TheRPGSite

Fan Forums => The RPGPundit's Own Forum => Topic started by: Thorn Drumheller on October 12, 2022, 03:48:37 PM

Title: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Thorn Drumheller on October 12, 2022, 03:48:37 PM
So I had to laugh when I saw this:

https://www.blackgate.com/2022/09/09/emnew-edge-sword-sorcery-magazineem-editor-oliver-brackenbury-interviewed-by-michael-harrington/ (https://www.blackgate.com/2022/09/09/emnew-edge-sword-sorcery-magazineem-editor-oliver-brackenbury-interviewed-by-michael-harrington/)

Just read the description of taking S&S but alloying inclusivity.........I'm fine with whatever they want to do. I'm just not gonna give 'em the chance. LOL
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on October 12, 2022, 09:51:49 PM
  That dumbass literally says "fellow white guys" in his blurbs.  Fuck me.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: rytrasmi on October 12, 2022, 10:06:08 PM
Oh, yes, finally! The messiah the Sword & Sorcery genre has been waiting for!
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 13, 2022, 12:49:15 AM
Quote
“How do we get more people into this genre?”

He may as well start burning money on a charcoal grill.



Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Stumpydave on October 13, 2022, 04:00:37 AM
No mention of Red Sonja?  It's like those old timers had a thing against wimminfolk!  What next, Conan is pilloried for his racist crimes against Stygians?

There's nothing inherently wrong with inclusion but why single out one group (or “white guys,” for brevity’s sake) as the biggest obstacle.  That's not very inclusive is it.


 

Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on October 13, 2022, 07:31:53 AM
Has he never read Imaro? It’s the progenitor of sword & soul!
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Skullking on October 13, 2022, 12:34:10 PM
"You can replace “women” and “sexism” in this example with just about every intersection of identity that isn’t my fellow white, cishet, neurotypical, able-bodied fellas"

This is beyond cringe.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on October 13, 2022, 12:44:13 PM
I don't fall into his "fellow white, cishet, neurotypical, able-bodied fellas" and I find this cringy af. I just want to be treated like a normal person, not coddled, worshipped, or pitied.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: wmarshal on October 13, 2022, 01:23:17 PM
No sale, and that cover art is plain awful.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Thorn Drumheller on October 13, 2022, 06:24:15 PM
No sale, and that cover art is plain awful.

Exactly. The cover art is so .... so..... dumb
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Domina on October 13, 2022, 11:27:33 PM
Amazing infantilization of black people in the article as per usual. Thank God we have these white saviors to tell us what's best for us.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on October 14, 2022, 02:10:49 AM
Has he never read Imaro? It’s the progenitor of sword & soul!

Yeah, the article sounds like he's giving out buzzwords for attention without acknowledging works like Imaro. I see that issue #0 of his magazine has free PDF and EPUB download, but I haven't read the stories.

I love the Imaro stories. I wish there were a direct RPG adaptation. Has anyone tried Ki Khanga? It's marketed as a "Sword & Soul" RPG, but I don't know anything about it otherwise.

https://www.mvmediaatl.com/product-page/ki-khanga-sword-and-soul-role-playing-game-basic-rules
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: rhialto on October 14, 2022, 06:01:35 AM
A quick search turned this up: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116013/is-my-copy-of-ki-khanga-a-misprint. There are no reviews on DriveThru for the Basic Game, and the sample provided only includes a few pages of the rules (the standard card deck rules referenced in the first link).
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on October 14, 2022, 12:33:08 PM
A quick search turned this up: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116013/is-my-copy-of-ki-khanga-a-misprint. There are no reviews on DriveThru for the Basic Game, and the sample provided only includes a few pages of the rules (the standard card deck rules referenced in the first link).

Thanks. Typos and missing references don't sound great, though those aren't judging the design quality of the game.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: rhialto on October 14, 2022, 01:06:45 PM
A quick search turned this up: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/116013/is-my-copy-of-ki-khanga-a-misprint. There are no reviews on DriveThru for the Basic Game, and the sample provided only includes a few pages of the rules (the standard card deck rules referenced in the first link).

Thanks. Typos and missing references don't sound great, though those aren't judging the design quality of the game.
Agree; what can be gleaned from the Basic Game preview on DriveThru looks like a FUDGE/FATE-like quality scale (Below Average, Average, etc.), with attributes combining to determine "fighting capability", etc. But there's nothing in the preview which indicates how the cards determine success or failure in task resolution.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on October 14, 2022, 10:03:53 PM
I don't fall into his "fellow white, cishet, neurotypical, able-bodied fellas" and I find this cringy af. I just want to be treated like a normal person, not coddled, worshipped, or pitied.

  Well, neither does he, which is why he is saying something so cringy.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: blackstone on October 14, 2022, 11:02:00 PM
I read part of the interview, and I just cannot understand how anyone can live in a constant state of paranoia and fear.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on October 15, 2022, 01:47:08 AM
"For example, don’t scratch your head wondering why more women don’t read and write in the genre when you’re reluctant to call out sexism in the scene...."

It never occurred to Mr. Brackenbury that maybe not a lot of women read sword & sorcery for the same reason not many men read romance novels, or not many women read technothrillers?  I.e., the genre's basic style and typical content simply doesn't appeal to the average reader of that group?

Sword and sorcery is largely plot-based melodrama, and very seldom goes into deep exploration of characters, emotions and relationships, which is (in my experience and observation) what most women want in their fiction. You could write a story which did do this, but even if it used all the classic S&S tropes I doubt it would much feel like S&S, any more than Mercedes Lackey feels like Fritz Leiber.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on October 15, 2022, 01:57:14 AM
I also have real doubts about whether Brackenbury will be able to pull off his proposed definition, given that "inclusivity" by definition precludes you from considering anything to be "wonderfully weird". The Weird is the Other, the Exotic, the Strange, and anybody focusing on "inclusivity" is explicitly targeted at deconstructing that lens of analysis.

Which is not to say you couldn't do something like this on a case-to-case basis. The fifth Fafhrd & Gray Mouser book, The Swords of Lankhmar, features our heroes explicitly falling for offputtingly weird nonhuman lovers (the invisible-fleshed ghoul Kreeshkra for Fafhrd, the wererat princess Hisvet for the Mouser) and discovering that they are not so different once you get past the obvious; that should please anybody looking for a message of inclusivity. But if that trope is overused, as for example by making it a definitional requirement of one's new genre, then like any overused trope it's going to lose its impact.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Trond on October 15, 2022, 09:57:54 AM
"For example, don’t scratch your head wondering why more women don’t read and write in the genre when you’re reluctant to call out sexism in the scene...."

It never occurred to Mr. Brackenbury that maybe not a lot of women read sword & sorcery for the same reason not many men read romance novels, or not many women read technothrillers?  I.e., the genre's basic style and typical content simply doesn't appeal to the average reader of that group?

Sword and sorcery is largely plot-based melodrama, and very seldom goes into deep exploration of characters, emotions and relationships, which is (in my experience and observation) what most women want in their fiction. You could write a story which did do this, but even if it used all the classic S&S tropes I doubt it would much feel like S&S, any more than Mercedes Lackey feels like Fritz Leiber.

The reasoning is very simple
Men don’t read a certain genre? => men are to blame
Women don’t read a certain genre? => men are to blame
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on October 15, 2022, 03:15:43 PM
What bugs me about the interview is the self-serving narrative that this broadening is a new thing, ignoring past works like Charles Saunders' Imaro novels and C.L. Moore's Jirel of Joiry. They are selling themselves as more revolutionary by not talking about previous works that have a variety of protagonists.

"For example, don’t scratch your head wondering why more women don’t read and write in the genre when you’re reluctant to call out sexism in the scene...."

It never occurred to Mr. Brackenbury that maybe not a lot of women read sword & sorcery for the same reason not many men read romance novels, or not many women read technothrillers?  I.e., the genre's basic style and typical content simply doesn't appeal to the average reader of that group?

This involves a chicken-and-egg question. Is the publishing merely reflecting the audience and culture? Or is the publishing *producing* the audience and culture? I would say the answer is both.

Regarding technothrillers... Traditionally, fewer women have been involved in science and tech. They've been considered less interested and/or less capable - some theorize that it is genetic. However, that has changed a lot in the past 50 years. I don't think that change was the result of some natural process. Many people actively shifted the culture such that many more women are involved in science and tech now. Much of that is in education and the workplace, but it's also influenced by women characters and authors in sci-fi. I wouldn't classify them as technothrillers necessarily, but more technical sci-fi like Andy Weir's The Martian and Artemis along with Martha Wells' Murderbot novels have been popular with many women I know.


Sword and sorcery is largely plot-based melodrama, and very seldom goes into deep exploration of characters, emotions and relationships, which is (in my experience and observation) what most women want in their fiction. You could write a story which did do this, but even if it used all the classic S&S tropes I doubt it would much feel like S&S, any more than Mercedes Lackey feels like Fritz Leiber.

Have you read C.L. Moore's Jirel of Joiry stories? I feel they are pretty classic S&S, while also being written by and about a woman, with appeal to women readers.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on October 15, 2022, 05:59:00 PM
s the publishing merely reflecting the audience and culture? Or is the publishing *producing* the audience and culture? I would say the answer is both.

There's certainly a mutual feedback loop. But Brackenbury's immediate assumption that the primary reason women haven't historically read S&S is its allegedly sexist content seems both reductionist and incomplete, and if he thinks all that's necessary to improve female S&S readership is to remove what he assumes is "sexist", I'm skeptical it'll have the results he hopes for.

Quote
I wouldn't classify them as technothrillers necessarily, but more technical sci-fi like Andy Weir's The Martian and Artemis along with Martha Wells' Murderbot novels have been popular with many women I know.

I don't doubt it, but The Martian, at least, has a lot of character work to go along with the technical detail, and from what I've read about the Murderbot series, those books also have a lot of introspection on the part of the protagonist. (I also can't help but wonder how much female liking for The Martian is a product of Matt Damon starring in the movie -- apologies to the exceptions.)

The stuff that in my observation seldom catches womens' interest is the stuff where everything that isn't an in-depth examination of technology tends to be about fight scenes or politics. Larry Correia knew what he was doing when he included a love story as a key element of his first Monster Hunter International book.

Quote
Have you read C.L. Moore's Jirel of Joiry stories? I feel they are pretty classic S&S, while also being written by and about a woman, with appeal to women readers.

I have, and you're right, they do entail a pretty heavy character and relationship emphasis in among the swordplay and eldritch weirdness. But I have to admit I think most modern "inclusivity" critics would still object to Jirel, given how her story turns on realizing that she's in love with the man who is the target of her blood vendetta; the trope "when a woman hates a man this badly, it means what she really feels for him is love" is considered highly problematic these days, and I'm not entirely sure I would even disagree.

It's also telling that stories like Jirel's, or the works of Tanith Lee and similar stuff, were far more often marketed under the genre label of "dark fantasy" than "sword & sorcery", despite involving a lot of the same tropes; it was what those authors did differently from authors like Vance, Howard or Leiber -- the gothicism, the romance, the style -- that got them their own marketing technique. (And the "dark fantasy" label is also why the works of authors like Abercrombie, Erikson, and Bakker had to have the label "grimdark" attached to them for marketing purposes, because they in turn were very different from either predecessor label.)

I don't think it's any accident that Red Sonja is still more well-known as a pulp heroine than Jirel, despite having much less original work created for her by her original author ("Red" Sonya of Rogatino was actually only written by Howard once in a piece of historical fiction, "The Shadow of the Vulture"; it was Roy Thomas and Barry Smith who transposed her into the Hyborian Age for the Conan comic series, which is where she became famous).
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on October 15, 2022, 06:44:01 PM
  "Inclusivity" means the same thing as "diversity" when people like this shit bag use it, it means anti white.  I could at least attempt to tolerate reading all their thoughts if they had the balls to just speak plainly (though to be honest only idiots cant understand what they are saying) and be up front about what he wants.  Ah well, hopefully his woman gets abortions and if he has kids he makes sure to get them gender reassignment surgery.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 16, 2022, 06:15:26 AM
"For example, don’t scratch your head wondering why more women don’t read and write in the genre when you’re reluctant to call out sexism in the scene...."

It never occurred to Mr. Brackenbury that maybe not a lot of women read sword & sorcery for the same reason not many men read romance novels, or not many women read technothrillers?  I.e., the genre's basic style and typical content simply doesn't appeal to the average reader of that group?

Sword and sorcery is largely plot-based melodrama, and very seldom goes into deep exploration of characters, emotions and relationships, which is (in my experience and observation) what most women want in their fiction. You could write a story which did do this, but even if it used all the classic S&S tropes I doubt it would much feel like S&S, any more than Mercedes Lackey feels like Fritz Leiber.

Exactly. I don't scratch my head wondering why more women don't read and write in a genre they don't prefer. But these numbskulls want to believe other men are evil, rapey bastards so they have a bad guy for their turgid feminist male hero fantasies.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Trond on October 16, 2022, 09:06:55 AM
What bugs me about the interview is the self-serving narrative that this broadening is a new thing, ignoring past works like Charles Saunders' Imaro novels and C.L. Moore's Jirel of Joiry. They are selling themselves as more revolutionary by not talking about previous works that have a variety of protagonists.


