I want to be up front as to why I’m posting this: I cannot really play 40k right now because those I play with are having a crisis of 40k faith, and it has spread to me. So, I am posting this in order to help reason through said crisis so that we can all play again (and perhaps better contextualize why we are playing it). I want to do this through talking about these hang-ups of ours, which would be best dealt with talking through and exploring the topic with the community. I can use some help with that. In short, I am trying to bring my group back into 40k! So if you have some good points to poke holes in my thinking here, they are more than welcome.
Mostly, my issue right now is that the people I have always played 40k with are thinking of bowing out for good because of what their support of the franchise might mean.
And what I hate is that after thinking about it, I actually do get it.
As far as I can tell from my readings about 40k and fascists/the alt-right/etc. online (of which I have done a fair bit so far), people tend to really dismiss absolutely any validity that these people have for choosing to idolize 40k over other IP’s for all kinds of reasons, which I also totally get because I did for the longest time too, but I think they miss some key points. I think there’s more credit due to the idea that 40k is easily idolized by these forces of hatred than folks seem to give these people. The more I’ve thought about it, the more I fear that 40k might actually have an intrinsic problem that comes with the lore, as-consumed by today’s real-world population.
People say ‘lol40k is a joke/satire/what have you’. “The Imperium is SO stupidly terrible, that no one should ever take it seriously.” “Obviously everything is horrible and there is nothing to admire here.” But as many will tell you, 40k is actually NOT presented as any sort of joke, not really. It’s ultra serious; rooted in parody perhaps, but is now largely not. The joke was basically that fascists and hatred is terrible, look at how ridiculous their world would be. And while I don’t think the change in tone to seriousness in 40k directly supports the idea that astartes/the Imperium/etc. are NOT terrible in any way, its still leaving things woefully unclear.
So 40k stopped being obviously satirical decades ago, and I personally have always taken the lore extremely seriously (having started during 3rd edition myself), in that, when you think about it, all that is required for it to be very realistic is the assumption that the warp exists. That’s in any case at least one way to look at it being a grounded, realistic sort of universe. There’s lots of other ways to draw very direct comparisons to 40k and the real world but I’d rather not go to off topic with that here. But regardless, I’ve actually always thought that the Imperium was a ‘beautiful creation’ – speaking purely in a narrative, engaging sense. Not that it would be a good place to live – obviously. The immersion of being a part of these terrible people partaking in this terrible universe has been appealing because of how new the problems are, and the sheer terror of what you face and then subsequently overcome together, while being a part of the mess of humanity. And that's fun and interesting as hell. I think all of this while, of course, being quite the opposite of these fascists/alt-right/people-spouting-hatred. In fact, I’ve always been proud of 40k as an IP because of the discussions I knew it could always bring about, partially in regards to humanity being at its worst, what they could accomplish in that state verses what they completely disallowed, just hypothetically. But I’ve also always believed that we cannot afford to leave any quarter for hatred to breed in. And if Warhammer 40k has only growing in that capacity…
I’ve read post after post after post about all of this, and I can’t help but think that most people are missing the mark. There is some reason, I think – blatant reason – why fascists would, and indeed perhaps almost should look to the Imperium as a model of pure strength. And if that’s what matters to them, that’s what matters to them (unfortunately). People are always saying that the Imperium is obviously the worst in every way – dancing around the actual reasons why these people look up to it. In a grimdark galaxy, it stands. It is resolute. Parts of it fall just as parts of it rise, but the Imperium does keep humanity alive. It is our deepest, darkest, worst impulses of governance and otherwise to the point where we’ve almost lost ourselves completely – and yet it works in this universe, and has endured for millennia. Even if you say that this is a story where humanity is overcoming not just the galaxy but also itself (a true and grimdark point to make), I would still give credit to the Imperium. The Imperium is a force to be reckoned with. One potentially sad point to real life fascists…maybe.
BUT (counter-point). The thing that people are trying to say but aren’t giving enough voice to is how there could be something BETTER. Instead of a fascist, dominating Imperium that allows for no voice within its throngs of underlings, there could be a government that works much more collectively, more democratically, or what have you – just like that one democratic hive on Necromunda, Gothrul's Needle (yes, democracy exists in 40k – even if it is still terrible in that hive). So there’s the thing – the Imperium is gloriously messed up but strong, yet if the government was replaced with something much more sensible, it would be so much better. Presumably. The problem is that sort of solution has barely even been vaguely, tertiarily SHOWN as even a possibility to sustain within the lore (for humanity). I get that is potentially a part of the grimdark theme – but there is so much room here for more clarity on the part of the narrative. And I suspect Gulliman’s work may show just how much better the Imperium COULD be. So there is certainly hope.
To clarify what I mean by that – better solutions to evil Empires is displayed better in, for example, Star Wars. In Star Wars, you have the ‘evil Empire’, and a rebellion, a republic, etc. You can see the alternative to the Empire very plainly. You can know the failings of these evil empires very easily, and see a better, more righteous alternative in which others get a say. You do not get that in Warhammer 40k. There is the Imperium. THE solution. Maybe there was some fancy idea of something way better in the Horus Heresy and that’s obviously a tragedy that given all their actions they still couldn’t sustain even a fraction of that vision, but there is some very real argument that because of the Horus Heresy’s failure, and any other government’s failure to have stopped the Imperium, that the message becomes “humanity is at its (at least martially) best when it’s at its worst”. Therein lies the danger, I suspect. That message. That subtext. I fear the Imperium does seem to support this theory, given the lack of any other evidence to the contrary, and the routine triumphs they make. These triumphs are supposedly in spite of the government etc. (given the ‘satire’ of the IP), but what actual proof of that is there? The Imperium is supposed to be ‘the most oppressive regime imaginable’, after all, sayeth the intro quote, so there should theoretically be a better one. Unless the Tau government is somehow supposed to be the example?
Some people might say it would be needless modernization of 40k lore to get Guilliman to really re-arrange things, or split the Imperium in two in some way. Letting the “SJW’s” have their way with things. I don’t care. I think this is necessary going forward, because when you are faced with it, really faced with the realization that supporting Warhammer 40k monetarily (by purchasing its products etc.) or otherwise – might grow a franchise that will only encourage more fascists more than most any other IP…is sort of a disgusting possibility. Again, please disprove me on any of this if you’re able; it’s why I’m here.
We want to deny that, thoroughly – but I fear it’s just the truth. That IS the fact of the matter, I fear, even if it is only to a small degree, which is unfortunately unlike any other IP I’m aware of. And boy is today not a great day and age to be encouraging hatred in.
In any case, this is the rut I currently find myself in, with my thinking. To me, Warhammer 40k has always been so much more than this. It’s glorious, fun, and yes - dark, sure…but only to the point where it enhances the fun. There’s no need to enjoy it at 1,100% sadistic levels like you can bring any franchise, just like you don’t have to enjoy it or see it in any way that encourages hate. It’s creative, it explores various aspects of humanity and in ways we never really see in popular fiction. But the option to see it in a way that encourages hatred is certainly there. I fear it is too easy to see.
So perhaps it’s not truly a question of whether or not Warhammer 40kshould encourage these people (I think it shouldn’t for all kinds of reasons – namely that hatred is bad, duh), but the fact of the matter is that it does. And more so than virtually any other IP. Right? If anyone can dissuade me of this thinking or refute any of my specific points, for the love of the God-Emperor please do so, below. For sake of my hobby, and our hobby group.
“Leakycheese suggests that a positive step would be a sign posted in every Games Workshop franchise, making clear to all customers that prejudice has no place in the community. Some changes to the lore of 40k would not go amiss, either; there should be greater ethnic diversity in models, he says, and it should be abundantly clear that the Imperium of Man aren’t the “good guys”.
“They need to put the satire back into it,” he says. “The other thing they need to do is stop making Space Marines appear as heroes; people on the alt-right think they are superhuman Übermensch warriors – they [Games Workshop] do stuff around that; it just needs to be brought back to the fore.”
It really is just too dangerous to let the Space Marines, Imperium etc., be marketed as the good guys; no one should get the impression that virtually every marine is good. I’ve always believed that the best thing about 40k is how primarily smaller groups, maybe a planet here and there, a handful of astartes chapters, etc., continue to actually be noble and fight for humanity, in spite of everything. That includes, of course, doing so in spite of the Imperium’s terribleness. That sort of goodness shining through is the real story of 40k, imo. The biggest reason to stick around in and for 40k (not to mention the possibility that humanity just needs to hang on long enough for it to become a fully psychic race, in which everything potentially gets better. That is just brilliant, exciting stuff, courtesy of the Emperor). Conversely, the way people are too easily able to perceive the lore now is upside-down; that these individual good people aren’t the emphasis for marketing, but rather the Imperium and its horrific military presence. They're celebrated because they are powerful and able to overcome xenos etc., and for little other virtue. And that emphasis needs to change, just like Leakycheese said – there needs to be a clearer emphasis on doing what is right in the face of what is wrong.
BUT, I do not want to wait to enjoy 40k until these things happen. I want to be able to more than justify to myself and my friends that there is absolutely no problem with playing, supporting, and buying 40k stuff right now. And to be honest, I’d rather not be doing so purely based on a pure hope that things will improve.
[Spoiler] And there are signs of it. I just recently caught wind of how in one of the latest novels, “Watchers of the Throne: The Regent's Shadow" by Chris Wraight, shows how the High Lords of terra already began a civil war of sorts against Guilliman, before being completely annihilated by Guilliman’s machinations, on account of his understanding of how corrupt and terrible the high lords were. The civil war has already come to 40k…and I for one could not be more relieved. This is the conflict that needs to happen. [/endSpoiler]
So, there are a few questions to think about here, ultimately.
TLDR:
To start with, can you say that 40k lore/the Imperium should not encourage fascists and alt-righters despite how the Imperium’s accomplishments are actually incredibly, and incalculably vast?
If you can’t say 40k shouldn’t encourage fascists and alt-righters, then is it *wrong* to pump money and time into a franchise that still exists in this state?
Finally, if you think it is not wrong to pump money and time into the franchise given this, then is that primarily because of hope for a coming change in the Warhammer lore itself through Guilliman and the IP’s presentation by Games Workshop to change marketing and perception with a better emphasis?
You are looking at this from the wrong perspective.
Why do you define the imperium's accomplishments "Incalulably vast"?
Sure, they have an extremely vast empire, but it is founded on reducing your people to little more than gears. That's not exactly what you define as "accomplishment".
Dictatorial countries usually make vast empires, that's normal, that's history.
The lower your common welfare, the higher your military might. That is an accepted rule. There is no accomplishment in this.
An accomplished country/nation/empire/whatever is one that has both external AND internal success.
As it is, the 40k empire is just a scifi version of the Roman empire (which was based on slavery).
sigmarxism. unreal. I would not even think something like this would be possible.
Not sure what an alt right is, but as fasism goes, non of the systems of governance that exist in w40k are fasist, so I can't really imagine how w40k could promote that system specificaly.
I could imagine someone having stron views on an a oligarchic theocracy or a theocratic oligarchy, but other don't system from our world don't exist in w40k, so it shouldn't be a problem.
as the hatred goes. I think it would be a big stretch. And tyranid or an orc is not human. Hating something like that in real world would be like hating locust or a deadly type of fungus. I don't think that hating any of those two is something bad.
I don't have time to read your full post, but yes 40k holds appeal for ethnofascists and anyone disagreeing with this is delusional. And just to be clear, that doesn't mean anyone at GW is supporting an agenda like that, I doubt anyone is.
Throw them in the gulag and usher in the utopia brother.
They don't exist, nobody genuinely believes any of that and if they did, they'd be insane like you. This whole phantom group of 40k nazis is just hyperbolic nonsense because it turns out that there are people playing the game who aren't politically left. If I ever meet someone who has missed the sarcasm of the imperium and seriously believes it should be real I'll avoid them.
artific3r wrote: Do video games lead to violence? Does rock and roll lead to moral degeneracy?
These are really bad analogies. The questions you should be asking are "does joining a violent/fascist/racist/sexist video game community lead to violence/fascism/racism/sexism?" (proven categorically true) and "Does entering a morally degenerate music scene lead to moral degeneracy?"
Rolling dice and painting space marines will never lead to anything except. It's engaging in the communities and subcommunities thereof. Considering there are known gamer->alt-right "funnels" (and also alt-right deprogramming funnels in those same spaces) I think dismissing it as "it's just a game, it can't affect people" is naive at best, sinister at worst.
edit: to further clarify my point, when you have people like Arch Warhammer who is openly anti-leftist/liberal and then, in discord, openly racist, etc, a normal person may start watching his videos to learn about warhammer. As they begin to trust him as a source of knowledge, that trust leads to them slowly (or quickly) buying into the anti-leftist/liberal ideology. Then they join his discord or twitter community or whatever and are inundated with toxic extremist politics/"jokes" and wow, you have a fully toxic alt-right person!
I've met some truly vile people involved in 40k, but this fascist boogeyman that people are riling themselves up about has yet to rear his (or her) head in my experience. At worst I've seen some teenagers who think saying racist words is the most hilarious brand of edgy humour they've heard, but that's about it. I don't think the KKK or whoever are sending recruiters into Games Workshop stores- actually joking aside, extremist groups tend to find the ost recruits at the very poor parts of society (after all, what do they have to lose?) and not the type who have the money to spend on plastic toys.
The whole thing is just a hip new refresh of the Satanic Panic, only instead of Lil Timmy turning to Satanism because he's playing a Tiefling Warlock, he's becoming a Neo-Nazi because he's playing Black Templars or whatever.
The lower your common welfare, the higher your military might. That is an accepted rule. There is no accomplishment in this.
An accomplished country/nation/empire/whatever is one that has both external AND internal success.
That would make the US one of the weakest military in the world, and something like Mozambik a military power house. Plus if you can't keep your people safe, then it is like Mr Rogan said, you ain't farming for yourself in case things go rough, you are farming for your neighbour who has a gun.
Chinas wealther historicaly came, from being able to stop invaders from the north, south and east. Which makes military might the corner stone of their civilisation, and considering they are the only one ancient civilisation that survived till today, saying it ain't an accomplishment just doesn't make sense.
The swiss build their might on quality of their soldiers, and the fact they were able to defend themselfs easier then other countries due to terrain being adventagous for the swiss defenders.
Russia is a power house since the XVIIIth century and the country is litteraly build to fuel expansion. Rome was like that too, the strengh of its army allowed Roman culture, laws and trade to spread. People wanted to be Roman citizents, and all of it because the empire was defended by a strong army. The moment Rome killed of its supply of fresh recruits by promoting great latifudia, they fell apart. And the same happened to the easter empire, when they stopped taking care of anatolians defending them from ur turks and other invaders.
artific3r wrote: Do video games lead to violence? Does rock and roll lead to moral degeneracy?
These are really bad analogies. The questions you should be asking are "does joining a violent/fascist/racist/sexist video game community lead to violence/fascism/racism/sexism?" (proven categorically true) and "Does entering a morally degenerate music scene lead to moral degeneracy?"
Rolling dice and painting space marines will never lead to anything except. It's engaging in the communities and subcommunities thereof. Considering there are known gamer->alt-right "funnels" (and also alt-right deprogramming funnels in those same spaces) I think dismissing it as "it's just a game, it can't affect people" is naive at best, sinister at worst.
edit: to further clarify my point, when you have people like Arch Warhammer who is openly anti-leftist/liberal and then, in discord, openly racist, etc, a normal person may start watching his videos to learn about warhammer. As they begin to trust him as a source of knowledge, that trust leads to them slowly (or quickly) buying into the anti-leftist/liberal ideology. Then they join his discord or twitter community or whatever and are inundated with toxic extremist politics/"jokes" and wow, you have a fully toxic alt-right person!
We've seen this a million times throughout history. It's a pretty boring topic, but I suppose every generation there is always a subset of people out there that thrive on this sort of drama.
If people who hold fascist or otherwise deplorable viewpoints idolise certain elements of 40k's background the problem is not with the background. I don't know why people have a hard time understanding this, but the problem is with the fascists. Y'know, because they're fascists.
Simply put, no. I've enjoyed the hobby for over thirty years and have not encountered what you consider to be issues. Crappy people existed prior to 40K and there will be crappy people after 40K is gone.
I don't know maybe it is because of the place I live in, but I can't have a laugh at anything with national socialist or marxist it name. It just isn't funny. Maybe it is funny from a continent away.
I read the whole OP. In part, I agree with it. I wouldn't want 40Ks background to change though, but I also would like the Imperium to be shown more often as the fascist dictatorship it really is. Chaos has become as strong as it is because of the Imperium, not despite it. And I would like 40K/ GW to emphasize that.
Karol wrote:Not sure what an alt right is, but as fasism goes, non of the systems of governance that exist in w40k are fasist, so I can't really imagine how w40k could promote that system specificaly..
The Imperium is a fascist system, without a shadow of a doubt - and aesthetically, fills a similar niche. The iconography, the central leader figure, the high militarisation, the emphasis on racial purity - all features many modern ethnofascists find appealing. And it's not hard for them to imagine that 40k is validating their beliefs - they're wrong, of course, but good luck telling them that.
as the hatred goes. I think it would be a big stretch. And tyranid or an orc is not human. Hating something like that in real world would be like hating locust or a deadly type of fungus. I don't think that hating any of those two is something bad.
The problem is when bigots *do* extend aliens and heretics to real world peoples, which happens. Tau, especially, are commonly compared in ethnofascist circles to communism/socialism or East Asians - and the latter leads to racist rhetoric.
Yes, *rationally* there's no way someone should be comparing a 40k race to a real ethnicity of humans on Earth, much less inciting hatred, but since when were racists and fascists rational?
Void__Dragon wrote:I don't have time to read your full post, but yes 40k holds appeal for ethnofascists and anyone disagreeing with this is delusional. And just to be clear, that doesn't mean anyone at GW is supporting an agenda like that, I doubt anyone is.
Yeah, sorry, but for everyone saying "there's no Nazi problem", you are unfortunately naïve in this. (not you Void__Dragon, I'm agreeing with you!)
Is it 40k that's making them ethnofascists and suchlike? Of course not. These people had scummy beliefs regardless of 40k. But 40k provides a place for them to spread those beliefs, to justify and normalise them through fiction, to have rallying symbols and things to compare to. Are GW to blame for that? Not in creating 40k, no, and they've done a *decent* job of disavowing certain extremely bigoted 40k figures (Arch), but I feel they could do more - a whole lot more, by being more vocal and proactive about support for hobbyists that are usually targeted by said bigots (women and trans hobbyists, different ethnicities, sexual orientation, and generally opposing nationalist/fascist beliefs). Double down on their "you will not be missed" statement, etc etc.
But yes - while I don't feel GW are actively to blame, or deliberately foster hatred, there is a sizeable portion of 40k hobbyists who *do* foster hatred and bigoted beliefs, and you are either very fortunate, or ignorant, to have not seen it.
Arbitrator wrote: I've met some truly vile people involved in 40k, but this fascist boogeyman that people are riling themselves up about has yet to rear his (or her) head in my experience. At worst I've seen some teenagers who think saying racist words is the most hilarious brand of edgy humour they've heard, but that's about it. I don't think the KKK or whoever are sending recruiters into Games Workshop stores- actually joking aside, extremist groups tend to find the ost recruits at the very poor parts of society (after all, what do they have to lose?) and not the type who have the money to spend on plastic toys.
The whole thing is just a hip new refresh of the Satanic Panic, only instead of Lil Timmy turning to Satanism because he's playing a Tiefling Warlock, he's becoming a Neo-Nazi because he's playing Black Templars or whatever.
This is largely my opinion, to the op, in my opinion? No, this is completely anecdotal but I'm the only black guy in my store, everyone else is white, things have been great for me. Ironically the only time my mates realised this is when a discussion like this came up and they actually thought about it. Honestly op, as many people have said there are crappy people, people who make stupid jokes. This is more or less like the satanic scare. At least in my view.
Slipspace wrote: If people who hold fascist or otherwise deplorable viewpoints idolise certain elements of 40k's background the problem is not with the background. I don't know why people have a hard time understanding this, but the problem is with the fascists. Y'know, because they're fascists.
Agreed, but we have to be aware that those fascists believe that the background supports their beliefs. Obviously, it was not intended to, and so I don't believe that 40k "encourages" hatred, but can it be used to support it? To a fascist, yes.
So, as much as we can all sit around and say "only a madman would think 40k supports fascism", that still leaves us with the madmen in our hobby. I'd like if GW spent more effort rooting them out. Make them uncomfortable, make them know that this isn't a place for them. Call them out vocally.
Irkjoe wrote: Throw them in the gulag and usher in the utopia brother.
They don't exist, nobody genuinely believes any of that and if they did, they'd be insane like you. This whole phantom group of 40k nazis is just hyperbolic nonsense because it turns out that there are people playing the game who aren't politically left. If I ever meet someone who has missed the sarcasm of the imperium and seriously believes it should be real I'll avoid them.
100%. I have never, ever, read or met anything or anyone that was in any way a "Fash" or a Nazi. Not even close. I am not saying my experience trumps all. But taking into account I have almost never heard of this problem until recent times. I do not wish to be rude to the original poster, but this may sound rude no matter how I edit it.
People who play 40k have very different ideals and you are going to have to get used to right leaning folks playing this game. Because there are a good amount of them. The great irony is, de-platforming is one of the tried and true go to tactics of a fascist's. Now, apart from this I will answer your post in the spirit it was made in.
No, I do not see a problem. A fictional universe in a toy soldier game does not give me pause in the slightest. And If it is giving you pause. Quit. Because you have far bigger problems you need to be focusing on (we all do). First world issues.
EDIT : I have thought further on this. And I do see a point in the fact the imperium has been softcon'd into a heroic force. I mean read any 40k literature. I reads like a germanic saga. This has been happening for a long time. And while I still stand by what Ive said above, I do see a problem with this. Probably not the same problem as the OP. Because the Imperium being Heroic is idiotic.
And while I am fully against censorship, I think GW should put more warnings on products that are being sold to children. It is the parents job to restrict access to damaging idea's. Not GWs. They just need a warning on every piece of literature.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: I read the whole OP. In part, I agree with it. I wouldn't want 40Ks background to change though, but I also would like the Imperium to be shown more often as the fascist dictatorship it really is. Chaos has become as strong as it is because of the Imperium, not despite it. And I would like 40K/ GW to emphasize that.
Yeah, no issue having the Imperium *be* the bad guy, but make that crystal clear. Make it clear that they're not essential, that what they do isn't just "survival", that for all their propaganda, they are still undisputedly evil.
Will next they deal with the Communists I assume? Only fair to thing to do. Take out two groups of mad delusional idiots with one stone, only fair thing to do.
None of it matters and to be frank I'm new to the forum and I at least know that a thread like this is pushing some sort of rule here.
The thing about 40k is that it's the worst of all possible worlds, a 'crapsack world' in the TvTropes lexicon. It's a ridiculous cartoon at worst, and a hodge-podge of genres and tropes at best. I say at its best, because that is also its widest appeal beyond the diversity of the Hobby (painting, playing, collecting, art, novels, etc). I appreciate that, but there's also worlds beyond it and that to a certain person 40k can appear to be in very bad taste.
Table wrote: People who play 40k have very different ideals and you are going to have to get used to right leaning folks playing this game. Because there are a good amount of them.
There's a difference between "right leaning" and actual racism, ethnocentric rhetoric, transphobia, antisemitism and support of fascism.
And before you say "w-w-well I haven't seen that" - good for you. But I have, so don't you dare say it doesn't exist. And, unfortunately, of all the communities I'm in, I see it in 40k the most. So, yeah - as far as I'm concerned, there's a problem. Even if there was just one person I saw with those beliefs, there's a problem.
Because you have far bigger problems you need to be focusing on (we all do). First world issues.
Like dealing with fascists, racists, and bigots, right? Or are you going to sweep those under the rug when you see them?
To start with, can you say that 40k lore/the Imperium should not encourage fascists and alt-righters despite how the Imperium’s accomplishments are actually incredibly, and incalculably vast?
If you can’t say 40k shouldn’t encourage fascists and alt-righters, then is it *wrong* to pump money and time into a franchise that still exists in this state?
Finally, if you think it is not wrong to pump money and time into the franchise given this, then is that primarily because of hope for a coming change in the Warhammer lore itself through Guilliman and the IP’s presentation by Games Workshop to change marketing and perception with a better emphasis?
"All Quiet on the Western Front" shows war. It doesn't promote it.
Warhammer 40k shows a fascist human future. It doesn't promote it.
That being said, even if fascists and far-right folks really were "taking over" 40k (and I highly doubt it - especially(!) at GWHQ or in my local community there's absolutely no indication this is going on) - is giving up and letting them take it over really a good idea?
Rihgu wrote:
These are really bad analogies. The questions you should be asking are "does joining a violent/fascist/racist/sexist video game community lead to violence/fascism/racism/sexism?" (proven categorically true) and "Does entering a morally degenerate music scene lead to moral degeneracy?"
No, the question you need to ask first is "is the community you're talking about violent/fascist/racist/sexist?", maybe even a more basic question of "is this even a community?" - I strongly disagree with the idea that there's a "video game community", for example. It's like claiming that all sports are one big community - doesn't matter if it's football, volleyball, chess, biking or sailing. There are football clubs that are great, there are football clubs that have issues with violence. But "football" isn't a violent community, even though some clubs have issues with hooligans.
BlackoCatto wrote: Will next they deal with the Communists I assume? Only fair to thing to do. Take out two groups of mad delusional idiots with one stone, only fair thing to do.
None of it matters and to be frank I'm new to the forum and I at least know that a thread like this is pushing some sort of rule here.
Dont worry. This thread will not last long. People are incapable of discussing different ideas without attacking in each other. I know, broad generalization. But I think I am about to proven right.
I think there are two strands of thought in the OP, one of which I agree with, the other I do not.
the first is the appeal the 40k lore has to people with fascist tendencies. Yes, you can call them shitposters, or the alt right, or whatever, but 40k has a lot of fans in that camp. You don't need to dig deep to find it. And it's not hard to see why: not only is 40k dominated by warfare, it's one in which the brainwashed super soldiers for the totalitarian empire are the protagonists! Also, the imperium of man is beset on all sides by threats, from without and within, the struggle has a spiritual aspect, and the best hope is violence and strength. If that doesn't sound like modern far right rherotic, you aren't paying attention.
the second strand is if GW is somehow responsible for this. And I don't think so. Nobody is lured into hatred because of GW, I think it just provides a vocabulary of symbols for people to relate to.
In short, I think it's obvious the appeal 40k has to the far right, but I don't think there's anything morally or ethically wrong with playing 40k.
BlackoCatto wrote: Will next they deal with the Communists I assume? Only fair to thing to do. Take out two groups of mad delusional idiots with one stone, only fair thing to do.
None of it matters and to be frank I'm new to the forum and I at least know that a thread like this is pushing some sort of rule here.
Dont worry. This thread will not last long. People are incapable of discussing different ideas without attacking in each other. I know, broad generalization. But I think I am about to proven right.
Table wrote: People who play 40k have very different ideals and you are going to have to get used to right leaning folks playing this game. Because there are a good amount of them.
There's a difference between "right leaning" and actual racism, ethnocentric rhetoric, transphobia, antisemitism and support of fascism.
And before you say "w-w-well I haven't seen that" - good for you. But I have, so don't you dare say it doesn't exist. And, unfortunately, of all the communities I'm in, I see it in 40k the most. So, yeah - as far as I'm concerned, there's a problem. Even if there was just one person I saw with those beliefs, there's a problem.
Because you have far bigger problems you need to be focusing on (we all do). First world issues.
Like dealing with fascists, racists, and bigots, right? Or are you going to sweep those under the rug when you see them?
dadx6 wrote:This is amusingly exactly like blaming women for inviting rape by wearing trashy clothes.
"WH40K encourages fascists and racists!"
No, the solution is for people to choose not to be fascists or racists. Just like the solution to rape is for people to not rape other people.
It's not "exactly" like at all.
Yes, 40k is not to blame for the actions of fascists and racists. 100% agreed. But the difference here is that women, near-universally, have made it very clear that their clothing isn't consent - and I don't feel that GW (and many members of the community, evidence by some comments in this thread) have showed such solidarity against fascists and racists.
Yes, we can all agree that fascists and racists are wrong, thank god for that, but when you've got comments sweeping them under the rug because "well, I've never seen it, so it isn't a problem", how is that showing any kind of solidarity against them? And from GW too - I hoped they'd hammer down harder on "you will not be missed". Apparently not, for now.
And before you say "w-w-well I haven't seen that" - good for you. But I have, so don't you dare say it doesn't exist. And, unfortunately, of all the communities I'm in, I see it in 40k the most. So, yeah - as far as I'm concerned, there's a problem. Even if there was just one person I saw with those beliefs, there's a problem.?
