we're talking about satire and the imperium being terrible, there's no reason why women shouldn't also be space marines— why let men do all the horrible things when Thatcher proved women can just as easily ruin lives! hashtag girl power

 Leopold Helveine wrote:

I think most of us agree that forcing female spacemarines while we have sisters already is incendiary campaigning.. but where does it end..

Saying that allowing women into the premier faction in the game, followed be a slippery slope allusion, is a pretty on-the-nose way to hide things.

 Da Boss wrote:
I think I work with a different definition of left than a lot of people here.
I would not say Globalisation for example is inherently a left wing thing. It's a bit blurry but I see left wing politics as being about wealth redistribution and having more of a role for the state in society.

Which amuses me no end - growing up in the 20th century, globalisation was the right wing capitalist/corporatists agenda that any poster child of left wing politics railed against.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leopold Helveine wrote:

I don't really get how people could possibly think that there ever was a so called far right warhammer fan base, as if politically invested people waste their time with a hobby-community.

So there is an active right wing fan base. Especially wargamming proper (historicals and chits), where even pointing out a game seems to glorify the Nazi's/Slavery/whatever by playing up to propaganda about their prowess/about their ragged condition/etc. gets you banned as you are somehow insulting peoples identity...

Which is a way is good, it shows your hobby has wide appeal which is important for its longevity. 40k has its share too, most notably in my mind the 'imperial Herald' facebook page that takes republican and 'culture war' talking points and makes them into 40k memes.

While it isn't satire I would find amusing, certainly to its fans it is satire of views they don't like in both the real world and 40k.

The whole FSM issue demonstrates that Warhammer isn’t satire any more. When a loud, angry group of people are far too invested in taking The Lore seriously to allow for FSM, that’s the tell. The satire has become the satirized.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
I think I work with a different definition of left than a lot of people here.
I would not say Globalisation for example is inherently a left wing thing. It's a bit blurry but I see left wing politics as being about wealth redistribution and having more of a role for the state in society.

Which amuses me no end - growing up in the 20th century, globalisation was the right wing capitalist/corporatists agenda that any poster child of left wing politics railed against.

Corporatocracy is not corporatism.

Use the correct word if you lot have to break the no politics rule.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
if we're talking about satire and the imperium being terrible, there's no reason why women shouldn't also be space marines— why let men do all the horrible things when Thatcher proved women can just as easily ruin lives! hashtag girl power

Sister of Battle already has that covered, I think. I'm pretty sure they commit more war crimes than space marines, being die-hard religious fanatics who love using fire and all.
Also inquisitors. They're like, living war crimes. They don't follow the Geneva Convention, they follow the Geneva Checklist.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
if we're talking about satire and the imperium being terrible, there's no reason why women shouldn't also be space marines— why let men do all the horrible things when Thatcher proved women can just as easily ruin lives! hashtag girl power

Sister of Battle already has that covered, I think. I'm pretty sure they commit more war crimes than space marines, being die-hard religious fanatics who love using fire and all.
Also inquisitors. They're like, living war crimes. They don't follow the Geneva Convention, they follow the Geneva Checklist.

right, so if there's no issue with women in the setting, then there's no issue with women being space marines!