But this sort of narrative has become extremely common in anything apparently appealing to the left “this is the first movie with a black female protagonist (since the last movie with a black female protagonist)”
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on October 17, 2022, 08:29:58 PM
What bugs me about the interview is the self-serving narrative that this broadening is a new thing, ignoring past works like Charles Saunders' Imaro novels and C.L. Moore's Jirel of Joiry. They are selling themselves as more revolutionary by not talking about previous works that have a variety of protagonists.

But this sort of narrative has become extremely common in anything apparently appealing to the left “this is the first movie with a black female protagonist (since the last movie with a black female protagonist)”

I would agree with that. It's a common narrative among the left-leaning, like many other flawed reasoning and/or deceptive tactics by people who want to advocate politics more than look at themselves. My feeling is that strident political advocates of either right or left have a lot of such narratives. Reality rarely conforms to a simplistic narrative.


Is the publishing merely reflecting the audience and culture? Or is the publishing *producing* the audience and culture? I would say the answer is both.

There's certainly a mutual feedback loop. But Brackenbury's immediate assumption that the primary reason women haven't historically read S&S is its allegedly sexist content seems both reductionist and incomplete, and if he thinks all that's necessary to improve female S&S readership is to remove what he assumes is "sexist", I'm skeptical it'll have the results he hopes for.

I think the main result he hopes for is to sell more copies of his own fiction magazine. It's also possible that he is a true believer in that he thinks it will marginally change the culture, but I suspect he is deliberately overselling.


I wouldn't classify them as technothrillers necessarily, but more technical sci-fi like Andy Weir's The Martian and Artemis along with Martha Wells' Murderbot novels have been popular with many women I know.

I don't doubt it, but The Martian, at least, has a lot of character work to go along with the technical detail, and from what I've read about the Murderbot series, those books also have a lot of introspection on the part of the protagonist. (I also can't help but wonder how much female liking for The Martian is a product of Matt Damon starring in the movie -- apologies to the exceptions.)

The stuff that in my observation seldom catches womens' interest is the stuff where everything that isn't an in-depth examination of technology tends to be about fight scenes or politics. Larry Correia knew what he was doing when he included a love story as a key element of his first Monster Hunter International book.

I haven't read MHI, and I'm not sure what we're disagreeing on here, if anything.

1) The original topic was about writing Sword & Sorcery stories with different protagonists and readers -- like S&S stories with women protagonists or with black protagonists. Evaluating that as a goal is different than judging how this one magazine creator is handling it.

2) Given this as a topic, I think of examples like Moore's Jirel of Joiry and Saunders' Imaro. These were certainly deliberately created to do just that. And I liked Jirel, and loved Imaro.

3) From my reading (which is mostly R.E. Howard with a scattering of Lieber, Vance, and others), Sword & Sorcery stories are frequently heavy on melodramatic emotion and sometimes romance. For example, Howards' "Queen of the Black Coast" is centered on romance and relationship, as much so as the Jirel of Joiry stories. It's not particularly deep character exploration, but then neither is Jirel. S&S does not have analytic tactical fighting like military sci-fi, but is much more about emotions and melodrama.

4) One could draw a line to classify Jirel and Imaro as being not really S&S, but I'm not sure what purpose that serves. Regardless of what label is put on them, I think they're both good and could make for good gaming.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on October 19, 2022, 04:44:31 PM
I think the main result (Brackenbury) hopes for is to sell more copies of his own fiction magazine. It's also possible that he is a true believer in that he thinks it will marginally change the culture, but I suspect he is deliberately overselling.

I suspect you're right. He wouldn't be the first business owner to try riding a current wave of popular sentiment for promotional purposes.

Quote
I'm not sure what we're disagreeing on here, if anything. ...From my reading (which is mostly R.E. Howard with a scattering of Lieber, Vance, and others), Sword & Sorcery stories are frequently heavy on melodramatic emotion and sometimes romance. For example, Howards' "Queen of the Black Coast" is centered on romance and relationship, as much so as the Jirel of Joiry stories. It's not particularly deep character exploration, but then neither is Jirel. ...One could draw a line to classify Jirel and Imaro as being not really S&S, but I'm not sure what purpose that serves. Regardless of what label is put on them, I think they're both good and could make for good gaming.

Well, again, I must concede you're right; I may have gone out of my way to emphasize the differences in fantasy subgenres and the audiences they attract, mostly because I have developed a knee-jerk resistance to what Brackenbury appears to be implicitly claiming -- i.e. that the fact a particular genre doesn't appeal to all audiences equally is somehow a political issue with the nature of the genre, rather than a personal reflection on the nature of the audiences.

Genres and subgenres are, ultimately, marketing labels -- they're ways to sell particular stories to audiences who have indicated they like stories like that. Ultimately I think the error in what Brackenbury is doing is that he thinks the label is shaping the audience more than the audience is shaping the label, and that while he may have the best will in the world, if he tries to broaden the definition of the "sword & sorcery" label to appeal to more audiences he is only going to weaken its usefulness. There are plenty of people who like both Tanith Lee and Fritz Leiber, but there are also plenty who prefer one to the other, and finding a way to put them both under the same label is doing those audiences a disservice.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on October 19, 2022, 06:09:24 PM
  "Fellow white guy" brackenbury is looking to grift, and for all I know will get some funding from some nebulous place/benefactor to make sure to be "more inclusive in sword and sorcery".  I have no doubt there are plenty of "non profits" out there who will fund subversives like that asshole to find more stuff and ruin it for the people who liked it....ie "Fellow white guys"
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Skullking on October 20, 2022, 04:32:33 PM
Well, again, I must concede you're right; I may have gone out of my way to emphasize the differences in fantasy subgenres and the audiences they attract, mostly because I have developed a knee-jerk resistance to what Brackenbury appears to be implicitly claiming -- i.e. that the fact a particular genre doesn't appeal to all audiences equally is somehow a political issue with the nature of the genre, rather than a personal reflection on the nature of the audiences.

Yes, media today must appeal to all audiences, well all except the original audience of course!
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on October 21, 2022, 01:06:43 PM
It's also telling that stories like Jirel's, or the works of Tanith Lee and similar stuff, were far more often marketed under the genre label of "dark fantasy" than "sword & sorcery", despite involving a lot of the same tropes; it was what those authors did differently from authors like Vance, Howard or Leiber -- the gothicism, the romance, the style -- that got them their own marketing technique. (And the "dark fantasy" label is also why the works of authors like Abercrombie, Erikson, and Bakker had to have the label "grimdark" attached to them for marketing purposes, because they in turn were very different from either predecessor label.)
I completely missed this, but now that you point it out it makes perfect sense. These are all actually the same genre: dark/gritty fantasy intended to rebel against the standard Arthurian/Tolkienesque romantic fantasy clichés.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on October 21, 2022, 04:01:10 PM
These are all actually the same genre: dark/gritty fantasy intended to rebel against the standard Arthurian/Tolkienesque romantic fantasy clichés.

Well, much of S&S's classic stuff predates Tolkien, and Tolkien himself was in his own way rebelling against classical romance tropes by putting the solidly English lower-/middle-class hobbits front and centre as fish-out-of-water heroes. But you're right, it's always possible to deconstruct genre labels by pointing out that the things they differentiate between usually have more in common than not.

I'm not opposed in principle to the idea that a particular subgenre can get stale and that deliberately going beyond its stereotypical tropes can reinvigorate it. I just dislike the marketing approach which explicitly politicizes that process.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on October 24, 2022, 02:53:40 AM
I'm not opposed in principle to the idea that a particular subgenre can get stale and that deliberately going beyond its stereotypical tropes can reinvigorate it. I just dislike the marketing approach which explicitly politicizes that process.

Yeah, this sucks. What's worse in some ways is that I suspect that in the current environment, politicized marketing is far more successful than non-politicized marketing. So maybe he's not wrong in a business sense, but it still sucks and I dislike it.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on October 24, 2022, 09:36:19 AM
Yeah. E.g. I see stuff being advertised as New Weird and Slipstream, which are meaningless labels to me. Wikipedia's description is just meaningless word salad.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Visitor Q on November 03, 2022, 02:08:32 PM
I think all of this misses the point that Sword and Sorcery (which I love) is generally quite a cyncial apolitical genre focusing on individuals who cleave their own path regardless of the hardships or hypocrisy the world presents them. The characteristics of the protagonists is secondary to their attitude.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on November 11, 2022, 02:02:40 PM
I think all of this misses the point that Sword and Sorcery (which I love) is generally quite a cyncial apolitical genre focusing on individuals who cleave their own path regardless of the hardships or hypocrisy the world presents them. The characteristics of the protagonists is secondary to their attitude.

Regarding Sword & Sorcery, there was some interesting discussion about the Imaro books in a thread on the "Other Games" forum that had cross-over with this topic.

https://www.therpgsite.com/other-games/aragorn-race-swapped-what-the-literal-fuck/msg1233081/#msg1233081

The Imaro books are often classified as the progenitors of "Sword & Soul" which is sometimes considered distinct from Sword & Sorcery, or alternately a subgenre. I think Imaro exemplifies the individualist attitude of Sword & Sorcery protagonists.

Still, I also think that if I was pitching a game in the world of Imaro, I would probably qualify it more than generic Sword & Sorcery.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: The Spaniard on November 12, 2022, 07:53:12 AM
Yea, gonna rush right out and get this one...  Inclusive to these dummies really means Exclusive, spin it as they might.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Trond on November 17, 2022, 04:38:12 PM
Yea, gonna rush right out and get this one...  Inclusive to these dummies really means Exclusive, spin it as they might.

Just like "diverse". As in "we are only hiring diverse employees". What it really means is "not white men".
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Thorn Drumheller on November 27, 2022, 12:55:10 PM
.......
Regarding Sword & Sorcery, there was some interesting discussion about the Imaro books in a thread on the "Other Games" forum that had cross-over with this topic.

https://www.therpgsite.com/other-games/aragorn-race-swapped-what-the-literal-fuck/msg1233081/#msg1233081

The Imaro books are often classified as the progenitors of "Sword & Soul" which is sometimes considered distinct from Sword & Sorcery, or alternately a subgenre. I think Imaro exemplifies the individualist attitude of Sword & Sorcery protagonists.

Still, I also think that if I was pitching a game in the world of Imaro, I would probably qualify it more than generic Sword & Sorcery.

LOL. I was thinking of Imaro. What if a studio decided to option the right to a movie? Could I as a white guy go, "You know, I don't feel like I'm represented in this film (I mean I'm sure white man is the bad guy but I want good guys too). Could we cast some white people? Or the best actor for the Imaro role is a white guy, let's cast him."

You know how that would turn out.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Thorn Drumheller on November 27, 2022, 12:55:40 PM
Yea, gonna rush right out and get this one...  Inclusive to these dummies really means Exclusive, spin it as they might.

Just like "diverse". As in "we are only hiring diverse employees". What it really means is "not white men".

Ding, ding, ding....we have a winner
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on November 27, 2022, 11:38:48 PM
Regarding Sword & Sorcery, there was some interesting discussion about the Imaro books in a thread on the "Other Games" forum that had cross-over with this topic.

https://www.therpgsite.com/other-games/aragorn-race-swapped-what-the-literal-fuck/msg1233081/#msg1233081

The Imaro books are often classified as the progenitors of "Sword & Soul" which is sometimes considered distinct from Sword & Sorcery, or alternately a subgenre. I think Imaro exemplifies the individualist attitude of Sword & Sorcery protagonists.

Still, I also think that if I was pitching a game in the world of Imaro, I would probably qualify it more than generic Sword & Sorcery.

LOL. I was thinking of Imaro. What if a studio decided to option the right to a movie? Could I as a white guy go, "You know, I don't feel like I'm represented in this film (I mean I'm sure white man is the bad guy but I want good guys too). Could we cast some white people? Or the best actor for the Imaro role is a white guy, let's cast him."

There *was* a movie made of a Charles Saunders story, as I found out in that thread. It wasn't a story about Imaro, but it was still a Saunders fantasy story about Africans -- and the producers made it with an all-white cast. The movie was called "Amazons".

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090627/

Saunders himself had to work on the script.

That's been quite common in the history of Hollywood. In practice, almost everyone only cares about cross-racial casting if it's in a direction they don't like. What they really care about is perceived bias against their preferred demographic. I think the history of Hollywood is quite clear in its biases.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: rpgSeeker on November 29, 2022, 09:29:24 AM
Yea, gonna rush right out and get this one...  Inclusive to these dummies really means Exclusive, spin it as they might.

Just like "diverse". As in "we are only hiring diverse employees". What it really means is "not white men".

No.

If someone who wants to hire 'diverse' has a choice between a female black Christian and a white male woke progressive, they will pick the latter. It's about ideological homogeneity. What hiring 'diverse' really means is hiring 'woke'.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: wmarshal on November 29, 2022, 10:59:51 AM
Yea, gonna rush right out and get this one...  Inclusive to these dummies really means Exclusive, spin it as they might.

Just like "diverse". As in "we are only hiring diverse employees". What it really means is "not white men".

No.

If someone who wants to hire 'diverse' has a choice between a female black Christian and a white male woke progressive, they will pick the latter. It's about ideological homogeneity. What hiring 'diverse' really means is hiring 'woke'.
Yes, it’s about ideology, not really identity. Identity politics is a tool used by the Woke to atomize the public. It’s just a means to an end.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: psiconauta_retro on December 06, 2022, 11:33:40 PM
Yea, gonna rush right out and get this one...  Inclusive to these dummies really means Exclusive, spin it as they might.