I have literally been in locker rooms, frat houses, strip clubs, and gun ranges, and I have never seen the sort of casual hatred I've seen from 40k players.
Polonius wrote: I think there are two strands of thought in the OP, one of which I agree with, the other I do not.
the first is the appeal the 40k lore has to people with fascist tendencies. Yes, you can call them shitposters, or the alt right, or whatever, but 40k has a lot of fans in that camp. You don't need to dig deep to find it. And it's not hard to see why: not only is 40k dominated by warfare, it's one in which the brainwashed super soldiers for the totalitarian empire are the protagonists! Also, the imperium of man is beset on all sides by threats, from without and within, the struggle has a spiritual aspect, and the best hope is violence and strength. If that doesn't sound like modern far right rherotic, you aren't paying attention.
the second strand is if GW is somehow responsible for this. And I don't think so. Nobody is lured into hatred because of GW, I think it just provides a vocabulary of symbols for people to relate to.
In short, I think it's obvious the appeal 40k has to the far right, but I don't think there's anything morally or ethically wrong with playing 40k.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: I read the whole OP. In part, I agree with it. I wouldn't want 40Ks background to change though, but I also would like the Imperium to be shown more often as the fascist dictatorship it really is. Chaos has become as strong as it is because of the Imperium, not despite it. And I would like 40K/ GW to emphasize that.
Yeah, no issue having the Imperium *be* the bad guy, but make that crystal clear. Make it clear that they're not essential, that what they do isn't just "survival", that for all their propaganda, they are still undisputedly evil.
what the hell are you talking about, they are human. That automaticly makes them right when facing anything that isn't human or goes against human survival. Being anti empire, would be like being anti human and pro animal in real life. The empire isn't bad, because inviting morality in to judgment of any system ends with one situation every time, since it was tried the first time in 1776, it can be upheld only as long as your faction is the strongest one and can force others.
Slipspace wrote:
If people who hold fascist or otherwise deplorable viewpoints idolise certain elements of 40k's background the problem is not with the background. I don't know why people have a hard time understanding this, but the problem is with the fascists. Y'know, because they're fascists.
Agreed, but we have to be aware that those fascists believe that the background supports their beliefs. Obviously, it was not intended to, and so I don't believe that 40k "encourages" hatred, but can it be used to support it? To a fascist, yes.
Okey, how would anyone who isn't a fasist, before they start w40k, suddenly become fasist after coming in contact with w40k lore? Because there are no fasist states in w40k. How would he find the background to support his ideas, when the back ground doesn't exist in the game?
Some years ago I was a financial planner (read: salesman) and part of our training for fleecing clients ("Shields Down" was part of our vocabulary...) was repetition. Repeating phrases, and making sure we repeatedly approached contacts using the same formulas was the core approach we were taught. Admittedly, the program had something of a survivorship bias, but the most successful salesmen were the ones who could repeat the same phrases over and over despite context and despite the mark (one teacher emphasized saying that everything was 'Great!' the manky scotch git, regardless of what it was it was a great opportunity to sell). The point being that constant repetition and exposure to an idea is possibly the greatest factor in someone taking it in.
Which has the unfortunate corollary that we need to practice a form of memetic sanitation so that, like daemons, bad ideas can't infiltrate us.
Table wrote: People who play 40k have very different ideals and you are going to have to get used to right leaning folks playing this game. Because there are a good amount of them.
There's a difference between "right leaning" and actual racism, ethnocentric rhetoric, transphobia, antisemitism and support of fascism.
And before you say "w-w-well I haven't seen that" - good for you. But I have, so don't you dare say it doesn't exist. And, unfortunately, of all the communities I'm in, I see it in 40k the most. So, yeah - as far as I'm concerned, there's a problem. Even if there was just one person I saw with those beliefs, there's a problem.
Because you have far bigger problems you need to be focusing on (we all do). First world issues.
Like dealing with fascists, racists, and bigots, right? Or are you going to sweep those under the rug when you see them?
No. And while my post was edited. And bears re-reading. I am not in the camp of censorship or de-platforming. It is ok for a setting to have a fascist state in it. It may be a dangerous for young children to be showed heroic versions of it without parental guidance proving context to it all. And that is only problem for me. It is up to GW to put more warning labels on. Or shift the suggested age of play higher. More parental interaction should be required when dealing with 40k and children.
As for a nazi liking 40k or identifying with the imperium? Good for them. I have the choice not play versus such people or even be in the same room with them. And when/if I run into one, that is what I will do. It is up to the store owners to stop harrasment of clients.
And no, I said I did not expect my experience to trump everyone else. Not sure how you glanced over that but ok.
Nurglitch wrote: Some years ago I was a financial planner (read: salesman) and part of our training for fleecing clients ("Shields Down" was part of our vocabulary...) was repetition. Repeating phrases, and making sure we repeatedly approached contacts using the same formulas was the core approach we were taught. Admittedly, the program had something of a survivorship bias, but the most successful salesmen were the ones who could repeat the same phrases over and over despite context and despite the mark (one teacher emphasized saying that everything was 'Great!' the manky scotch git, regardless of what it was it was a great opportunity to sell). The point being that constant repetition and exposure to an idea is possibly the greatest factor in someone taking it in.
Which has the unfortunate corollary that we need to practice a form of memetic sanitation so that, like daemons, bad ideas can't infiltrate us.
Ah yes, the good old 1984 tactics book. To the Gulag we go.
the first is the appeal the 40k lore has to people with fascist tendencies. Yes, you can call them shitposters, or the alt right, or whatever, but 40k has a lot of fans in that camp. You don't need to dig deep to find it. And it's not hard to see why: not only is 40k dominated by warfare, it's one in which the brainwashed super soldiers for the totalitarian empire are the protagonists! Also, the imperium of man is beset on all sides by threats, from without and within, the struggle has a spiritual aspect, and the best hope is violence and strength. If that doesn't sound like modern far right rherotic, you aren't paying attention.
aside for the super soldiers, unless we count waregs and kozaks as those, you just described how Russia functions since XIIth century, and before the Kiev and Novigrod Rus. It would be really hard to describe Russia at any time as fasist.
Beint totalitarian or having a country based on military might is hardly indicative of being fasist. I mean the US have one of the largest army in the world, and they aren't fasist. North Korea is totalitarian and exist for the sole purpose to feed and arm its army, but it ain't fasists either.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: I read the whole OP. In part, I agree with it. I wouldn't want 40Ks background to change though, but I also would like the Imperium to be shown more often as the fascist dictatorship it really is. Chaos has become as strong as it is because of the Imperium, not despite it. And I would like 40K/ GW to emphasize that.
Yeah, no issue having the Imperium *be* the bad guy, but make that crystal clear. Make it clear that they're not essential, that what they do isn't just "survival", that for all their propaganda, they are still undisputedly evil.
what the hell are you talking about, they are human. That automaticly makes them right when facing anything that isn't human or goes against human survival. Being anti empire, would be like being anti human and pro animal in real life. The empire isn't bad, because inviting morality in to judgment of any system ends with one situation every time, since it was tried the first time in 1776, it can be upheld only as long as your faction is the strongest one and can force others.
Might doesn't make right.
karol wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
If people who hold fascist or otherwise deplorable viewpoints idolise certain elements of 40k's background the problem is not with the background. I don't know why people have a hard time understanding this, but the problem is with the fascists. Y'know, because they're fascists.
Agreed, but we have to be aware that those fascists believe that the background supports their beliefs. Obviously, it was not intended to, and so I don't believe that 40k "encourages" hatred, but can it be used to support it? To a fascist, yes.
Okey, how would anyone who isn't a fasist, before they start w40k, suddenly become fasist after coming in contact with w40k lore? Because there are no fasist states in w40k. How would he find the background to support his ideas, when the back ground doesn't exist in the game?
Sgt. Cortez wrote: I read the whole OP. In part, I agree with it. I wouldn't want 40Ks background to change though, but I also would like the Imperium to be shown more often as the fascist dictatorship it really is. Chaos has become as strong as it is because of the Imperium, not despite it. And I would like 40K/ GW to emphasize that.
Yeah, no issue having the Imperium *be* the bad guy, but make that crystal clear. Make it clear that they're not essential, that what they do isn't just "survival", that for all their propaganda, they are still undisputedly evil.
what the hell are you talking about, they are human. That automaticly makes them right when facing anything that isn't human or goes against human survival.
... it really doesn't. Being human doesn't make you "good" or "right" in the slightest.
Or are you genuinely saying that humans could and should wipe out all other life in the galaxy, and they'd be justified because "humans, feth yeah!" ?
Okey, how would anyone who isn't a fasist, before they start w40k, suddenly become fasist after coming in contact with w40k lore?
Because of encouragement and validation from fascist members within the hobby - who, not removed, continue to fester.
It's probably worth noting that the right wing 40k lot tends to gravitate heavily to the Space Marines, which are a warrior class separate from humanity, which most crucially, does not always feel loyalty to the civilian government, which it sees as corrupt. Again, the parallels are pretty obvious.
To start with, can you say that 40k lore/the Imperium should not encourage fascists and alt-righters despite how the Imperium’s accomplishments are actually incredibly, and incalculably vast?
If you can’t say 40k shouldn’t encourage fascists and alt-righters, then is it *wrong* to pump money and time into a franchise that still exists in this state?
Finally, if you think it is not wrong to pump money and time into the franchise given this, then is that primarily because of hope for a coming change in the Warhammer lore itself through Guilliman and the IP’s presentation by Games Workshop to change marketing and perception with a better emphasis?
"All Quiet on the Western Front" shows war. It doesn't promote it.
Warhammer 40k shows a fascist human future. It doesn't promote it.
That being said, even if fascists and far-right folks really were "taking over" 40k (and I highly doubt it - especially(!) at GWHQ or in my local community there's absolutely no indication this is going on) - is giving up and letting them take it over really a good idea?
Rihgu wrote:
These are really bad analogies. The questions you should be asking are "does joining a violent/fascist/racist/sexist video game community lead to violence/fascism/racism/sexism?" (proven categorically true) and "Does entering a morally degenerate music scene lead to moral degeneracy?"
No, the question you need to ask first is "is the community you're talking about violent/fascist/racist/sexist?", maybe even a more basic question of "is this even a community?" - I strongly disagree with the idea that there's a "video game community", for example. It's like claiming that all sports are one big community - doesn't matter if it's football, volleyball, chess, biking or sailing. There are football clubs that are great, there are football clubs that have issues with violence. But "football" isn't a violent community, even though some clubs have issues with hooligans.
I agree with you that there is no single video game community, hence why I alluded to that in my post. We agree with each other, I think fully, on the points that we've poste, based on what you've posted.
the first is the appeal the 40k lore has to people with fascist tendencies. Yes, you can call them shitposters, or the alt right, or whatever, but 40k has a lot of fans in that camp. You don't need to dig deep to find it. And it's not hard to see why: not only is 40k dominated by warfare, it's one in which the brainwashed super soldiers for the totalitarian empire are the protagonists! Also, the imperium of man is beset on all sides by threats, from without and within, the struggle has a spiritual aspect, and the best hope is violence and strength. If that doesn't sound like modern far right rherotic, you aren't paying attention.
aside for the super soldiers, unless we count waregs and kozaks as those, you just described how Russia functions since XIIth century, and before the Kiev and Novigrod Rus. It would be really hard to describe Russia at any time as fasist.
Beint totalitarian or having a country based on military might is hardly indicative of being fasist. I mean the US have one of the largest army in the world, and they aren't fasist. North Korea is totalitarian and exist for the sole purpose to feed and arm its army, but it ain't fasists either.
I think that having hang ups about the phrase "fascist" is just not going to be useful to a conversation. We could say "far right totalitarian militarism" instead, but that's just a lot of words. the point is, they are all broadly opposed to democracy, rule of law, or civil liberties.
Nurglitch wrote: Some years ago I was a financial planner (read: salesman) and part of our training for fleecing clients ("Shields Down" was part of our vocabulary...) was repetition. Repeating phrases, and making sure we repeatedly approached contacts using the same formulas was the core approach we were taught. Admittedly, the program had something of a survivorship bias, but the most successful salesmen were the ones who could repeat the same phrases over and over despite context and despite the mark (one teacher emphasized saying that everything was 'Great!' the manky scotch git, regardless of what it was it was a great opportunity to sell). The point being that constant repetition and exposure to an idea is possibly the greatest factor in someone taking it in.
Which has the unfortunate corollary that we need to practice a form of memetic sanitation so that, like daemons, bad ideas can't infiltrate us.
Eh, not into mind control on any level. One mans bad idea is another mans great idea. Where does the censorship begin? Where does it end? Who is policing this?
The problem is at home. It is with parents not being interactive with their children. There will ALWAYS be nazi's. There will ALWAYS be jerks. Parents need to conceptualized this fact and edit to their moral standing. Whatever that may be.
Another problem is people do not understand what I am about to type. You cannot shame a racist. You cannot stop someone from being a jerk. You CAN stop them from slander, physical or mental violence and from harassment. The problem needs to be solved in the stores by the store owners.
Table wrote:I am not in the camp of censorship or de-platforming.
What's wrong with deplatforming fascists? What could they possible have to say that's constructive to civil society on their platform?
It is ok for a setting to have a fascist state in it. It may be a dangerous for young children to be showed heroic versions of it without parental guidance proving context to it all. And that is only problem for me. It is up to GW to put more warning labels on. Or shift the suggested age of play higher. More parental interaction should be required when dealing with 40k and children.
That's what I've been saying. The Imperium being fascist and outright *evil* is fine - but some people (grown adults, not just children) don't get that it's evil. And yes, we can sit here and agree that they're dumb and delusional, but unless we show them the door, what else do we do about that?
As for a nazi liking 40k or identifying with the imperium? Good for them. I have the choice not play versus such people or even be in the same room with them. And when/if I run into one, that is what I will do. It is up to the store owners to stop harrasment of clients.
It's not up to the store owners at all - it's up to *all* people to stand against fascists. And while I like the fact that you would refuse to interact with them, that's not exactly showing them that they're not welcome here full stop, is it?
And no, I said I did not expect my experience to trump everyone else. Not sure how you glanced over that but ok.
You certainly phrased it in such a way to say "OP is a load of tosh because I haven't seen it". Otherwise, why bring it up?
A nazi loves a cat, the communist the tree. Clearly we must kill all cats cut all trees down, can't have those stinking people making off with our cats and trees. I'll have you know whom loved cats, Hitler! Pol Pot grew trees in his backyard garden, don't mind the skulls, decoration.
Table wrote:Eh, not into mind control on any level. One mans bad idea is another mans great idea. Where does the censorship begin? Where does it end? Who is policing this?
It's fairly simple. You either agree that it's okay to believe that some races are superior, or you don't believe it's okay.
I know which side of the camp I'm on. I hope you do too.
The problem is at home. It is with parents not being interactive with their children. There will ALWAYS be nazi's. There will ALWAYS be jerks. Parents need to conceptualized this fact and edit to their moral standing. Whatever that may be.
There many always be Nazis that crawl out of the woodwork. But we need to stamp that out. Sure, starts at home, starts wherever - but that's not important when you've got someone in your face spitting bile about ethnofascism.
See it, stamp it out.
Another problem is people do not understand what I am about to type. You cannot shame a racist. You cannot stop someone from being a jerk. You CAN stop them from slander, physical or mental violence and from harassment. The problem needs to be solved in the stores by the store owners.
Yes, you can't *stop* them. But you can make it clear that you will not tolerate it in your community.
And, if we're going to the store owner point you keep mentioning - okay. GW, as the essential owners of the 40k property, need to solve the problem - yes? Do you agree?
As always in a discussion like this, it's importation to remember that fascism is a poorly defined concept, and we porbably shouldn't get too hung up on labels. From wikipedia article "definitions of fascism" (a topic broad enough to merit a separate article)"
In his 1995 essay "Ur-Fascism", cultural theorist Umberto Eco lists fourteen general properties of fascist ideology.[19] He argues that it is not possible to organise these into a coherent system, but that "it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it". He uses the term "Ur-fascism" as a generic description of different historical forms of fascism. The fourteen properties are as follows:
"The Cult of Tradition", characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by Tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement. "The Rejection of modernism", which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system. "The Cult of Action for Action's Sake", which dictates that action is of value in itself, and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science. "Disagreement Is Treason" – Fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith. "Fear of Difference", which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants. "Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class", fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups. "Obsession with a Plot" and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society (such as the German elite's 'fear' of the 1930s Jewish populace's businesses and well-doings; see also anti-Semitism). Eco also cites Pat Robertson's book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession. Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak." On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will. "Pacifism is Trafficking with the Enemy" because "Life is Permanent Warfare" – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to not build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war. "Contempt for the Weak", which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate Leader who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force. "Everybody is Educated to Become a Hero", which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, "[t]he Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death." "Machismo", which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold "both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality." "Selective Populism" – The People, conceived monolithically, have a Common Will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the Leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of "no longer represent[ing] the Voice of the People." "Newspeak" – Fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.
I don't think you need to try hard to find aspects of all of these in the Imperium of Man, while they are much less pronounced in the other cultures were see in depth such as the eldar, Tau, or orks.
Hell, half of those phrases sound like 40k flavour text!
Table wrote:I am not in the camp of censorship or de-platforming.
What's wrong with deplatforming fascists? What could they possible have to say that's constructive to civil society on their platform?
What's wrong with deplatforming the the conservative, the liberal, the Jew, the Christian, the Muslim, the Communist, the Socialist, The Texan, the Californian, Black, White, Asian, Gay, Straight, etc...
Who gets to decide anything and who declares the labelling of the individual? Do you, do they, A Gov't body in power? It worked real well in the 50s I hear, a whole commission dedicated to rooting them out, destroy them, expose them, deplatform them. Why I can see GW now, "Were you or ever were a Comm... I mean Facist."
what the hell are you talking about, they are human. That automaticly makes them right when facing anything that isn't human or goes against human survival. Being anti empire, would be like being anti human and pro animal in real life. The empire isn't bad, because inviting morality in to judgment of any system ends with one situation every time, since it was tried the first time in 1776, it can be upheld only as long as your faction is the strongest one and can force others.
oof, massive red flag right here. If you can't comprehend that the Imperium is the bad guys then you're actually proving to me that OP's point might be true.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: I read the whole OP. In part, I agree with it. I wouldn't want 40Ks background to change though, but I also would like the Imperium to be shown more often as the fascist dictatorship it really is. Chaos has become as strong as it is because of the Imperium, not despite it. And I would like 40K/ GW to emphasize that.
Yeah, no issue having the Imperium *be* the bad guy, but make that crystal clear. Make it clear that they're not essential, that what they do isn't just "survival", that for all their propaganda, they are still undisputedly evil.
what the hell are you talking about, they are human. That automaticly makes them right when facing anything that isn't human or goes against human survival.
... it really doesn't. Being human doesn't make you "good" or "right" in the slightest.
Or are you genuinely saying that humans could and should wipe out all other life in the galaxy, and they'd be justified because "humans, feth yeah!" ?
Okey, how would anyone who isn't a fasist, before they start w40k, suddenly become fasist after coming in contact with w40k lore?
Because of encouragement and validation from fascist members within the hobby - who, not removed, continue to fester.
Because there are no fasist states in w40k.
The Imperium.
You are not the the thought police. You have no right to remove anyone or anything unless you are a store owner, club organizer or parent. You do understand that banning ideas and de-platforming people is the go to tactic of the same very fascists that we are against?
Cases of harassment do need to be dealt with. But by the proper authorities in the situations. If a nazi is in a store messing with clients the owner needs to eject them or deal with consequences of supporting such people, and those will probably be legal consequences.
Once more. If you want to edit who and who cannot play. Then you are the problem right along with the fash. If you have issues in a club or online, bring it to the attention of the purveyors of such places. I am old school card carrying and donating member of the ACLU. As I find its old stances very important. Freedom of speech is the most sacred and important right in this country. And you or I do not get to control that. A nazi has as much right to gather and speak as anyone. I do not like what they say. So I dont attend. Or, protest. Which is also a right.
I am a old school centrist. A democrat before it was invaded by the far left. I am for big government. I am for social programs to lift up and help those who have been disadvantaged by race or gender or poverty. I think college should be free. I think the military should be cut in half. I think that the constitution is important to America. This includes owning guns and saying things that people do not like. I am only stating this so we can just skip the political pandering and attacks.
Table wrote:I am not in the camp of censorship or de-platforming.
What's wrong with deplatforming fascists? What could they possible have to say that's constructive to civil society on their platform?
What's wrong with deplatforming the the conservative, the liberal, the Jew, the Christian, the Muslim, the Communist, the Socialist, The Texan, the Californian, Black, White, Asian, Gay, Straight, etc...
Which one of those groups prides themselves on racism, ethnocentricism, bigotry, and authoritarian/totalitarian militarisation?
Oh, yeah - none of them.
But what I've just described? That's a fascist. A Nazi. And you aren't a fascist if you don't hold those beliefs, because those are quite literally the hallmarks of being fascist.
So, now I've demonstrated *why* fascists are different to all your strawmen, and deserving of removal, are you still going to defend racists and ethnocentrists?
Slipspace wrote: If people who hold fascist or otherwise deplorable viewpoints idolise certain elements of 40k's background the problem is not with the background. I don't know why people have a hard time understanding this, but the problem is with the fascists. Y'know, because they're fascists.
Agreed, but we have to be aware that those fascists believe that the background supports their beliefs. Obviously, it was not intended to, and so I don't believe that 40k "encourages" hatred, but can it be used to support it? To a fascist, yes.
So, as much as we can all sit around and say "only a madman would think 40k supports fascism", that still leaves us with the madmen in our hobby. I'd like if GW spent more effort rooting them out. Make them uncomfortable, make them know that this isn't a place for them. Call them out vocally.
It isn't GWs responsibility people out for anything at all. Not only that, it would be totally meaningless and they only do it because they believe it makes them look good. It was a hollow marketing attempt that was met with much deserved resentment, not because racism isn't bad, but because it isn't GWs right to tell me anything beyond what new models are coming out.
The 40k fascists is a conspiracy theory that you use to shut people up and justify a completely unearned sense of moral superiority. And even if they were real, nobody would need you to take the heavy burden upon yourself to explain why fascism is bad.
Table wrote:I am not in the camp of censorship or de-platforming.
What's wrong with deplatforming fascists? What could they possible have to say that's constructive to civil society on their platform?
What's wrong with deplatforming the the conservative, the liberal, the Jew, the Christian, the Muslim, the Communist, the Socialist, The Texan, the Californian, Black, White, Asian, Gay, Straight, etc...
Which one of those groups prides themselves on racism, ethnocentricism, bigotry, and authoritarian/totalitarian militarisation?
Oh, yeah - none of them.
But what I've just described? That's a fascist. A Nazi. And you aren't a fascist if you don't hold those beliefs, because those are quite literally the hallmarks of being fascist.
So, now I've demonstrated *why* fascists are different to all your strawmen, and deserving of removal, are you still going to defend racists and ethnocentrists?
If we are going by that I mean there is plenty of data that shows a large amount racism within the black community and large proportion of intolerance for homosexuals within it as well. I wonder would you say that for a Communist of some sort. Then again you obviously believe in the gak which is the Paradox of Intolerance.
It's interesting that this topic pops up more frequently now and I've had discussions about this in multiple threads now. I get the concern, but if people draw real-life lessons from 40k or try to validate some of their beliefs with 40k lore, the fault lies with them.
40k lore is not a holy book for fascists that gives them a divine mandate to validate their deplorable beliefs. It is a piece of fiction that at its core serves as a warning against totalitarian regimes. And it poses an uncomfortable question imo: if those existential threats were in fact real, would or could we also devolve into a similar system?
I have never encountered people as op describes them, but I don't deny that they exist. I can't say anything to the extent of the problem, but I am heavily, heavily against censoring 40k or putting a warning label on it.
I believe it is within the responsability of the community to first try to engage these people, especially when they are young, and try to educate them about 40k being a parody and meant as a warning. If that doesn't work you can just avoid these people.
My point is that if people truly draw real life lessons from 40k or idolize parts of its lore because they think it validates their beliefs, such people will do the same with any piece of fiction that has dark aspects. Are we gonna put a warning label or censor any piece of fiction that might appeal to these people?
Edit: doing that would massively go against my understanding of free speech.
Table wrote: You are not the the thought police. You have no right to remove anyone or anything unless you are a store owner, club organizer or parent. You do understand that banning ideas and de-platforming people is the go to tactic of the same very fascists that we are against?
Racists have no right to be racist. I'm just showing them the door.
I advise you read Karl Popper's Paradox of Intolerance.
Cases of harassment do need to be dealt with. But by the proper authorities in the situations. If a nazi is in a store messing with clients the owner needs to eject them or deal with consequences of supporting such people, and those will probably be legal consequences.
Okay, so GW, as the owner of the 40k brand, need to be ejecting fascists, yes?
Once more. If you want to edit who and who cannot play. Then you are the problem right along with the fash.
Why should fascists have a place to play?
Seriously, why should they? They actively jeopardise the safety of those around them - what gives them freedom to express their hatred?
Freedom of speech is the most sacred and important right in this country. And you or I do not get to control that. A nazi has as much right to gather and speak as anyone
... um, no. Nazis don't have a right to gather and speak as any, because that is hate speech. Hate speech is not protected by the International Declaration of Human Rights. So, no, Nazis don't have a right to gather and speak, but unfortunately, it seems many people don't have the stones to take them to account on it.
Also, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. You express your beliefs as a fascist - suffer the consequences.
I am a old school centrist. A democrat before it was invaded by the far left. I am for big government. I am for social programs to lift up and help those who have been disadvantaged by race or gender or poverty. I think college should be free. I think the military should be cut in half. I think that the constitution is important to America. This includes owning guns and saying things that people do not like. I am only stating this so we can just skip the political pandering and attacks.
I wasn't going to mention any of that, because it doesn't change that you're misinformed on the idea of freedom of speech.
If someone's free speech jeopardises the rights of other people (be that by race, gender, sexuality, etc) to live in life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, then their beliefs *are not protected by freedom of speech*.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Irkjoe wrote: It isn't GWs responsibility people out for anything at all.
Why not? Table was saying that the store owners (and therefore, IP owners) are the ones who have a responsibility to deal with that.
Not only that, it would be totally meaningless and they only do it because they believe it makes them look good. It was a hollow marketing attempt that was met with much deserved resentment, not because racism isn't bad, but because it isn't GWs right to tell me anything beyond what new models are coming out.
Ah, the good old "stop saying racists are bad, I want to live in ignorance!!!" argument.
The 40k fascists is a conspiracy theory that you use to shut people up and justify a completely unearned sense of moral superiority. And even if they were real, nobody would need you to take the heavy burden upon yourself to explain why fascism is bad.
Happy living in your bubble? You might want to look out the window, is all I'm saying.
The crux of the issue is rooted in a couple of false premises:
"Fiction has the responsibility to shape reality in a positive way"
It doesn't. Fiction is a way to engage with concepts that are removed from reality and, as such, must be free of restriction to have a reason to exist in the first place. People write about war, rape, torture, crime etc. because these concepts are intriguing, but one cannot engage with them in the real world due to very tangible consequences for one self and others, which are not present in fiction.
"Concepts explored in fiction do, in fact, shape reality in meaningful ways"
This one isn't as bad, because they can and do, but the extent and quality of their impact is impossible to measure and we should be wary of voices who call to restrict fiction in pursuit of something they cannot even make a solid, empirically sound case for.
Taking 40k as an example, the false premise employed in this context would be something like this:
"40k explores a dystopian future of humanity, in which fascism and religious dogmatism are the norm rather than the extreme, which in turn reinforces fascist tendencies in reality and should thus be censored/altered to depict a different picture to make our world better."
Now, the two false premises are obvious in this example, but it also misses the fact that 40k is successful not despite these supposedly problematic concepts, but specifically because of them.
tl;dr
No. The issue lies in the misunderstanding of fiction and its place and effects in the real world. Attempts to change or censor fiction are likely rooted in a naive and simplistic world view or an authoritarian mindset.
Table wrote:You are not the the thought police. You have no right to remove anyone or anything unless you are a store owner, club organizer or parent. You do understand that banning ideas and de-platforming people is the go to tactic of the same very fascists that we are against?
Once more. If you want to edit who and who cannot play. Then you are the problem right along with the fash. If you have issues in a club or online, bring it to the attention of the purveyors of such places. I am old school card carrying and donating member of the ACLU. As I find its old stances very important. Freedom of speech is the most sacred and important right in this country. And you or I do not get to control that. A nazi has as much right to gather and speak as anyone. I do not like what they say. So I dont attend. Or, protest. Which is also a right.
Well, actual fascists used street violence, secret police, and work camps to handle view points they didn't like. I'm not sure the Gestapo were politely escorting dissidents out of public places.
