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

We've always had dictators, and we still do. They've always hid behind the ideologies of communism, fascism, authoritarianism theocracy, and others. But now we are facing totalitarianism not from an outside force, but from forces within our own governments. Call me paranoid if you want, but governments around the world, even in so called "free" countries are beginning to take away our freedoms. I might be slightly biased since the gaming industry is almost always hammered by fascists and pseudo-scientists trying to ruin everything.

Three days ago the Australian government banned yet another video game, Mortal Kombat, this is one of many video games that have either been completely banned or censored in some way (link). Germany, another oppressive anti-gamer government censored Bulletstorm last month (link). A few months ago Japan decided to censor hardcore child pornography in video games, anime, manga, and other mediums (link). The UK government is trying to create a law that will block all citizens from accessing online pornography unless they have a special porn license that they have to separately request from their ISP (link). In every civilized country in the world, excluding parts of the Netherlands, marijuana is illegal, despite how it is no worse for you than a cigarette and does have some medicinal purposes.

In the United Kingdom there are 85 sharia courts that enforce civil Islamic law (link). Also in the UK nearly all of the public schools require school uniforms or an overly strict dress code. In Australia they'll ban anything, including breast sizes. Last year the Australian government made it illegal for adult women who have what the government deems "small" breasts or look like they look young, they will be banned from participating in any adult media (link). Even in the United States we are not safe from unnecessary totalitarianism. Look at the pseudo scientists who claim that playing violent video games makes you want to kill and rape people. Or the people who want to ban all video games and try to prevent video game sales to teenagers (link).

Sure, this stuff might seem minor now, but it isn't getting any better. And it's always a slippery slope. So tell me, is this freedom or is this censorship? Is this a democracy or is it a nanny state? How much longer until we live under an Orwellian-esque government?

Which country are you talking about when you ask about the ETA on Big Brother? Because your examples are all over the place.

Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

you seriously cannot see an issue with hardcore child porn unless there are real children in it?

I am sad. This thread has made me sad.

corpsesarefun wrote:

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

you seriously cannot see an issue with hardcore child porn unless there are real children in it?

If children weren't involved in making it, who is harmed by it?

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

you seriously cannot see an issue with hardcore child porn unless there are real children in it?

If children weren't involved in making it, who is harmed by it?

Nobody is harmed, but you are a sick fether if you don't have qualms with it.

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

Really?





Wow!

In the United Kingdom there are 85 sharia courts that enforce civil Islamic law (link). Also in the UK nearly all of the public schools require school uniforms or an overly strict dress code

You must really have it in with kids and their crazy fashions as well, do you run up to them screaming and shouting for them not to follow the herd and cast off their Nikes, and addidas and converse, and Superdry and habibs and turbans and stuff. Or do they make you so sick you want to burn them all to the ground?

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

you seriously cannot see an issue with hardcore child porn unless there are real children in it?

If children weren't involved in making it, who is harmed by it?

Same argument applies as with porn, rape-fantasy, and violent video games: you create the impression that this type of activity is appropriate and more people will engage in it.

I think it's a bunch of BS, especially when the rationale for anti-child porn laws are protection of children, not reducing the prevalence of pedophiles.

Interestingly, there are a lot of parallels that can be drawn between the "war on child porn" and the "war on drugs."

corpsesarefun wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

you seriously cannot see an issue with hardcore child porn unless there are real children in it?

If children weren't involved in making it, who is harmed by it?

Nobody is harmed, but you are a sick fether if you don't have qualms with it.

I'm a sick fether because I don't have qualms about something that doesn't harm anybody?

Really?

So, drawings of children getting 3 male genitals slammed into them is fine, but if someone takes a photo of it, then it's over the line?

Logic just doesn't apply. And yes, I can understand why Aussies are banning pornographies of people who look young. All the evidence it understandable, and it all can be justifed, and justified it has been. In my school, girls wear pants that hug their asses so much that they may not be wearing pants at all. It's distracting.

corpsesarefun wrote:

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

you seriously cannot see an issue with hardcore child porn unless there are real children in it?

It's either:
Let the pedo watch fake non-real child porn.
or
They act out their fantasies for real.

Eh? It's a non-issue. Welcome to just getting old enough to be realizing that there are people out there who are uncomfortable with things you're comfortable with. "Think of the children" has been an classic motto since the beginning of time.. You're not seeing anything that didn't exist 20 years ago when Tipper Gore and the other clucking Congressional hens were on their vicious tirade against music, and even before then with book burnings and banned literature.

Plus it's harmless. No reason for the government to get involved in harmless virtual porn in which no one is hurt?

biccat wrote:Same argument applies as with porn, rape-fantasy, and violent video games: you create the impression that this type of activity is appropriate and more people will engage in it.

The kind of people who watch rape-porn and play violent video games fall into two categories: those who understand that it's fantasy, and those who were already morally okay with the themes present.

Chowderhead wrote:So, drawings of children getting 3 male genitals slammed into them is fine, but if someone takes a photo of it, then it's over the line?

Logic just doesn't apply.

The harm inherent in the production of child pornography is that you're fething a child, not that you're taking pictures of fething a child.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:
The harm inherent in the production of child pornography is that you're fething a child, not that you're taking pictures of fething a child.

I think you need to take your black and white blinkers off and step into a world of greys.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

biccat wrote:Same argument applies as with porn, rape-fantasy, and violent video games: you create the impression that this type of activity is appropriate and more people will engage in it.

The kind of people who watch rape-porn and play violent video games fall into two categories: those who understand that it's fantasy, and those who were already morally okay with the themes present.