Just like "diverse". As in "we are only hiring diverse employees". What it really means is "not white men".

No.

If someone who wants to hire 'diverse' has a choice between a female black Christian and a white male woke progressive, they will pick the latter. It's about ideological homogeneity. What hiring 'diverse' really means is hiring 'woke'.
Yes, it’s about ideology, not really identity. Identity politics is a tool used by the Woke to atomize the public. It’s just a means to an end.

This thesis of how this is not about being anti-white but being pro-woke is enlightening, I had not thought about that.

Personally I think this woke magazine is destined to fail, but lets see if they get to make any money while pressing on their woke ideology.

Did anybody read their #0 issue? Is it any good? At this point I would rather not put my own personal time to check it out without having seen any review here.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Jam The MF on December 07, 2022, 01:21:43 AM
Oh, yes, finally! The messiah the Sword & Sorcery genre has been waiting for!

Ha!!!
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on December 07, 2022, 12:35:14 PM
Regarding Sword & Sorcery, there was some interesting discussion about the Imaro books in a thread on the "Other Games" forum that had cross-over with this topic.

https://www.therpgsite.com/other-games/aragorn-race-swapped-what-the-literal-fuck/msg1233081/#msg1233081

The Imaro books are often classified as the progenitors of "Sword & Soul" which is sometimes considered distinct from Sword & Sorcery, or alternately a subgenre. I think Imaro exemplifies the individualist attitude of Sword & Sorcery protagonists.

Still, I also think that if I was pitching a game in the world of Imaro, I would probably qualify it more than generic Sword & Sorcery.

LOL. I was thinking of Imaro. What if a studio decided to option the right to a movie? Could I as a white guy go, "You know, I don't feel like I'm represented in this film (I mean I'm sure white man is the bad guy but I want good guys too). Could we cast some white people? Or the best actor for the Imaro role is a white guy, let's cast him."

There *was* a movie made of a Charles Saunders story, as I found out in that thread. It wasn't a story about Imaro, but it was still a Saunders fantasy story about Africans -- and the producers made it with an all-white cast. The movie was called "Amazons".

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090627/

Saunders himself had to work on the script.

That's been quite common in the history of Hollywood. In practice, almost everyone only cares about cross-racial casting if it's in a direction they don't like. What they really care about is perceived bias against their preferred demographic. I think the history of Hollywood is quite clear in its biases.
Tvtropes has a helpful list of examples: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RaceLift

Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on December 07, 2022, 02:48:36 PM
This thesis of how this is not about being anti-white but being pro-woke is enlightening, I had not thought about that.

Personally I think this woke magazine is destined to fail, but lets see if they get to make any money while pressing on their woke ideology.

Did anybody read their #0 issue? Is it any good? At this point I would rather not put my own personal time to check it out without having seen any review here.

I downloaded issue #0 to see what people were talking about, but I only skimmed the stories. I'm not sure how to compare them apples to apples, since I haven't read any other contemporary S&S fiction magazines. I've read collections of classic R.E. Howard, Charles Saunders, and others. However, that's selectively picking best stories of top authors, which isn't a fair comparison with a magazine starting up.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: psiconauta_retro on December 07, 2022, 10:37:49 PM
This thesis of how this is not about being anti-white but being pro-woke is enlightening, I had not thought about that.

Personally I think this woke magazine is destined to fail, but lets see if they get to make any money while pressing on their woke ideology.

Did anybody read their #0 issue? Is it any good? At this point I would rather not put my own personal time to check it out without having seen any review here.

I downloaded issue #0 to see what people were talking about, but I only skimmed the stories. I'm not sure how to compare them apples to apples, since I haven't read any other contemporary S&S fiction magazines. I've read collections of classic R.E. Howard, Charles Saunders, and others. However, that's selectively picking best stories of top authors, which isn't a fair comparison with a magazine starting up.
Thank you, I will download the issue #0 and have a look.

Did you notice in any way the diversity and inclusiveness? Do you feel it would be any different without them? I also have not ready any other  contemporary S&S fiction magazines so I don't have any point of reference.

I don’t know if it is possible to answer this, but does it feel particularly "woke"?

I have been thinking that the editor may not be suitable for that position. If he really did practice what he preaches then that position should be filled by somebody more... "diverse".
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: JeremyR on January 12, 2023, 03:05:37 AM
Not a magazine, but if you have Kindle Unlimited, there's a 2 year running monthly (or so) S&S book (3-4 stories per book) called Savage Realms.

There's also the very long and excellent collection Sword of the Four Winds by Daniel Quiogue which is Sword & Sorcery from various different Eastern culture, ranging from Filipino to Polynesian to I guess Malaysia? He calls it "Sword & Silk"
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 12:05:13 PM
Sorry to psiconauta_retro, I realized that there was a question I had left hanging for a while.

I downloaded issue #0 to see what people were talking about, but I only skimmed the stories. I'm not sure how to compare them apples to apples, since I haven't read any other contemporary S&S fiction magazines. I've read collections of classic R.E. Howard, Charles Saunders, and others. However, that's selectively picking best stories of top authors, which isn't a fair comparison with a magazine starting up.

Thank you, I will download the issue #0 and have a look.

Did you notice in any way the diversity and inclusiveness? Do you feel it would be any different without them? I also have not ready any other  contemporary S&S fiction magazines so I don't have any point of reference.

I don’t know if it is possible to answer this, but does it feel particularly "woke"?

I can try answering about woke feel, but standards differ. It started with a Mongol-inspired story that didn't seem particularly woke from the first page, but I didn't read the rest. It's easily possible that there were more woke aspects to the stories. From flipping through, it seemed noticeable that there were multiple non-European based settings and multiple female protagonists.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Stephen Tannhauser on January 13, 2023, 01:51:43 PM
It started with a Mongol-inspired story that didn't seem particularly woke from the first page, but I didn't read the rest. It's easily possible that there were more woke aspects to the stories. From flipping through, it seemed noticeable that there were multiple non-European based settings and multiple female protagonists.

The real question we should all be asking, of course is: Were any of the stories good? Were they entertaining, exciting, interesting, enjoyable, moving?

I have no objection to what used to be called "non-vanilla" protagonists, as long as the stories they're in are good stories and not exercises in browbeating the Straight White Audience into reparations-inspiring guilt.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 14, 2023, 07:50:16 PM
It started with a Mongol-inspired story that didn't seem particularly woke from the first page, but I didn't read the rest. It's easily possible that there were more woke aspects to the stories. From flipping through, it seemed noticeable that there were multiple non-European based settings and multiple female protagonists.

The real question we should all be asking, of course is: Were any of the stories good? Were they entertaining, exciting, interesting, enjoyable, moving?

I have no objection to what used to be called "non-vanilla" protagonists, as long as the stories they're in are good stories and not exercises in browbeating the Straight White Audience into reparations-inspiring guilt.

How can we beat racism unless we tell white people who are against racism that racism am bad?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Thorn Drumheller on January 23, 2023, 05:00:36 PM
It started with a Mongol-inspired story that didn't seem particularly woke from the first page, but I didn't read the rest. It's easily possible that there were more woke aspects to the stories. From flipping through, it seemed noticeable that there were multiple non-European based settings and multiple female protagonists.

The real question we should all be asking, of course is: Were any of the stories good? Were they entertaining, exciting, interesting, enjoyable, moving?

I have no objection to what used to be called "non-vanilla" protagonists, as long as the stories they're in are good stories and not exercises in browbeating the Straight White Audience into reparations-inspiring guilt.

How can we beat racism unless we tell white people who are against racism that racism am bad?

Yes this ^^^^^^^

Us white people who hate racism are bad cause we're white
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on January 23, 2023, 06:27:21 PM
Even literal Africans think it's cringy. https://youtu.be/iYJ48s2I5qw

Sure, they had slavery and colonialism in their pasts. It was terrible for them. But rather than dwell on the horrors of the past and obsess over getting revenge, they work towards building brighter futures. It's really inspiring.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Spinachcat on January 23, 2023, 08:22:11 PM
"Everything woke turns to shit."

LOL. That cover is painful and speaks volumes about the publisher's lack of common sense.

All the "Diversity, Equity, Inclusion" blah blah bullshit is just more blatant anti-Whitism from worthless scumbags, but what else is new in clown world?

Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Eirikrautha on January 24, 2023, 06:52:51 AM
Even literal Africans think it's cringy. https://youtu.be/iYJ48s2I5qw

Sure, they had slavery and colonialism in their pasts present. It was is terrible for them.

The worst thing about the woke left is that they are so determined to justify their destruction of western culture that they are willing to ignore slavery in the present in order to weaponize slavery in the past.  It's disgusting.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on January 24, 2023, 05:07:36 PM
Even literal Africans think it's cringy. https://youtu.be/iYJ48s2I5qw

Sure, they had slavery and colonialism in their pasts. It was terrible for them. But rather than dwell on the horrors of the past and obsess over getting revenge, they work towards building brighter futures. It's really inspiring.

So from watching the video... I haven't seen The Woman King, but complaining that Black Panther doesn't realistically represent modern African countries is just stupid. Wakanda is a fictional country from a superhero comic book. It is intentionally unique and fantastical, with its own religion and crazy technology. I'll admit to some bias since I love the comics - particularly the Christopher Priest run from the 1990s - but this seems petty.

The Black Panther comics and the Black Panther movies shouldn't have to represent all of Africa. I can see complaining that modern African countries should be better represented in movies, but I don't think Black Panther should be expected to do so.

I'd complain much more about movie adaptations set in real African countries, like Black Hawk Down. One of the fascinating parts of that book was when it interviewed local civilian residents who were on the scene as the military action was going down. But that side of the story was completely cut out of the movie.

---

Going back to Sword & Sorcery, I think it would also be fair to say that the Imaro stories by Charles Saunders don't accurately reflect African history -- which again is not the point. They don't and they shouldn't have to.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Thorn Drumheller on February 01, 2023, 05:36:34 PM
So idk why I was thinking about this thread today. But it occurred to me how the person who wants to make S&S inclusive just doesn't get it.

I then thought, can we cancel and go after the romance novel industry? I feel like I'm not represented in romance novels. I'm not rich, I'm not ripped/shredded, I'm not a world traveler. I can cook, but just normal things. Can we get romance writers to make me a love interest in the story? LOL

Anyway, random I know but still made me laugh.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~ on February 05, 2023, 08:33:37 PM
Quote
Nothing wrong with my fellow white guys,
I don’t want them to go away, or have anything taken away from them--

"I just want them to have no say in anything that I take a personal interest
in by deprioritizing their civil status as rational or even compassionate human
beings! That's what you get for all that oppression!"
Quote
We’ll be focused on experimentation--

Not really keen on buying what you "experiment" with in your free time, thanks!

Quote
... I love sword & sorcery, period, ...

Such gender envy...
Quote
I suspect there’s an element of phonebook-length fantasy novel, and mega-franchise, fatigue.

I suspect that he's murdered the golden goose.

Quote
Tower of the Elephant fell completely flat for my younger guest--

There's no pleasing lack of taste.
Quote
Learning the history of the genre at large isn’t mandatory, but it doesn’t hurt!

We're aware of your fondness for hIsToRy...

Quote
I imagine this question could yield some interesting answers when presented to people different from myself.

How about white people?
Quote
I hope you’ll all try the magazine out, joining me on this journey, as I think it could be the start of something truly wonderful!

In a manner of speaking: Hard no.





After all that, at last I just have to say:

THIN

YOUR

PAINTS!

HENCE:
Your mix is unpromotable.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Wtrmute on February 28, 2023, 11:10:27 AM
So from watching the video... I haven't seen The Woman King, but complaining that Black Panther doesn't realistically represent modern African countries is just stupid. Wakanda is a fictional country from a superhero comic book. It is intentionally unique and fantastical, with its own religion and crazy technology. I'll admit to some bias since I love the comics - particularly the Christopher Priest run from the 1990s - but this seems petty.

The Black Panther comics and the Black Panther movies shouldn't have to represent all of Africa. I can see complaining that modern African countries should be better represented in movies, but I don't think Black Panther should be expected to do so.

I'd complain much more about movie adaptations set in real African countries, like Black Hawk Down. One of the fascinating parts of that book was when it interviewed local civilian residents who were on the scene as the military action was going down. But that side of the story was completely cut out of the movie.

You're completely entitled to enjoy Black Panther and Wakanda, but the big problem with it is not so much that it doesn't reflect the reality of Eastern Africa, but more that it's an ethnonationalist state; Back when the first movie came out, people were memeing “Make Wakanda Great Again” to hell and back. If we think that ethnonationalism is a dangerous cultural/political position, then we ought to decry it when it happens in Africa just as much as when it happens in the United States.

If ethnonationalism is just as valid as social democracy, then sure, Wakanda away. But then other ethnonationalist states in fiction also get a free pass.

Going back to Sword & Sorcery, I think it would also be fair to say that the Imaro stories by Charles Saunders don't accurately reflect African history -- which again is not the point. They don't and they shouldn't have to.

I haven't actually read the Imaro stories, but I completely agree. It's not actual Africa, then it can be whatever the author wants to happen, even if it's just like (what we think it was like) in the Great Zimbabwe, except that all the warriors carry katanas around. Cheesy? Hell, yes. But if a good story can be told, then it's all golden.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on February 28, 2023, 02:09:06 PM
So from watching the video... I haven't seen The Woman King, but complaining that Black Panther doesn't realistically represent modern African countries is just stupid. Wakanda is a fictional country from a superhero comic book. It is intentionally unique and fantastical, with its own religion and crazy technology. I'll admit to some bias since I love the comics - particularly the Christopher Priest run from the 1990s - but this seems petty.