Irkjoe wrote:It isn't GWs responsibility people out for anything at all. Not only that, it would be totally meaningless and they only do it because they believe it makes them look good. It was a hollow marketing attempt that was met with much deserved resentment, not because racism isn't bad, but because it isn't GWs right to tell me anything beyond what new models are coming out.
The 40k fascists is a conspiracy theory that you use to shut people up and justify a completely unearned sense of moral superiority. And even if they were real, nobody would need you to take the heavy burden upon yourself to explain why fascism is bad.
So, I don't get why racists have some sort of right to think as they do, but a company has no right to say, no, you shouldn't be that way, and we don't want you around.
also, why is everybody's response to this always "i'm 100% not racist, but being told not to be racist makes me soooooo mad." When I'm at a public pool and it says, "don't gak in the pool," I don't get mad about that. I think, "yeah, it's a shame it needs to be said, but I really don't want gak in the pool!"
It's interesting that this topic pops up more frequently now and I've had discussions about this in multiple threads now. I get the concern, but if people draw real-life lessons from 40k or try to validate some of their beliefs with 40k lore, the fault lies with them.
40k lore is not a holy book for fascists that gives them a divine mandate to validate their deplorable beliefs. It is a piece of fiction that at its core serves as a warning against totalitarian regimes. And it poses an uncomfortable question imo: if those existential threats were in fact real, would or could we also devolve into a similar system?
I have never encountered people as op describes them, but I don't deny that they exist. I can't say anything to the extent of the problem, but I am heavily, heavily against censoring 40k or putting a warning label on it.
I believe it is within the responsability of the community to first try to engage these people, especially when they are young, and try to educate them about 40k being a parody and meant as a warning. If that doesn't work you can just avoid these people.
My point is that if people truly draw real life lessons from 40k or idolize parts of its lore because they think it validates their beliefs, such people will do the same with any piece of fiction that has dark aspects. Are we gonna put a warning label or censor any piece of fiction that might appeal to these people?
I don't think that's what anyone here is saying.
The point I'm making, that you, I think, agree with, is that it's a community effort to prevent fascists and bigots in our hobby - and that means active solidarity against people with those beliefs, young or old. It's all well and good to say "well, we'll just avoid them", but that's not *solving* the problem, it's just letting it gather it's own audience.
TL;DR - no, 40k's fine. But the fascists that exist within the community that aren't being called out are a problem.
Satire and parody of real world events are always more palatable when it does not mirror reality too closely.
To a degree this is determined by your perspective of current events, but oh well.
I thought this thread was going to be about the bitterness associated eith investing a large amount of time and money into a game only for it to bite you in the butt and make it near impossible for you to comepte due to the nature of how the company has decided to "balance" the game.
BlackoCatto wrote: Why should a Marxist have a place to play? I say we get rid of Tau and their animes, we don't need no stinkin' Tau and their.... interesting art.
What part of Marxist doctrine promotes racism, ethnocentricism or bigotry?
BlackoCatto wrote: Why should a Marxist have a place to play? I say we get rid of Tau and their animes, we don't need no stinkin' Tau and their.... interesting art.
What part of Marxist doctrine promotes racism, ethnocentricism or bigotry?
Or is "interesting art" all you've got?
Come on, it's not even like you're trying.
There is a mountain of skulls that beg to differ and my family was fortunate to not become part of such.
BertBert wrote: No. The issue lies in the misunderstanding of fiction and its place and effects in the real world. Attempts to change or censor fiction are likely rooted in a naive and simplistic world view or an authoritarian mindset.
Again, as I touched on this only just now, I don't think the main consensus here is "40k needs to change". The fiction's fine. The question is what do we do about the idiots who think it's a great way to live your life?
BlackoCatto wrote: Why should a Marxist have a place to play? I say we get rid of Tau and their animes, we don't need no stinkin' Tau and their.... interesting art.
What part of Marxist doctrine promotes racism, ethnocentricism or bigotry?
Or is "interesting art" all you've got?
Come on, it's not even like you're trying.
There is a mountain of skulls that beg to differ and my family was fortunate to not become part of such.
Marxist, not Soviet or Communist. Marxist. I'm asking for specifics here.
Sledgehammer wrote: Satire and parody of real world events are always more palatable when it does not mirror reality too closely.
To a degree this is determined by your perspective of current events, but oh well.
Can we stop claiming that 40k is a satire or parody? Yes, 30 years ago, it had satirical elements, but it was never the driving force of the game or it's appeal, and those elements have long been fleshed away. 40k is utterly and consistently sincere in it's tone. the only aspects of winking humor in 40k are when it parodies itself.
BertBert wrote: The crux of the issue is rooted in a couple of false premises:
"Fiction has the responsibility to shape reality in a positive way"
It doesn't. Fiction is a way to engage with concepts that are removed from reality and, as such, must be free of restriction to have a reason to exist in the first place. People write about war, rape, torture, crime etc. because these concepts are intriguing, but one cannot engage with them in the real world due to very tangible consequences for one self and others, which are not present in fiction.
"Concepts explored in fiction do, in fact, shape reality in meaningful ways"
This one isn't as bad, because they can and do, but the extent and quality of their impact is impossible to measure and we should be wary of voices who call to restrict fiction in pursuit of something they cannot even make a solid, empirically sound case for.
Taking 40k as an example, the false premise employed in this context would be something like this:
"40k explores a dystopian future of humanity, in which fascism and religious dogmatism are the norm rather than the extreme, which in turn reinforces fascist tendencies in reality and should thus be censored/altered to depict a different picture to make our world better."
Now, the two false premises are obvious in this example, but it also misses the fact that 40k is successful not despite these supposedly problematic concepts, but specifically because of them.
tl;dr
No. The issue lies in the misunderstanding of fiction and its place and effects in the real world. Attempts to change or censor fiction are likely rooted in a naive and simplistic world view or an authoritarian mindset.
Thank you. Way better put than I did. I wholeheartedly agree with this
Sledgehammer wrote: I thought this thread was going to be about the bitterness associated eith investing a large amount of time and money into a game only for it to bite you in the butt and make it near impossible for you to comepte due to the nature of how the company has decided to "balance" the game.
I think the answer would still have been a no, but it wouldn't have spawned this many laughable takes.
Also... the Tau live in a rigid caste system with a genetically different ruling class. Guess what... that ain't marxist.
It's collectivist, and it's implied that there is state control of the economy (OTOH, the water caste explicitly contains merchants), and it's close enough, but the Tau empire seems to present an ideal form of collectivism in stark contrast to the grim dark of the Imperium.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The question is what do we do about the idiots who think it's a great way to live your life?
We address them the same way we do in all other instances of everyday life. Distance yourself from them, challenge their beliefs, let them know certain behaviour is not accepted. It's not rocket science and I'm baffled how this is even an issue? Do you guys have overt racists in your gaming groups? I know I don't.
It's interesting that this topic pops up more frequently now and I've had discussions about this in multiple threads now. I get the concern, but if people draw real-life lessons from 40k or try to validate some of their beliefs with 40k lore, the fault lies with them.
40k lore is not a holy book for fascists that gives them a divine mandate to validate their deplorable beliefs. It is a piece of fiction that at its core serves as a warning against totalitarian regimes. And it poses an uncomfortable question imo: if those existential threats were in fact real, would or could we also devolve into a similar system?
I have never encountered people as op describes them, but I don't deny that they exist. I can't say anything to the extent of the problem, but I am heavily, heavily against censoring 40k or putting a warning label on it.
I believe it is within the responsability of the community to first try to engage these people, especially when they are young, and try to educate them about 40k being a parody and meant as a warning. If that doesn't work you can just avoid these people.
My point is that if people truly draw real life lessons from 40k or idolize parts of its lore because they think it validates their beliefs, such people will do the same with any piece of fiction that has dark aspects. Are we gonna put a warning label or censor any piece of fiction that might appeal to these people?
I don't think that's what anyone here is saying.
The point I'm making, that you, I think, agree with, is that it's a community effort to prevent fascists and bigots in our hobby - and that means active solidarity against people with those beliefs, young or old. It's all well and good to say "well, we'll just avoid them", but that's not *solving* the problem, it's just letting it gather it's own audience.
TL;DR - no, 40k's fine. But the fascists that exist within the community that aren't being called out are a problem.
That I totally agree with. I think I wrote that we as a community have to engage such people when encounterd, especially when they are young and try to educate them.
BertBert wrote: No. The issue lies in the misunderstanding of fiction and its place and effects in the real world. Attempts to change or censor fiction are likely rooted in a naive and simplistic world view or an authoritarian mindset.
Again, as I touched on this only just now, I don't think the main consensus here is "40k needs to change". The fiction's fine. The question is what do we do about the idiots who think it's a great way to live your life?
BlackoCatto wrote: Why should a Marxist have a place to play? I say we get rid of Tau and their animes, we don't need no stinkin' Tau and their.... interesting art.
What part of Marxist doctrine promotes racism, ethnocentricism or bigotry?
Or is "interesting art" all you've got?
Come on, it's not even like you're trying.
There is a mountain of skulls that beg to differ and my family was fortunate to not become part of such.
Marxist, not Soviet or Communist. Marxist. I'm asking for specifics here.
Every single one owes itself to it, a corner stone of everyone.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The question is what do we do about the idiots who think it's a great way to live your life?
We address them the same way we do in all other instances of everyday life. Distance yourself from them, challenge their beliefs, let them know certain behaviour is not accepted. It's not rocket science and I'm baffled how this is even an issue? Do you guys have overt racists in your gaming groups? I know I don't.
Absolutely! It *shouldn't* be an issue, yet there's plenty of people in this here thread who don't even think they exist, and those who do exist should be allowed their freedom of hatespeech!
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The question is what do we do about the idiots who think it's a great way to live your life?
We address them the same way we do in all other instances of everyday life. Distance yourself from them, challenge their beliefs, let them know certain behaviour is not accepted. It's not rocket science and I'm baffled how this is even an issue? Do you guys have overt racists in your gaming groups? I know I don't.
Absolutely! It *shouldn't* be an issue, yet there's plenty of people in this here thread who don't even think they exist, and those who do exist should be allowed their freedom of hatespeech!
I don't know, maybe we're the odd ones out here.
I think there are a couple reasons. the first is, a lot of people are more bigoted than they realize, so they see stuff that they perceive as cheeky humor instead of hateful. The second is that people are legitimately afraid that they will be the next target, so they're more willing to give intolerant speech that doesn't effect them a pass, because they know they might say something intolerant in the future. And Third, some people do see free speech as speech without consequences, where nobody should be held accountable for just words.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Absolutely! It *shouldn't* be an issue, yet there's plenty of people in this here thread who don't even think they exist, and those who do exist should be allowed their freedom of hatespeech!
I don't know, maybe we're the odd ones out here.
Folks in the States have a very different opinion on what freedom of speech means compared to people in other countries. In the states, freedom of speech means that people have the right to speak freely all of their opinions and should not be censored, regardless of how horrible their ideas are. Those ideas should be challenged, ignored, and/or mocked, but they shouldn't be censored. In many other countries, this idea of freedom of speech does not exist, hence the idea of "hate speech," or language that must be shut down because it is offensive, hurtful, incorrect, etc. I think that's part of the disagreement you guys are having.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Absolutely! It *shouldn't* be an issue, yet there's plenty of people in this here thread who don't even think they exist, and those who do exist should be allowed their freedom of hatespeech!
I don't know, maybe we're the odd ones out here.
Folks in the States have a very different opinion on what freedom of speech means compared to people in other countries. In the states, freedom of speech means that people have the right to speak freely all of their opinions and should not be censored, regardless of how horrible their ideas are. Those ideas should be challenged, ignored, and/or mocked, but they shouldn't be censored. In many other countries, this idea of freedom of speech does not exist, hence the idea of "hate speech," or language that must be shut down because it is offensive, hurtful, incorrect, etc. I think that's part of the disagreement you guys are having.
that's true, but Americans tend to have a very broad view of what "censorship" is. The first amendment applies to governmental action, but we seem to think that private entities, or even individuals, cannot limit our speech.
CommunistNapkin wrote: Folks in the States have a very different opinion on what freedom of speech means compared to people in other countries. In the states, freedom of speech means that people have the right to speak freely all of their opinions and should not be censored, regardless of how horrible their ideas are. Those ideas should be challenged, ignored, and/or mocked, but they shouldn't be censored. In many other countries, this idea of freedom of speech does not exist, hence the idea of "hate speech," or language that must be shut down because it is offensive, hurtful, incorrect, etc. I think that's part of the disagreement you guys are having.
I think the only disagreement here boils down to "is freedom of hatespeech allowed without consequences".
Again, I hasten to mention again that the UDHR does not support hatespeech as a right to freedom of expression.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: [Absolutely! It *shouldn't* be an issue, yet there's plenty of people in this here thread who don't even think they exist, and those who do exist should be allowed their freedom of hatespeech!
I don't know, maybe we're the odd ones out here.
Well, there is nuance to this argument. Do they have the right to voice their opinion? Yes, to a certain extent delineated by the law. Do they have the right to do so without opposition? Certainly not, which is why every single right wing demonstration here is met with numerous and vocal resistance.
In these discussions people tend to forget that 1) these right wing hardliners are a tiny minority and 2) the anonymity of the internet tends to erode social conventions, which is why many people online will use much stronger language than they do in real life.
In my opinion, 40K can be touched by the Poe Law of satire. No matter how grotesque and ridiculous a satire is, there will always be people with such extremist and insane views that they will support it at face value. 40K is no stranger to this phenomenon. I don't think 40K molds teenagers and young adult political and philosophical beliefs all that much though since te overwhelming majority of its consumers are well aware it's a satire or at the very least a nightmare.
While it's true that what you consume can and does, to a certain extand, affects your beliefs and worldviews, how you consume it also has an impact. Since 40K is a social hobby with a strong artistic and creative side to it, it can easily undermine its narrative (taken at face value) by encouraging pro-social rapport and activities. For a bitter, isolated, anti-social, extremely competitive person lacking self confidence, the ideal candidate for recruitment in extremist groups, 40K could indeed play it's part in the radicalisation of such person. In other word, it's very complicated.
I do not fault GW for that nor the hobby in and on itself. It's effect is only really pernicious on people who are already very vulnerable to recruitment by extremist groups. The same could be said for many comic books like Batman or the Punisher for example. It could also be said for late 80 and onward action movie with a white man in a mission of vengeance. It's also important to note that while it can affect a person's beliefs and prejudices, it's extremely poor at affecting a person's behavior. Most radicals aren't, fortunately, murderers or harrassers. Another point of importance is that there is no online community dedicated to those who enjoy 40K at face value and really do believe "the Imperium has it and is a great civilisation". If there were, then 40K couuld become a lot more toxic, but at the moment, most of the forums are dedicated to people searching netlist, discussing points of rules, showing of a cool model here and there, posting some battle report, debatin the physics of boltgun and complaining about everything under the sun.
Lord Damocles wrote: Video games cause violence
Dungeons & Dragons is satanic
and toy soldiers breed fascism
I have never seen anyone suggesting that "toy soldiers breed fascism". It's always been "elements of the background have been coopted by fascists".
We saw this starting in 2015-2016 with the reddit/4chan trash of a certain individual being copy/pasted onto art of the God-Emperor of Mankind. It's been spreading out a bit more via Facebook groups and the like with coopting stuff like Death Korps and other Guard/Imperium-related slogans/imagery in support of some of the more out there crap being peddled by supporters of said individual.
The Dungeons and Dragons satanic panic? It had no real supporting evidence. It was literally a moral panic spurred on by really crummy religious and political officials here in the US and tabloids which tended to back them up.
Video games causing violence? It's been heavily debunked--but the same kinds of people who were involved with the D&D "satanic panic" were pushing this.
I can, with a fair amount of certainty, tell you that there's attempts at recruiting via 40k as an avenue and there is definitely targeted harassment in the 40k community that comes up from a very specific kind of individual aimed at the 'other'.
GW doesn't have a responsibility to attack your ideological enemies because they aren't an arbiter and they don't know what's best. Anything they say is also undercut by the fact that they're a company and considerations beyond what is right and wrong go into any statement they make. If they believe it will help sales they'll tweet anything. This is just about using a company as a political hammer.
Nobody has denied that racism is bad. You keep saying this with the implied threat that if somebody doesn't agree with you about everything else they're a racist.
I might emerge from my bubble if somebody can produce this network of 40k playing fascists.
Nobody has denied that racism is bad. You keep saying this with the implied threat that if somebody doesn't agree with you about everything else they're a racist.
That's all these threads ever devolve into. They always come off as a less discussion, but a more a masturbatory exercise where they talk at people, knowing if eventually somebody will (be perceived to have) 'slip up' in their response and 'if you don't agree with me you're a heckin nazi!!! can either be sprung on them, or people just roll their eyes and stop replying because it's the internet equivalent of talking to a wall.
Nobody has denied that racism is bad. You keep saying this with the implied threat that if somebody doesn't agree with you about everything else they're a racist.
That's all these threads ever devolve into. They always come off as a less discussion, but a more a masturbatory exercise where they talk at people, knowing if eventually somebody will (be perceived to have) 'slip up' in their response and 'if you don't agree with me you're a heckin nazi!!!"
They also tend to devolve into people continually insisting that there is no problem because they have never encountered it or they "can't find it".
Some of us have encountered it in our lives. Some of us are also aware of the fact that this was not a problem that was really "out in the open" until relatively recently.
Nobody has denied that racism is bad. You keep saying this with the implied threat that if somebody doesn't agree with you about everything else they're a racist.
That's all these threads ever devolve into. They always come off as a less discussion, but a more a masturbatory exercise where they talk at people, knowing if eventually somebody will (be perceived to have) 'slip up' in their response and 'if you don't agree with me you're a heckin nazi!!! can either be sprung on them, or people just roll their eyes and stop replying because it's the internet equivalent of talking to a wall.
Pretty much this.
As soon as something could be perceived as racist/sexist/fascist/anything not good, people will start squinting real hard to label you.
I'm of firm belief that anything in-game isnt inherently fascist. Its a game, its all fiction. Even if someone came around and painted up a AM army with the 39-45 german scheme, i still wouldn't consider them facist. Just because you like the aestetic doesn't mean you're fascist, heck, i'd do it if AM was an army that interested me in the slightest.
If a Che Guevara T shirt doesn't turn you into a Marxist Revolutionary then 40k won't turn you into a National Socialist either Adding to this, isolating and ostracizing "troubled" individuals in one of the few places where they can be high/normal functioning is probably going to radicalize them further instead of finding common ground. Be more like this guy, but with 40k instead of Blues: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis
At some point the line is crossed where suppressing the content is no longer censorship, but a society simply having an immune system. No one is suggesting that making death threats illegal is censorship, for example. Where that line is? That's the rub aint it...
CommunistNapkin wrote: Folks in the States have a very different opinion on what freedom of speech means compared to people in other countries. In the states, freedom of speech means that people have the right to speak freely all of their opinions and should not be censored, regardless of how horrible their ideas are. Those ideas should be challenged, ignored, and/or mocked, but they shouldn't be censored. In many other countries, this idea of freedom of speech does not exist, hence the idea of "hate speech," or language that must be shut down because it is offensive, hurtful, incorrect, etc. I think that's part of the disagreement you guys are having.
I think the only disagreement here boils down to "is freedom of hatespeech allowed without consequences".
Again, I hasten to mention again that the UDHR does not support hatespeech as a right to freedom of expression.
Following up on this, I'm just going to reiterate the 'Folks in the States' part.
Referring to the the UDHR is just going to generate blank stares and confusion, there's really only a single point of reference when Americans talk about 'freedom of speech.'
Well, there is a second, but its religious and doesn't have that concept.
----
Anyway, to the OP's question: no.
Fiction exploring fictional concepts doesn't encourage real life behavior. Video games don't create violence, rock music and D&D don't create Satanists (oogy boogy satanists that never existed, even).
If that's anyone's take, go off and read your Chick Tracts, because it sounds like the same sort of bigotry with a new target. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chick_tract see Controversies)
Other-izing gamers, assuming further 'deviancy' and demanding they recant is still appalling even if its coming from a different direction.
BC's point, regardless of how poorly constructed and how his posts have devolved, is that censorship begets censorship. I won't go into too much detail due to the rules of this forum, and I can't speak for Britain, but here in the states, I have absolutely seen blatant and unapologetic censorship beyond the groups of topic in this thread (racists and fascists), and that has me greatly concerned.
I feel it is far more important to show and teach why an idea is wrong than to simply censor it.
I also feel it's long since time that the mods close this thread.
Wow i just noticed this topic, man it exploded fast.....
I see you went right into the gutter with your reference sources-sig marxist and vice? talk about only get one side of the argument.
These are FICTIONAL worlds that should not directly involve anything real world. 40K is no more a discussion of real facism (well actually it is more correctly defined as a feudalist system necessary given the expansive distances and population size of the imperial. in lore Terra doesn't care what sort of political system each world uses as long as they pay the tithes and swear loyalty to the imperium) than star trek is a discussion of utopian communism. hell the Honor Harrington universe (novels) deeply involve every kind of political system man has ever invented-constitutional monarchies, direct monarchies, communist states, socialist state, theocratic states, representative democracies etc....battletech does much the same.
On top of that it is a fictional world that is designed to make playing the GAME interesting to keep and draw players interests.
I stepped away from current 40K because i think 9th edition is complete and utter garbage from the perspective of game mechanics compared to what the game was when i really enjoyed it. playing a rule set heavily influenced by collectable card games + toy soldiers is not the kind of game i enjoy playing.
I don't care about virtue signaling, offensive speech, personal ideology or any of the rest of it as long as i can get together with fellow players and have a fun game, step away from our comparatively small niche hobby and look at the bigger ones, think about how impossible doing any other type of social activity would become if you had to vet every person involved to make sure they met your approved level of socially acceptable thoughts.
1. It's good to think critically about the media you consume. It's natural to feel torn when something that you like has troublesome elements. If the bad outweighs the good and you can no longer support 40k, feel confident in your choice.
2. There's absolutely a ton of stuff in the 40k lore that's attractive to fascists. A strong male figure dominates a centralized government, monoculture is enforced through violence, physical deviation denotes corruption, tradition confers legitimacy, etc.
3. That being said: That doesn't make 40k fascist. Authoritarians and racist goons are used to espousing less-extreme beliefs than they actually hold. They've gotten good at broadcasting their beliefs through cryptic symbols — Pepe, the OK symbol, and milk emojis have all been co-opted in the last several years. Crypto-fascists are entirely earnest in their terrible beliefs, but they've been forced by polite society to live in a space of submerged meaning — the same space occupied by satire and irony. A setting like 40k, which centralizes a restrictive, hateful state while also distancing itself from any grand moral statements, is going to be catnip to these people.
To some extent, it doesn't matter what else exists in 40k — a certain mindset is here for daddy Imperium, and it'll recontextualize other elements of the setting as necessary. See troubling elements of the fandoms for: Flames of War (and other historical wargames); the Snyderverse; My Little Pony; anime in general; hell, even guns.
I'm not trying to say that creators shouldn't be mindful of their messaging. But I'm also loath to blame a creator for unruly elements co-opting their work. And for what it's worth, there are many elements in 40k that undermine a fascist reading: The Imperium, for all its might, is ramshackle and self-destructive. It's a creaking, ineffective and hypocritical system that is at least a co-author of its own woes. The Tau, the Eldar and the Dark Eldar all offer competing visions to the Imperium. Orks are still violent, mad-scientist hooligans with no real agenda. And Chaos is still inherently goofy and cartoonish — a fitting archenemy for the Imperium of Man.
I guess the tl;dr I'm trying to get at — 40k has elements that are going to be attractive to the fash, but I don't think it's fair to read it as a fascist text. If the setting squicks you out, do what's best for you (and don't let any edgelords give you gruff over that). If you like 40k, please stick around. Be vocal in whatever way works for you. Don't let the only points of view be from prejudiced, authoritarian knuckleheads.
I think there's a causation-order problem here; I suspect people who find 40k speaks to their love of fascist ideology were already philosophically inclined that way ahead of time and 40k happened to fit into their worldview. Assuming that people can't tell fiction from reality and are being ideologically shaped by it sounds a lot like the Jack Thompson murder-simulators-training-killing-machines alarmist video game arguments of yesteryear.
I do find 40k effectively trains people to hate players with a slightly different interpretation of how the game should be played or to hate GW, though, at least given my interactions with various 40k communities as compared to other wargaming communities.
Matt Swain wrote: Oh FFS! the 40k setting isn't pro fascist and pro hate, it shows the horrors of what a fascist regime based on hate and fear would be like!
You didn't read the OP or any of the conversation did you?
It might be wise to close this thread sooner rather than later, as it has allready has devolved in parts to a discussion of actual political policy.
As for the topic itself; I don't believe creative decisions regarding works of fiction need to be encumbered by contemporary or historical politics when the fiction itself has no agenda.
I have noticed in the last decade or so that super-politicized groups try to colonize fandoms, twisting the imagery and the tropes of the IP to suit their agenda. Generally, this has been the work of left wingers (for example, as to comics) but with 40k it has long been right wingers. On one hand, 40k is a natural target for right wingers with all of its gothic and fascist imagery. On the other hand, it’s pretty ironic that right wingers would not figure out that all of the overblown imagery of 40k is satirical — I think it’s ultimately very funny that they can’t seem to perceive how absurd and juvenile it is to unironically idolize the Imperium (or any aspect of 40k). This partly has to do with the way the game was presented from 4E on, as less obviously comical.
BertBert wrote: Attempts to change or censor fiction are likely rooted in a naive and simplistic world view or an authoritarian mindset.
Dystopian fiction teaches not only by providing examples of what is right, but also by providing examples of what is wrong. I've used 40k in recreational programs for youth and as a teaching tool. It's all about your approach- and that's a thing that only you can control. For every one idiot who wants to sculpt KKK hoods on their Space Marines because they think the Imperium's orthodoxy and xenophobia implies a tacit acceptance of real world racism, there will be someone who paints Hello Kitty marines.
In the end, it is the responsibility of PEOPLE to determine what they will and will not tolerate in others.
If I was playing 40k with someone who made racist, sexist, homophobic jokes, I would first, politely tell them that those kind of jokes bother me, and ask them to refrain from making those jokes again. If they persist, or otherwise escalate the situation, I issue another last chance in the form of "I've asked once; this makes two. I don't want to pack up and walk out on you mid game, but if you keep making those kind of jokes or statements, I will."
If it's at a store? Talk to the staff in private after an incident that makes you uncomfortable, and again, let them know that stuff bothers you, and that if it continues, you may have to game elsewhere. If it's staff? Talk to the manager in private. If it's the manager? Play and shop elsewhere. If you feel it is safe to do so, let them know privately and politely why you are choosing to shop elsewhere- you probably won't change their behavior, but if a few other like minded people have already done the same, you never know.
You say your friends are starting to bow out of 40k because they are feeling this too, but later you talk about how it isn't the game, it's the community. Seems to me you've got the answer right there: BE the community of positive play.
Don't quit the game, just don't play it with @$$holes. Also, be welcoming non-@$$holes yourselves, who provide positive gaming experiences for people so that they too have a choice to play with people who aren't @$$holes.
That's not to discourage the conversation- we're four pages in, so obviously people have strong thoughts and feelings on the issue; conversations like this actually can be part of the solution.
Is it fair to say that in conclusion, that if you for example encounter someone in your local game store who does not quite get that 40k is meant as satire and a warning against totalitarianism, the best course is to engage them and educate them, especially if they are young. If they dont listen you can just avoid them if you feel uncomfortable around them.
And op should not quit the hobby because he does not indirectly support fascism by buying from GW.
Manchu wrote: I have noticed in the last decade or so that super-politicized groups try to colonize fandoms, twisting the imagery and the tropes of the IP to suit their agenda.
I think this is very naive. Most nerd fandoms were born with a socio-political agenda underneath it. Star Trek was deliberately a reflection of the desired utopia of the left wing of the 60's and the new left. Tolkien's work is a mythologised version of Europe during the first half of the 20th century. Narnia is a biblically inspired work of fiction. Dungeons and Dragons canibalised most of Tolkien work's to create their games and thus most of his themes. It's not stranger either to the "in vogue" then return of esoterism and neopaganism surge of the 80's following the in the footstep of the hippy movement of the 60's and 70's. The X-Men were explicitly created to discuss racism through "fantasy racism". Captain America was a pro-war and anti-nazi propaganda piece. The Punisher was a satire of vigilentism and police militarisation with the start of the War on Drugs and the War on Terror. Judge Dread was a bit the same thing. Wonder Woman was created explicitly to serve as a feminist icon. Warhammer 40K was created to first lampoon the Thatcher and late Cold War era and now can serve to lampoon the War on Terror government overeach and propaganda. Nerd fandom always were very political. You and I were just too young, back in the days, and not knowledgeable enough of politics to actually get the references and metaphores or be capable of making a congent discussion on those subjects. Fiction always is a huge battleground for political ideals as they can serve to transmit and foster values with great speed and mark the imaginary of people. They can influence our perception of social phenomenon.