You can't say that unequivocally. There are 3 groups:
1) those that, no matter what, will not act in the manner suggested by the media.
2) those that, no matter what, are going to act in the manner suggested, whether they see it or not.
3) those that will be swayed by the media.

The existence of groups 1 & 2 are obvious, the existence of group 3 is unproveable, but if we assume it's non-zero, then the next question should be how much freedom are we willing to sacrifice to reduce the effects of the media on group 3.

If group 3 is large (relative to group 2), then there's a strong argument that we should restrict access.
If group 3 is small (relative to group 2), then there's a strong argument that we should not restrict access.

samusaran253 wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

samusaran253 wrote:Let me clarify, I'm not against Japan censoring child porn. But I am against them censoring child pornography in video games and anime and stuff, since it's victimless and unnecessary totalitarianism.

you seriously cannot see an issue with hardcore child porn unless there are real children in it?

It's either:
Let the pedo watch fake non-real child porn.
or
They act out their fantasies for real.

And another for the ignore list. Seriously, you have no idea.

True pedophiles would never harm a child. There's nothing wrong with necrophilia or pedophilia or any other fetish. It's only wrong when there is a victim (i.e. a child gets raped or a corpse gets fethed).

The sadness, it grows. Have we really created a group of people that think that if a simulacra of a child being sexually exploited isn't legal that that is the same thing as totalitarianism? Odds are you already own in and just want it to stop being illegal. You say it is harming no one but I'd say you are already a victim.

Ahtman wrote:I am sad. This thread has made me sad.

indeed.

Guys, we're all getting a little side tracked here. The OP was talking about countries banning "freedoms etc" (to sum it up briefly), and you're all stuck debating one aspect of it that nobody likes to think about.

So I rather humbly suggest we start discussing what these governments are doing and stop discussing the ethics of the current topic.

biccat wrote:The existence of groups 1 & 2 are obvious, the existence of group 3 is unproveable, but if we assume it's non-zero, then the next question should be how much freedom are we willing to sacrifice to reduce the effects of the media on group 3.

If group 3 is large (relative to group 2), then there's a strong argument that we should restrict access.
If group 3 is small (relative to group 2), then there's a strong argument that we should not restrict access.

I've never seen any actual data that supports the existence of even a small group three. If you know of anything, point it out? shrugshrug.

Mr. Burning wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:The harm inherent in the production of child pornography is that you're fething a child, not that you're taking pictures of fething a child.

I think you need to take your black and white blinkers off and step into a world of greys.

I could probably do that more easily if you pointed out one of those greys.

Lets not have a Dakkaites versus Some Dude episode again.

Just drop the topic and discuss the OP properly.

Damn, how have the mods not seen this thread yet?

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

biccat wrote:The existence of groups 1 & 2 are obvious, the existence of group 3 is unproveable, but if we assume it's non-zero, then the next question should be how much freedom are we willing to sacrifice to reduce the effects of the media on group 3.

If group 3 is large (relative to group 2), then there's a strong argument that we should restrict access.
If group 3 is small (relative to group 2), then there's a strong argument that we should not restrict access.

I've never seen any actual data that supports the existence of even a small group three. If you know of anything, point it out? shrugshrug.

You can't measure group 3, because until they act, they look like they're in group 1. Afterwards, they look like they're in group 2.

Isn't it the purpose of propaganda to appeal to people in group 3? There was a lot of it during the various wars, and it arguably had some effect. Anti-American propaganda is supposedly a good recruiting tool for fighters in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Darkvoidof40k wrote:Guys, we're all getting a little side tracked here. The OP was talking about countries banning "freedoms etc" (to sum it up briefly), and you're all stuck debating one aspect of it that nobody likes to think about.

So I rather humbly suggest we start discussing what these governments are doing and stop discussing the ethics of the current topic.

What's there to discuss? The porn license is never going to get off the ground, and if it does it'll be laughably easy to get around. Australia has been a nanny state for what seems like decades, so I can't imagine that the banning of Mortal Kombat or small-breasted porn comes as a suprise. The marijuana debate is incredibly one-sided and inevitably leads to a liberal beatdown on conservatives, so it's not like we need another one of those. The sharia courts in the UK, IIRC do not enforce civil Sharia law, they are mediators, and the rulings only apply so long as both participants agree that they do. Finally, the anti-video games scientists and lobbyists in the USA are not the government, and thus it's not a symptom of totalitarianism.

Did I miss anything?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote:You can't measure group 3, because until they act, they look like they're in group 1. Afterwards, they look like they're in group 2.

You can, however, study how effective violent media is at influencing people into being morally accepting of violence. I'm sure there's studies lying around the net that have done this. I can't recall any offhand that supported a large (or small) group three, and I'm too tired to bother searching, but if you want to take a crack at it, I doubt it'd be hard to find some.

biccat wrote:Isn't it the purpose of propaganda to appeal to people in group 3? There was a lot of it during the various wars, and it arguably had some effect. Anti-American propaganda is supposedly a good recruiting tool for fighters in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Granted, but I'd argue that the massive casualties on the Iraq and Afghanistan side of the war is a damn good recruiting tool all on its own.

Ahtman wrote:I am sad. This thread has made me sad.

This thread is bad and you should all feel bad.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Ahtman wrote:I am sad. This thread has made me sad.

This thread is bad and you should all feel bad.

It is and I do.

'This is a bad thread' is redundant, all threads are bad.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:'This is a bad thread' is redundant, all threads are bad.

That is utter opinion.