The Black Panther comics and the Black Panther movies shouldn't have to represent all of Africa. I can see complaining that modern African countries should be better represented in movies, but I don't think Black Panther should be expected to do so.

I'd complain much more about movie adaptations set in real African countries, like Black Hawk Down. One of the fascinating parts of that book was when it interviewed local civilian residents who were on the scene as the military action was going down. But that side of the story was completely cut out of the movie.

You're completely entitled to enjoy Black Panther and Wakanda, but the big problem with it is not so much that it doesn't reflect the reality of Eastern Africa, but more that it's an ethnonationalist state; Back when the first movie came out, people were memeing “Make Wakanda Great Again” to hell and back. If we think that ethnonationalism is a dangerous cultural/political position, then we ought to decry it when it happens in Africa just as much as when it happens in the United States.

If ethnonationalism is just as valid as social democracy, then sure, Wakanda away. But then other ethnonationalist states in fiction also get a free pass.

Wakanda is extremely isolationist, but it isn't ethnonationalist. At most, it is a parallel to Japan.

It does not recognize race legally, and there has been no mention of it culturally. In the MCU thus far, the only outsider invited to live in Wakanda thus far is a white man -- Bucky Barnes. Two outsiders were allowed to visit under exceptional circumstances -- Everett Ross and Riri Williams. However, they were kicked out afterwards -- and with both, it was seriously discussed whether they should be killed. I don't see anything to suggest that their race ever factored into either discussion.

The whole point of the first movie was that Killmonger believed in Pan-Africanism and unity among black people. He took over Wakanda to pursue that agenda -- but that was from his unique upbringing in America, not an internal Wakandan idea. It was rejected when he was overthrown. Except under Killmonger, Wakanda hasn't shown any favoritism towards African countries compared to any other country.

---

In the comics, one of the only outsiders to grow up in Wakanda was a white man, Hunter, whose family died in a plane crash in Wakanda when he was a baby. He was adopted by the royal family and grew up to be head of the secret service, known as White Wolf. (In the MCU, Bucky Barnes is supposed to be a parallel for this character.) In the comics, Hunter suffered some discrimination growing up because of being an outsider, but he had full legal rights and was considered fully Wakandan.

There also isn't any identity of Wakandans as being a distinct race superior to other Africans. Killmonger's mother was American -- but nothing was made of his mixed parentage in terms of how he was seen. They questioned him for being raised outside of Wakanda, not over his race. Also, the MCU version has been clear to portray Wakanda as multi-ethnic internally, particularly the Jabari clan. It was implied that they were seen as strange backward hicks for their ways, but they still had full legal rights under Wakanda's constitutional monarchy.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Brad on February 28, 2023, 04:13:10 PM
Wakanda is extremely isolationist, but it isn't ethnonationalist. At most, it is a parallel to Japan.

They're not racist, they're just xenophobic! Like, what's the functional difference? How does this differ from people living in isolated rural communities who don't want a bunch of "dirty foreigners" moving into their territory?

That's quite the sharp knife you have there being able to split a gnat's cunt hair...

ALSO, in Ultimates, Captain America is literally the only white man allowed in Wakanda because he pretty much single-handedly saved the country from an alien invasion. "Yeah, but it has nothing to do with race!" Okay, he's still the token white guy. The let in Riri Williams, who is an outsider...see how your bullshit fails just based on the actual comics?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on February 28, 2023, 05:43:33 PM
They're not racist, they're just xenophobic! Like, what's the functional difference? How does this differ from people living in isolated rural communities who don't want a bunch of "dirty foreigners" moving into their territory?

That's quite the sharp knife you have there being able to split a gnat's cunt hair...

ALSO, in Ultimates, Captain America is literally the only white man allowed in Wakanda because he pretty much single-handedly saved the country from an alien invasion. "Yeah, but it has nothing to do with race!" Okay, he's still the token white guy. The let in Riri Williams, who is an outsider...see how your bullshit fails just based on the actual comics?

The functional difference is that it doesn't matter if you're a black outsider or a white outsider. They will accept white heroes like the Fantastic Four just as much as black heroes like Riri Williams.

---

The problem with comics is that there are so many version under so many writers, it is impossible to say anything for certain. I haven't read all the comics, and never read when Riri Williams was let in. So there may have been some comics where Wakanda was portrayed as racially biased. Maybe under that writer, Wakanda was racially biased.

I can say Wakanda wasn't racially biased when it was introduced with the Fantastic Four - or under the 1990s to early 2000s run under Christopher Priest, or in the other scattered collections that I've read.

It's easier to talk about the MCU because it's a much more limited set of canon. In the MCU, the only person they let in - black or white - is Bucky Barnes, who is white. They allow Riri Williams in temporarily only in the same way that they let in Everett Ross, and in both cases, they talk about possibly killing them.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Brad on February 28, 2023, 05:58:17 PM
The functional difference is that it doesn't matter if you're a black outsider or a white outsider. They will accept white heroes like the Fantastic Four just as much as black heroes like Riri Williams.

So, again, how does this differ from my real life example in any way?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on March 01, 2023, 05:09:28 AM
 Do you not realize the irony in saying Wakanda is not racist and more akin to Japan?  LMAO. 
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Brad on March 01, 2023, 06:20:25 AM
Do you not realize the irony in saying Wakanda is not racist and more akin to Japan?  LMAO.

LOOK, it's only a racist ethnostate if it's white people doing it. Asians, blacks, etc., doesn't count. I mean he's literally saying that under the guise of "outsiders", and refuses to address my own example of small communities that don't want outsiders, but we all know he has a problem with it because they're dumbass rednecks.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Thorn Drumheller on March 01, 2023, 10:39:21 AM
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/oliverbrackenbury/new-edge-sword-and-sorcery-magazine?ref=aaa0g1

better hurry, you can help fund it with a coupla days to go.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on March 01, 2023, 11:24:20 AM
Do you not realize the irony in saying Wakanda is not racist and more akin to Japan?  LMAO.

LOOK, it's only a racist ethnostate if it's white people doing it. Asians, blacks, etc., doesn't count. I mean he's literally saying that under the guise of "outsiders", and refuses to address my own example of small communities that don't want outsiders, but we all know he has a problem with it because they're dumbass rednecks.

Japan has plenty of racist *people*, just like many other countries. It also has a past that is full of racism and colonialism. I hate the racism of the Japanese. As a Korean, my father spent his childhood under Japanese racist oppression. However, he also faced plenty of racism from white people when he emigrated to the U.S. The current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race, so I would not call it an ethnostate.

Specifying a nameless hypothetical community that doesn't want outsiders isn't useful to compare, since it is hypothetical. Let's take a specific example of a small white community that doesn't want outsiders -- say Brigadoon from the 1947 musical. As portrayed, it's much like Wakanda in that it is intentionally keeping itself secret and hiding from the outside world, like Wakanda has traditionally done. My son was in a high school production of Brigadoon 7 years ago, and I didn't have any condemnation of the play for its racism, nor would I call Brigadoon a racist ethnostate.

I wouldn't claim that the people of Brigadoon are free of racism. However, their drive to be isolated from the outside world is not inherently a racist principle -- and I wouldn't condemn the play as racist as a result.

Would either of you (Brad or oggsmash) call Brigadoon a racist white ethnostate? If not, can you explain why?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~~ on March 01, 2023, 09:02:24 PM
Mmmmmm delicious utopias! Please sir, can I have some more?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on March 02, 2023, 05:15:16 AM
  Korea has a looong history of racism regarding Japan as well, I understand being extra salty about the last 100 years considering the ass kicking the Japanese gave them though.  Saying Japan is neutral when it is very very hard to immigrate there and become a citizen is an out right lie.  If we use the metric of the USA regarding immigration Japan, Korea and China are all big time ethnostates. 
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on March 02, 2023, 05:18:49 AM
  But when the creator of Dilbert turns out to be uber racist after reading a poll....who isnt?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on March 02, 2023, 05:32:11 AM
  Alot of historical hard feelings and mistreatment also emerge from essentially a group getting their asses kicked by another group.   All the salt towards white people is from both their past behavior and being just too good at kicking asses.   Modern day the salty folk are pushing for changes socially and societally that in the past requires an actual fight/war.   My advice as always is be careful how hard one pushes, because at some point the changes they want may end up requiring an actual fight....and historically the people being pushed are pretty good at fighting.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Brad on March 02, 2023, 10:33:31 AM
Japan has plenty of racist *people*, just like many other countries. It also has a past that is full of racism and colonialism. I hate the racism of the Japanese. As a Korean, my father spent his childhood under Japanese racist oppression. However, he also faced plenty of racism from white people when he emigrated to the U.S. The current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race, so I would not call it an ethnostate.

Specifying a nameless hypothetical community that doesn't want outsiders isn't useful to compare, since it is hypothetical. Let's take a specific example of a small white community that doesn't want outsiders -- say Brigadoon from the 1947 musical. As portrayed, it's much like Wakanda in that it is intentionally keeping itself secret and hiding from the outside world, like Wakanda has traditionally done. My son was in a high school production of Brigadoon 7 years ago, and I didn't have any condemnation of the play for its racism, nor would I call Brigadoon a racist ethnostate.

I wouldn't claim that the people of Brigadoon are free of racism. However, their drive to be isolated from the outside world is not inherently a racist principle -- and I wouldn't condemn the play as racist as a result.

Would either of you (Brad or oggsmash) call Brigadoon a racist white ethnostate? If not, can you explain why?

Koreans are the most racist people on Earth in my experience, so let's not pretend the Japanese are somehow worse. That said, I have a friend who moved to Japan years ago to open his own videogame company and speaks fluent Japanese, married a Japanese girl. It's my understanding he can never become a Japanese citizen, even now, because he's a white dude. So the statement "the current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race" doesn't even make any sense. He'll always be an outsider and second-class member of Japanese society, regardless of what he does.

RE: hypotheticals, how about instead of some dumbass play we use real-life examples? Japan: de facto ethnostate. Maine: de factor ethno-"state". 94% white people. The first one is fine, the second one is problematic for a lot of people. Why? Because there are too many white people living in Maine?

Bringing up some dumb play when plenty of real-world examples exist is just disingenuous.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~~ on March 02, 2023, 12:59:20 PM
  Korea has a looong history of racism regarding Japan as well, I understand being extra salty about the last 100 years considering the ass kicking the Japanese gave them though.  Saying Japan is neutral when it is very very hard to immigrate there and become a citizen is an out right lie.  If we use the metric of the USA regarding immigration Japan, Korea and China are all big time ethnostates.

  Alot of historical hard feelings and mistreatment also emerge from essentially a group getting their asses kicked by another group.   All the salt towards white people is from both their past behavior and being just too good at kicking asses.   Modern day the salty folk are pushing for changes socially and societally that in the past requires an actual fight/war.   My advice as always is be careful how hard one pushes, because at some point the changes they want may end up requiring an actual fight....and historically the people being pushed are pretty good at fighting.

Heroism is too right-wing for our post-revolutionary world, thou shalt mobishly bitch thine way into the finest yonder establishment.

Even if yellows suck at war relative to whites (because Genghis Khan is a lie), the entire framing is "live like your entire culture is a retarded victim of tyranny" with a delusion that there are never whites that will ever seek mutual peace under any circumstances.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 01:22:55 PM
oggsmash, you haven't answered my question about Brigadoon. Like Wakanda, it is a fictional community that is strongly isolationist. The question is, does their isolationism inherently mean that they should both be considered racial ethno-states?


  Korea has a looong history of racism regarding Japan as well, I understand being extra salty about the last 100 years considering the ass kicking the Japanese gave them though.  Saying Japan is neutral when it is very very hard to immigrate there and become a citizen is an out right lie.  If we use the metric of the USA regarding immigration Japan, Korea and China are all big time ethnostates.

I agree that Korea and Japan have lots of racism, but I disagree about how you come to that conclusion. It seems to me that you are coming from a position that:

1) Low immigration or desire for less immigration is proof of racism

and/or

2) Less racial diversity is proof of racism


To me, the proof of racial discrimination is in actual attitudes over race and how racial minorities are treated. I hear a lot about how ethnic Korean citizens of Japan (Zainichi Koreans) suffer racial discrimination in the present. In South Korea, I hear about how black kids face discrimination growing up - highlighted by Korean-American football star Hines Ward - as well as non-white foreign workers. I would want both countries to do more to fight racism both legally and culturally.

That's the real problem, and it could be true regardless about how common the racial minority is or the level of immigration.

---

This is relevant because within the U.S., I don't think those two assumptions apply either. The least diverse state in the U.S. is Maine at 94% white, but I don't think that means it is the most racist state. My sister lives in Maine, and from her experience, while racism is present, it isn't the worst.

Similarly, if someone advocates for less immigration, I don't consider that proof that they are racist. I'd have to actually talk to the person and see how they feel about other races. There are factors other than race that are relevant to immigration. For example, I'd note that Japan has 10 times the population density of the U.S., and South Korean has 15 times the population density. Both rely heavily on imported food for their overpopulation. That will factor into what level of immigration they want.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~~ on March 02, 2023, 02:48:29 PM
Japanese think that the Koreans should be living in Korea. Would it be wrong for Koreans to think that Japanese should live in Japan and not Korea?