Careful there, I didn’t argue (even implicitly) that fiction isn’t created with political undertones (or overtones) in the first place — I said that others later colonize it for their own separate purposes.
Case in point, the origins of 40k have something to do with a subversive, punk mentality. Those who want to use it to idolize IRL figures of authority (or the military generally) are certainly twisting the original concept to diametrically opposite effect.
Polonius wrote: that's true, but Americans tend to have a very broad view of what "censorship" is. The first amendment applies to governmental action, but we seem to think that private entities, or even individuals, cannot limit our speech.
Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946) disagrees with you there.
Polonius is well aware of the letter of the law, BCB. He is talking about the cultural tone of American culture in re free speech, rather than the legal reality.
I really enjoyed reading this thread, and I think the level to which everyone is so tense in replying is sad. Everyone who has replied basically agrees with how to deal with the problem, they basically only disagree on the extent of the problem or whether GW should bear responsibility.
I think that GW bears a little responsibility because the later writers (from 4e/5e onward) have written the background in a way that justifies the Imperium and makes them into more of a "good guy" faction. I think it is mostly clumsy writing and some less thoughtful designers after the old guard left and is not malicious.
But the Imperium is a pastiche of both fascism (and this should be really obvious, people who don't see it must be being a bit wilful to my mind!) and totalitarian communism as well. It is sort of a pastiche of all the worst stuff from the 20th century overlaid onto the Holy Roman Empire, in space! Which is a cool idea for a setting, to be sure.
I think if we accept that fascists like 40K a lot (and those who haven't encountered it, it does exist) then we can examine why that is. And yeah, we can do something about it.
As for free speech, that is a very parochial american point of view. Most of the world doesn't work like that, you guys are the weird outliers, it's just that you are used to considering yourselves the default more. Pro-Nazi stuff will get you in trouble with the law pretty easily where I am, for sure.
Manchu wrote: Careful there, I didn’t argue (even implicitly) that fiction isn’t created with political undertones in the first place — I said that others later colonize it for their own separate purposes.
I disagree. It wasn't an "undertone" and it's not a seperate purpose. I can't see any difference there. I don't think you noticed or got involved into adult discussion about those fandoms before you turned yourself into an adult and thus changed perception.
Every piece of 40k starts with describing how awful the IoM is, but then it undermines that by having Imperial characters that don't really explore how awful things are. E.g generic Battle Brother Genericus has little to do with the oppressive Imperial policies.
And because most of the 40k lore is Imperial focused, it paints this false image that the IoM is somehow the justified protagonist of the setting.
The obvious solution isn't "canceling" 40k, but exploring the other povs of the setting. Giving the other factions' pov (Eldar, Tau, Ork, Necron and Chaos) more weight would dispel the protagonistic weight of the IoM. And exploring the civilian and other "minor" races' pov would better show how awful the IoM truly is.
Polonius wrote: that's true, but Americans tend to have a very broad view of what "censorship" is. The first amendment applies to governmental action, but we seem to think that private entities, or even individuals, cannot limit our speech.
Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946) disagrees with you there.
If you’re trying to play gotcha, you picked poorly. Marsh involved company towns, and held that when private property is opened in the sane way as public, the communities 1st amendment rights override the rights of a property owner. It’s not quite dead law, but it doesn’t really come up much
OTOH, Pruneyard v Robins is still good albeit only in California.
Da Boss wrote: I think if we accept that fascists like 40K a lot (and those who haven't encountered it, it does exist) then we can examine why that is. And yeah, we can do something about it.
Fascists also drink water. And Hitler was a vegetarian.
"Fascists like X, therefore X is bad" is the most basic example of a logical fallacy you can commit.
My primary objection against comparisons between the Imperium and facisim is that broadness of the given arguments, most people who argue for such comparisons use general notions of authoritarianism totalitarianism to make their case. In realit the broad framework of the Imperium is rooted far before the advent of facisism as a political ideology. A comparison can be made, but for the most part only insofar that the Imperium borrows a number from popular conceptions of facisism with regards to it's aesthetics. The deeper foundations, however are much more closely related to feudalism, absolute monarchism, the Catholic church of old, the Roman empire, etc, than to the machinations of Mussollini.
Case in point, the origins of 40k have something to do with a subversive, punk mentality. Those who want to use it to idolize IRL figures of authority (or the military generally) are certainly twisting the original concept to diametrically opposite effect.
I think subversive is a much better description than satirical. I’m not sure what naming a warboss after a prime minister really satirizes, but it is pretty punk rock.
Da Boss wrote: I really enjoyed reading this thread, and I think the level to which everyone is so tense in replying is sad. Everyone who has replied basically agrees with how to deal with the problem, they basically only disagree on the extent of the problem or whether GW should bear responsibility.
.
.
.
I think if we accept that fascists like 40K a lot (and those who haven't encountered it, it does exist) then we can examine why that is. And yeah, we can do something about it.
This latter statement of yours is why its 'so tense.'
Its unclear who you've decided to Otherize as 'fascists' and what 'something' you intend to do about it.
It seems better to let gamers enjoy the fiction they know is fiction, and if you have to be seen 'doing something,' addressing real world problems would be better.
epronovost wrote: I don't think you noticed or got involved into adult discussion about those fandoms before you turned yourself into an adult and thus changed perception.
This is a good point. But there is also a sense in which the context has changed since when I was a kid. For example, I grew up in a conservative household but it was also a household that loved Star Trek. In those days, ST:TNG was on every Sunday night in our house and we saw no real conflict between the sweeping left wing utopia of that show and our own IRL conservatism; they fit together somehow in a way that may not make sense in today’s world of demanding rigid, strict ideological tribalism.
Caradman Sturnn wrote: My primary objection against comparisons between the Imperium and facisim is that broadness of the given arguments, most people who argue for such comparisons use general notions of authoritarianism totalitarianism to make their case. In realit the broad framework of the Imperium is rooted far before the advent of facisism as a political ideology. A comparison can be made, but for the most part only insofar that the Imperium borrows a number from popular conceptions of facisism with regards to it's aesthetics. The deeper foundations, however are much more closely related to feudalism, absolute monarchism, the Catholic church of old, the Roman empire, etc, than to the machinations of Mussollini.
I think there’s more to it though. The idea of a United people, facing threats from all sides including within and literally below. If you look, there’s a lot to connect the IOM to fascism instead of just generic authoritarianism.
But still, what’s the point? Oh, those lads aren’t fascist! They’re just advocating for a totalitarian state which thrives on constant conflict.
I have read some really stupid discussions on dakka, but this one wins. Toy soldiers and aliens people, and a dystopia for a setting. The OP can quit, what do we care. GW encourages you to buy, play, and make others buy. It is just a game company, It has no political agenda whatsoever.
Caradman Sturnn wrote: My primary objection against comparisons between the Imperium and facisim is that broadness of the given arguments, most people who argue for such comparisons use general notions of authoritarianism totalitarianism to make their case. In realit the broad framework of the Imperium is rooted far before the advent of facisism as a political ideology. A comparison can be made, but for the most part only insofar that the Imperium borrows a number from popular conceptions of facisism with regards to it's aesthetics. The deeper foundations, however are much more closely related to feudalism, absolute monarchism, the Catholic church of old, the Roman empire, etc, than to the machinations of Mussollini.
I think there’s more to it though. The idea of a United people, facing threats from all sides including within and literally below. If you look, there’s a lot to connect the IOM to fascism instead of just generic authoritarianism.
I won't dispute your obeservations, however I will note that the historical fascist regimes were never under an actual threat in the way the Imperium has been, and as I already mentioned, a number of feudal and reactionary mechanicsms that are present in the Imperium were actively being condemned by the facists at their height.
epronovost wrote: I don't think you noticed or got involved into adult discussion about those fandoms before you turned yourself into an adult and thus changed perception.
This is a good point. But there is also a sense in which the context has changed since when I was a kid. For example, I grew up in a conservative household but it was also a household that loved Star Trek. In those days, ST:TNG was on every Sunday night in our house and we saw no real conflict between the sweeping left wing utopia of that show and our own IRL conservatism; they fit together somehow in a way that may not make sense in today’s world of demanding rigid, strict ideological tribalism.
I think things have changed, but it’s not also how old you are, but how old the ideas being discussed are. Star Trek was, for its time, diverse for the sake of diversity, but people accept it because that’s how it was. Having a black female officer, or Russian, was a big deal then, but we accept that. When modern trek includes modern diversity, people seemingly get mad because they only want the original version.
In some ways, it’s why everybody on the right lionizes MLK when objecting to any modern civil rights movement, even though MLK was LOATHED by the right when he was alive.
Polonius, there might be something to that but I’m making a different point. In the 90s, when TNG was still in production, we were watching it without hating on it for being “liberal” (even though we knew it certainly was), whereas today there seems to be a much more intense filing into tribal ideological commitments. I think that development has to do with why a person like OP has all this anxiety about whether he should play 40k given that some other 40k players, and not even GW or the 40k setting themselves, have political opinions he considers bad.
Manchu wrote: This is a good point. But there is also a sense in which the context has changed since when I was a kid. For example, I grew up in a conservative household but it was also a household that loved Star Trek. In those days, ST:TNG was on every Sunday night in our house and we saw no real conflict between the sweeping left wing utopia of that show and our own IRL conservatism; they fit together somehow in a way that may not make sense in today’s world of demanding rigid, strict ideological tribalism.
This phenomenon is called compartimentalisation and it's not exactly very hard. We do it all the time. I love war drama and war fiction, but I'm a pacifist. How do I square up both of those things? I compartimentalise. We can seperate what we enjoy as fiction or as fantasy and what we enjoy in reality. All that to say I'm not reall surprised that conservative people enjoy liberal media and vice versa. Hell, a former neo-nazi friend of mine told me he used to be a fan of Captain America comic books even when he was within his group. That's how crazy things can be.
Tyran wrote: The big problem with 40k is the narrative focus.
Every piece of 40k starts with describing how awful the IoM is, but then it undermines that by having Imperial characters that don't really explore how awful things are. E.g generic Battle Brother Genericus has little to do with the oppressive Imperial policies.
And because most of the 40k lore is Imperial focused, it paints this false image that the IoM is somehow the justified protagonist of the setting.
The obvious solution isn't "canceling" 40k, but exploring the other povs of the setting. Giving the other factions' pov (Eldar, Tau, Ork, Necron and Chaos) more weight would dispel the protagonistic weight of the IoM. And exploring the civilian and other "minor" races' pov would better show how awful the IoM truly is.
Generic Battle Brother Genericus was taken from his parents as a child to be trained and indoctrinated by a religious warrior-cult to become a killing machine. It's a fairly common premise in the 40k universe, but that doesn't make it less horrible, so I don't see how this is hiding the awful nature of the IoM. It's just that we have taken Space Marines and all that comes with them for granted within this setting. Any attempt of creating a similar superhuman warrior in the real world would obviously face heavy opposition from an ethical standpoint, but we are willing and capable to make that leap and pretend Space Marines are justified when engaging with 40k.
We also do have other POVs, more than ever really. Thing is, no matter which race or faction you engage with, it always culminates in various kinds of murder and killing, because that's the essence of 40k. Morality rarely enters the picture, because GW doesn't produce miniatures of humanist philospohers. Master of Mankind does explore some of that in the Emperor's motivations and plans for humanity as a whole, but I don't think you can go much further than this without departing too much from the core premise of 40k.
Here's a relevant example for another POV: In Damocles, Shadowsun orders the bombardment of a Hive City, killing millions of people in one salvo. The author explicitly mentions that, as a large portion of the Hive Spire breaks off, crushing the levels below. When her Tau forces get ambushed and obliterated by the White Scars, she proclaims that these Tau were happy to give their lives for the greater good, and that their sacrifice is a small price to pay.
Violence on a massive scale is a regular occurrence in 40k, and it's not limited to the IoM. It's never justified from a general point of view, only in the heads of the people in the story. Readers are competent enough to make that leap, we do it all the time when engaging with fiction.
Manchu wrote: Polonius, there might be something to that but I’m making a different point. In the 90s, when TNG was still in production, we were watching it without hating on it for being “liberal” (even though we knew it certainly was), whereas today there seems to be a much more intense filing into tribal ideological commitments. I think that development has to do with why a person like OP has all this anxiety about whether he should play 40k given that some other 40k players, and not even GW or the 40k setting themselves, have political opinions he considers bad.
Oh, yes, that makes sense. I’m a card carrying member of the ACLu, and I love military history and war movies and the NFL. I think some people do feel the need to square their interests and hobbies with their politics in a way that was rare a generation ago.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote: Compartmentalization regarding fiction seems to have gotten harder since the 1990s as evinced by this thread.
In many areas, but not in all. I think matters of sexuality, while they’ve been highly politicized, are less partisan than prior. I think conservatives can enjoy fiction with queer themes more readily than in the past.
Our culture has gotten shockingly less uptight though. I belong to a Presbytarian church in the Deep South, and our divorced pastor dating is a matter of curious gossip, but not scandal. A cohabiting couple joined to no raised eye brows. Admittedly, were not a very conservative congregation, but even 3” years ago it’d be very different.
Generic Battle Brother Genericus was taken from his parents as a child to be trained and indoctrinated by a religious warrior-cult to become a killing machine. It's a fairly common premise in the 40k universe, but that doesn't make it less horrible, so I don't see how this is hiding the awful nature of the IoM. It's just that we have taken Space Marines and all that comes with them for granted within this setting. Any attempt of creating a similar superhuman warrior in the real world would obviously face heavy opposition from an ethical standpoint, but we are willing and capable to make that leap and pretend Space Marines are justified when engaging with 40k.
The problem is that we have taken it for granted. I don't think there is a piece of 40k lore that explicitly explores why that practice is horrible.
We also do have other POVs, more than ever really. Thing is, no matter which race or faction you engage with, it always culminates in various kinds of murder and killing, because that's the essence of 40k. Morality rarely enters the picture, because GW doesn't produce miniatures of humanist philospohers. Master of Mankind does explore some of that in the Emperor's motivations and plans for humanity as a whole, but I don't think you can go much further than this without departing too much from the core premise of 40k.
We do have more POVs than ever before, but it still is a very sad and small proportion of all the boring Imperial focused stories. And yes every race partakes in the murder and killing, but it is easier to see the flaws of other factions from the outside.
Here's a relevant example for another POV: In Damocles, Shadowsun orders the bombardment of a Hive City, killing millions of people in one salvo. The author explicitly mentions that, as a large portion of the Hive Spire breaks off, crushing the levels below. When her Tau forces get ambushed and obliterated by the White Scars, she proclaims that these Tau were happy to give their lives for the greater good, and that their sacrifice is a small price to pay.
Violence on a massive scale is a regular occurrence in 40k, and it's not limited to the IoM. It's never justified from a general point of view, only in the heads of the people in the story. Readers are competent enough to make that leap, we do it all the time when engaging with fiction.
Some of use are competent enough to make that leap, but that is not an universal trait, and any good storytelling recognizes that some readers do need narrative hand-holding.
Polonius wrote: I think there are two strands of thought in the OP, one of which I agree with, the other I do not.
the first is the appeal the 40k lore has to people with fascist tendencies. Yes, you can call them shitposters, or the alt right, or whatever, but 40k has a lot of fans in that camp. You don't need to dig deep to find it. And it's not hard to see why: not only is 40k dominated by warfare, it's one in which the brainwashed super soldiers for the totalitarian empire are the protagonists! Also, the imperium of man is beset on all sides by threats, from without and within, the struggle has a spiritual aspect, and the best hope is violence and strength. If that doesn't sound like modern far right rherotic, you aren't paying attention.
the second strand is if GW is somehow responsible for this. And I don't think so. Nobody is lured into hatred because of GW, I think it just provides a vocabulary of symbols for people to relate to.
In short, I think it's obvious the appeal 40k has to the far right, but I don't think there's anything morally or ethically wrong with playing 40k.
100% agree with this.
In recent years though I've become incredibly uncomfortable with some of way 40k is marketed which is part real-world events and part the almost complete removal of self-awareness and critical takedowns within-Lore of what the Imperium and its poster boys represent. I think the reductive and silly counter argument usually goes something like "oh well, all the lore in the rulebook and such is written from the Imperium PoV, it's basically propaganda!" Which... I guess it kind of is.... but it absolutely does not come across that way whatsoever. It comes across as Word of God, immutable truth: The Imperium is the only true hope for Humanity and represents it's best interests, Xenos are all without question to be killed and exterminated as they cannot be trusted to exist and Faith in the Emperor is the one bulwark against eternal damnation. Oh and Astartes are given the most glowing praise, with the moral and ethical nature of their creation and continued existence and use is not touched upon whatsoever, not in the rule book, not in their Codex.
If more material surrounding 40k made more of an effort to address and argue against this stuff I think GW's statements about "You will not be missed" might have a little more weight. Certainly if they fire BL authors for speaking out in defense of Bisexual Youtubers who get homophobic attacks directed towards them it basically shows said statements as the insincere corporate piss they really are.
People bringing up 4chan earlier actually makes for a really good point in how just brushing off any concerns or being so self-assured in the knowledge that somehow everyone is going to "get" the parody is actually a really dangerous idea. You go back 12-13 years in 4chan's history and while there were a lot of edgy people on there throwing around slurs, the actual politics of the userbase were fairly left wing or at most, pretty liberal. Back in 2008, you had threads on /v/ bemoaning the prevalence of shaved head middle age white dudes as being the only type of character design video game developers were capable of making, and wanting more diversity in race, age and gender amongst protagonists. Fast-forward to 2016-onwards and the mere appearance of a black woman in any major role in a video game gets you about 50 threads about "Neo-Marxist Frankfurt School Liberal (???) plots to commit White Genocide." This is entirely because in a culture revolving around anonymity and edginess, eventually it would be filled with people not in on the joke, and ones who took it seriously. I mean, hell, look at Incels, also a 4chan creation. Incels started as a fething joke, an ironic pisstake. Now an Incel is a defined and actual thing that people believe and actually are.
I don't want to be all "oh won't somebody please think of the children!" but if all you show people of this supposed horrible setting is how the Imperium is necessary and Space Marines are awesome then that's what certain people are going to believe and it's going to attract or warp the views of the more susceptible ones. A shock revelation for some but many people do not separate themselves that much from their chosen hobbies or fictional universes.
What's also interesting is that in my anecdotal experience, I've seen more women, people of colour and openly LGBT people engaged with Sigmar and other tabletop games than I have 40k, despite 40k being the biggest of them all. And I live in a very diverse and accepting area where the 40k community is incredibly open-minded and incredibly anti-fash. But the community is only one aspect of it, when the game and setting itself revolves around so much psuedo-Fascist ultra-Toxic Masculine power fantasies that are ABSOLUTELY NOT presented as ironic jokes or critiques anymore it tends to make a lot of people highly uncomfortable.
Polonius wrote: Oh, yes, that makes sense. I’m a card carrying member of the ACLu, and I love military history and war movies and the NFL. I think some people do feel the need to square their interests and hobbies with their politics in a way that was rare a generation ago.
I think it's caused by internet and discussion forums like this one. Here, political discussions are banned (even though we are having one right now), but that's not the case in many forums and politics and debates of value always arise once in a while in any given community. Back in the days, people didn't spent hours writting with strangers on any ggiven subject. Debates on subject of core value like equality, justice, war/peace, democracy, religion, etc. can and often are painful. This leads to people who just want some fun and "chill time" to favor their ingroups and their consumption habits.
Nurglitch wrote: Some years ago I was a financial planner (read: salesman) and part of our training for fleecing clients ("Shields Down" was part of our vocabulary...) was repetition. Repeating phrases, and making sure we repeatedly approached contacts using the same formulas was the core approach we were taught. Admittedly, the program had something of a survivorship bias, but the most successful salesmen were the ones who could repeat the same phrases over and over despite context and despite the mark (one teacher emphasized saying that everything was 'Great!' the manky scotch git, regardless of what it was it was a great opportunity to sell). The point being that constant repetition and exposure to an idea is possibly the greatest factor in someone taking it in.
Which has the unfortunate corollary that we need to practice a form of memetic sanitation so that, like daemons, bad ideas can't infiltrate us.
Eh, not into mind control on any level. One mans bad idea is another mans great idea. Where does the censorship begin? Where does it end? Who is policing this?
The problem is at home. It is with parents not being interactive with their children. There will ALWAYS be nazi's. There will ALWAYS be jerks. Parents need to conceptualized this fact and edit to their moral standing. Whatever that may be.
Another problem is people do not understand what I am about to type. You cannot shame a racist. You cannot stop someone from being a jerk. You CAN stop them from slander, physical or mental violence and from harassment. The problem needs to be solved in the stores by the store owners.
Does anyone hold a gun to your head so that you wash your hands? Because that's the sanitation I'm talking about. People do need to take personal responsibility and keep their own minds clean of fascist memes.
After reading some of this thread it amazes me that people forget scumbags like arch (formerly arch warhammer) and his sizable following exist.
You know, the guy who was against GW's statement in which they say their setting is not what they want the real world to be and all forms of bigotry are bad.
One big reason that I recommend wargaming to young people is that it invariably involves taking a meta level perspective on rules that also regulate one’s own success or failure. This perspective is difficult to adopt in a structured way, but wargames offer just such an opportunity and regularly, as they force us to talk about personally important regulations in an objective manner unless we want to be that guy. Oddly enough, GWs poorly composed rules are a bonus in this regard, because if one cannot adopt this meta level critical attitude, then one cannot play these games... well, not coherently and fairly, showing good sportsmanship and so on. One big difference between when I began recommending specifically GW games and now, almost 30 years later, is that people don’t seem to be able to adopt such an attitude so easily, and are thus unable to talk and reason things through. So the world is increasingly polarized, and this seems to show up in the hobby as a sort of symptom. Moreover, unable to adopt a meta level critical perspective on themselves, people don’t seem to recognize the irony in the intolerance of a social organization preaching diversity and tolerance for some and not others based on race, for example. My point here is that, IFF GW games seem to encourage fascism or colonialism, this likely has more to do with the reactionary attitudes and shallow, non reflective rationale motivating social virtue signaling and so on than it has to do with anything actually in GW games...
We do have more POVs than ever before, but it still is a very sad and small proportion of all the boring Imperial focused stories. And yes every race partakes in the murder and killing, but it is easier to see the flaws of other factions from the outside.
So it's about personal preference then? I'm not super invested into Space Marines or Guard for that matter (I play neither), but their stories are easily the most interesting for me, because humans will always be more relatable to me than aliens.
Some of use are competent enough to make that leap, but that is not an universal trait, and any good storytelling recognizes that some readers do need narrative hand-holding.
I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree with both of those statements. You have to attribute a certain amount of maturity and competence to people, because if you don't, that will prompt certain kinds of people to try and assume control over their lives and decisions. It's also most definitely not standard practice to deliver overt moralistic preaching in anything that isn't made for children. Narrative handholding makes sense as far as the plot goes, but not the underlying implications.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why does this thread exist when it's basically just the worst parts of Sigmarxism?
Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Uhhh, probably because it’s s productive and healthy discussion? I think we’re seeing a lot of perspectives that all seem to broadly agree with the OPs concern, but disagree with the suggestion that GW change it’s product.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why does this thread exist when it's basically just the worst parts of Sigmarxism?
Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Uhhh, probably because it’s s productive and healthy discussion? I think we’re seeing a lot of perspectives that all seem to broadly agree with the OPs concern, but disagree with the suggestion that GW change it’s product.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Dakka Dakka has an OT politics ban. On-topic discussion isn’t banned, of course, including discussion of the political aspects/implications of miniatures gaming. It can be a fine line, and there is certainly some stuff a little over the line ITT, but all in all this is a topic squarely within on-topic discussion for this forum.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why does this thread exist when it's basically just the worst parts of Sigmarxism?
Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Uhhh, probably because it’s s productive and healthy discussion? I think we’re seeing a lot of perspectives that all seem to broadly agree with the OPs concern, but disagree with the suggestion that GW change it’s product.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why does this thread exist when it's basically just the worst parts of Sigmarxism?
Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Uhhh, probably because it’s s productive and healthy discussion? I think we’re seeing a lot of perspectives that all seem to broadly agree with the OPs concern, but disagree with the suggestion that GW change it’s product.
"Rules for thee, and not for me", you mean.
"Politics Free Zones" have a habit of doing exactly that, by tacitly endorsing a particular political stance and discouraging dissent.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why does this thread exist when it's basically just the worst parts of Sigmarxism?
Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Uhhh, probably because it’s s productive and healthy discussion? I think we’re seeing a lot of perspectives that all seem to broadly agree with the OPs concern, but disagree with the suggestion that GW change it’s product.
"Rules for thee, and not for me", you mean.
Read the rules. No political discussions in OT. This is a discussion about the wargaming community, not a random political discussion.
The goal of the rule is to focus discussion on wargaming and related topics, and this is about wargaming.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why does this thread exist when it's basically just the worst parts of Sigmarxism?
Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Uhhh, probably because it’s s productive and healthy discussion? I think we’re seeing a lot of perspectives that all seem to broadly agree with the OPs concern, but disagree with the suggestion that GW change it’s product.
Yeah, but there has been a brewing argument between what should or shouldn't be censored, with one side supporting censorship of dangerous ideas and the other seeing that as a lead into further censorship.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why does this thread exist when it's basically just the worst parts of Sigmarxism?
Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Uhhh, probably because it’s s productive and healthy discussion? I think we’re seeing a lot of perspectives that all seem to broadly agree with the OPs concern, but disagree with the suggestion that GW change it’s product.
Yeah, but there has been a brewing argument between what should or shouldn't be censored, with one side supporting censorship of dangerous ideas and the other seeing that as a lead into further censorship.
Which makes it a germane and relevant topic on a wargaming board. Dakka allows for fierce controversy, and it allows for off topic discussion. It just doesn’t want spend mod time on off topic brush fires. It’s their nickel, and I don’t disagree with the policy, even if I was a frequent poster in the politics threads.
Well, I’m late to the party and not going to pretend I read everything.
Some people can separate fiction from reality, and some can’t.
If a person believes that playing 40k somehow supports fascism, what do you say to that? I enjoy the Saw movies, but resist the urge to torture-porn people. I like the movie Fight Club, but don’t engage in domestic terrorism. I like Die Hard, and don’t go around quipping one-liners and shooting people.
For me, the satirical nature of the setting is enough for me to be able to wink and touch my nose when the “heroes” chant litanies of hate. It’s the nature of dystopian settings that make them interesting places to play in.
Imagine the video game DOOM set in a pleasant heavenscape where all the denizens try to give you cookies and ice cream. I mean, yeah, you could chainsaw the nice cherubs and see if they explode into ammo and health, but would that be fun? Do I encourage demonification of the universe by playing that? Do Satanists “win” by my enjoying “Hell”?
(No negatives meant to real world Satanists, you do you.)
So, while some real-world fascists might like 40k, they probably also like spending time with their families. Going out for a cup of coffee. Eating at non-ethnic restaurants. None of those are good reasons for me to stop enjoying time with my family, going out for coffee, or eating at whatever restaurant I want.
I can separate fascist activities from non-fascist activities that fascists might enjoy. All I can suggest is that if you can’t, you honestly should seek professional assistance in navigating what must be an absolutely terrifying existence.
This thread is now 6 pages long and there has been some genuine discussion without major name calling or the like. It might be off topic, but I think that's awesome and commendable.
ZebioLizard2 wrote: Why are politics being allowed now? Why is a mod endorsing this?
Dakka Dakka has an OT politics ban. On-topic discussion isn’t banned, of course, including discussion of the political aspects/implications of miniatures gaming. It can be a fine line, and there is certainly some stuff a little over the line ITT, but all in all this is a topic squarely within on-topic discussion for this forum.
That feels like a distinction without a difference to allow general politics to be spoken of in a different measure so long as it's attached to a topic that matches it.
But I'll drop that argument since it's done. The community I'm personally within knows the distinction of 40k's satire and former things to be that of something of another universe.
Someone brought up the Evil Empire of Star Wars and the Republics and Rebellions.. But when you look at it within Star Wars it seems like the Republics have constantly failed, they constantly fall and easily become subverted at the first chance of someone villainous and seeking power. I do not believe that the intention of the lore creators was that Republics are genuinely terrible, end up corrupt, or otherwise... But that's how the lore has ended up. I don't believe it encourages the thought that we should be pushing for non-Republic sources of government as a stable method of governance.
The idea is that. The idea of fiction separation from belief in real life.