"Don't you dare get comfortable here, this is our home!"
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 04:37:08 PM
oggsmash, you haven't answered my question about Brigadoon. Like Wakanda, it is a fictional community that is strongly isolationist. The question is, does their isolationism inherently mean that they should both be considered racial ethno-states?


  Korea has a looong history of racism regarding Japan as well, I understand being extra salty about the last 100 years considering the ass kicking the Japanese gave them though.  Saying Japan is neutral when it is very very hard to immigrate there and become a citizen is an out right lie.  If we use the metric of the USA regarding immigration Japan, Korea and China are all big time ethnostates.

I agree that Korea and Japan have lots of racism, but I disagree about how you come to that conclusion. It seems to me that you are coming from a position that:

1) Low immigration or desire for less immigration is proof of racism

and/or

2) Less racial diversity is proof of racism


To me, the proof of racial discrimination is in actual attitudes over race and how racial minorities are treated. I hear a lot about how ethnic Korean citizens of Japan (Zainichi Koreans) suffer racial discrimination in the present. In South Korea, I hear about how black kids face discrimination growing up - highlighted by Korean-American football star Hines Ward - as well as non-white foreign workers. I would want both countries to do more to fight racism both legally and culturally.

That's the real problem, and it could be true regardless about how common the racial minority is or the level of immigration.

---

This is relevant because within the U.S., I don't think those two assumptions apply either. The least diverse state in the U.S. is Maine at 94% white, but I don't think that means it is the most racist state. My sister lives in Maine, and from her experience, while racism is present, it isn't the worst.

Similarly, if someone advocates for less immigration, I don't consider that proof that they are racist. I'd have to actually talk to the person and see how they feel about other races. There are factors other than race that are relevant to immigration. For example, I'd note that Japan has 10 times the population density of the U.S., and South Korean has 15 times the population density. Both rely heavily on imported food for their overpopulation. That will factor into what level of immigration they want.

How many "refugees" has the Maine population accepted? NIMBY right?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 06:15:34 PM
This is relevant because within the U.S., I don't think those two assumptions apply either. The least diverse state in the U.S. is Maine at 94% white, but I don't think that means it is the most racist state. My sister lives in Maine, and from her experience, while racism is present, it isn't the worst.

How many "refugees" has the Maine population accepted? NIMBY right?

From what I see, Maine accepted 3028 refugees in 2021. With Maine's population of 1.3 million, that's 2.2 refugees per thousand residents. For comparison, Texas had 2.0 refugees per thousand residents, and New York had 1.8 refugees per thousand residents. The state with the most per capita is Minnesota with 3.2 refugees per thousand residents. The state with the least was Wyoming, with 0.002 refugees per thousand residents.

Source: https://usafacts.org/articles/where-do-refugees-resettle-in-the-us/

So it seems to me that Maine is taking a roughly equal share of refugees.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 06:49:12 PM
Japanese think that the Koreans should be living in Korea. Would it be wrong for Koreans to think that Japanese should live in Japan and not Korea?

"Don't you dare get comfortable here, this is our home!"

Dispotatic254 - Are you aware of the history there?

Most of the nearly 1 million Koreans living in Japan have been there for generations. During the occupation from 1910 to 1944, Japan brought close to 2 million Korean people into Japan -- often by force -- as workers or other jobs. My grandfather went to Japan to learn dairy farming at an agricultural school during the early occupation. He left as did most others, but some stayed because their livelihoods, children, and other ties were now in Japan.

During that time, Koreans were told that Japan and Korea were one country, and Koreans should work to help their country. So there are multiple generations of people who are ethnically Korean who have grown up in Japan as their only home, and are sometimes intermarried. They are the complete opposite of invaders, and it is rank hypocrisy for racist Japanese to resent their presence there.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Brad on March 02, 2023, 09:03:23 PM
I like how we went from "Japan isn't an ethnostate" and "Japanese aren't racist" to basically admitting Japan is an ethnostate and Japanese are racist, by the same guy, within one page.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: SHARK on March 02, 2023, 10:07:39 PM
Greetings!

Why is this such a revelation? Why do so many Libtards push the idea that only WHITE PEOPLE are racist? Every group of people are racist. Especially Asians. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, they lead the pack. They are often viciously racist against other Asians. I've heard them called "Jungle Asians". You know, the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Indonesians, Burmese. I'm sure there are others. Ultimately though, who cares? It is human nature. It is what it is! *Laughing*

If it bothers you, then simply avoid racist people, and embrace people into your life that are not racist. DONE.

Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

The Woke fucking Libtards are the true racists, here in America. They are terrible, and full of hate. They arrogantly seek to divide everyone and make everyone hate each other--meanwhile, while they build this Marxist utopian shithole, they deep down view themselves as being the super-special anointed elite that gets to rule over everyone else. Fuck them all! These scum need the napalm, baby. Comics, movies, and more, have all been corrupted by the Libtards. Let them all burn the fuck down.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: rytrasmi on March 03, 2023, 09:00:48 AM
Greetings!

Why is this such a revelation? Why do so many Libtards push the idea that only WHITE PEOPLE are racist? Every group of people are racist. Especially Asians. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, they lead the pack. They are often viciously racist against other Asians. I've heard them called "Jungle Asians". You know, the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Indonesians, Burmese. I'm sure there are others. Ultimately though, who cares? It is human nature. It is what it is! *Laughing*

If it bothers you, then simply avoid racist people, and embrace people into your life that are not racist. DONE.

Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

The Woke fucking Libtards are the true racists, here in America. They are terrible, and full of hate. They arrogantly seek to divide everyone and make everyone hate each other--meanwhile, while they build this Marxist utopian shithole, they deep down view themselves as being the super-special anointed elite that gets to rule over everyone else. Fuck them all! These scum need the napalm, baby. Comics, movies, and more, have all been corrupted by the Libtards. Let them all burn the fuck down.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well said Shark and I 100% agree! It’s easy for the racism topic to get blown out of proportion and co-opted by malicious parties to indoctrinate people. We would do well to remember the Golden Rule and trust our own experiences.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~~ on March 03, 2023, 09:09:34 AM
Japanese think that the Koreans should be living in Korea. Would it be wrong for Koreans to think that Japanese should live in Japan and not Korea?

"Don't you dare get comfortable here, this is our home!"

Dispotatic254 - Are you aware of the history there?

With historians like you, who needs awareness?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~~ on March 03, 2023, 10:14:18 AM
Greetings!

Why is this such a revelation? Why do so many Libtards push the idea that only WHITE PEOPLE are racist? Every group of people are racist. Especially Asians. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, they lead the pack. They are often viciously racist against other Asians. I've heard them called "Jungle Asians". You know, the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Indonesians, Burmese. I'm sure there are others. Ultimately though, who cares? It is human nature. It is what it is! *Laughing*

If it bothers you, then simply avoid racist people, and embrace people into your life that are not racist. DONE.

Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

The Woke fucking Libtards are the true racists, here in America. They are terrible, and full of hate. They arrogantly seek to divide everyone and make everyone hate each other--meanwhile, while they build this Marxist utopian shithole, they deep down view themselves as being the super-special anointed elite that gets to rule over everyone else. Fuck them all! These scum need the napalm, baby. Comics, movies, and more, have all been corrupted by the Libtards. Let them all burn the fuck down.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

If I can visit a bar in Japan and call the guy next to me a rice-slant* after he calls me a gaijin, but we still toast the saki for mutually hating those Marxist-wannabe city-flaggots cosplaying as Iroquois warriors, then I'd rather be racist. Proggoid-shitlibs can cope and seethe that biological racialism or whatever doesn't work the way they/them/rêtàrd want it to, as a fake self-loathing gibs grift for token morons pretending that they akshuwalley wouldn't do a colonialism if given the chance.

Marxist wannabes because everyone from Stalin to Castro still had cold iron balls and liked them that way, credit where its due.



* Wouldn't say that to a Mongolian though, those burly bastards clearly don't fuck around.
Have you seen one of those desert mammoths? I mean fuuuuuck dude, let some burly Chav do it but not me sir.
Anyway it wouldn't work because Mongolians don't eat rice (see: desert) and calling them a horse-meat-slant is too badass to be insulting.
Like ooooo the Japanese hunt whales! Fall out off the ship though and try to eat the whale then, you're still stranded at sea as a floating shark snack.
A Mongolian falls off his lame horse in the desert? He eats the horse, he walks back to camp, he gets a new horse. Hunt, herd, haul, repeat.
Be smarter Japan: Think like Mongolia.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on March 03, 2023, 01:07:49 PM
Greetings!

Why is this such a revelation? Why do so many Libtards push the idea that only WHITE PEOPLE are racist? Every group of people are racist. Especially Asians. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, they lead the pack. They are often viciously racist against other Asians. I've heard them called "Jungle Asians". You know, the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Indonesians, Burmese. I'm sure there are others. Ultimately though, who cares? It is human nature. It is what it is! *Laughing*

If it bothers you, then simply avoid racist people, and embrace people into your life that are not racist. DONE.

Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

The Woke fucking Libtards are the true racists, here in America. They are terrible, and full of hate. They arrogantly seek to divide everyone and make everyone hate each other--meanwhile, while they build this Marxist utopian shithole, they deep down view themselves as being the super-special anointed elite that gets to rule over everyone else. Fuck them all! These scum need the napalm, baby. Comics, movies, and more, have all been corrupted by the Libtards. Let them all burn the fuck down.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

True, not all Americans ARE Gringos, but all Gringos ARE Americans, except when it's an European we don't like, then we call them Gringos too because it offends them.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: blackstone on March 03, 2023, 03:22:10 PM
Japanese think that the Koreans should be living in Korea. Would it be wrong for Koreans to think that Japanese should live in Japan and not Korea?

"Don't you dare get comfortable here, this is our home!"

Dispotatic254 - Are you aware of the history there?

Most of the nearly 1 million Koreans living in Japan have been there for generations. During the occupation from 1910 to 1944, Japan brought close to 2 million Korean people into Japan -- often by force -- as workers or other jobs. My grandfather went to Japan to learn dairy farming at an agricultural school during the early occupation. He left as did most others, but some stayed because their livelihoods, children, and other ties were now in Japan.

During that time, Koreans were told that Japan and Korea were one country, and Koreans should work to help their country. So there are multiple generations of people who are ethnically Korean who have grown up in Japan as their only home, and are sometimes intermarried. They are the complete opposite of invaders, and it is rank hypocrisy for racist Japanese to resent their presence there.

Also you should be aware while the Korea was occupied during that time by the Japanese, the Koreans were treated as second class citizens. They had to take up Japanese names and could not speak Japanese in public.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: oggsmash on March 03, 2023, 03:35:13 PM
I like how we went from "Japan isn't an ethnostate" and "Japanese aren't racist" to basically admitting Japan is an ethnostate and Japanese are racist, by the same guy, within one page.

  No shit.  I am sure we can 100 percent rely on his reports from his sister as to how much racism is or is not in Maine as well.  The guy is living in his own world.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on March 03, 2023, 04:05:30 PM
Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

Well said, SHARK. We might not agree on everything, but I fully agree with this.


I like how we went from "Japan isn't an ethnostate" and "Japanese aren't racist" to basically admitting Japan is an ethnostate and Japanese are racist, by the same guy, within one page.

  No shit.  I am sure we can 100 percent rely on his reports from his sister as to how much racism is or is not in Maine as well.  The guy is living in his own world.

Sorry if I communicated poorly. I think we crossed about the meaning of "ethnostate". I thought of that as meaning a country where someone's legal rights depend on what race they are -- like 1980s South Africa. I didn't mean to imply that Japan didn't have racism.

Despite complaining about racism in Japan, I do believe that there are many Japanese people opposed to racism. I just hope the sentiment grows. My father's religion growing up, Mugyohoe, is a Christian movement that originated in pre-war Japan -- and promoted peace as well as racial unity. My family had many Japanese friends who were in the movement. It has never been very popular, but they add to the ranks of those who want to promote racial harmony.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: SHARK on March 03, 2023, 08:41:24 PM
Greetings!

Why is this such a revelation? Why do so many Libtards push the idea that only WHITE PEOPLE are racist? Every group of people are racist. Especially Asians. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, they lead the pack. They are often viciously racist against other Asians. I've heard them called "Jungle Asians". You know, the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Indonesians, Burmese. I'm sure there are others. Ultimately though, who cares? It is human nature. It is what it is! *Laughing*

If it bothers you, then simply avoid racist people, and embrace people into your life that are not racist. DONE.

Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

The Woke fucking Libtards are the true racists, here in America. They are terrible, and full of hate. They arrogantly seek to divide everyone and make everyone hate each other--meanwhile, while they build this Marxist utopian shithole, they deep down view themselves as being the super-special anointed elite that gets to rule over everyone else. Fuck them all! These scum need the napalm, baby. Comics, movies, and more, have all been corrupted by the Libtards. Let them all burn the fuck down.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well said Shark and I 100% agree! It’s easy for the racism topic to get blown out of proportion and co-opted by malicious parties to indoctrinate people. We would do well to remember the Golden Rule and trust our own experiences.

Greetings!

Thank you, Rytrasmi! Excellent! Yeah, so much of people's discussions on "racism"--particularly on the interwebs and in the media--is absolutely poisonous, ignorant, and garbage. I'd also so say that most of what goes on in colleges is also lying, Marxist propaganda, and not based in historical reality or TRUTH in any way. It's disgusting. My blood pressure goes up when I hear these sanctimonious college professors bloviating nothing but racist propaganda to students, every day in classes. I saw it when I was in school--and it is even much worse NOW.

Everyone throughout history has been racist, towards somebody, or everybody. *Laughing* I don't dwell on that fact--I focus just like you said, on the Golden Rule and what I am experiencing in front of me.

Long ago, I had a *ahem*--Japanese girlfriend. Her mother took a dim view of me, and called me Gaijen. Yeah, my girlfriend translated for me, and told me without holding back precisely what *Gaijen* meant. So, I've been discriminated against, and "victimized" by racist people. It was terrible, and horrifying, and heartbreaking! (It sucked, but come on. *Laughing*)

My Japanese girlfriend was very eager to make it up to me for being so unfairly offended by her disapproving and racist mother.

I think people need to get away from the hateful, Marxist propaganda, and simply focus on real people, and real relationships. People in your neighborhood, at church, at work, wherever. Say hi. Be kind, generous, and willing to become friends.

It always makes me laugh as well, at how so many of these "racist incidents" and "Hate crimes"--have actually been total, lying HOAXES, done by the Libtards themselves. Under investigation and feeling the fire from police detectives--so many of them have CONFESSED to it all being a lying HOAX. The graffiti, the swastikas, whatever. Actual Black men hired to beat up O'le Jussie Smollett by HIMSELF--but Jusse claimed it was racist WHITE men that had attacked him. Black women students falsely claiming racist gang-rape--and yet, most of it is all fucking lies. All because these Libtards themselves either hate themselves, or they otherwise hate white people, and so desperately WANT there to be angry, racist white people everywhere. It is sickening, and disgusting. We need to resist the lies and deceit everywhere, and fight for the TRUTH.

I apologize for going on a rant, my friend!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: SHARK on March 03, 2023, 08:42:29 PM
Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

Well said, SHARK. We might not agree on everything, but I fully agree with this.


I like how we went from "Japan isn't an ethnostate" and "Japanese aren't racist" to basically admitting Japan is an ethnostate and Japanese are racist, by the same guy, within one page.

  No shit.  I am sure we can 100 percent rely on his reports from his sister as to how much racism is or is not in Maine as well.  The guy is living in his own world.

Sorry if I communicated poorly. I think we crossed about the meaning of "ethnostate". I thought of that as meaning a country where someone's legal rights depend on what race they are -- like 1980s South Africa. I didn't mean to imply that Japan didn't have racism.

Despite complaining about racism in Japan, I do believe that there are many Japanese people opposed to racism. I just hope the sentiment grows. My father's religion growing up, Mugyohoe, is a Christian movement that originated in pre-war Japan -- and promoted peace as well as racial unity. My family had many Japanese friends who were in the movement. It has never been very popular, but they add to the ranks of those who want to promote racial harmony.

Greetings!

Thank you, Jhkim.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~~ on March 03, 2023, 10:11:49 PM
Japanese think that the Koreans should be living in Korea. Would it be wrong for Koreans to think that Japanese should live in Japan and not Korea?

"Don't you dare get comfortable here, this is our home!"

Dispotatic254 - Are you aware of the history there?

Most of the nearly 1 million Koreans living in Japan have been there for generations. During the occupation from 1910 to 1944, Japan brought close to 2 million Korean people into Japan -- often by force -- as workers or other jobs. My grandfather went to Japan to learn dairy farming at an agricultural school during the early occupation. He left as did most others, but some stayed because their livelihoods, children, and other ties were now in Japan.

During that time, Koreans were told that Japan and Korea were one country, and Koreans should work to help their country. So there are multiple generations of people who are ethnically Korean who have grown up in Japan as their only home, and are sometimes intermarried. They are the complete opposite of invaders, and it is rank hypocrisy for racist Japanese to resent their presence there.

Also you should be aware while the Korea was occupied during that time by the Japanese, the Koreans were treated as second class citizens. They had to take up Japanese names and could not speak Japanese in public.

Already knew that.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: ~~ on March 03, 2023, 10:23:36 PM
Despite complaining about racism in Japan, I do believe that there are many Japanese people opposed to racism. I just hope the sentiment grows. My father's religion growing up, Mugyohoe, is a Christian movement that originated in pre-war Japan -- and promoted peace as well as racial unity. My family had many Japanese friends who were in the movement. It has never been very popular, but they add to the ranks of those who want to promote racial harmony.

Racial unity? Fuckin' A man, I'm all for it, you don't have to be at each others throats constantly.

None for whites though, I guess. The Leninist-Trotskyite boys said we were too evil, and that's good enough for a shitlib.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Trond on March 04, 2023, 09:11:18 AM
Greetings!

Why is this such a revelation? Why do so many Libtards push the idea that only WHITE PEOPLE are racist? Every group of people are racist. Especially Asians. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, they lead the pack. They are often viciously racist against other Asians. I've heard them called "Jungle Asians". You know, the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Indonesians, Burmese. I'm sure there are others. Ultimately though, who cares? It is human nature. It is what it is! *Laughing*

If it bothers you, then simply avoid racist people, and embrace people into your life that are not racist. DONE.

Somehow though, literally MILLIONS of Black Africans, Brown Latinos, and Asians--all love each other, and white people, especially. Whatever they may think of a particular *group*--they eagerly make exceptions for individuals that they favour. And, well, while the men can, generally speaking be slower to accept others of different races, the women are certainly eager to welcome others with open arms. Once you have whatever woman embracing a foreign man, for example, the men within her circles typically get on board, too.

I have personally seen this in *FULL EFFECT* myself, whether it is with Asians, Latinos, or Black Africans. I've seen this reality amongst dozens of friends and associates, a well as myself, personally, for *DECADES*. My entire life. Don't worry about whoever being racist. Whaa, whaa, whaa. Just focus on YOU. Being the best person you can be. When interacting with others--foreigners, someone of a different race, don't be a smug, arrogant jackass. Be cool. Be respectful, and enthusiastic about their language, culture, food, and customs. Be forgiving of their flaws and shortcomings. YOU have flaws and shortcomings, too. Somewhere along the way, goddamn, you find that you have the opportunity to embrace and enjoy genuinely wonderful an awesome relationships.

The Woke fucking Libtards are the true racists, here in America. They are terrible, and full of hate. They arrogantly seek to divide everyone and make everyone hate each other--meanwhile, while they build this Marxist utopian shithole, they deep down view themselves as being the super-special anointed elite that gets to rule over everyone else. Fuck them all! These scum need the napalm, baby. Comics, movies, and more, have all been corrupted by the Libtards. Let them all burn the fuck down.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Well said Shark and I 100% agree! It’s easy for the racism topic to get blown out of proportion and co-opted by malicious parties to indoctrinate people. We would do well to remember the Golden Rule and trust our own experiences.

Greetings!

Thank you, Rytrasmi! Excellent! Yeah, so much of people's discussions on "racism"--particularly on the interwebs and in the media--is absolutely poisonous, ignorant, and garbage. I'd also so say that most of what goes on in colleges is also lying, Marxist propaganda, and not based in historical reality or TRUTH in any way. It's disgusting. My blood pressure goes up when I hear these sanctimonious college professors bloviating nothing but racist propaganda to students, every day in classes. I saw it when I was in school--and it is even much worse NOW.

Everyone throughout history has been racist, towards somebody, or everybody. *Laughing* I don't dwell on that fact--I focus just like you said, on the Golden Rule and what I am experiencing in front of me.

Long ago, I had a *ahem*--Japanese girlfriend. Her mother took a dim view of me, and called me Gaijen. Yeah, my girlfriend translated for me, and told me without holding back precisely what *Gaijen* meant. So, I've been discriminated against, and "victimized" by racist people. It was terrible, and horrifying, and heartbreaking! (It sucked, but come on. *Laughing*)

My Japanese girlfriend was very eager to make it up to me for being so unfairly offended by her disapproving and racist mother.

I think people need to get away from the hateful, Marxist propaganda, and simply focus on real people, and real relationships. People in your neighborhood, at church, at work, wherever. Say hi. Be kind, generous, and willing to become friends.

It always makes me laugh as well, at how so many of these "racist incidents" and "Hate crimes"--have actually been total, lying HOAXES, done by the Libtards themselves. Under investigation and feeling the fire from police detectives--so many of them have CONFESSED to it all being a lying HOAX. The graffiti, the swastikas, whatever. Actual Black men hired to beat up O'le Jussie Smollett by HIMSELF--but Jusse claimed it was racist WHITE men that had attacked him. Black women students falsely claiming racist gang-rape--and yet, most of it is all fucking lies. All because these Libtards themselves either hate themselves, or they otherwise hate white people, and so desperately WANT there to be angry, racist white people everywhere. It is sickening, and disgusting. We need to resist the lies and deceit everywhere, and fight for the TRUTH.

I apologize for going on a rant, my friend!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Yup, people who think that only whites can be racist are misinformed ignoramuses. By the way, I was called a “white devil” by some shithead black religious group in downtown LA, BEFORE the George Floyd incident made things even worse. It also annoys me to no end that some other professors at my university push “anti racist” bullshit that has been shown to make things worse rather than better. Thankfully my university don’t teach a lot of classes like that, and once when one prof arranged a seminar on “micro aggressions” not a single other faculty showed up, just a couple of confused students 😄 So there is some resistance but it’s not vocal enough.

A white friend of mine also had a similar story about dating and even marrying an Asian girl (from Korea). It led to a lot of huffing and puffing from the family for sure. The guy later told me that the family, although nice enough in some ways, were the most openly racist people he’d ever met (I don’t think he knows many people from India 😄). Had he been black she would probably have been kicked out of the family, or at the very least the wedding would never have happened.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Jason Coplen on April 13, 2023, 09:35:50 PM
Japan has plenty of racist *people*, just like many other countries. It also has a past that is full of racism and colonialism. I hate the racism of the Japanese. As a Korean, my father spent his childhood under Japanese racist oppression. However, he also faced plenty of racism from white people when he emigrated to the U.S. The current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race, so I would not call it an ethnostate.

Specifying a nameless hypothetical community that doesn't want outsiders isn't useful to compare, since it is hypothetical. Let's take a specific example of a small white community that doesn't want outsiders -- say Brigadoon from the 1947 musical. As portrayed, it's much like Wakanda in that it is intentionally keeping itself secret and hiding from the outside world, like Wakanda has traditionally done. My son was in a high school production of Brigadoon 7 years ago, and I didn't have any condemnation of the play for its racism, nor would I call Brigadoon a racist ethnostate.

I wouldn't claim that the people of Brigadoon are free of racism. However, their drive to be isolated from the outside world is not inherently a racist principle -- and I wouldn't condemn the play as racist as a result.

Would either of you (Brad or oggsmash) call Brigadoon a racist white ethnostate? If not, can you explain why?

Koreans are the most racist people on Earth in my experience, so let's not pretend the Japanese are somehow worse. That said, I have a friend who moved to Japan years ago to open his own videogame company and speaks fluent Japanese, married a Japanese girl. It's my understanding he can never become a Japanese citizen, even now, because he's a white dude. So the statement "the current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race" doesn't even make any sense. He'll always be an outsider and second-class member of Japanese society, regardless of what he does.

RE: hypotheticals, how about instead of some dumbass play we use real-life examples? Japan: de facto ethnostate. Maine: de factor ethno-"state". 94% white people. The first one is fine, the second one is problematic for a lot of people. Why? Because there are too many white people living in Maine?

Bringing up some dumb play when plenty of real-world examples exist is just disingenuous.

He's always full of shit. Best to ignore him.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 27, 2023, 03:22:13 PM
Japan has plenty of racist *people*, just like many other countries. It also has a past that is full of racism and colonialism. I hate the racism of the Japanese. As a Korean, my father spent his childhood under Japanese racist oppression. However, he also faced plenty of racism from white people when he emigrated to the U.S. The current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race, so I would not call it an ethnostate.

Specifying a nameless hypothetical community that doesn't want outsiders isn't useful to compare, since it is hypothetical. Let's take a specific example of a small white community that doesn't want outsiders -- say Brigadoon from the 1947 musical. As portrayed, it's much like Wakanda in that it is intentionally keeping itself secret and hiding from the outside world, like Wakanda has traditionally done. My son was in a high school production of Brigadoon 7 years ago, and I didn't have any condemnation of the play for its racism, nor would I call Brigadoon a racist ethnostate.

I wouldn't claim that the people of Brigadoon are free of racism. However, their drive to be isolated from the outside world is not inherently a racist principle -- and I wouldn't condemn the play as racist as a result.

Would either of you (Brad or oggsmash) call Brigadoon a racist white ethnostate? If not, can you explain why?

Koreans are the most racist people on Earth in my experience, so let's not pretend the Japanese are somehow worse. That said, I have a friend who moved to Japan years ago to open his own videogame company and speaks fluent Japanese, married a Japanese girl. It's my understanding he can never become a Japanese citizen, even now, because he's a white dude. So the statement "the current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race" doesn't even make any sense. He'll always be an outsider and second-class member of Japanese society, regardless of what he does.

RE: hypotheticals, how about instead of some dumbass play we use real-life examples? Japan: de facto ethnostate. Maine: de factor ethno-"state". 94% white people. The first one is fine, the second one is problematic for a lot of people. Why? Because there are too many white people living in Maine?

Bringing up some dumb play when plenty of real-world examples exist is just disingenuous.

He's always full of shit. Best to ignore him.