I want to be up front as to why I’m posting this: I cannot really play 40k right now because those I play with are having a crisis of 40k faith, and it has spread to me. So, I am posting this in order to help reason through said crisis so that we can all play again (and perhaps better contextualize why we are playing it). I want to do this through talking about these hang-ups of ours, which would be best dealt with talking through and exploring the topic with the community. I can use some help with that. In short, I am trying to bring my group back into 40k! So if you have some good points to poke holes in my thinking here, they are more than welcome.
Mostly, my issue right now is that the people I have always played 40k with are thinking of bowing out for good because of what their support of the franchise might mean.
And what I hate is that after thinking about it, I actually do get it.
As far as I can tell from my readings about 40k and fascists/the alt-right/etc. online (of which I have done a fair bit so far), people tend to really dismiss absolutely any validity that these people have for choosing to idolize 40k over other IP’s for all kinds of reasons, which I also totally get because I did for the longest time too, but I think they miss some key points. I think there’s more credit due to the idea that 40k is easily idolized by these forces of hatred than folks seem to give these people. The more I’ve thought about it, the more I fear that 40k might actually have an intrinsic problem that comes with the lore, as-consumed by today’s real-world population.
People say ‘lol40k is a joke/satire/what have you’. “The Imperium is SO stupidly terrible, that no one should ever take it seriously.” “Obviously everything is horrible and there is nothing to admire here.” But as many will tell you, 40k is actually NOT presented as any sort of joke, not really. It’s ultra serious; rooted in parody perhaps, but is now largely not. The joke was basically that fascists and hatred is terrible, look at how ridiculous their world would be. And while I don’t think the change in tone to seriousness in 40k directly supports the idea that astartes/the Imperium/etc. are NOT terrible in any way, its still leaving things woefully unclear.
So 40k stopped being obviously satirical decades ago, and I personally have always taken the lore extremely seriously (having started during 3rd edition myself), in that, when you think about it, all that is required for it to be very realistic is the assumption that the warp exists. That’s in any case at least one way to look at it being a grounded, realistic sort of universe. There’s lots of other ways to draw very direct comparisons to 40k and the real world but I’d rather not go to off topic with that here. But regardless, I’ve actually always thought that the Imperium was a ‘beautiful creation’ – speaking purely in a narrative, engaging sense. Not that it would be a good place to live – obviously. The immersion of being a part of these terrible people partaking in this terrible universe has been appealing because of how new the problems are, and the sheer terror of what you face and then subsequently overcome together, while being a part of the mess of humanity. And that's fun and interesting as hell. I think all of this while, of course, being quite the opposite of these fascists/alt-right/people-spouting-hatred. In fact, I’ve always been proud of 40k as an IP because of the discussions I knew it could always bring about, partially in regards to humanity being at its worst, what they could accomplish in that state verses what they completely disallowed, just hypothetically. But I’ve also always believed that we cannot afford to leave any quarter for hatred to breed in. And if Warhammer 40k has only growing in that capacity…
I’ve read post after post after post about all of this, and I can’t help but think that most people are missing the mark. There is some reason, I think – blatant reason – why fascists would, and indeed perhaps almost should look to the Imperium as a model of pure strength. And if that’s what matters to them, that’s what matters to them (unfortunately). People are always saying that the Imperium is obviously the worst in every way – dancing around the actual reasons why these people look up to it. In a grimdark galaxy, it stands. It is resolute. Parts of it fall just as parts of it rise, but the Imperium does keep humanity alive. It is our deepest, darkest, worst impulses of governance and otherwise to the point where we’ve almost lost ourselves completely – and yet it works in this universe, and has endured for millennia. Even if you say that this is a story where humanity is overcoming not just the galaxy but also itself (a true and grimdark point to make), I would still give credit to the Imperium. The Imperium is a force to be reckoned with. One potentially sad point to real life fascists…maybe.
BUT (counter-point). The thing that people are trying to say but aren’t giving enough voice to is how there could be something BETTER. Instead of a fascist, dominating Imperium that allows for no voice within its throngs of underlings, there could be a government that works much more collectively, more democratically, or what have you – just like that one democratic hive on Necromunda, Gothrul's Needle (yes, democracy exists in 40k – even if it is still terrible in that hive). So there’s the thing – the Imperium is gloriously messed up but strong, yet if the government was replaced with something much more sensible, it would be so much better. Presumably. The problem is that sort of solution has barely even been vaguely, tertiarily SHOWN as even a possibility to sustain within the lore (for humanity). I get that is potentially a part of the grimdark theme – but there is so much room here for more clarity on the part of the narrative. And I suspect Gulliman’s work may show just how much better the Imperium COULD be. So there is certainly hope.
To clarify what I mean by that – better solutions to evil Empires is displayed better in, for example, Star Wars. In Star Wars, you have the ‘evil Empire’, and a rebellion, a republic, etc. You can see the alternative to the Empire very plainly. You can know the failings of these evil empires very easily, and see a better, more righteous alternative in which others get a say. You do not get that in Warhammer 40k. There is the Imperium. THE solution. Maybe there was some fancy idea of something way better in the Horus Heresy and that’s obviously a tragedy that given all their actions they still couldn’t sustain even a fraction of that vision, but there is some very real argument that because of the Horus Heresy’s failure, and any other government’s failure to have stopped the Imperium, that the message becomes “humanity is at its (at least martially) best when it’s at its worst”. Therein lies the danger, I suspect. That message. That subtext. I fear the Imperium does seem to support this theory, given the lack of any other evidence to the contrary, and the routine triumphs they make. These triumphs are supposedly in spite of the government etc. (given the ‘satire’ of the IP), but what actual proof of that is there? The Imperium is supposed to be ‘the most oppressive regime imaginable’, after all, sayeth the intro quote, so there should theoretically be a better one. Unless the Tau government is somehow supposed to be the example?
Some people might say it would be needless modernization of 40k lore to get Guilliman to really re-arrange things, or split the Imperium in two in some way. Letting the “SJW’s” have their way with things. I don’t care. I think this is necessary going forward, because when you are faced with it, really faced with the realization that supporting Warhammer 40k monetarily (by purchasing its products etc.) or otherwise – might grow a franchise that will only encourage more fascists more than most any other IP…is sort of a disgusting possibility. Again, please disprove me on any of this if you’re able; it’s why I’m here.
We want to deny that, thoroughly – but I fear it’s just the truth. That IS the fact of the matter, I fear, even if it is only to a small degree, which is unfortunately unlike any other IP I’m aware of. And boy is today not a great day and age to be encouraging hatred in.
In any case, this is the rut I currently find myself in, with my thinking. To me, Warhammer 40k has always been so much more than this. It’s glorious, fun, and yes - dark, sure…but only to the point where it enhances the fun. There’s no need to enjoy it at 1,100% sadistic levels like you can bring any franchise, just like you don’t have to enjoy it or see it in any way that encourages hate. It’s creative, it explores various aspects of humanity and in ways we never really see in popular fiction. But the option to see it in a way that encourages hatred is certainly there. I fear it is too easy to see.
So perhaps it’s not truly a question of whether or not Warhammer 40kshould encourage these people (I think it shouldn’t for all kinds of reasons – namely that hatred is bad, duh), but the fact of the matter is that it does. And more so than virtually any other IP. Right? If anyone can dissuade me of this thinking or refute any of my specific points, for the love of the God-Emperor please do so, below. For sake of my hobby, and our hobby group.
“Leakycheese suggests that a positive step would be a sign posted in every Games Workshop franchise, making clear to all customers that prejudice has no place in the community. Some changes to the lore of 40k would not go amiss, either; there should be greater ethnic diversity in models, he says, and it should be abundantly clear that the Imperium of Man aren’t the “good guys”.
“They need to put the satire back into it,” he says. “The other thing they need to do is stop making Space Marines appear as heroes; people on the alt-right think they are superhuman Übermensch warriors – they [Games Workshop] do stuff around that; it just needs to be brought back to the fore.”
It really is just too dangerous to let the Space Marines, Imperium etc., be marketed as the good guys; no one should get the impression that virtually every marine is good. I’ve always believed that the best thing about 40k is how primarily smaller groups, maybe a planet here and there, a handful of astartes chapters, etc., continue to actually be noble and fight for humanity, in spite of everything. That includes, of course, doing so in spite of the Imperium’s terribleness. That sort of goodness shining through is the real story of 40k, imo. The biggest reason to stick around in and for 40k (not to mention the possibility that humanity just needs to hang on long enough for it to become a fully psychic race, in which everything potentially gets better. That is just brilliant, exciting stuff, courtesy of the Emperor). Conversely, the way people are too easily able to perceive the lore now is upside-down; that these individual good people aren’t the emphasis for marketing, but rather the Imperium and its horrific military presence. They're celebrated because they are powerful and able to overcome xenos etc., and for little other virtue. And that emphasis needs to change, just like Leakycheese said – there needs to be a clearer emphasis on doing what is right in the face of what is wrong.
BUT, I do not want to wait to enjoy 40k until these things happen. I want to be able to more than justify to myself and my friends that there is absolutely no problem with playing, supporting, and buying 40k stuff right now. And to be honest, I’d rather not be doing so purely based on a pure hope that things will improve.
[Spoiler] And there are signs of it. I just recently caught wind of how in one of the latest novels, “Watchers of the Throne: The Regent's Shadow" by Chris Wraight, shows how the High Lords of terra already began a civil war of sorts against Guilliman, before being completely annihilated by Guilliman’s machinations, on account of his understanding of how corrupt and terrible the high lords were. The civil war has already come to 40k…and I for one could not be more relieved. This is the conflict that needs to happen. [/endSpoiler]
So, there are a few questions to think about here, ultimately.
TLDR:
To start with, can you say that 40k lore/the Imperium should not encourage fascists and alt-righters despite how the Imperium’s accomplishments are actually incredibly, and incalculably vast?
If you can’t say 40k shouldn’t encourage fascists and alt-righters, then is it *wrong* to pump money and time into a franchise that still exists in this state?
Finally, if you think it is not wrong to pump money and time into the franchise given this, then is that primarily because of hope for a coming change in the Warhammer lore itself through Guilliman and the IP’s presentation by Games Workshop to change marketing and perception with a better emphasis?
After reading this I think I should send you a bill for an hourly rate....
Me? I "pump money & time" into this franchise because GW makes models I like, and I & my circle enjoy playing the game (and other GW games). It has nothing at all to do with the lore & evolving story your fretting about.
I will stop giving GW $ when they stop making great models & producing fun (enough) games.
Beyond my not playing with them, I don't give a sht wether or not the lore appeals to the fascists, racists, & other human trash amongst us.
That’s quite a good example, actually. I think you’d really have to bend over backwards to say that SW is anti-democracy. I don’t think SW has any significant political insights, whatsoever. But if there were (or are) some niche of SW fans that interpreted the whole thing to be an argument for IRL authoritarianism, would you really feel the need to stop liking SW?
Manchu wrote: That’s quite a good example, actually. I think you’d really have to bend over backwards to say that SW is anti-democracy. I don’t think SW has any significant political insights, whatsoever. But if there were (or are) some niche of SW fans that interpreted the whole thing to be an argument for IRL authoritarianism, would you really feel the need to stop liking SW?
The nature of any form of heroic story telling paints government as at best, ineffective, or at worst, malicious. If the old republic had sniffed out palpatine early on, that’s a boring story. Ditto the aurors handling Voldemort’s return. Even Star Trek regularly casts the federation as bureaucrats getting in the way of real men doing the real work.
BaconCatBug, you seem to have misunderstood what I said. I never said Warhammer was bad. I really like warhammer!
I did say it appeals to fascists though. And it seems to be a common misunderstanding with people who are uncomfortable with this discussion - saying Warhammer appeals to fascists is not me saying "people who like warhamer are fascists!". I like warhammer. I am not a fascist. But it is interesting to look at why it might appeal to them, and it shouldn't make any of us uncomfortable to examine that in my opinion.
Voss, I take your point. I would kick anyone with fascist views out of a club or group I was running, or leave a group if it had a lot of people like that and they were tolerated. And by fascist views, no, I do not mean anyone with right wing views. I'm not a child. I work with someone who grew up under soviet communism who has to me quite right wing views and I think he is a great person and I really admire him. We often debate politics in work and both get a lot out of it.
Fascist views are something different, and I mean that when I say it.
What's also interesting is that in my anecdotal experience, I've seen more women, people of colour and openly LGBT people engaged with Sigmar and other tabletop games than I have 40k, despite 40k being the biggest of them all. And I live in a very diverse and accepting area where the 40k community is incredibly open-minded and incredibly anti-fash. But the community is only one aspect of it, when the game and setting itself revolves around so much psuedo-Fascist ultra-Toxic Masculine power fantasies that are ABSOLUTELY NOT presented as ironic jokes or critiques anymore it tends to make a lot of people highly uncomfortable.
Can attest to this. The Age of Sigmar line tends to attract a much more diverse group of people and has been outselling 40k a bit recently. No 40k games which reduces sales, but the AoS models are selling more due to interest from people who like to collect and paint stuff. Someone who has no idea of what 40k is is probably more likely to be interested in AoS due to its more optimistic setting compared to the ultra-dour 40k setting.
I would love to see some sales numbers on Soulbound and Wrath and Glory to see which one people are gravitating towards.
PaddyMick wrote: In 40k's defence, saying 'It's just a game' is valid, because as big as it is, that's all it is.
It's also a community, or a collection of communities, and that's the more relevant part.
Fair enough. The analogy I would draw in that case is with football. Football is a game, and a community, and also a collection of communities. It's international, like 40k, and it's got some pretty dark real life stories to tell about corruption, hooliganism and abuse - but that doesn't stop it being just a game; we don't blame FIFA for the bad stuff and we don't stop or kids playing it.
What's also interesting is that in my anecdotal experience, I've seen more women, people of colour and openly LGBT people engaged with Sigmar and other tabletop games than I have 40k, despite 40k being the biggest of them all. And I live in a very diverse and accepting area where the 40k community is incredibly open-minded and incredibly anti-fash. But the community is only one aspect of it, when the game and setting itself revolves around so much psuedo-Fascist ultra-Toxic Masculine power fantasies that are ABSOLUTELY NOT presented as ironic jokes or critiques anymore it tends to make a lot of people highly uncomfortable.
Can attest to this. The Age of Sigmar line tends to attract a much more diverse group of people and has been outselling 40k a bit recently. No 40k games which reduces sales, but the AoS models are selling more due to interest from people who like to collect and paint stuff. Someone who has no idea of what 40k is is probably more likely to be interested in AoS due to its more optimistic setting compared to the ultra-dour 40k setting.
I would love to see some sales numbers on Soulbound and Wrath and Glory to see which one people are gravitating towards.
Outselling where though? I doubt it's a universal thing. The battleboxes for 40k were all sold out in various places before the AOS ones were.
Just FYI I will be deleting posts that keep going down this line of debating whether Nazism or Communism is worse, which is not on topic for this thread or Dakka Dakka generally. Thanks!
Da Boss wrote: And by fascist views, no, I do not mean anyone with right wing views. I'm not a child. I work with someone who grew up under soviet communism who has to me quite right wing views and I think he is a great person and I really admire him. We often debate politics in work and both get a lot out of it.
Fascist views are something different, and I mean that when I say it.
Exalted. You have a lot you can teach to us here in the states, where I'm seeing the most division.
Da Boss wrote: I think if we accept that fascists like 40K a lot (and those who haven't encountered it, it does exist) then we can examine why that is. And yeah, we can do something about it.
Fascists also drink water. And Hitler was a vegetarian.
"Fascists like X, therefore X is bad" is the most basic example of a logical fallacy you can commit.
Did you miss the part where Da Boss said "examine why that is"?
What seemed pretty clear to me was an insight like "there's a correlation between 40k and a disproportionately large amount of fascist fans. Why is that?", which would then prompt some kind of examination into if that's something inherent about 40k, or just a coincidence.
Instead, you deliberately dumbed their insight down to claim a "logical fallacy".
Yes, Hitler was a vegetarian. I don't object to an examination to see if vegetarianism leads to fascism, but I don't think it would go far, as I'm sure you know.
Wolfblade wrote:After reading some of this thread it amazes me that people forget scumbags like arch (formerly arch warhammer) and his sizable following exist.
You know, the guy who was against GW's statement in which they say their setting is not what they want the real world to be and all forms of bigotry are bad.
Yeah, how quickly some folks seem to forget that. Like, outright racial slurs on his channel, and some VERY suspect comments on his discord with some very racist overtones.
Da Boss wrote:I did say it appeals to fascists though. And it seems to be a common misunderstanding with people who are uncomfortable with this discussion - saying Warhammer appeals to fascists is not me saying "people who like warhamer are fascists!". I like warhammer. I am not a fascist. But it is interesting to look at why it might appeal to them, and it shouldn't make any of us uncomfortable to examine that in my opinion.
Voss, I take your point. I would kick anyone with fascist views out of a club or group I was running, or leave a group if it had a lot of people like that and they were tolerated. And by fascist views, no, I do not mean anyone with right wing views. I'm not a child. I work with someone who grew up under soviet communism who has to me quite right wing views and I think he is a great person and I really admire him. We often debate politics in work and both get a lot out of it.
Fascist views are something different, and I mean that when I say it.
100%.
When many of us are talking about fascism, we mean fascism. When we mean Nazis, we mean Nazis. Not just right of centre.
40k therefore changed release and story focus, imperium went from unnecessarily cruel and self undermining to heroic, especially in regards to marines.
40k got taken by GW itself to be ernest in conjunction of above.
What's also interesting is that in my anecdotal experience, I've seen more women, people of colour and openly LGBT people engaged with Sigmar and other tabletop games than I have 40k, despite 40k being the biggest of them all. And I live in a very diverse and accepting area where the 40k community is incredibly open-minded and incredibly anti-fash. But the community is only one aspect of it, when the game and setting itself revolves around so much psuedo-Fascist ultra-Toxic Masculine power fantasies that are ABSOLUTELY NOT presented as ironic jokes or critiques anymore it tends to make a lot of people highly uncomfortable.
Can attest to this. The Age of Sigmar line tends to attract a much more diverse group of people and has been outselling 40k a bit recently. No 40k games which reduces sales, but the AoS models are selling more due to interest from people who like to collect and paint stuff. Someone who has no idea of what 40k is is probably more likely to be interested in AoS due to its more optimistic setting compared to the ultra-dour 40k setting.
I would love to see some sales numbers on Soulbound and Wrath and Glory to see which one people are gravitating towards.
Outselling where though? I doubt it's a universal thing. The battleboxes for 40k were all sold out in various places before the AOS ones were.
Just speaking locally.
Again, mostly because there has been no FLGS tourney or game scene which the 40k scene thrives on here. We had 2-3 tournaments for all of 2020 and that usually just results in people not wanting to expand their armies in regards to the game itself as they have yet to test their newest builds. Age of Sigmar seems to suffer less from this locally as a lot of people are just buying them to paint and collect. I imagine it is also easier to sell AoS to parents as AoS has a bit more obvious good vs evil compared to 40k. Does also help that the "marines" of AoS is a bit more gender equal as of late which probably has an appeal to a wider potential audience.
I honestly think what we're talking about from the Arch contingent and similar is more racism than pro-fascism. It's just that it looks like pro-fascism because a lot of them interpret the Imperium as a white society/institution; remember the kerfluffle over the black Ultramarine?
In the Infinity community, the same kind of people who unironically think the Imperium is laudable tend to gravitate towards PanOceania (and, to a certain extent, Ariadna), with its space Catholicism and knights, "Deus Vult" and all that. Nevermind the fact that they're explicitly corporatist, pro-freedom of speech, etc, they're coded as primarily white and Christian. Of course, it's been noted that right wing people tend to support capitalism as long as they see it maintaining the proper social hierarchy - this progression from monarchism has been chronicled in worrying detail. The authoritarian, dystopian faction in Infinity (at least the most overtly) is Yu Jing, but that doesn't receive the support of those types because it's culturally Chinese. It also explains a lot of the antipathy towards the Tau from a lot of the Warhammer community, since they've been coded as Asian/nonwhite, and not as morally deplorable as the Imperium.
Fundamentally this is a bit of a problem of GW's own making, since they've steered hard into a heroic Imperium for a long time now. So it's not that the racists are seeing something that isn't there - there's notes they're picking up on. But it's not turning anyone racist (or fascist), those tendencies are already there.
Hecaton wrote: I honestly think what we're talking about from the Arch contingent and similar is more racism than pro-fascism. It's just that it looks like pro-fascism because a lot of them interpret the Imperium as a white society/institution; remember the kerfluffle over the black Ultramarine?
In the Infinity community, the same kind of people who unironically think the Imperium is laudable tend to gravitate towards PanOceania (and, to a certain extent, Ariadna), with its space Catholicism and knights, "Deus Vult" and all that. Nevermind the fact that they're explicitly corporatist, pro-freedom of speech, etc, they're coded as primarily white and Christian. The authoritarian, dystopian faction (at least the most overtly) is Yu Jing, but that doesn't receive the support of those types because it's culturally Chinese. It also explains a lot of the antipathy towards the Tau from a lot of the community, since they've been coded as Asian/nonwhite, and not as morally deplorable as the Imperium.
Fundamentally this is a bit of a problem of GW's own making, since they've steered hard into a heroic Imperium for a long time now. So it's not that the racists are seeing something that isn't there - there's notes they're picking up on. But it's not turning anyone racist (or fascist), those tendencies are already there.
Does it encourage hate? No, it's a fictional setting. Do some 'fascists' like it? Maybe, but the question you then ask is: so what if they do? Honestly, Hitler and Stalin could both rise from the grave tomorrow, walk into a gee dubs and start playing Warhammer, and it still wouldn't stop me doing it...
This odd sort of reverse guilt by association is a very strange logic and I really don't know why people even entertain it. Furthermore it seems to have been seized on or even potentially propagated by certain elements of the fanbase as a way to attack people they don't like, a fairly loud example of this happening earlier this year.
As to the OP, I would suggest telling your friends to develop thicker skins and re-evaluate their reasoning.
Because we don't need anyone to spell it out - it's obvious.
It is unexplored, you don't leave the obvious unexplored.
So it's about personal preference then? I'm not super invested into Space Marines or Guard for that matter (I play neither), but their stories are easily the most interesting for me, because humans will always be more relatable to me than aliens.
In part yes, but 40k being too human eccentric is a well know issue. There is a reason why we always complain about Space Marines getting another model release while some Xeno factions are still mostly metal.
I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree with both of those statements. You have to attribute a certain amount of maturity and competence to people, because if you don't, that will prompt certain kinds of people to try and assume control over their lives and decisions. It's also most definitely not standard practice to deliver overt moralistic preaching in anything that isn't made for children. Narrative handholding makes sense as far as the plot goes, but not the underlying implications.
SW has it, ST has it, LotR has it. The trick is delivering without making it feel like preaching, but people are moral creatures, we cannot separate morality from storytelling, because the moment we start empathizing with characters, we start empathizing with their morality. In fact I would say "moraless" storytelling is extremely rare, as even 40k books have some degree of it as we are supposed to empathize with the characters of each book.
Also, Warhammer has a children audience, kids play the tabletop, read the books and there is even a comic line specifically meant to introduce children to the setting. When an IP gets large enough, you have to assume children will consume it.
It would not stop me playing it either, but I think it is worth thinking about and talking about. I spend a lot of time on this hobby and I like to think about it (probably much more than I should to a silly toy soldiers game).
What I am doing myself is re-organising the setting in my headcanon (which will be used for introducing new people to wargaming and also as a setting to run roleplaying games in) where it is obvious that the Imperium are the bad guys, and where alternatives exist (just alternatives that are not as powerful or influential, thus giving players an underdog faction to control and root for against the evil empire).
Edit: I started with GW games when I was 11 or 12. And back then me and my older brother could see that the IoM were the baddies. I played Blood Angels back then and he played Imperial Guard, but specifically a rebel faction that had deserted and were trying to find a new home outside of Imperial Space. The story behind our games was that my Blood Angels were coming after them to capture them and execute them. We understood in our games that my guys were the baddies, and I had fun playing them. But we got that, even back then. We understood that, as children. So I think we don't need to worry TOO much about the kids playing the game, but then again back in 2e it was a bit more obvious that the Imperium were not the good guys. But to me as soon as they were executing people for genetic "flaws" it was clear who they were.
DaBoss, that doesn’t even sound like “head canon” inasmuch is certainly true, within canonical 40k, that the IoM is horrendous, and it is at least arguable that there are alternatives to “how things MUST be” — and in fact, the latter informs the former, because any discourse whatsoever about alternatives is considered treasonous and blasphemous by TPTB.
For me, it's just a matter of understanding it as something that should be approached critically (which is a fancy word for "don't assume the Imperium, or any other faction, is justified in what it does"). I don't know about introducing kids to it - I don't have any of my own, and I started playing 40k when I was eight, and I turned out ok, but I was a bit precocious with understanding when something isn't meant to be taken seriously.
Aye, I just want to introduce more of those human societies into the setting so that they exist as examples and it is not as hopless to go against the IoM. But OT for this thread, just an example of what you can do as a gamer if you don't like this stuff.
Da Boss wrote: Aye, I just want to introduce more of those human societies into the setting so that they exist as examples and it is not as hopless to go against the IoM. But OT for this thread, just an example of what you can do as a gamer if you don't like this stuff.
Don't associate with those people and don't encourage them. Also, when you get the chance, call GW out on how they're steering too hard into a heroic IoM.
Da Boss wrote: It would not stop me playing it either, but I think it is worth thinking about and talking about. I spend a lot of time on this hobby and I like to think about it (probably much more than I should to a silly toy soldiers game).
What I am doing myself is re-organising the setting in my headcanon (which will be used for introducing new people to wargaming and also as a setting to run roleplaying games in) where it is obvious that the Imperium are the bad guys, and where alternatives exist (just alternatives that are not as powerful or influential, thus giving players an underdog faction to control and root for against the evil empire).
There is no evil, because there is no good anymore. Simple as, someone named it corectly, a crapverse. Where everything has gone so to gak that the alternative of morality isn't even a consideration anymore, because the universe was at one point selfaware enough to satirise everything, heck take a look at orks, the "commedic relief faction" would be in any other universe be the BBG.
The imperium was once obvious, a corrupt totalitarian and needlessly cruel , to the point of selfsabotaging feudal wanna be Utopia ending in the worst dystopia to ever exist. Because the ends did justify the means approach got taken. I wonder where that comes from:... hint look at any historically totalitarian state in our history and i bet you find a corresponding 40kIoM faction.
Tau, mindcontroll, 1984 or whatevs+ police state+ feudal cast system, in which just practicising a hobby may get you killed because you are not in the correct class to craft.
Necrons: oh look we are the epitome of useless absolute monarchy throwing a hissy fit and beeing baseline responsible for the whole mess.
Eldar.... yeah we fethed , tortured and excessed to the point we tore the galaxy a new opening to "literally hell, but worse" which reflected our behaviour....
Chaos? Well all off the above, except we take your soul aswell. Also there's no healthcare... otoh it's equal opportunity but only if you have a soul--- so rip Tau, nids and Necrons , you don't get hired.
OP, don’t let other people spoil your fun. You won’t stop people like that playing the game by stopping yourself.
Just choose who you associate with, and game with, carefully and don’t engage with bad people.
There’s a lot of racism and thuggery and just unpleasant people in the football (soccer) fan base but it doesn’t mean we should stop watching it. We just tell those idiots they are wrong.
These people are committed to their ideals regardless of what games they play.
Da Boss wrote: Aye, I just want to introduce more of those human societies into the setting so that they exist as examples and it is not as hopless to go against the IoM. But OT for this thread, just an example of what you can do as a gamer if you don't like this stuff.
Don't associate with those people and don't encourage them. Also, when you get the chance, call GW out on how they're steering too hard into a heroic IoM.
I disagree. I think this has been established in this discussion already, GW is under no obligation to make the imperium more or less heroic since it's fiction and they have no political agenda.
Also, portraying the imperium as heroic does not take away the awful stuff they do. It's not just one or the other. Heroic deeds of characters within a faction does not mean that the faction is suddenly good or right.
Sororitas can be heroic and selfless, they are however still utterly bonkers religious zealots. A dark Eldar incubus can do heroic deeds in combat and uphold some form of martial honor, that does not make him less of a torturing sadist.
I always considered the Black Crusade RPG one of the odd places gamers could find heroism in the 40k setting. Of course, you play Chaos-tainted characters, who are known to get up to some pretty vile stuff. But the overriding idea of the game (so far as I understood it) was not so much to rehabilitate chaos as to remind us that the IoM is actually a ton more scary than the gross-looking misfits.
I disagree. I think this has been established in this discussion already, GW is under no obligation to make the imperium more or less heroic since it's fiction and they have no political agenda.
Also, portraying the imperium as heroic does not take away the awful stuff they do. It's not just one or the other. Heroic deeds of characters within a faction does not mean that the faction is suddenly good or right.