Never mind that Korea had the longest unbroken chain of slavery of ANY society in history, spanning about 1500 years:

It's a hilarious short and I can't embed it

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t18qMiEXVyI (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t18qMiEXVyI)
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 27, 2023, 04:49:22 PM
Japan has plenty of racist *people*, just like many other countries. It also has a past that is full of racism and colonialism. I hate the racism of the Japanese. As a Korean, my father spent his childhood under Japanese racist oppression. However, he also faced plenty of racism from white people when he emigrated to the U.S. The current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race, so I would not call it an ethnostate.

Specifying a nameless hypothetical community that doesn't want outsiders isn't useful to compare, since it is hypothetical. Let's take a specific example of a small white community that doesn't want outsiders -- say Brigadoon from the 1947 musical. As portrayed, it's much like Wakanda in that it is intentionally keeping itself secret and hiding from the outside world, like Wakanda has traditionally done. My son was in a high school production of Brigadoon 7 years ago, and I didn't have any condemnation of the play for its racism, nor would I call Brigadoon a racist ethnostate.

I wouldn't claim that the people of Brigadoon are free of racism. However, their drive to be isolated from the outside world is not inherently a racist principle -- and I wouldn't condemn the play as racist as a result.

Would either of you (Brad or oggsmash) call Brigadoon a racist white ethnostate? If not, can you explain why?

Koreans are the most racist people on Earth in my experience, so let's not pretend the Japanese are somehow worse. That said, I have a friend who moved to Japan years ago to open his own videogame company and speaks fluent Japanese, married a Japanese girl. It's my understanding he can never become a Japanese citizen, even now, because he's a white dude. So the statement "the current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race" doesn't even make any sense. He'll always be an outsider and second-class member of Japanese society, regardless of what he does.

RE: hypotheticals, how about instead of some dumbass play we use real-life examples? Japan: de facto ethnostate. Maine: de factor ethno-"state". 94% white people. The first one is fine, the second one is problematic for a lot of people. Why? Because there are too many white people living in Maine?

Bringing up some dumb play when plenty of real-world examples exist is just disingenuous.

Never mind that Korea had the longest unbroken chain of slavery of ANY society in history, spanning about 1500 years:

It's a hilarious short and I can't embed it

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t18qMiEXVyI (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t18qMiEXVyI)

Yup. That guy is a total dumbass. Korea has been a hugely classist society for centuries. Even though slavery has been outlawed, classism is still extremely strong in South Korea. Class bias is the reason why films like Parasite had such a strong impact. Social class is encoded into the Korean language, with different grammar based on mode of address (honorifics).

I'm not clear what we're disagreeing about.

This subtopic got kicked off back in reply #58 where Wtrmute characterized Wakanda as an ethnonationalist state, which I disagreed with. I said that fictional isolationist societies like Wakanda and Brigadoon can be criticized for their isolationism, but their isolationism isn't inherently ethnonationalism in either case.

With Japan, my issue with historical Japan isn't about isolationism like not allowing Koreans to immigrate -- but rather with conquering their neighboring countries (including Korea), forced immigration of Koreans to be laborers during WWII, and then treating those forced laborers as second-class citizens.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 27, 2023, 05:33:50 PM
Japan has plenty of racist *people*, just like many other countries. It also has a past that is full of racism and colonialism. I hate the racism of the Japanese. As a Korean, my father spent his childhood under Japanese racist oppression. However, he also faced plenty of racism from white people when he emigrated to the U.S. The current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race, so I would not call it an ethnostate.

Specifying a nameless hypothetical community that doesn't want outsiders isn't useful to compare, since it is hypothetical. Let's take a specific example of a small white community that doesn't want outsiders -- say Brigadoon from the 1947 musical. As portrayed, it's much like Wakanda in that it is intentionally keeping itself secret and hiding from the outside world, like Wakanda has traditionally done. My son was in a high school production of Brigadoon 7 years ago, and I didn't have any condemnation of the play for its racism, nor would I call Brigadoon a racist ethnostate.

I wouldn't claim that the people of Brigadoon are free of racism. However, their drive to be isolated from the outside world is not inherently a racist principle -- and I wouldn't condemn the play as racist as a result.

Would either of you (Brad or oggsmash) call Brigadoon a racist white ethnostate? If not, can you explain why?

Koreans are the most racist people on Earth in my experience, so let's not pretend the Japanese are somehow worse. That said, I have a friend who moved to Japan years ago to open his own videogame company and speaks fluent Japanese, married a Japanese girl. It's my understanding he can never become a Japanese citizen, even now, because he's a white dude. So the statement "the current laws of Japan are neutral with respect to race" doesn't even make any sense. He'll always be an outsider and second-class member of Japanese society, regardless of what he does.

RE: hypotheticals, how about instead of some dumbass play we use real-life examples? Japan: de facto ethnostate. Maine: de factor ethno-"state". 94% white people. The first one is fine, the second one is problematic for a lot of people. Why? Because there are too many white people living in Maine?

Bringing up some dumb play when plenty of real-world examples exist is just disingenuous.

Never mind that Korea had the longest unbroken chain of slavery of ANY society in history, spanning about 1500 years:

It's a hilarious short and I can't embed it

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t18qMiEXVyI (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t18qMiEXVyI)

Yup. That guy is a total dumbass. Korea has been a hugely classist society for centuries. Even though slavery has been outlawed, classism is still extremely strong in South Korea. Class bias is the reason why films like Parasite had such a strong impact. Social class is encoded into the Korean language, with different grammar based on mode of address (honorifics).

I'm not clear what we're disagreeing about.

This subtopic got kicked off back in reply #58 where Wtrmute characterized Wakanda as an ethnonationalist state, which I disagreed with. I said that fictional isolationist societies like Wakanda and Brigadoon can be criticized for their isolationism, but their isolationism isn't inherently ethnonationalism in either case.

With Japan, my issue with historical Japan isn't about isolationism like not allowing Koreans to immigrate -- but rather with conquering their neighboring countries (including Korea), forced immigration of Koreans to be laborers during WWII, and then treating those forced laborers as second-class citizens.

Your definition of ethnicity seems a little off to me.

Something I'm sure Koreans never did to other people's right? In all the 1500 years of slavery.

Spare me the virtue posturing, ALL people around the world committed atrocities. Some do even today.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 27, 2023, 06:00:38 PM
Yup. That guy is a total dumbass. Korea has been a hugely classist society for centuries. Even though slavery has been outlawed, classism is still extremely strong in South Korea. Class bias is the reason why films like Parasite had such a strong impact. Social class is encoded into the Korean language, with different grammar based on mode of address (honorifics).

I'm not clear what we're disagreeing about.

This subtopic got kicked off back in reply #58 where Wtrmute characterized Wakanda as an ethnonationalist state, which I disagreed with. I said that fictional isolationist societies like Wakanda and Brigadoon can be criticized for their isolationism, but their isolationism isn't inherently ethnonationalism in either case.

With Japan, my issue with historical Japan isn't about isolationism like not allowing Koreans to immigrate -- but rather with conquering their neighboring countries (including Korea), forced immigration of Koreans to be laborers during WWII, and then treating those forced laborers as second-class citizens.

Your definition of ethnicity seems a little off to me.

Something I'm sure Koreans never did to other people's right? In all the 1500 years of slavery.

Spare me the virtue posturing, ALL people around the world committed atrocities. Some do even today.

GeekyBugle, we seem to be talking past each other.

I am saying that Korea has had an abusive, atrocious system of repression of the lower classes -- including not just slaves (nobi) but also in its inequality among other classes like vulgar commoners (cheonmin). You refer to "ethnicity" and "other people" -- but Korean nobi was a social class of ethnic Koreans. The Koreans got their slaves by oppressing their own poor, not by raiding other countries and taking captives. That doesn't make it any better - I'm just stating a fact.

That said, while all countries have committed atrocities, I don't buy into moral relativism. The United States committed atrocities in WWII, and so did Nazi Germany. That doesn't make them equal.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Grognard GM on April 27, 2023, 06:39:32 PM
That said, while all countries have committed atrocities, I don't buy into moral relativism. The United States committed atrocities in WWII, and so did Nazi Germany. That doesn't make them equal.

So then you'd agree that the Ottoman Empire's version of slavery was far worse than America's. I mean, since it's an objective fact, and you not being a fan of moral relativism.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 27, 2023, 07:00:25 PM
Yup. That guy is a total dumbass. Korea has been a hugely classist society for centuries. Even though slavery has been outlawed, classism is still extremely strong in South Korea. Class bias is the reason why films like Parasite had such a strong impact. Social class is encoded into the Korean language, with different grammar based on mode of address (honorifics).

I'm not clear what we're disagreeing about.

This subtopic got kicked off back in reply #58 where Wtrmute characterized Wakanda as an ethnonationalist state, which I disagreed with. I said that fictional isolationist societies like Wakanda and Brigadoon can be criticized for their isolationism, but their isolationism isn't inherently ethnonationalism in either case.

With Japan, my issue with historical Japan isn't about isolationism like not allowing Koreans to immigrate -- but rather with conquering their neighboring countries (including Korea), forced immigration of Koreans to be laborers during WWII, and then treating those forced laborers as second-class citizens.

Your definition of ethnicity seems a little off to me.

Something I'm sure Koreans never did to other people's right? In all the 1500 years of slavery.

Spare me the virtue posturing, ALL people around the world committed atrocities. Some do even today.

GeekyBugle, we seem to be talking past each other.

I am saying that Korea has had an abusive, atrocious system of repression of the lower classes -- including not just slaves (nobi) but also in its inequality among other classes like vulgar commoners (cheonmin). You refer to "ethnicity" and "other people" -- but Korean nobi was a social class of ethnic Koreans. The Koreans got their slaves by oppressing their own poor, not by raiding other countries and taking captives. That doesn't make it any better - I'm just stating a fact.

That said, while all countries have committed atrocities, I don't buy into moral relativism. The United States committed atrocities in WWII, and so did Nazi Germany. That doesn't make them equal.

I agree, 1500 years of uninterrupted slavery seem especially heinous.

Japan committed atrocities during WWII nobody is denying it, but the ethnicity comment is regarding wakanda, your claim that it's not an ethnostate is based on an iffy definition of ethnicity.

Edited to add:

Ethnicity
a large group of people with a shared culture, language, history, set of traditions, etc., or the fact of belonging to one of these groups:

Do you agree with that definition?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 27, 2023, 07:47:16 PM
This subtopic got kicked off back in reply #58 where Wtrmute characterized Wakanda as an ethnonationalist state, which I disagreed with. I said that fictional isolationist societies like Wakanda and Brigadoon can be criticized for their isolationism, but their isolationism isn't inherently ethnonationalism in either case.

With Japan, my issue with historical Japan isn't about isolationism like not allowing Koreans to immigrate -- but rather with conquering their neighboring countries (including Korea), forced immigration of Koreans to be laborers during WWII, and then treating those forced laborers as second-class citizens.

Japan committed atrocities during WWII nobody is denying it, but the ethnicity comment is regarding wakanda, your claim that it's not an ethnostate is based on an iffy definition of ethnicity.

Edited to add:

Ethnicity
a large group of people with a shared culture, language, history, set of traditions, etc., or the fact of belonging to one of these groups:

Do you agree with that definition?

There are three terms being thrown around here -- "ethnicity", "ethnostate" and "ethnonationalist state". Wtrmute used the term "ethnonationalist state" when talking about Wakanda. For of an ethnonationalist, I think of now-banned user Alathon. He self-identified as an ethnonationalist, and claimed that societies function better if they are one race. Specifically, he said that the US would be better if it was only white people. As far as I know, he didn't advocate violence against non-white Americans, but would prefer that they live in societies that fit their race better.

I'm fine with the dictionary definition of "ethnicity" you quote, but I don't think it's going to clear up any disagreement. I'd prefer to focus on cases and judgement of them, whether fictional Wakanda or Brigadoon, or real states referred to like Maine, Japan, and South Korea.

EDITED TO ADD: The important question isn't whether Japan is an ethnostate or Wakanda is an ethnostate - but more on what that means. If we decide that "ethnostate" means that almost all citizens share the same native langauge and overall history, then I'm fine calling them ethnostates -- but that doesn't mean that everyone in Japan is an ethnonationalist like Alathon.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 27, 2023, 08:21:15 PM
This subtopic got kicked off back in reply #58 where Wtrmute characterized Wakanda as an ethnonationalist state, which I disagreed with. I said that fictional isolationist societies like Wakanda and Brigadoon can be criticized for their isolationism, but their isolationism isn't inherently ethnonationalism in either case.

With Japan, my issue with historical Japan isn't about isolationism like not allowing Koreans to immigrate -- but rather with conquering their neighboring countries (including Korea), forced immigration of Koreans to be laborers during WWII, and then treating those forced laborers as second-class citizens.

Japan committed atrocities during WWII nobody is denying it, but the ethnicity comment is regarding wakanda, your claim that it's not an ethnostate is based on an iffy definition of ethnicity.

Edited to add:

Ethnicity
a large group of people with a shared culture, language, history, set of traditions, etc., or the fact of belonging to one of these groups:

Do you agree with that definition?

There are three terms being thrown around here -- "ethnicity", "ethnostate" and "ethnonationalist state". Wtrmute used the term "ethnonationalist state" when talking about Wakanda. For of an ethnonationalist, I think of now-banned user Alathon. He self-identified as an ethnonationalist, and claimed that societies function better if they are one race. Specifically, he said that the US would be better if it was only white people. As far as I know, he didn't advocate violence against non-white Americans, but would prefer that they live in societies that fit their race better.