Sororitas can be heroic and selfless, they are however still utterly bonkers religious zealots. A dark incubus can do heroic deeds in combat and uphold some form of martial honor, that does not make him less of a torturing sadist.
Depends on your definition of heroism i.e. "great" vs. "good."
That the Imperium is "great" is fine, that the Imperium is "good" is obviously in question and portraying them as unironically good oftentimes comes off as a right wing wet dream.
I thought the Black Crusade RPG skated around that stuff but ultimately chickened out. They came close to what I wanted but just missed the mark in a lot of ways unfortunately. I must take another stab at it myself sometime.
Hecaton: Well, yeah, if I know someone is a fascist no way am I hanging out with them at all. But I run RPGs for kids in school and will also be introducing them to wargames, so I just like to think a bit about stuff from that angle sometimes.
Da Boss wrote: I really enjoyed reading this thread, and I think the level to which everyone is so tense in replying is sad. Everyone who has replied basically agrees with how to deal with the problem, they basically only disagree on the extent of the problem or whether GW should bear responsibility.
I think that GW bears a little responsibility because the later writers (from 4e/5e onward) have written the background in a way that justifies the Imperium and makes them into more of a "good guy" faction. I think it is mostly clumsy writing and some less thoughtful designers after the old guard left and is not malicious.
But the Imperium is a pastiche of both fascism (and this should be really obvious, people who don't see it must be being a bit wilful to my mind!) and totalitarian communism as well. It is sort of a pastiche of all the worst stuff from the 20th century overlaid onto the Holy Roman Empire, in space! Which is a cool idea for a setting, to be sure.
I think if we accept that fascists like 40K a lot (and those who haven't encountered it, it does exist) then we can examine why that is. And yeah, we can do something about it.
As for free speech, that is a very parochial american point of view. Most of the world doesn't work like that, you guys are the weird outliers, it's just that you are used to considering yourselves the default more. Pro-Nazi stuff will get you in trouble with the law pretty easily where I am, for sure.
It's nice to see some good discussion.
I disagree with this notion that 40k has some weird fascistic craw though. The only superiority elements are that of humanity over any other races. There is no real racism in as much as the imperium doesn't care what race you are, as long as you do your duty. In that it's more totalitarian if anything.
If 'fascists' (and I put that in quote because I really don't think there are that many) do like 40k I'd imagine it's got more to do with the aesthetic of marching infantry formations, massed tanks and the Gothic imagery than any ideology.
Da Boss wrote: Aye, I just want to introduce more of those human societies into the setting so that they exist as examples and it is not as hopless to go against the IoM. But OT for this thread, just an example of what you can do as a gamer if you don't like this stuff.
Don't associate with those people and don't encourage them. Also, when you get the chance, call GW out on how they're steering too hard into a heroic IoM.
Why? People naturally want to see people being heroes and reading about heroic characters kicking the ass of evil or threats to other humans. It's a key part of the genre/setting, and one of the big draws of a lot of fiction. Nobody watches lord of the rings and complains that the good guys were too rough on Sauron.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I disagree with this notion that 40k has some weird fascistic craw though. The only superiority elements are that of humanity over any other races. There is no real racism in as much as the imperium doesn't care what race you are, as long as you do your duty. In that it's more totalitarian if anything.
If you look at it in depth you're right, but many of these types have their own headcanon that the Imperium is overwhelmingly white, and the iconography is uses is heavily grounded in Euro-Christian inspirations (taken to extremes). The Tau are called "communists" because people think they're supposed to be Chinese. And I've of course seen people who think that Orks or Tyranids are supposed to be an analogy for blacks or immigrants.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Why? People naturally want to see people being heroes and reading about heroic characters kicking the ass of evil or threats to other humans. It's a key part of the genre/setting, and one of the big draws of a lot of fiction. Nobody watches lord of the rings and complains that the good guys were too rough on Sauron.
The difference is that Sauron was the one committing mass murder and with the brutal industrial war machine. The Imperium is unapologetically genocidal and xenophobic; there's issues with portraying them as heroic that don't come into play when we're talking about the men, elves, dwarves, or hobbits of Middle-Earth. Unironically, at least; the Imperium makes for great heroes if you have a sense of irony.
I disagree. I think this has been established in this discussion already, GW is under no obligation to make the imperium more or less heroic since it's fiction and they have no political agenda.
Also, portraying the imperium as heroic does not take away the awful stuff they do. It's not just one or the other. Heroic deeds of characters within a faction does not mean that the faction is suddenly good or right.
Sororitas can be heroic and selfless, they are however still utterly bonkers religious zealots. A dark incubus can do heroic deeds in combat and uphold some form of martial honor, that does not make him less of a torturing sadist.
Depends on your definition of heroism i.e. "great" vs. "good."
That the Imperium is "great" is fine, that the Imperium is "good" is obviously in question and portraying them as unironically good oftentimes comes off as a right wing wet dream.
Fair enough, but are they portrayed as unironically good as a faction in its entirety? I mean if they write about the brave selfless cadian soldier who sacrifices himself for his homeworld that could be considered heroic and maybe even "good", depending on your definition, but you can be sure that on the same time on some ecclesiarchy planet there are going to be some "heretics" strapped on penitent engines for no good reason. And my point is that they don't have to necessarily show both those things within one black library novel that deals with the heroic cadian soldier for example.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I disagree with this notion that 40k has some weird fascistic craw though. The only superiority elements are that of humanity over any other races. There is no real racism in as much as the imperium doesn't care what race you are, as long as you do your duty. In that it's more totalitarian if anything.
If you look at it in depth you're right, but many of these types have their own headcanon that the Imperium is overwhelmingly white, and the iconography is uses is heavily grounded in Euro-Christian inspirations (taken to extremes). The Tau are called "communists" because people think they're supposed to be Chinese. And I've of course seen people who think that Orks or Tyranids are supposed to be an analogy for blacks or immigrants.
Maybe, but as has already been said, that's not the problem of the setting or its creators really. It's bad enough that those things are taken seriously and then pearl clutchers in the media run with them as ways to attack the setting or people who enjoy it.
Whenever I have seen Warhammer reported in the media, it tends to be in a fairly benign way, more poking fun at how nerdy it is than being worried about the content of the background. Don't think I've ever seen a media story about that. There was a positive piece about warhammer in the Guardian recently enough, though patronizing as usual from these sorts of pieces of course.
Tiberias wrote: Fair enough, but are they portrayed as unironically good as a faction in its entirety? I mean if they write about the brave selfless cadian soldier who sacrifices himself for his homeworld that could be considered heroic and maybe even "good", depending on your definition, but you can be sure that on the same time on some ecclesiarchy planet there are some heretics strapped on penitent engines for no reason. And my point is that they don't have to necessarily show both those things within one black library novel that deals with the heroic cadian soldier for example.
My point is that they don't show the penitent engines often enough, and what's more they don't really go into the fact that the Cadian soldier would gladly give his life to murder innocent Tau or Eldar children, or just human children who were born with physical deformities. These aren't good people.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Why? People naturally want to see people being heroes and reading about heroic characters kicking the ass of evil or threats to other humans. It's a key part of the genre/setting, and one of the big draws of a lot of fiction. Nobody watches lord of the rings and complains that the good guys were too rough on Sauron.
The difference is that Sauron was the one committing mass murder and with the brutal industrial war machine. The Imperium is unapologetically genocidal and xenophobic; there's issues with portraying them as heroic that don't come into play when we're talking about the men, elves, dwarves, or hobbits of Middle-Earth. Unironically, at least; the Imperium makes for great heroes if you have a sense of irony.
Fair point. I actually come down more on your side thinking about it, as someone who likes heresy era traitors more than anything, they were the ones really opposing the things you mention.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Maybe, but as has already been said, that's not the problem of the setting or its creators really. It's bad enough that those things are taken seriously and then pearl clutchers in the media run with them as ways to attack the setting or people who enjoy it.
It's not the problem of the creators, but it *is* the problem of the people who shifted things to portray the full-on genocidal Imperium in an unironically positive way. They made a choice, and that choice had consequences, and I don't think it was the best choice.
Da Boss wrote: Whenever I have seen Warhammer reported in the media, it tends to be in a fairly benign way, more poking fun at how nerdy it is than being worried about the content of the background. Don't think I've ever seen a media story about that. There was a positive piece about warhammer in the Guardian recently enough, though patronizing as usual from these sorts of pieces of course.
Not so much Warhammer, but I've seen things in national newspapers trying to make out like Tolkien was portraying non white people when he wrote the orcs (absurd in my opinion, as they don't come from foreign lands, have their own origin myths, and other foreign humans exist in harad and umbar) it snacks more of hysteria really.
I think they didn't even realise they were making that choice. I bet no one sat down and planned it, it is more of a creative drift by people who didn't really get it in my view.
Edit: Orcs always seemed to me a pretty uncharitable take on the urban poor more than anything else (and I mean the urban poor in Britain, not "urban" in the way it might be used in the US). But I think Tolkien wasn't intentionally doing any of that really, his prejudices just informed his writing. (I love the Lord of the Rings also, btw).
Da Boss wrote: The IoM is all about genetic purity and so on as well, which people can absolutely twist around to fit their ideology.
It isn't racist, as such, but it does use those ideas to show how crappy the Imperium is.
They also commit mass murder of children born with physical deformities, which mirrors the way the Nazis treated people with certain conditions.
True, absolutely true, but I've said this time and time again, this is the sort of thing that poses an uncomfortable question to the reader.
These children can in the worst case condemn an entire planet to damnation if their psychic potential goes unchecked. They can pose an actual threat to an entire population. The comparison to the nazis is fair, but they murdered people they deemed unworthy to live and exaggerated that through propaganda, those poor people never posed a threat to anyone. And the uncomfortable question that 40k poses imo is this: if those threats were real like in 40k, would we also devolve into such cruelty that easily, when we have done it for less in our real life history?
Da Boss wrote: I think they didn't even realise they were making that choice. I bet no one sat down and planned it, it is more of a creative drift by people who didn't really get it in my view.
Very possible! But an uninformed choice is still a choice.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Maybe, but as has already been said, that's not the problem of the setting or its creators really. It's bad enough that those things are taken seriously and then pearl clutchers in the media run with them as ways to attack the setting or people who enjoy it.
It's not the problem of the creators, but it *is* the problem of the people who shifted things to portray the full-on genocidal Imperium in an unironically positive way. They made a choice, and that choice had consequences, and I don't think it was the best choice.
I disagree, in my opinion they are just stories in a setting that happens to be pretty awful. I really don't link them to anything in reality, moral or ethics wise.
Not so much Warhammer, but I've seen things in national newspapers trying to make out like Tolkien was portraying non white people when he wrote the orcs (absurd in my opinion, as they don't come from foreign lands, have their own origin myths, and other foreign humans exist in harad and umbar) it snacks more of hysteria really.
Well, Tolkien did describe orcs as looking somewhat Asian at one point. But I don't think he meant for them to be a stand-in for a race. There was a recent brouhaha that focused on Dungeons & Dragons about orcs being code for black people, which was a Twitter shitstorm that Hasbro seemed to take seriously for all the wrong reasons.
Da Boss wrote: I think they didn't even realise they were making that choice. I bet no one sat down and planned it, it is more of a creative drift by people who didn't really get it in my view.
Edit: Orcs always seemed to me a pretty uncharitable take on the urban poor more than anything else (and I mean the urban poor in Britain, not "urban" in the way it might be used in the US). But I think Tolkien wasn't intentionally doing any of that really, his prejudices just informed his writing. (I love the Lord of the Rings also, btw).
I just see orcs as the antithesis of the elves, being the purest form, and the orcs being their twisted opposite. Some of the origin theories even have them as corrupted elves... Again, I would hesitate to ascribe any real world influence to them.
True, absolutely true, but I've said this time and time again, this is the sort of thing that poses an uncomfortable question to the reader.
GW never treats it that way, though - it's not something that's examined, because if it was the Imperium would come off as too evil.
Tiberias wrote: These children can in the worst case condemn an entire planet to damnation if their psychic potential goes unchecked.
I'm not talking about psykers, I'm talking about kids born with harelips or whatever, who are almost always killed at birth in the Imperium.
Tiberias wrote: They can pose an actual threat to an entire population. The comparison to the nazis is fair, but they murdered people they deemed unworthy to live and exaggerated that through propaganda, those poor people never posed a threat to anyone. And the uncomfortable question that 40k poses imo is this: if those threats were real like in 40k, would we also devolve into such cruelty that easily, when we have done it for less in our real life history?
Someone born with a harelip doesn't pose a threat to the Imperium, either.
Da Boss wrote: Aye, I just want to introduce more of those human societies into the setting so that they exist as examples and it is not as hopless to go against the IoM.
That's what the Tau were for, originally. Then people complained that they were too noble and naive and good and didn't fit the universe, despite the subtle hints in the lore that the Tau empire wasn't quite as great as it seemed on the surface. So GW exaggerated it out to comic proportions with Ethereals overtly mind controlling the Tau and enslaving their client races, all to ensure that they're just as bad as the IoM in their own way.
And regardless- GW is never going to offer a less evil alternative to the Imperium again as long as they're trying to sell Space Marines as good guys, rather than as the dogmatic enforcers of a genocidal totalitarian ethnostate.
I know it's been said plenty of times already but I'm going to beat my dead horse: I think this whole issue boils down to the setting losing the sight of the fact that the Imperium is meant to be a villain, not an antihero. Over the past decade and a half I've noticed a lot more fans with the perspective that the Imperium is flawed but necessary, or that it's bad but the least evil in the setting. There's also been a gradual shift towards rationalizing many of its regressive elements, like justifying AdMech religiosity by saying that everything has a spirit so ackshually their behavior isn't idiotic cargo-culting but rather a logical and optimal approach to their technology.
The Imperium has to be evil, unnecessary, regressive, short-sighted, and crippled by its own inadequacy moreso than external factors. Otherwise the setting becomes literal fascist fantasy; a sci-fi universe in which establishing a brutal totalitarian state is the just and proper thing to do, and playing as its ubermensch enforcers exterminating 'heretics' and 'subhuman mutants' makes you the hero. Go fething figure it would attract people of undesirable ideologies.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I disagree with this notion that 40k has some weird fascistic craw though. The only superiority elements are that of humanity over any other races. There is no real racism in as much as the imperium doesn't care what race you are, as long as you do your duty. In that it's more totalitarian if anything.
Don't think of it so literally; it's metaphor. Sci-fi has a long (and clumsy) history of using species as stand-in for nations and/or race, particularly when they all speak English and are two-dimensional caricatures of Earth cultures. It is very easy to read the Imperial 'human supremacist' state as an analogue for an ethnostate IRL.
Give The Iron Dream a read, or at least just read through the Wikipedia page. It's a satirical piece intended to demonstrate just how easily common sci-fi tropes match to problematic real-world ideologies.
catbarf wrote: Don't think of it so literally; it's metaphor. Sci-fi has a long (and clumsy) history of using species as stand-in for nations and/or race, particularly when they all speak English and are two-dimensional caricatures of Earth cultures. It is very easy to read the Imperial 'human supremacist' state as an analogue for an ethnostate IRL.
Give The Iron Dream a read, or at least just read through the Wikipedia page. It's a satirical piece intended to demonstrate just how easily common sci-fi tropes match to problematic real-world ideologies.
You know, it's funny, when I was a kid and wasn't aware of the greater 40k community I liked the fact that the aliens in 40k *weren't* particularly human-like and weren't standins for other races. Orks don't reproduce sexually, so no libido, and have an incredible love for violence; that's a very alien mindset. Eldar *look* very similar to humans, but its clear that their psychology deviates immensely from humans - or at least it should be. And forget Necrons and Tyranids.
Then, later, I encounter people online or at conventions who are like "DAE orks n******?" and I get that some people just take the setting a very different way. I'd prefer my aliens in 40k *alien,* even if you could sit down and have a conversation with them.
The main focus on 40k is a vast empire led by xenophobic upper classes that value racial purity and massacre thousands, millions in fact to sustain the life of their Emperor.
But again, is that just being ascribed to it after the fact? Are sci do writers a bunch of closet racists? Seems unlikely. I'm sure some of the older ones may have had opinions of their time, but that's about it.
As for them all speaking English, well I'd suggest that might be more to do with the popularity of the language in the real world, aswell as English speaking nations having the socio economic environment where writers/filmmakers etc could actually prosper.
True, absolutely true, but I've said this time and time again, this is the sort of thing that poses an uncomfortable question to the reader.
GW never treats it that way, though - it's not something that's examined, because if it was the Imperium would come off as too evil.
Tiberias wrote: These children can in the worst case condemn an entire planet to damnation if their psychic potential goes unchecked.
I'm not talking about psykers, I'm talking about kids born with harelips or whatever, who are almost always killed at birth in the Imperium.
Tiberias wrote: They can pose an actual threat to an entire population. The comparison to the nazis is fair, but they murdered people they deemed unworthy to live and exaggerated that through propaganda, those poor people never posed a threat to anyone. And the uncomfortable question that 40k poses imo is this: if those threats were real like in 40k, would we also devolve into such cruelty that easily, when we have done it for less in our real life history?
Someone born with a harelip doesn't pose a threat to the Imperium, either.
GW doesn't have to treat it that way because it is plainly obvious. Some people don't see that as has been discussed or plainly ignore it to pander to their own ideology, but as I've also already said, you can only try to positively engage these people and try to educate them or avoid them.
And my point is that in 40k these potential threats of unchecked psykers and mutants are in fact real, not that they don't needlessly murder people even if they just examine harmless forms of mutation. That does not mean the imperium is right in what it does. It just poses the question that if those existential threats were real would we also just as easily not differentiate between individual cases and cull parts of the population just to be safe?
Tiberias wrote: Fair enough, but are they portrayed as unironically good as a faction in its entirety? I mean if they write about the brave selfless cadian soldier who sacrifices himself for his homeworld that could be considered heroic and maybe even "good", depending on your definition, but you can be sure that on the same time on some ecclesiarchy planet there are some heretics strapped on penitent engines for no reason. And my point is that they don't have to necessarily show both those things within one black library novel that deals with the heroic cadian soldier for example.
My point is that they don't show the penitent engines often enough, and what's more they don't really go into the fact that the Cadian soldier would gladly give his life to murder innocent Tau or Eldar children, or just human children who were born with physical deformities. These aren't good people.
Maybe this is where people get uncomfortable, as it is so close to the way things are in some contemporary earthly societies, as I suppose it must be if a neofeudal technocracy is to succeed in conquering the world and controlling its poorest through oppression and fear...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr. Burning wrote: The Imperium get all the spiffy looking uniforms too.
Fascists like that kind of thing as well.
Yes, adding to the observation above. I suppose someone might become uncomfortable when 40k imperialism mirrors contemporary society in somehow personally significant ways.
catbarf wrote: Give The Iron Dream a read, or at least just read through the Wikipedia page. It's a satirical piece intended to demonstrate just how easily common sci-fi tropes match to problematic real-world ideologies.
Just to put it here as it is really ironic, i switched the article to german for ease of reading and we censored that book for "Glorification of National-Socialistic Ideology" for two years
Wolfblade wrote:After reading some of this thread it amazes me that people forget scumbags like arch (formerly arch warhammer) and his sizable following exist.
You know, the guy who was against GW's statement in which they say their setting is not what they want the real world to be and all forms of bigotry are bad.
Yeah, how quickly some folks seem to forget that. Like, outright racial slurs on his channel, and some VERY suspect comments on his discord with some very racist overtones.
More like open support of fascism/authoritarianism, very explicitly and extremely racist remarks, anti-trans remarks, saying "people with X political views aren't human," and outright support for genocide as a "solution." And that's just his discord, let alone his two youtube channels (of which his primary is 40k related and his views frequently creep into his videos).
My view on the whole issue is that Warhammer's setting attracts these kinds of people because a lot of the lore and art is their (mostly) ideal world or worldview. I.E. The might makes right, or how the Imperium is made of mostly white male figures in the art, and a lot of the stories (and yes, there are obvious exceptions like Gaunt's Ghosts). It's why they kick up such a fuss every time there's any sort of diversity beyond what 40k has historically had (i.e. the black Ultramarine set these people off), and it's always hidden under the guise of "but muh lore!" The Warhammer community needs to be more aware of these people and stand up to them better instead of sweeping them under the rug and pretending they don't exist/aren't a problem.
GW doesn't have to treat it that way because it is plainly obvious. Some people don't see that as has been discussed or plainly ignore it to pander to their own ideology, but as I've also already said, you can only try to positively engage these people and try to educate them or avoid them.
And my point is that in 40k these potential threats of unchecked psykers and mutants are in fact real, not that they don't needlessly murder people even if they just examine harmless forms of mutation. That does not mean the imperium is right in what it does. It just poses the question that if those existential threats were real would we also just as easily not differentiate between individual cases and cull parts of the population just to be safe?
Those threats actually aren't. Non-psyker mutants aren't a particular problem, the Imperium just likes genocide. Races like the Eldar and Kroot deal with their psykers in a way that doesn't involve atrocities. The only question that's posed is why does the setting not examine the fact that characters like Celestine and Gaunt and Caine are all pro-genocide?
I mean it took right until the end of the year, but this is literally the dumbest post and thread of the year...bar none.
This "rise of fascism" outlook is so ridiculous that I think many of you just need to unplug from the online BS for about 6 months. Jesus, get a grip....and a life.
Tabletop wargaming related content is now one of the few online places I frequent due to the absolute rot that has become of media, social media and online activity in general, but it seems that this is now starting to house a lot of that rot. What a joke.
Wolfblade wrote:After reading some of this thread it amazes me that people forget scumbags like arch (formerly arch warhammer) and his sizable following exist.
You know, the guy who was against GW's statement in which they say their setting is not what they want the real world to be and all forms of bigotry are bad.
Yeah, how quickly some folks seem to forget that. Like, outright racial slurs on his channel, and some VERY suspect comments on his discord with some very racist overtones.
More like open support of fascism/authoritarianism, very explicitly and extremely racist remarks, anti-trans remarks, saying "people with X political views aren't human," and outright support for genocide as a "solution." And that's just his discord, let alone his two youtube channels (of which his primary is 40k related and his views frequently creep into his videos).
My view on the whole issue is that Warhammer's setting attracts these kinds of people because a lot of the lore and art is their (mostly) ideal world or worldview. I.E. The might makes right, or how the Imperium is made of mostly white male figures in the art, and a lot of the stories (and yes, there are obvious exceptions like Gaunt's Ghosts, but for). It's why they kick up such a fuss every time there's any sort of diversity beyond what 40k has historically had (i.e. the black Ultramarine set these people off), and it's always hidden under the guise of "but muh lore!" The Warhammer community needs to be more aware of these people and stand up to them better instead of sweeping them under the rug and pretending they don't exist/aren't a problem.
The warhammer "community" isn't a monolith that acts in tandem, it's a bunch of small nodes and individuals. You are either speaking for a large group of people you don't know or what you really mean is twitter community. My community is made of the actual people I play with, not you or anybody who just happens to also play warhammer somewhere else.
And a huge number of the community never interacts online; or if they do never leave facebook. Forums have always been a tiny subset of the userbase and the "extremist" are an even smaller subset of that.
So even if there is such a population its a very small (if often vocal/active posting) group that is, in the real world, a very tiny influence. Heck many might not even have much if any influence outside of their own small circled niche. So much of the chatter is likely going in circles between the same people.
GW doesn't have to treat it that way because it is plainly obvious. Some people don't see that as has been discussed or plainly ignore it to pander to their own ideology, but as I've also already said, you can only try to positively engage these people and try to educate them or avoid them.
And my point is that in 40k these potential threats of unchecked psykers and mutants are in fact real, not that they don't needlessly murder people even if they just examine harmless forms of mutation. That does not mean the imperium is right in what it does. It just poses the question that if those existential threats were real would we also just as easily not differentiate between individual cases and cull parts of the population just to be safe?
Those threats actually aren't. Non-psyker mutants aren't a particular problem, the Imperium just likes genocide. Races like the Eldar and Kroot deal with their psykers in a way that doesn't involve atrocities. The only question that's posed is why does the setting not examine the fact that characters like Celestine and Gaunt and Caine are all pro-genocide?
Sorry but that is just false. These threats are real within 40k because they don't know which mutant or psyker poses an actual threat and they don't care to find out. They just cull them to eliminate any potential threat of a planet turning into a literal hellscape because they missed one untrained psyker. Is that evil? Yeah of course but that wasn't the point.
Your comparison with other races also falls flat because humans, eldar and kroot just don't compare. They have completely different psykic potentials and their souls resonate differently on the warp, with the humans arguably having rapidly evolved the biggest psykic potential compared to their short lifespans.
If we're gonna talk about this we have to talk accurately about the lore I believe.
No, it's true. Non-psyker mutants aren't really a problem; they're caused by Chaos, but it's not like they have an innate ideological alignment *with* Chaos. There's nowhere in the fluff that agrees with you and not me.
These threats are real within 40k because they don't know which mutant or psyker poses an actual threat and they don't care to find out. They just cull them to eliminate any potential threat of a planet turning into a literal hellscape because they missed one untrained psyker. Is that evil? Yeah of course but that wasn't the point.
No, it being evil is exactly the point. Other races in the setting can manage the dangers that go along with psychic potential without resorting to genocide; if the Imperium has to, it's because they don't spend the effort to get good enough to tell the difference. Either way, the Imperium is morally at fault for killing all of the people with physical deformities that they do. Someone with a harelip isn't going to destroy their society, but they murder them anyway because they love killing people who look different.
Tiberias wrote: Your comparison with other races also falls flat because humans, eldar and kroot just don't compare. They have completely different psykic potentials and their souls resonate differently on the warp, with the humans arguably having rapidly evolved the biggest psykic potential compared to their short lifespans.
If we're gonna talk about this we have to talk accurately about the lore I believe.
I'm talking more accurately about the lore than you. Your comments about "different psykic[sic] potentials" is just pure speculation; you're working with the circular logic that the Imperium is justified and then making up explanations that support that. The evidence points the other way, the Imperium is *not* justified in what it does.
Moral reasoning applies equally to all creatures; humans born with physical deformities don't have less of a right to life than those without, and nonhumans don't have less of a right to life, either. Believing otherwise is morally bankrupt, but that's the Imperium for you.
Wolfblade wrote:After reading some of this thread it amazes me that people forget scumbags like arch (formerly arch warhammer) and his sizable following exist.
You know, the guy who was against GW's statement in which they say their setting is not what they want the real world to be and all forms of bigotry are bad.
Yeah, how quickly some folks seem to forget that. Like, outright racial slurs on his channel, and some VERY suspect comments on his discord with some very racist overtones.
More like open support of fascism/authoritarianism, very explicitly and extremely racist remarks, anti-trans remarks, saying "people with X political views aren't human," and outright support for genocide as a "solution." And that's just his discord, let alone his two youtube channels (of which his primary is 40k related and his views frequently creep into his videos).
My view on the whole issue is that Warhammer's setting attracts these kinds of people because a lot of the lore and art is their (mostly) ideal world or worldview. I.E. The might makes right, or how the Imperium is made of mostly white male figures in the art, and a lot of the stories (and yes, there are obvious exceptions like Gaunt's Ghosts, but for). It's why they kick up such a fuss every time there's any sort of diversity beyond what 40k has historically had (i.e. the black Ultramarine set these people off), and it's always hidden under the guise of "but muh lore!" The Warhammer community needs to be more aware of these people and stand up to them better instead of sweeping them under the rug and pretending they don't exist/aren't a problem.
Bigoted youtubers are a problem. But its a problem with the specific youtubers and the supporters they gather, not with the game or setting.
There are similar ones who are fans of various ancient cultures, and even one who originally seemed to be a rationalist defender of science and evolution before he descended into all out madness. It doesn't mean ancient history or evolution are pro-fascist ideologies.
You're making a mess of cause and effect. Mass social media like youtube makes it easy for Cult of Personality folks to gather followers to a central hub, especially when everything about it is online. You want to get rid of this guy? Appeal to youtube to de-platform him, don't berate GW or (even worse) gamers in general. You might as well complain to clothing manufacturers that they're supporting some guy who dares to dress himself in the morning.
This thread should probably be called “does this thread encourage hatred” cause really who’s this opinionated they take this wierd stand for a game....... don’t like the lore don’t read the books or make your own lore or just shut up and play I played with a group for 6 years we NEVER talked about any of this dumb stuff what is wrong with people!?
Voss wrote: Bigoted youtubers are a problem. But its a problem with the specific youtubers and the supporters they gather, not with the game or setting.
There are similar ones who are fans of various ancient cultures, and even one who originally seemed to be a rationalist defender of science and evolution before he descended into all out madness. It doesn't mean ancient history or evolution are pro-fascist ideologies.
You're making a mess of cause and effect. Mass social media like youtube makes it easy for Cult of Personality folks to gather followers to a central hub, especially when everything about it is online. You want to get rid of this guy? Appeal to youtube to de-platform him, don't berate GW or (even worse) gamers in general. You might as well complain to clothing manufacturers that they're supporting some guy who dares to dress himself in the morning.
Well, in the end the bigoted youtuber is in a small part aided by the way GW handles the setting, with portraying the genocide-happy Imperium as unironic heroes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stalked21 wrote: This thread should probably be called “does this thread encourage hatred” cause really who’s this opinionated they take this wierd stand for a game....... don’t like the lore don’t read the books or make your own lore or just shut up and play I played with a group for 6 years we NEVER talked about any of this dumb stuff what is wrong with people!?
Some of us liked the lore in 2e/3e and then felt it veered too much towards fascism apologia.
I think part of the problem is, from a young age we're trained to look for our stories to be "good vs evil" and thats not really a theme of 40kTBH (cause everyone's evil) 40k is more a story of "law vs chaos" and the take away is "both extremes are bad"
I didn't read the whole thread, but there are a couple things that should be said if they aren't already:
1. 40k fascists (though most would deny that particular label) do exist. Anyone telling you they don't is blessedly ignorant.
2. That being said, it's a very small population. Probably in the 1-2%ish range.
3. What there are a lot of is right-aligned 40k players. This can come as a shock to people who don't normally interact with people on the right of the political spectrum on a regular basis, which is to say, most people who are white collar professionals living in big cities. These right-wingers are not alt-right fascists. But if they're American, they probably voted for Donald Trump twice, and with how polarized America has become, that itself can create some uncomfortable interactions.
4. All wargaming/ miniature hobbying attracts a more right-leaning crowd than the population as a whole - mainly because is disproportionately white and male and both those groups lean right, but even beyond that, because it's about playing toy soldiers, and that's just something that is fundamentally more likely to appeal to people with right-leaning worldviews. This is true all over the world - in Japan, the people who buy robot kits skew significantly to the right as well, and there's actually more overt fascists in that hobby than in 40k, for example.
I don't think any of the above is a problem (except the fascists, but the problem is them, not the other 95-99% of the player base), but they are things to keep in mind.
I agree all of the factions in 40K are evil in some way shape or form my DA are “good” but do terrible things to their own race for empowers sake. That’s why I picked them it’s the perfect representation for how the imperium is as a whole. The secrets the lies the mass murder to hide secrets no one in 40K is good but why are we fighting each other as a community. We all have different ideas that’s what makes it great just learn to live with each other and accept we have different views if we force feed them down someone else’s throat that’s how true division happens! *cough* imperium/chaos dark eldar/eldar heck mechanicum/dark mechanicum
No, it's true. Non-psyker mutants aren't really a problem; they're caused by Chaos, but it's not like they have an innate ideological alignment *with* Chaos. There's nowhere in the fluff that agrees with you and not me.
These threats are real within 40k because they don't know which mutant or psyker poses an actual threat and they don't care to find out. They just cull them to eliminate any potential threat of a planet turning into a literal hellscape because they missed one untrained psyker. Is that evil? Yeah of course but that wasn't the point.
No, it being evil is exactly the point. Other races in the setting can manage the dangers that go along with psychic potential without resorting to genocide; if the Imperium has to, it's because they don't spend the effort to get good enough to tell the difference. Either way, the Imperium is morally at fault for killing all of the people with physical deformities that they do. Someone with a harelip isn't going to destroy their society, but they murder them anyway because they love killing people who look different.
Tiberias wrote: Your comparison with other races also falls flat because humans, eldar and kroot just don't compare. They have completely different psykic potentials and their souls resonate differently on the warp, with the humans arguably having rapidly evolved the biggest psykic potential compared to their short lifespans.
If we're gonna talk about this we have to talk accurately about the lore I believe.
I'm talking more accurately about the lore than you. Your comments about "different psykic[sic] potentials" is just pure speculation; you're working with the circular logic that the Imperium is justified and then making up explanations that support that. The evidence points the other way, the Imperium is *not* justified in what it does.
Moral reasoning applies equally to all creatures; humans born with physical deformities don't have less of a right to life than those without, and nonhumans don't have less of a right to life, either. Believing otherwise is morally bankrupt, but that's the Imperium for you.
I think you entirely missed my point. At no point in any post in this thread or other threads you and I have spoken about this have I argued that the imperium is in any way justified or right in what they are doing to mutants, untrained psykers etc.
Also my point about other races was not about how they are worth less then humans within the lore, but how they work differently both their anatomy and psykic resonance in the warp and that is just a fact within the lore.
I am not quite sure anymore what your point is. You say GW should focus more on the ugly sides of the imperium. If they write about the heroic cadian solider to pick up the example from before, do they have to spell out in that same novel that the imperium is evil and a total crapstate? Is it about the ratio between the number of novels and shortstories where they write about the heroic cadian soldier as compared to stories about cadian soldiers killing innocent mutants for no reason?
Bigoted youtubers are a problem. But its a problem with the specific youtubers and the supporters they gather, not with the game or setting.
There are similar ones who are fans of various ancient cultures, and even one who originally seemed to be a rationalist defender of science and evolution before he descended into all out madness. It doesn't mean ancient history or evolution are pro-fascist ideologies.
You're making a mess of cause and effect. Mass social media like youtube makes it easy for Cult of Personality folks to gather followers to a central hub, especially when everything about it is online. You want to get rid of this guy? Appeal to youtube to de-platform him, don't berate GW or (even worse) gamers in general. You might as well complain to clothing manufacturers that they're supporting some guy who dares to dress himself in the morning.
Nowhere there did I say it's GW's fault so you're making quite a bit of a strawman there. What I said is that the setting appeals to these kinds of people for several reasons.
That said, GW can't be expected to deal with the problem entirely. It's why I said the community needs to react better to these kinds of people instead of pretending they aren't a problem within the hobby. How it started doesn't matter so much as the fact that it's here now, and it should be dealt with. This "deal with it elsewhere" attitude is part of the "sweep it under the rug" I was talking about as the problem already exists within the community, which means it's too late to stop it at the source to stop it here like you're suggesting.
(And for the record, certain proud and bigoted groups have taken to wearing certain brands and styles of clothes, so the clothing manufacturer stopped selling them.)
Honestly, compared to all the other alt-right rabbitholes you could be led down on youtube, 40k is probably *anti-fascist* in the sense that getting it into your youtube algorithim is more likely to expose you to non-alt-right stuff than most other topics someone interested in toy soldiers might be likely to youtube.
Algorithmic radicalization is a youtube problem, not a 40k problem.
I don't think it's correct to say that the setting is no longer presented ironically. I think it's fair to say that things are often now presented from an Imperial propaganda perspective, and this can make the satire seem to have been diluted, but it's still there. I suspect they think it goes without saying that the IoM is a horrible fascist state and that they don't therefore need to spell it out directly. It may be that some of that subtext gets lost when translated to other markets and cultures including the US.
It's difficult to see what anyone wants GW to do that they're not already doing. They made their 'you will not be missed' statement against racism, bigotry, etc. They've been taking steps to make their miniatures, painting examples, books, and art more representative and less sexualised. They've shut down at least one of the bigoted youtuber types on IP grounds. They're sending about as clear a message as they can that they don't support this stuff, short of some massive reimagining of the setting.
My God, it's like growing up in the 80s with Satanic Panic all over again.. No, playing a wizard will not make your child a devil worshiper. No, playing warhammer will not make your child or anyone else into a Nazi. No, censorship and a crusade to rid the world of all wrongthink is not the answer.
It is really a lame kind of puritanism to get into a moral panic over the IoM. Fact is GW plagiarise EVERYTHING for making their IP. The IoM is smorgasbord rip off of historical Rome, the Holy Roman Empire, Tsarist Russia, Spanish Inquisition, Communist Russia and also other fiction including Dune (god emperor), Starship Troopers, Lovecraft and so much else.
40k Stalinist: I gotta admit that I love the IoM for the commissars, forced labour gulags, arbitrary executions, cult of personality and brainwashing but I am not 100% sure the totalitarianism that I see and love in 40k wears the right colour shirt? Maybe we should unironically send some inquisitors round to root out the wrongthink?
I think you entirely missed my point. At no point in any post in this thread or other threads you and I have spoken about this have I argued that the imperium is in any way justified or right in what they are doing to mutants, untrained psykers etc.
Also my point about other races was not about how they are worth less then humans within the lore, but how they work differently both their anatomy and psykic resonance in the warp and that is just a fact within the lore.
You said that the Imperium was taking the expedient path in protecting itself from psykers and mutants, which is not true. So no, I didn't miss your point, I just don't agree with it.
Tiberias wrote: I am not quite sure anymore what your point is. You say GW should focus more on the ugly sides of the imperium. If they write about the heroic cadian solider to pick up the example from before, do they have to spell out in that same novel that the imperium is evil and a total crapstate? Is it about the ratio between the number of novels and shortstories where they write about the heroic cadian soldier as compared to stories about cadian soldiers killing innocent mutants for no reason?
When the Imperium is invariably portrayed as the heroes of stories but on the other hand they're in favor of murderous eugenics, ethnic cleansing, and other stuff, and factions like the Eldar and Kroot aren't, but are portrayed more villainously more often, there's a problem. The ratio is important for the purposes of presentation, yes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RegularGuy wrote: My God, it's like growing up in the 80s with Satanic Panic all over again.. No, playing a wizard will not make your child a devil worshiper. No, playing warhammer will not make your child or anyone else into a Nazi. No, censorship and a crusade to rid the world of all wrongthink is not the answer.
On the other hand, supporting the IoM as justified or laudable is morally wrongheaded too.
soviet13 wrote: I don't think it's correct to say that the setting is no longer presented ironically. I think it's fair to say that things are often now presented from an Imperial propaganda perspective, and this can make the satire seem to have been diluted, but it's still there. I suspect they think it goes without saying that the IoM is a horrible fascist state and that they don't therefore need to spell it out directly. It may be that some of that subtext gets lost when translated to other markets and cultures including the US.
Well no, it's more than that. There's been a significant shift over the years towards portraying Imperium characters in a less satirical light, with Guilliman being probably the highest profile example. There's really no satire to Guilliman - he's basically just a classic serious hero protagonist - and he's now effectively the face of the Imperium. Even the forces he's portrayed as fighting against are more hide-bound bureaucrats than fascists. I'm not suggesting it's GW's intent, but it's very easy for an authoritarian-minded person to look at Guilliman's story and read it as a heroic strong-man outsider battling against a "deep state."
GW's painted themselves into a bit of a corner here with a shift in the tone, ironically in what I think must have been an attempt to appeal to a wider, more diverse audience.
Well but that sort-of makes the opposite point, doesn't it? Nobody looks at GSC and thinks "that's what we should emulate! they're the good guys!" The whole faction is designed as a satire of worker rebellions, with the sucker-punch at the end being that after you've overthrown your oppressors, the aliens you hailed as your savior show up and eat your brains.
Meanwhile, it's very possible to look at Guilliman and say "he's the good guy!" and from there someone so inclined can pretty easily get to: "he just needs to get rid of all the swamp-dwelling deep state operatives and he can make the Imperium of Man great again the way it used to be!"
By creating unabashed heroes to be the Imperium's new POV characters - and particularly by reaching back into the Imperium's supposedly glorious past to do so - they've created a narrative that can be read in a pro-alt-right way in a way the prior one couldn't. It certainly isn't intended to be - if nothing else, alt-right stuff is bad for business - but it *can* be.
Personally I don't think it takes very long or a very deep study to notice that the IOM and Marines are not good guys, even my 10 year old decided his chapter was a renegade from the IOM and doesn't partake in all their nonsense. If a kid that old can figure it out, we don't need to wring our hands unduly I think.
In fact, we locked on the theory that the Emperor is really a the Chaos God Malice, and that explains the ins and outs of the imperium and why it is the way it is pretty well. Mind you we were able to keep in mind that all of this is fiction anyway without any trouble.
So as far as OP's original fear:
because when you are faced with it, really faced with the realization that supporting Warhammer 40k monetarily (by purchasing its products etc.) or otherwise – might grow a franchise that will only encourage more fascists more than most any other IP…is sort of a disgusting possibility. Again, please disprove me on any of this if you’re able; it’s why I’m here.
We want to deny that, thoroughly – but I fear it’s just the truth. That IS the fact of the matter, I fear, even if it is only to a small degree, which is unfortunately unlike any other IP I’m aware of. And boy is today not a great day and age to be encouraging hatred in.
I find it experientially to be unfounded. Just as fear from the old neighbor lady about Harry Potter turning my child into a stanist was equally unfounded.
yukishiro1 wrote: Well but that sort-of makes the opposite point, doesn't it? Nobody looks at GSC and thinks "that's what we should emulate! they're the good guys!" The whole faction is designed as a satire of worker rebellions, with the sucker-punch at the end being that after you've overthrown your oppressors, the aliens you hailed as your savior show up and eat your brains.
Meanwhile, it's very possible to look at Guilliman and say "he's the good guy!" and from there someone so inclined can pretty easily get to: "he just needs to get rid of all the swamp-dwelling deep state operatives and he can make the Imperium of Man great again the way it used to be!"
By creating unabashed heroes to be the Imperium's new POV characters - and particularly by reaching back into the Imperium's supposedly glorious past to do so - they've created a narrative that can be read in a pro-alt-right way in a way the prior one couldn't. It certainly isn't intended to be - if nothing else, alt-right stuff is bad for business - but it *can* be.
The IoM aren't the "good guys" unless you are just being anthropocentric, which ironically would be actual racism. Every faction in 40k universe are shades of grey, or rather grimdark, the IoM included. A lot of what makes them grimdark / dystopian was plagiarised from the history of communism actually. Eg: commissars, purges.
SolarCross wrote: I guess the Tyranid faction was an evil plot by GW to promote communism. Or maybe they just ripped off Starship Troopers, take your pick.
Definitely one of those.
We should have a 9+ page thread to determine wich.
yukishiro1 wrote: Well but that sort-of makes the opposite point, doesn't it? Nobody looks at GSC and thinks "that's what we should emulate! they're the good guys!" The whole faction is designed as a satire of worker rebellions, with the sucker-punch at the end being that after you've overthrown your oppressors, the aliens you hailed as your savior show up and eat your brains.
Meanwhile, it's very possible to look at Guilliman and say "he's the good guy!" and from there someone so inclined can pretty easily get to: "he just needs to get rid of all the swamp-dwelling deep state operatives and he can make the Imperium of Man great again the way it used to be!"
By creating unabashed heroes to be the Imperium's new POV characters - and particularly by reaching back into the Imperium's supposedly glorious past to do so - they've created a narrative that can be read in a pro-alt-right way in a way the prior one couldn't. It certainly isn't intended to be - if nothing else, alt-right stuff is bad for business - but it *can* be.
The IoM aren't the "good guys" unless you are just being anthropocentric, which ironically would be actual racism. Every faction in 40k universe are shades of grey, or rather grimdark, the IoM included. A lot of what makes them grimdark / dystopian was plagiarised from the history of communism actually. Eg: commissars, purges.
plagurized from communism, fascism, the worst excesses of capitalism etc. 40k basicly took the the worst huimanity has done to itself under every system and packaged them together
Well but again that's kinda the point: we now have the major Imperium POV character *not* being grimdark in any significant way. He'd fit in in your average superhero movie with no real problem. And he's got a whole bunch of new literal ubermenschen to do his bidding as he seeks to Make the Imperium Great Again, and his message is basically: it's not the fault of the Emperor that the Imperium sucks so much, it's the fault of the deep state that has corrupted his vision. And the solution is to give all power to the strong military man who knows best how to protect us all from the enemies within and without.
I'm not saying this is the read GW intends - it clearly isn't - but it's made possible by the shift towards more conventionally heroic POV characters. Although GW was trying to do the complete opposite, it's created a bit of an opening for the alt-right to project its own idiocy onto the setting, in a way that just didn't work in the older version of the IP. It's not a coincidence that we're having this discussion about fascism and 40k in 2020, and not in 1985 or 1990.
yukishiro1 wrote: Well but again that's kinda the point: we now have the major Imperium POV character *not* being grimdark in any significant way. He'd fit in in your average superhero movie with no real problem. And he's got a whole bunch of new literal ubermenschen to do his bidding as he seeks to Make the Imperium Great Again, and his message is basically: it's not the fault of the Emperor that the Imperium sucks so much, it's the fault of the deep state that has corrupted his vision. And the solution is to give all power to the strong military man who knows best how to protect us all from the enemies within and without.
I'm not saying this is the read GW intends - it clearly isn't - but it's made possible by the shift towards more conventionally heroic POV characters. Although GW was trying to do the complete opposite, it's created a bit of an opening for the alt-right to project its own idiocy onto the setting, in a way that just didn't work in the older version of the IP. It's not a coincidence that we're having this discussion about fascism and 40k in 2020, and not in 1985 or 1990.
I also want to point out a certain political group literally took the design of the emperor and just stuck their chosen politician's head on the body. They don't see the IoM as the bad guy apparently, but as a goal to aim for.
yukishiro1 wrote: Well but again that's kinda the point: we now have the major Imperium POV character *not* being grimdark in any significant way. He'd fit in in your average superhero movie with no real problem. And he's got a whole bunch of new literal ubermenschen to do his bidding as he seeks to Make the Imperium Great Again, and his message is basically: it's not the fault of the Emperor that the Imperium sucks so much, it's the fault of the deep state that has corrupted his vision. And the solution is to give all power to the strong military man who knows best how to protect us all from the enemies within and without.
The novel Dark Imperium doesn't seem to suggest that at all. Guilliman is pretty disillusioned with the Emperor, as well as with the current Imperium. He seems to be fighting to preserve some kind of human polity while hoping to change it towards something a bit less insane...though the hints we get are that he is having to make compromises of convenience in order to maintain the fight against the myriad of threats. Also he keeps being forced to run around troubleshooting and therefore does not seem to succeed in enacting permanent rational change. He is like a torch shedding a little light around him, but the darkness closes in again as soon as he moves elsewhere, and he seems to be failing overall in actually making significant lasting reform. We are seeing a non-grimdark hero fighting and failing to change the grimdark Imperium. So far at best he is just shoring it up militarily so that it doesn't totally collapse, so he's winning battles but losing the long war.
Guilliman may very well be trying to save everything and therefore failing to save anything.
yukishiro1 wrote: Well but again that's kinda the point: we now have the major Imperium POV character *not* being grimdark in any significant way. He'd fit in in your average superhero movie with no real problem. And he's got a whole bunch of new literal ubermenschen to do his bidding as he seeks to Make the Imperium Great Again, and his message is basically: it's not the fault of the Emperor that the Imperium sucks so much, it's the fault of the deep state that has corrupted his vision. And the solution is to give all power to the strong military man who knows best how to protect us all from the enemies within and without.
I'm not saying this is the read GW intends - it clearly isn't - but it's made possible by the shift towards more conventionally heroic POV characters. Although GW was trying to do the complete opposite, it's created a bit of an opening for the alt-right to project its own idiocy onto the setting, in a way that just didn't work in the older version of the IP. It's not a coincidence that we're having this discussion about fascism and 40k in 2020, and not in 1985 or 1990.
I also want to point out a certain political group literally took the design of the emperor and just stuck their chosen politician's head on the body. They don't see the IoM as the bad guy apparently, but as a goal to aim for.
I thought that was a float in Italy for a festival? And that was parody and more mockery than trying to show them in a positive light?
Well right, but again, that can be worked into the alt right interpretation: Guilliman is struggling against the power of the swamp and the deep state, and what he needs is more ruthless strong men who can do what needs to be done to purge the enemies within in order to protect humanity. If anything, in this read Guilliman's flaw is that he isn't as ruthless as the Emperor was.
This doesn't seem likely to be the story GW is trying to tell, but it shows how you can get in a muddle by introducing non-satirical, non-grimdark elements into what was a grimdark satire. It's hard for the viewer to know what they're supposed to make of it, and that tends to result in people just seeing in it whatever they are predisposed to see.
yukishiro1 wrote: Well but again that's kinda the point: we now have the major Imperium POV character *not* being grimdark in any significant way. He'd fit in in your average superhero movie with no real problem. And he's got a whole bunch of new literal ubermenschen to do his bidding as he seeks to Make the Imperium Great Again, and his message is basically: it's not the fault of the Emperor that the Imperium sucks so much, it's the fault of the deep state that has corrupted his vision. And the solution is to give all power to the strong military man who knows best how to protect us all from the enemies within and without.
I'm not saying this is the read GW intends - it clearly isn't - but it's made possible by the shift towards more conventionally heroic POV characters. Although GW was trying to do the complete opposite, it's created a bit of an opening for the alt-right to project its own idiocy onto the setting, in a way that just didn't work in the older version of the IP. It's not a coincidence that we're having this discussion about fascism and 40k in 2020, and not in 1985 or 1990.
I also want to point out a certain political group literally took the design of the emperor and just stuck their chosen politician's head on the body. They don't see the IoM as the bad guy apparently, but as a goal to aim for.
I thought that was a float in Italy for a festival? And that was parody and more mockery than trying to show them in a positive light?
I don't think it matters what the original intention was considering those who support it take and view it as a serious tribute to him and his perceived greatness and ignore the context around it and have replicated it in various forms of artwork.
FWIW I think there is a much larger number of alt-righters using the Trump-Emperor thing as a meme who know nothing or next to nothing about 40k and just think it looks cool than actual 40k fans doing it.
Didn't read through the whole thread but some of this stuff sounds pretty depressing.
Tony Cottrell should apologise for his remark to that gentleman. Piss poor coming from someone like him.
And this Arch dude has something against Saamelaiset? He is on my naughty list now. Saamedikki FTW!
GW needs to reintroduce Rainbow Warriors back as a canonized SM Chapter, needs to write some BL books about female inquisitors exterminating overly zealous SM factions, and as a cherry on top, Lion El Johnson needs to come out of the closet. Dark Angels chapter's history is pretty queer, it needs to be highlighted more.
In hindsight, the RT lore was a bit smarter in how it dealt with the setting. Bring back more of it!
Human ideologies and behaviors effectively encourage hatred, not the games, not the movies, not the comics. The only way games, movies, comics can encourage hatred is when they are used like a media to spread an ideology, but usually when something like that happens, the customers start to complain and they quit the franchise, but thankfully this is something that isn't yet happened in the GW games. So I think we can say W40k can have a lot of flaws, but not this one.
I think you entirely missed my point. At no point in any post in this thread or other threads you and I have spoken about this have I argued that the imperium is in any way justified or right in what they are doing to mutants, untrained psykers etc.
Also my point about other races was not about how they are worth less then humans within the lore, but how they work differently both their anatomy and psykic resonance in the warp and that is just a fact within the lore.
You said that the Imperium was taking the expedient path in protecting itself from psykers and mutants, which is not true. So no, I didn't miss your point, I just don't agree with it.
Careful there now. I said that they do that, but at no point did I say they take the expedient path by doing that. I said it poses an interesting and uncomfortable quetion to the reader. Don't put words in my mouth, I really don't like that.
tauist wrote: Didn't read through the whole thread but some of this stuff sounds pretty depressing.
Tony Cottrell should apologise for his remark to that gentleman. Piss poor coming from someone like him.
And this Arch dude has something against Saamelaiset? He is on my naughty list now. Saamedikki FTW!
GW needs to reintroduce Rainbow Warriors back as a canonized SM Chapter, needs to write some BL books about female inquisitors exterminating overly zealous SM factions, and as a cherry on top, Lion El Johnson needs to come out of the closet. Dark Angels chapter's history is pretty queer, it needs to be highlighted more.
In hindsight, the RT lore was a bit smarter in how it dealt with the setting. Bring back more of it!
I think they should play against type and have the Rainbow Warriors be like... blood sacrifice Aztecs who fell to Khorne. Don't need to make them queer.
The Lion, OTOH, just needs to come out of the closet.
Careful there now. I said that they do that, but at no point did I say they take the expedient path by doing that. I said it poses an interesting and uncomfortable quetion to the reader. Don't put words in my mouth, I really don't like that.
I'm not putting words in your mouth. You were saying that the physically deformed (or "mutants") posed an existential threat to the Imperium, which is just flat out untrue. Even psykers can be dealt with without genocide, as every species except for the humans in the IoM does. The point is this - they are only dangerous to the Imperium because the Imperium stubbornly refuses to employ non-genocidal means of dealing with them. So it's not really an uncomfortable question posed to the reader, unless you take the latter-day GW fluff as canon and go "Oh, all the good people are into genocide, why aren't I?"
Yes, yes you are. I said they pose a threat and they do. I said the Imperium doesn't differentiate the individual case, because they don't care. Human unchecked psykers pose a threat to open a gateway for demons since human minds are more susceptible towards the whispers of demons and that is established lore. Genestealer cults also exist for example so mutants can pose a threat to a human populated planet, that is also established lore.
I did NOT say that how the imperium deals with it was expedient, but rather how brutally they don't care todifferentiate the individual case poses and interesting question to the reader and I've explained this multiple times now. Stop playing gotcha with me, I was really trying to have a conversation in good faith with you and engage with the points you had made, but I'm almost done trying to do that when you continue to try to color me like I support something like that. [b]
No.
It's like the people who think Tyler Durden was a role model or that ceasers legion was a good choice for the mojave.
They missed the point, it's not the source materials fault they are stupid.
I said the Imperium doesn't differentiate the individual case, because they don't care.
If that's the case, then given what I said above, it paints the Imperium as morally bankrupt, no uncomfortable questions asked. If, as you say, it's asking unconfortable questions of the reader because it's so effective, or, in other words, expedient, then I'm right about what you said.
Human unchecked psykers pose a threat to open a gateway for demons since human minds are more susceptible towards the whispers of demons and that is established lore.
Human psykers aren't any more or less vulnerable to demons than other races' psykers. The Imperium just refuses to deal with the problem in an intelligent way and would rather tyrannize and murder. This is emphatically *not* established lore.
Genestealer cults also exist for example so mutants can pose a threat to a human populated planet, that is also established lore.
Genestealers don't create mutants, they create human/alien hybrida. Moreover, killing kids with harelips doesn't stop genestealer infestations, it just makes the problem worse because your population will start looking elsewhere for succour. But the Imperium is full speed ahead on the kid-murdering.
I did NOT say that how the imperium deals with it was expedient, but rather how brutally they don't care todifferentiate the individual case poses and interesting question to the reader and I've explained this multiple times now. Stop playing gotcha with me, I was really trying to have a conversation in good faith with you and engage with the points you had made, but I'm almost done trying to do that when you continue to try to color me like I support something like that. [b]
You didn't use that word, but you implied it when you said that the Imperium's treatment of those born with physical deformities should posit uncomfortable questions. Put simply, the Imperiums's treatment of such people is both needlessly cruel and absolutely ineffective at protecting itself. It's actually counterproductive, because if your kid is born with a harelip, or his limbs didn't develop properly because of the toxic chemicals in the factory you're forced to work in 15 hours a day mutating your sperm cells, why would you stay loyal to the Imperium? Your local Chaos cult thinks your kid's abnormalities are blessings from the gods, and is willing to help you hide them from the authorities.
You're continuing to work on circular logic that justifies the Imperium's atrocities from an out-of-universe perspective, and of course I'm going to call that out, because that's fethed UK p.
The_Grim_Angel wrote: Human ideologies and behaviors effectively encourage hatred, not the games, not the movies, not the comics. The only way games, movies, comics can encourage hatred is when they are used like a media to spread an ideology, but usually when something like that happens, the customers start to complain and they quit the franchise, but thankfully this is something that isn't yet happened in the GW games. So I think we can say W40k can have a lot of flaws, but not this one.
Great point. This is essentially what I was trying to espouse last night.
40k is essentially just a grim backdrop where stories of armoured super soldiers stomping aliens can be set. You really do not need to look much deeper than that in anything other than imaginative speculation. You could contrast this to works like 1984 or brave new world, where the ideology is explicitly part of the story and also the message to be digested and thought about by the reader.
A similar example would be the 2000ad setting. The authoritarian hellscape of the megacities patrolled by extra judicial 'judges' who subjectively apply the law and pass sentences without any form of trial sounds to me as a liberal like some terrible nightmare, but I still enjoy the setting as a fictional backdrop for stories about 'good' guys stomping bad guys.
There is toxicity in the 40k community, but I think it has nothing to do with the lore. Rather I think it's connected to the competative nature of the game. That means WAAC people can sometimes choose go indulge in 40k and use their poor attitude to infect communities. Same with people who have superiority complex who think their models/collections are better or more legit than others.
The competative side of 40k has been reinforced by the increasing tournament scene. Now im not saying tournaments is bad, it just that it attracts people with weird attitude aswell as good ones.
As to the lore attracting nazis or whatever, its bs.
You're just blatantly wrong here. How are non-psychic mutants inherently a threat to the Imperium?
I didn't say that nor did I imply it. I said the imperium doesn't care to differentiate, which is evil and morally reprehensible for the last time, I don't know how often I have to spell this out for you.
I said the Imperium doesn't differentiate the individual case, because they don't care.
If that's the case, then given what I said above, it paints the Imperium as morally bankrupt, no uncomfortable questions asked. If, as you say, it's asking unconfortable questions of the reader because it's so effective, or, in other words, expedient, then I'm right about what you said.
And I agreed multiple times that the imperium is morally bankrupt. Both in this thread and multiple other threads about this topic I don't understand how this is a point of contention unless you seriously never properly read any of my posts.
Human unchecked psykers pose a threat to open a gateway for demons since human minds are more susceptible towards the whispers of demons and that is established lore.
Human psykers aren't any more or less vulnerable to demons than other races' psykers. The Imperium just refuses to deal with the problem in an intelligent way and would rather tyrannize and murder. This is emphatically *not* established lore.
Yes they are, this was the whole point of the emperor trying to complete his webway project as fast as possible, he wanted to limit exposure to the warp and guide humanity towards their evolution as a psykic race. Since you don't seem to get any of my points I'm still gonna spell it out for you. The emperor is still NOT a good guy, he is a genocidal maniac who dragged humanity forward kicking and screaming.
Genestealer cults also exist for example so mutants can pose a threat to a human populated planet, that is also established lore.
Genestealers don't create mutants, they create human/alien hybrida. Moreover, killing kids with harelips doesn't stop genestealer infestations, it just makes the problem worse because your population will start looking elsewhere for succour. But the Imperium is full speed ahead on the kid-murdering.
That is just arguing semantics now, the imperium can't and/or doesn't care to visually distinguish between alien/human hybrid and mutant. Again, is that evil YES for the last time.
I did NOT say that how the imperium deals with it was expedient, but rather how brutally they don't care todifferentiate the individual case poses and interesting question to the reader and I've explained this multiple times now. Stop playing gotcha with me, I was really trying to have a conversation in good faith with you and engage with the points you had made, but I'm almost done trying to do that when you continue to try to color me like I support something like that. [b]
You didn't use that word, but you implied it when you said that the Imperium's treatment of those born with physical deformities should posit uncomfortable questions. Put simply, the Imperiums's treatment of such people is both needlessly cruel and absolutely ineffective at protecting itself. It's actually counterproductive, because if your kid is born with a harelip, or his limbs didn't develop properly because of the toxic chemicals in the factory you're forced to work in 15 hours a day mutating your sperm cells, why would you stay loyal to the Imperium? Your local Chaos cult thinks your kid's abnormalities are blessings from the gods, and is willing to help you hide them from the authorities.
I didn't argue or imply any of that, are you kidding me? The uncomfortable question for me was this, again: We in our real life history have devolved into such cruelty for much less. If these threats were real or more tangible, would we devolve into such cruelty again and much more easily so?
You're continuing to work on circular logic that justifies the Imperium's atrocities from an out-of-universe perspective, and of course I'm going to call that out, because that's fethed UK p.
It's really ironic accusing me of using circular logic here. And accusing me of justifying the atrocities of the imperium is just absolutely beyond ridiculous. I am getting the impression that you did not actually read any of my posts or are purposuefully misinterpreting them to now try to colour me in a certain light. I am now done taking you seriously in any way shape or form.
Hoping that people will "get the joke" is not a guaranteed thing, as I said in my post back on page 5-6 using 4chan and incels as an example. This doesn't mean 40k will turn people into fascists*, but it will certainly appeal to them unless GW and the Community makes it clearer that the IoM is not a thing to emulate or admire. And the issue there is that GW themselves are basically doing nothing to address that whatsoever.
People earlier in this thread talk about how "obvious" it is that the Imperium is terrible and the bad guy, but I will bet good money you're all making these assumptions based on lore and background you read 20+ years ago. Try opening up and reading the 9th Edition Rulebook sometime and having a read of the lore. Sure, you can say it's written from an Imperial perspective, but there is no hint of irony or critique in it what presents, there are no smoking guns of "everything you just read is a load of bs". It is all presented as immutable and objective fact. The Imperium is justified in everything it does because of Apocalyptic Race War, Xenos are all to be exterminated and never to be trusted because of ancestral misdeeds and their inferiority to the superior Human form, the only way to avoid eternal damnation is to submit to worship of the Emperor completely and utterly and ask no questions. Nowhere is this more apparent in the lore for Marines, in both rulebook and Codex, where the negative aspects of them are completely downplayed and the usages of words like "Hero" and "Heroics" and "Defenders of Humanity" have increased tenfold. And this isn't even getting into the meta discussion surrounding Marines, where marketing on streams and Warcom will absolutely not address their problematic elements whatsoever. And of course it won't, because it's marketing, but it's basically the first thing people see and what they remember most. Hell, just look at how they market anything else; they're not afraid to address the scary or evil aspects of those things. Necrons are rightly treated as being evil and scary and that's a big selling point!
This thread is actually a perfect example of some not getting the joke or irony and the bringing up of Guilliman earlier encapsulates it perfectly. I won't repeat what others said about Guilliman's return and his portrayal being the most obvious example of turning the IoM into the good guys and how problematic that is, but in this very thread we've had people claiming that the tragedy of 40kIoM is how it fell from the lofty idealistic heights of the 30k Imperium. If you honestly believe that then congratulations you didn't "get the joke" and you didn't pick up on the "obvious" message. The Imperium of 10,000 years ago is just as vile and monstrous with the only differences being a slightly more efficient bureaucracy for 30k and the religious ideals of 40k being worn openly, rather than hidden behind some flimsy bs about the Imperial Truth (which in its entire structure is intensely religious and apes religious iconography and methods constantly anyway). If your skin didn't fething crawl in Horus Rising when Sindermann is giving a religious sermon that basically consists of saying "we're right because we're right and that means we are justified in anything we do" then yeah, I dunno. Or how about later in those early books with the Interex and how they live peacefully and in harmony with Aliens and how all of our PoV characters are disgusted and repulsed by it.
*Although in recent years I've seen an uptick of younger kids playing games in GW stores loudly and gleefully exclaiming how they're going to "purge the filthy xenos!" Which does make me a little uncomfortable I'm not gonna lie.
Bosskelot wrote: *Although in recent years I've seen an uptick of younger kids playing games in GW stores loudly and gleefully exclaiming how they're going to "purge the filthy xenos!" Which does make me a little uncomfortable I'm not gonna lie.
I mean, that's part of the fun, isn't it?
But on a more serious note, why is that making you uncomfortable? It's clearly in the context of the game, it's like RPing a warrior in D&D and being happy that you managed to kill a dragon - why would that affect you like that?
*Although in recent years I've seen an uptick of younger kids playing games in GW stores loudly and gleefully exclaiming how they're going to "purge the filthy xenos!" Which does make me a little uncomfortable I'm not gonna lie.
How is someone saying a verbatim phrase from the setting whilst in a venue facilitating that setting in any way worrying?
yukishiro1 wrote: Well but again that's kinda the point: we now have the major Imperium POV character *not* being grimdark in any significant way. He'd fit in in your average superhero movie with no real problem. And he's got a whole bunch of new literal ubermenschen to do his bidding as he seeks to Make the Imperium Great Again, and his message is basically: it's not the fault of the Emperor that the Imperium sucks so much, it's the fault of the deep state that has corrupted his vision. And the solution is to give all power to the strong military man who knows best how to protect us all from the enemies within and without.
I'm not saying this is the read GW intends - it clearly isn't - but it's made possible by the shift towards more conventionally heroic POV characters. Although GW was trying to do the complete opposite, it's created a bit of an opening for the alt-right to project its own idiocy onto the setting, in a way that just didn't work in the older version of the IP. It's not a coincidence that we're having this discussion about fascism and 40k in 2020, and not in 1985 or 1990.
I also want to point out a certain political group literally took the design of the emperor and just stuck their chosen politician's head on the body. They don't see the IoM as the bad guy apparently, but as a goal to aim for.
I'm just going to note the Horus Heresy depicts the emperor as an incompetant narcisist whose utterly devoid of empathy and thus doomed to fail as a result....
I'm just going to note the Horus Heresy depicts the emperor as an incompetant narcisist whose utterly devoid of empathy and thus doomed to fail as a result....
Problem is that those are all pretty much requirements for a fascistic strong man persona and people who are vulnerable to the arguments of fascism rarely see those qualities as weaknesses.
I am able to understand that a game is a game and it won’t alter my thinking or perspective in any way.
Back stories and fluff are just reading material and nothing more.
What does encourage hatred (in me at least) is when political/religious beliefs are forced on to something entirely separate from them.
There are people who’s entire point of existence seems to be to find or create patterns where none exist, or to alter context to fit an agenda.
If people are unable to keep reality and fantasy a separate entity then they are on a collision course with a wall.
However, this also comes from the fact that a lot of people are offended by everything these days.
There is a chance that just saying hi to someone could offend someone in some way.
Keep reality and war games separate, it’s a simple thing to do.
*Although in recent years I've seen an uptick of younger kids playing games in GW stores loudly and gleefully exclaiming how they're going to "purge the filthy xenos!" Which does make me a little uncomfortable I'm not gonna lie.
How is someone saying a verbatim phrase from the setting whilst in a venue facilitating that setting in any way worrying?
I remember back in the day (late 90's) at the local GW store they used to determine first turn by who had the most compelling warcry (until the neighbouring stores got unhappy because apparently a bunch of teenagers screaming out "For the Emperor!!!" and "Waaaagh!!" at the top of their lungs a few times an hour was scaring off customers, lol).
hotsauceman1 wrote: No.
It's like the people who think Tyler Durden was a role model or that ceasers legion was a good choice for the mojave.
They missed the point, it's not the source materials fault they are stupid.
I dunno, it definitely does seem like there's a pattern of "the way something looks on the surface is all that matters to anyone" that shines through in all of these writings. You're not going to look at the cover of the 8th edition rulebook, point to the dude posed like God in the roof of the sistine chapel, surrounded by white light and go "ah yes, the bad guy."
It does seem like any time a villainous character is allowed to look cool and seem "savvy" or "smart" in a piece of media, there's a whole legion of idiots who will idolize them in a way they don't tend to idolize, say, Sauron from LOTR. They always seem to follow a similar pattern, too: Tyler Durden, Heath Ledger Joker, Hans Landa, The Punisher - them being Cool and Badass is the text, them being wrong is the subtext.
I also think it's pretty telling how many people will complain any time a character like that is portrayed like they reasonably would be - the reaction to Anakin Skywalker being portrayed as a whiny, bitchy manchild whose greatest victories in the films all involved murdering helpless, basically unarmed people was pretty negative because people just want Darth Vader to be a Cool Badass.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: But again, is that just being ascribed to it after the fact? Are sci do writers a bunch of closet racists? Seems unlikely. I'm sure some of the older ones may have had opinions of their time, but that's about it.
As for them all speaking English, well I'd suggest that might be more to do with the popularity of the language in the real world, aswell as English speaking nations having the socio economic environment where writers/filmmakers etc could actually prosper.
I heard in the spanish rulebooks they all speak spanish. If the GW writers could address this inconsistency I think I'd appreciate it, it's a major plot hole. Which rulebook language is canonical?
hotsauceman1 wrote: No.
It's like the people who think Tyler Durden was a role model or that ceasers legion was a good choice for the mojave.
They missed the point, it's not the source materials fault they are stupid.
I dunno, it definitely does seem like there's a pattern of "the way something looks on the surface is all that matters to anyone" that shines through in all of these writings. You're not going to look at the cover of the 8th edition rulebook, point to the dude posed like God in the roof of the sistine chapel, surrounded by white light and go "ah yes, the bad guy."
It does seem like any time a villainous character is allowed to look cool and seem "savvy" or "smart" in a piece of media, there's a whole legion of idiots who will idolize them in a way they don't tend to idolize, say, Sauron from LOTR. They always seem to follow a similar pattern, too: Tyler Durden, Heath Ledger Joker, Hans Landa, The Punisher - them being Cool and Badass is the text, them being wrong is the subtext.
I also think it's pretty telling how many people will complain any time a character like that is portrayed like they reasonably would be - the reaction to Anakin Skywalker being portrayed as a whiny, bitchy manchild whose greatest victories in the films all involved murdering helpless, basically unarmed people was pretty negative because people just want Darth Vader to be a Cool Badass.
People often like anti heroes or villains as much as heroes. It doesn't mean anything.
Da Boss wrote: Jackal90: the creators of the game put political themes into it, you know? Like the did it on purpose. Because it makes it more compelling.
And I think no one is really saying that 40K is going to turn people fascist or whatever, we are commenting on it being popular with fascists.
You should go back to the start of this thread - that is exactly what some people are saying.
I honestly think some are either being hyperbolic in this thread and/or they have a serious problem with the separation of fantasy and reality.
At this rate I'm expecting people to be demanding that Animaniacs publishes a warning after Pinky and the Brain that world domination is not a healthy thing etc...
At some level you have to trust that the majority of people are able to separate reality from fantasy; that they are able to scream about killing orks and then go on with their life quite normally without trying to kill anyone ever.
Also people keep saying that the community/GW needs to "reject" the extremist groups, yet by and large I've not seen any real acceptance of them. Most people already reject them on some level (eg they might watch Arch Warhammer's lore videos, even though they don't support or are unaware of his racist attitude outside of those videos). What else do you want? Armed mobs and pitchforks? If anything ignoring them is a very powerful weapon - giving them attention and highlighting them and mentioning them over and over bumps them up in attention and gives them exposure. Ignoring them leaves them alone; prevents their expansion and generally leaves them isolated (which they mostly already are).
Da Boss wrote: Jackal90: the creators of the game put political themes into it, you know? Like the did it on purpose. Because it makes it more compelling.
And I think no one is really saying that 40K is going to turn people fascist or whatever, we are commenting on it being popular with fascists.
lots of things are popular with fascists, I mean hell, the reaction to stuff like star trek discovery suggests the alt right has taken to thinking of trek as theirs. *shrugs* I don't get it eaither
Da Boss wrote: Aye, I just want to introduce more of those human societies into the setting so that they exist as examples and it is not as hopless to go against the IoM. But OT for this thread, just an example of what you can do as a gamer if you don't like this stuff.
Don't associate with those people and don't encourage them. Also, when you get the chance, call GW out on how they're steering too hard into a heroic IoM.
Yep. Just curate your play group. Several years ago now I took over organizing our local group as the previous person who was kind of "in charge" moved away, and over time you just learn scumbags exist, and you don't have to allow them to play toy soldiers in your group.
I mean yeah I know lots of things are popular with fascists. They often like craft beer and norse mythology and all sorts of gak I like. But we're talking about Warhammer here, and it's not a conversation designed to "shut down warhammer" or something, just a discussion on the topic.
Problem is that those are all pretty much requirements for a fascistic strong man persona and people who are vulnerable to the arguments of fascism rarely see those qualities as weaknesses.
there is no political system in the world right now where a strong leader isn't wanted. Even in democratic systems you have party heads, factions leaders etc. Saying that this is somehow fasist specific is not very accurate. all humans breath, does this mean that the act of breathing is some sort of -ism too, because those people do it too.
I heard in the spanish rulebooks they all speak spanish. If the GW writers could address this inconsistency I think I'd appreciate it, it's a major plot hole. Which rulebook language is canonical?
Don't the english books always hold the highest level of canon? I mean otherwise there would be some really funny stuff in w40k, if we took some of the black library books translated in to polish as true.
So in my very limited 5 years in the hobby, I have encountered:
Player wearing star of Rhodesia badge on jacket
Players using racist language in GW store, but playing it off as jokes
Same but homophobic or transphobic language
Models and units painted with clear Nazi or 3rd Reich iconography
Models and units painted/modelled to look like KKK members
Players getting upset/bothered because my guard/custodians had black and brown skin
Players actively making attacks against my female characters because they said "women don't belong on the battlefield"
Players that called my Tallarn Guard, Sand N-words.
40k is full of fascists and idiot children. But no, I do not think the hobby is racist or fascist. I do think it's got a rallying cry/dog whistle towards those people though.
I also think GW has done a LOT this year to stop that sort of stuff. This really helped me see it in a better light though:
Da Boss wrote: Jackal90: the creators of the game put political themes into it, you know? Like the did it on purpose. Because it makes it more compelling.
And I think no one is really saying that 40K is going to turn people fascist or whatever, we are commenting on it being popular with fascists.
So what if it is? What's your point or end goal here? Is it to stop them being allowed to play or like the models? Because I would suggest that aswell as being impossible and unnecessary, it's also very illiberal and leaning towards that authoritarianism that I would assume you are very much against to attempt that. Why are people bothered about what other people believe? As long as it isn't affecting you directly, who cares? Trying to get them booted out of the hobby isn't going to change their opinions, so I assume it's just a matter of ideologically purifying your hobby space. The problem then arises, more often than not, that this devolves into a purity spiral with the window for what is acceptable getting smaller and smaller. (There is a very interesting BBC radio 4 podcast about this very thing happening to online knitting communities.) Just leave them be, if you don't like their ideas, don't associate.
This is the main problem I had with the statement in June. Those folks I deem to be ideological troublemakers took it as carte blanche to start attacking people on twitter, almost immediately.
The IoM aren't the "good guys" unless you are just being anthropocentric, which ironically would be actual racism. Every faction in 40k universe are shades of grey, or rather grimdark, the IoM included. A lot of what makes them grimdark / dystopian was plagiarised from the history of communism actually. Eg: commissars, purges.
Wait so you want to tell me that the right stance to have, as I assume racism is the wrong stance, that being team human in w40k and real life is somehow the wrong stance to hold? w40k players should be pro eldar and orks?
Da Boss wrote: Jackal90: the creators of the game put political themes into it, you know? Like the did it on purpose. Because it makes it more compelling.
And I think no one is really saying that 40K is going to turn people fascist or whatever, we are commenting on it being popular with fascists.
lots of things are popular with fascists, I mean hell, the reaction to stuff like star trek discovery suggests the alt right has taken to thinking of trek as theirs. *shrugs* I don't get it eaither
As one matures you realise that people like things people like.
That liking the same things you like doesn't mean people have to hold the same social, political or moral values in any way shape or form.
40K isn't something that only one segment of society likes, its got potential for many many segments to engage with and enjoy. For the vast majority of situations this is a POSITIVE thing as it creates new interactions; broadens horizons and brings different communities and groups and backgrounds together.
And yes along the way there will be some nasty people in there too; by and large the social aspects of 40K keep it to a minimum; sure the internet gives some a podium to shout from; but by and large the appeal of the game broadens horizons and helps engage and forge new understandings. It's a social game at its core and the more outreach we, as gamers, and GW as company does the more diverse the social groups become - to the general betterment of those groups.
In the end you've got to learn not to worry that someone "nasty" in your view, likes the same thing you do. It doesn't mean there's something wrong with 40K or reading, or golfing or football or whatever. It just means those people also engage with the same thing you do. Doesn't mean you have to engage with them; nor that engaging with your hobby is somehow supporting the views of those other people.
hotsauceman1 wrote: No.
It's like the people who think Tyler Durden was a role model or that ceasers legion was a good choice for the mojave.
They missed the point, it's not the source materials fault they are stupid.
I dunno, it definitely does seem like there's a pattern of "the way something looks on the surface is all that matters to anyone" that shines through in all of these writings. You're not going to look at the cover of the 8th edition rulebook, point to the dude posed like God in the roof of the sistine chapel, surrounded by white light and go "ah yes, the bad guy."
It does seem like any time a villainous character is allowed to look cool and seem "savvy" or "smart" in a piece of media, there's a whole legion of idiots who will idolize them in a way they don't tend to idolize, say, Sauron from LOTR. They always seem to follow a similar pattern, too: Tyler Durden, Heath Ledger Joker, Hans Landa, The Punisher - them being Cool and Badass is the text, them being wrong is the subtext.
I also think it's pretty telling how many people will complain any time a character like that is portrayed like they reasonably would be - the reaction to Anakin Skywalker being portrayed as a whiny, bitchy manchild whose greatest victories in the films all involved murdering helpless, basically unarmed people was pretty negative because people just want Darth Vader to be a Cool Badass.
People often like anti heroes or villains as much as heroes. It doesn't mean anything.
I mean, there does seem to be a pretty strong correlation between people I meet who don't pay their child support, constantly tell stories about how they're the victim and everybody else is the bad guy, and can't handle any challenge to their ego and punisher skull and heath ledger joker car window stickers.
I'm in favor of the trend of purposefully trying to craft media that denies people like that villains to idolized.
Player wearing star of Rhodesia badge on jacket
Players using racist language in GW store, but playing it off as jokes
Same but homophobic or transphobic language
Models and units painted with clear Nazi or 3rd Reich iconography
Models and units painted/modelled to look like KKK members
Players getting upset/bothered because my guard/custodians had black and brown skin
Players actively making attacks against my female characters because they said "women don't belong on the battlefield"
Players that called my Tallarn Guard, Sand N-words.
The only thing I can say happened to me is:
Models and units painted with clear Nazi or 3rd Reich iconography - I mean what're you going to do when you play Bolt Action as Germans?
There's one guy around that has a Guard army which I'd call "counts-as nazis" as it's clearly inspired by them. *edit* I should add that the first time I saw that army he explained to me - without me asking - that it was an old paint job from his youth, he was aware of what it looks like and that it's not representative of his views.
None of the other items happened to me - maybe it's more of an issue with where you are, as opposed to what you're playing?
hotsauceman1 wrote: No.
It's like the people who think Tyler Durden was a role model or that ceasers legion was a good choice for the mojave.
They missed the point, it's not the source materials fault they are stupid.
I dunno, it definitely does seem like there's a pattern of "the way something looks on the surface is all that matters to anyone" that shines through in all of these writings. You're not going to look at the cover of the 8th edition rulebook, point to the dude posed like God in the roof of the sistine chapel, surrounded by white light and go "ah yes, the bad guy."
It does seem like any time a villainous character is allowed to look cool and seem "savvy" or "smart" in a piece of media, there's a whole legion of idiots who will idolize them in a way they don't tend to idolize, say, Sauron from LOTR. They always seem to follow a similar pattern, too: Tyler Durden, Heath Ledger Joker, Hans Landa, The Punisher - them being Cool and Badass is the text, them being wrong is the subtext.
I also think it's pretty telling how many people will complain any time a character like that is portrayed like they reasonably would be - the reaction to Anakin Skywalker being portrayed as a whiny, bitchy manchild whose greatest victories in the films all involved murdering helpless, basically unarmed people was pretty negative because people just want Darth Vader to be a Cool Badass.
People often like anti heroes or villains as much as heroes. It doesn't mean anything.
I mean, there does seem to be a pretty strong correlation between people I meet who don't pay their child support, constantly tell stories about how they're the victim and everybody else is the bad guy, and can't handle any challenge to their ego and punisher skull and heath ledger joker car window stickers.
I'm in favor of the trend of purposefully trying to craft media that denies people like that villains to idolized.
A strong correlation of a limited subset?
A niche media with a niche fanbase with a niche forum in a niche sub forum?
the_scotsman wrote: ...there's a whole legion of idiots who will idolize them in a way they don't tend to idolize, say, Sauron from LOTR. They always seem to follow a similar pattern, too: Tyler Durden, Heath Ledger Joker, Hans Landa, The Punisher - them being Cool and Badass is the text, them being wrong is the subtext.
If people idolise them to the point of it being a worry, those people were already a worry beforehand, it's not the character that is worrying.
But those characters are compelling for a reason, they have relatable features. They aren't just generic bad guy who is 100% bad through and through and you know you're supposed to hate, a good story has flawed heroes and relatable villains.
Is it a concern that a very tiny percentage of the population takes them seriously? Maybe, but if it is a concern, I would say it was a concern before those characters existed.
I also think it's pretty telling how many people will complain any time a character like that is portrayed like they reasonably would be - the reaction to Anakin Skywalker being portrayed as a whiny, bitchy manchild whose greatest victories in the films all involved murdering helpless, basically unarmed people was pretty negative because people just want Darth Vader to be a Cool Badass.
People didn't want Darth Vader to be a cool badass, they wanted to see a relatable character turn bad for reasons that would make sense to you or I. They wanted to see a Luke Skywalker type that failed.
What they got was an unlikeable kid who turned into a whiny teenager who went from zero to murdering kids in the blink of an eye with a whole bunch of bad acting and bad writing throughout.
Da Boss wrote: Jackal90: the creators of the game put political themes into it, you know? Like the did it on purpose. Because it makes it more compelling.
And I think no one is really saying that 40K is going to turn people fascist or whatever, we are commenting on it being popular with fascists.
So what if it is? What's your point or end goal here? Is it to stop them being allowed to play or like the models? Because I would suggest that aswell as being impossible and unnecessary, it's also very illiberal and leaning towards that authoritarianism that I would assume you are very much against to attempt that. Why are people bothered about what other people believe? As long as it isn't affecting you directly, who cares? Trying to get them booted out of the hobby isn't going to change their opinions, so I assume it's just a matter of ideologically purifying your hobby space. The problem then arises, more often than not, that this devolves into a purity spiral with the window for what is acceptable getting smaller and smaller. (There is a very interesting BBC radio 4 podcast about this very thing happening to online knitting communities.) Just leave them be, if you don't like their ideas, don't associate.
This is the main problem I had with the statement in June. Those folks I deem to be ideological troublemakers took it as carte blanche to start attacking people on twitter, almost immediately.
I mean, yeah I am pro fascists not being a part of my hobby generally, yeah. I am not trying to do anything in particular to bring that about though, and I think it is weird that you jumped to all these possible end goals I have. "I would like it if fascists would go away" is not the same as me actively doing anything. I am bothered about what other people believe when it is harmful or dangerous, when it dehumanises others and makes their lives more difficult. I care about it because I care about people other than myself, obviously? Like, even if it doesn't effect me directly, fascist ideology absolutely does effect others and I want to help those people. But like, isn't that all pretty obvious? I don't think it is sinister or authoritarian at all.
What I find more interesting is just to discuss why Warhammer is attractive to fascists and hear what others have to say. It seems like some people are uncomfortable with that conversation or find it ridiculous or want it shut down, but like, why? You can go post in a different thread if you think this one is silly, but the really strong response is weird to me. We discuss all sorts of stuff here that is less interesting or more trivial than this topic.
Da Boss wrote: Jackal90: the creators of the game put political themes into it, you know? Like the did it on purpose. Because it makes it more compelling.
And I think no one is really saying that 40K is going to turn people fascist or whatever, we are commenting on it being popular with fascists.
So what if it is? What's your point or end goal here? Is it to stop them being allowed to play or like the models?
One of the first lessons you learn if you have to manage an in-person group is that the worst ~3% of players will drive off 3x-4x their number of decent personable humans if you don't just kick them out.
And in the worst case, they'll get your group ejected from the store you probably use to host your games by doing the same thing they do with good players with paying customers.
Having a standard of behavioral decency is necessary for any group that wants to last.
I don't think I ever saw people play a "nazi" army outside of historicals, and non of the people that played those armies or ally armies like hungarians or italians had political views aligned with the german reich. In fact considering history it is really hard to be pro nazi or pro communist around here. Specialy the nazi thing.
What I find more interesting is just to discuss why Warhammer is attractive to fascists and hear what others have to say.
I don't think it is more attractive, then anything else that people can do. There are probably more what ever counts as a fascist in MMA clubs and hooligan gym clubs, then in w40k. I still have no idea how w40k could appeal to someone who is a fasist or national socialist, as there is no such system in the lore. There is no communism or any form of democracy either. well maybe eldar are kind of a like the US pre civil war, but this is still a big kind of a and a maybe.
There is a theocracy and oligarchy in it. But I don't see many people who like those system play w40k, or it being popular in places where they are base of sociaty.
Sometimes I think that -isms are just buzz words nowadays, and that they don't really mean the definition of the word, but are just a nice replacement for a bannable insult to someone or something one doesn't like. And if it was true, depending on the viewer, anything in any facet of live is majority an -ism of some sort, which isn't very useful to go on with life, but a good thing to write about. As we are proving it now.
I mean, there does seem to be a pretty strong correlation between people I meet who don't pay their child support, constantly tell stories about how they're the victim and everybody else is the bad guy, and can't handle any challenge to their ego and punisher skull and heath ledger joker car window stickers.
I'm in favor of the trend of purposefully trying to craft media that denies people like that villains to idolized.
I'm sure lots of them like beer too, so, shall we ban them from buying beer? On the flip side, I'm a parent to 2 healthy kids, and a loyal husband who provides for my family, and I like all those villains, so what? It doesn't mean anything. It's fiction, and doesn't correlate to reality in any meaningful way.
I would suggest that without strong villains then there would be no need for strong moral heroes...