I'm fine with the dictionary definition of "ethnicity" you quote, but I don't think it's going to clear up any disagreement. I'd prefer to focus on cases and judgement of them, whether fictional Wakanda or Brigadoon, or real states referred to like Maine, Japan, and South Korea.

EDITED TO ADD: The important question isn't whether Japan is an ethnostate or Wakanda is an ethnostate - but more on what that means. If we decide that "ethnostate" means that almost all citizens share the same native langauge and overall history, then I'm fine calling them ethnostates -- but that doesn't mean that everyone in Japan is an ethnonationalist like Alathon.

Ethnostate:
a state that is dominated by members of a single ethnic group

White Ethnostate:
A White ethnostate is a proposed type of state in which residence or citizenship would be limited to whites, and non-whites, such as Blacks, Asians, Jews, Middle Easterners and North Africans and Hispanics would be excluded from citizenship.

I don't think there's a meaningful difference between the two things, but since I like consistency and since when people accuse Israel/Japan of being an Ethnostate they are thinking of the second definition let's use that one.

So, Wakanda being a place where ONLY ethnic wakandans can live fits perfectly the definition of an Ethnostate.

Meanwhile Israel doesn't since there's Muslims that have the nationality and full citizenship rights. No idea about Japan so I won't pronounce myself in one way or the other.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 28, 2023, 01:02:52 AM
Ethnostate:
a state that is dominated by members of a single ethnic group

White Ethnostate:
A White ethnostate is a proposed type of state in which residence or citizenship would be limited to whites, and non-whites, such as Blacks, Asians, Jews, Middle Easterners and North Africans and Hispanics would be excluded from citizenship.

I don't think there's a meaningful difference between the two things, but since I like consistency and since when people accuse Israel/Japan of being an Ethnostate they are thinking of the second definition let's use that one.

So, Wakanda being a place where ONLY ethnic wakandans can live fits perfectly the definition of an Ethnostate.

Meanwhile Israel doesn't since there's Muslims that have the nationality and full citizenship rights. No idea about Japan so I won't pronounce myself in one way or the other.

Modern Israel's notable ethnic policy is immigration. A person automatically has the right to immigrate to Israel if they are Jewish, or the direct family of a Jewish person. Other ethnicities have more restricted immigration rights. Israel strongly encourages immigration by Jews, and about 22% of the population are immigrants. Also, according to Israeli law:

Quote
1.  The State of Israel
a) Israel is the historic homeland of the Jewish people in which the State of Israel was established.
b) The state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, religious, and historic right to self-determination.
c) The fulfillment of the right of national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

---

Modern Japan, by contrast, has no ethnic-specific laws for immigration or citizenship. Non-ethnic Japanese citizens have the same rights as ethnic Japanese. According to the Japanese constitution:

Quote
Article 14. All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin.
Peers and peerage shall not be recognized.
No privilege shall accompany any award of honor, decoration or any distinction, nor shall any such award be valid beyond the lifetime of the individual who now holds or hereafter may receive it.

Though note that this constitution was imposed on Japan by the US after WWII. Legally, becoming a Japanese citizen is the same for anyone regardless of ethnicity - but it has a very long naturalization process (10 years permanent residence). The immigration rate is extremely low - less than 1% of the population is immigrant.

---

Fictional communities like Wakanda and Brigadoon are isolationist -- but I think it is weird to call either Wakandan or Brigadooner an ethnicity, since this is a fictional "ethnicity" that is the same as their community, and there is no suggestion that Wakanda or Brigadoon defines themselves ethnically.

When a white baby crash-lands in Wakanda, they don't judge based on the baby's race or ethnicity. He is raised as a Wakandan citizen and he grows up to have a high position in government. Likewise, in Brigadoon, the American visitor without any mention of his race or even nationality.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 28, 2023, 01:24:12 AM
Ethnostate:
a state that is dominated by members of a single ethnic group

White Ethnostate:
A White ethnostate is a proposed type of state in which residence or citizenship would be limited to whites, and non-whites, such as Blacks, Asians, Jews, Middle Easterners and North Africans and Hispanics would be excluded from citizenship.

I don't think there's a meaningful difference between the two things, but since I like consistency and since when people accuse Israel/Japan of being an Ethnostate they are thinking of the second definition let's use that one.

So, Wakanda being a place where ONLY ethnic wakandans can live fits perfectly the definition of an Ethnostate.

Meanwhile Israel doesn't since there's Muslims that have the nationality and full citizenship rights. No idea about Japan so I won't pronounce myself in one way or the other.

Modern Israel's notable ethnic policy is immigration. A person automatically has the right to immigrate to Israel if they are Jewish, or the direct family of a Jewish person. Other ethnicities have more restricted immigration rights. Israel strongly encourages immigration by Jews, and about 22% of the population are immigrants. Also, according to Israeli law:

Quote
1.  The State of Israel
a) Israel is the historic homeland of the Jewish people in which the State of Israel was established.
b) The state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, religious, and historic right to self-determination.
c) The fulfillment of the right of national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

---

Modern Japan, by contrast, has no ethnic-specific laws for immigration or citizenship. Non-ethnic Japanese citizens have the same rights as ethnic Japanese. According to the Japanese constitution:

Quote
Article 14. All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin.
Peers and peerage shall not be recognized.
No privilege shall accompany any award of honor, decoration or any distinction, nor shall any such award be valid beyond the lifetime of the individual who now holds or hereafter may receive it.

Though note that this constitution was imposed on Japan by the US after WWII. Legally, becoming a Japanese citizen is the same for anyone regardless of ethnicity - but it has a very long naturalization process (10 years permanent residence). The immigration rate is extremely low - less than 1% of the population is immigrant.

---

Fictional communities like Wakanda and Brigadoon are isolationist -- but I think it is weird to call either Wakandan or Brigadooner an ethnicity, since this is a fictional "ethnicity" that is the same as their community, and there is no suggestion that Wakanda or Brigadoon defines themselves ethnically.

When a white baby crash-lands in Wakanda, they don't judge based on the baby's race or ethnicity. He is raised as a Wakandan citizen and he grows up to have a high position in government. Likewise, in Brigadoon, the American visitor without any mention of his race or even nationality.

So Jews are black?

Because 130,000 Ethiopian Jews live in Israel, I guess your fuzzy grasp of the concept of ethnicity is at play AGAIN.

Immigration ISN'T a moral good or a moral bad, IF you agree that Jews (due to the historical persecution they have faced) deserve to call their millennial country of origin home, and given that there's still millions of Jews outside of Israel (not forgetting the Ethiopians) why should they need or have to open their borders to non Jewish immigrants?

Furthermore, given that if they did open their borders the people most likely to move there want to EXTERMINATE them... I think their policy is rooted on self preservation.

WOW, Wakandans would accept an orphan baby regardless of the race! Such diversity! Much wow!
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 28, 2023, 11:11:08 AM
Immigration ISN'T a moral good or a moral bad, IF you agree that Jews (due to the historical persecution they have faced) deserve to call their millennial country of origin home, and given that there's still millions of Jews outside of Israel (not forgetting the Ethiopians) why should they need or have to open their borders to non Jewish immigrants?

OK, I'm confused. This is exactly what I was saying -- that immigration alone isn't inherently a moral good or moral bad.

It seemed like your argument was that Wakanda was an ethnostate and morally wrong because it didn't open itself up to non-Wakandan immigrants. But now I'm not clear. Are you saying that there is a moral wrong with Wakanda's isolationism? What should Wakanda be like to be morally right? 
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 28, 2023, 11:18:58 AM
Immigration ISN'T a moral good or a moral bad, IF you agree that Jews (due to the historical persecution they have faced) deserve to call their millennial country of origin home, and given that there's still millions of Jews outside of Israel (not forgetting the Ethiopians) why should they need or have to open their borders to non Jewish immigrants?

OK, I'm confused. This is exactly what I was saying -- that immigration alone isn't inherently a moral good or moral bad.

It seemed like your argument was that Wakanda was an ethnostate and morally wrong because it didn't open itself up to non-Wakandan immigrants. But now I'm not clear. Are you saying that there is a moral wrong with Wakanda's isolationism? What should Wakanda be like to be morally right?

WOW you're really confused.

Wakanda IS an Ethnostate

Wakanda is morally wrong because having super advanced tech allowed all kinds of atrocities to be committed against their neighbors: The Arab slave trade, 12 centuries 15 million souls enslaved, the Trans-Atlantic slave trade 4 centuries 12 million souls enslaved, not counting ALL the natural disasters like droughts, etc. More recently for allowing the contamination of the planet to continue because they would not share their super tech.

One doesn't necessarily follow from the other but Ethnostates do tend to be isolationists.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 28, 2023, 05:33:20 PM
This is exactly what I was saying -- that immigration alone isn't inherently a moral good or moral bad.

It seemed like your argument was that Wakanda was an ethnostate and morally wrong because it didn't open itself up to non-Wakandan immigrants. But now I'm not clear. Are you saying that there is a moral wrong with Wakanda's isolationism? What should Wakanda be like to be morally right?

Wakanda IS an Ethnostate

Wakanda is morally wrong because having super advanced tech allowed all kinds of atrocities to be committed against their neighbors: The Arab slave trade, 12 centuries 15 million souls enslaved, the Trans-Atlantic slave trade 4 centuries 12 million souls enslaved, not counting ALL the natural disasters like droughts, etc. More recently for allowing the contamination of the planet to continue because they would not share their super tech.

From this it sounds like you don't have a problem with Wakanda's no-immigration policy (i.e. "Wakanda for Wakandans").

Instead, you think that they should have used their advanced technology to become a superpower and act as world police to solve the problems of other countries.

---

This sounds like a critique of isolationism. I'm sympathetic to that. As another example, the isolationism of Star Trek's Federation Prime Directive often seemed like moral cowardice to me - like when they would let a whole planet perish rather than interfere. However, I also have to admit that historically, real countries going out to be world police has most often been conquest and domination rather than making the world better.

Based on the Christopher Priest comics (which I'm a fan of), I'm not convinced that centuries of Wakandan domination would have necessarily been better for history. The modern Wakandans are a decent country overall - with their own flaws and strengths - but they're not an enlightened utopia. If they became a superpower in medieval times, they might well have participated in the slave trade just like most Europeans, Arabs, and Africans did. I could easily picture a "What If" comic set in an alternate 18th century after centuries of Wakandan domination, where the New World Wakandan colonies are having debates over their own rights and freedom -- along with those of their Gaulish and Celtic slaves.

I suppose my ideal case would be Wakanda as a center of learning - who spread knowledge like especially medical and ecological knowledge, and participating in international debate, but don't get militarily involved in territorial wars.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 28, 2023, 06:59:18 PM
This is exactly what I was saying -- that immigration alone isn't inherently a moral good or moral bad.

It seemed like your argument was that Wakanda was an ethnostate and morally wrong because it didn't open itself up to non-Wakandan immigrants. But now I'm not clear. Are you saying that there is a moral wrong with Wakanda's isolationism? What should Wakanda be like to be morally right?

Wakanda IS an Ethnostate

Wakanda is morally wrong because having super advanced tech allowed all kinds of atrocities to be committed against their neighbors: The Arab slave trade, 12 centuries 15 million souls enslaved, the Trans-Atlantic slave trade 4 centuries 12 million souls enslaved, not counting ALL the natural disasters like droughts, etc. More recently for allowing the contamination of the planet to continue because they would not share their super tech.

From this it sounds like you don't have a problem with Wakanda's no-immigration policy (i.e. "Wakanda for Wakandans").

Instead, you think that they should have used their advanced technology to become a superpower and act as world police to solve the problems of other countries.

---

This sounds like a critique of isolationism. I'm sympathetic to that. As another example, the isolationism of Star Trek's Federation Prime Directive often seemed like moral cowardice to me - like when they would let a whole planet perish rather than interfere. However, I also have to admit that historically, real countries going out to be world police has most often been conquest and domination rather than making the world better.

Based on the Christopher Priest comics (which I'm a fan of), I'm not convinced that centuries of Wakandan domination would have necessarily been better for history. The modern Wakandans are a decent country overall - with their own flaws and strengths - but they're not an enlightened utopia. If they became a superpower in medieval times, they might well have participated in the slave trade just like most Europeans, Arabs, and Africans did. I could easily picture a "What If" comic set in an alternate 18th century after centuries of Wakandan domination, where the New World Wakandan colonies are having debates over their own rights and freedom -- along with those of their Gaulish and Celtic slaves.

I suppose my ideal case would be Wakanda as a center of learning - who spread knowledge like especially medical and ecological knowledge, and participating in international debate, but don't get militarily involved in territorial wars.

Given that I openly support closing Mexico's borders and deporting ALL the illegals you could hardly say I'm an open borders proponent, no I have no problem with country X deciding they do not want Immigration.

Stopping the slave trade can hardly be described as intervening in foreign wars, and since I do admire the Brits for spending blood and treasure to stop it I do think that if someone else had the power and choose to do nothing then that's morally wrong.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

To do nothing to stop an evil when it's within your power (supertech compared to other nations) it's morally wrong, I would even say it's downright evil.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 28, 2023, 08:00:08 PM
From this it sounds like you don't have a problem with Wakanda's no-immigration policy (i.e. "Wakanda for Wakandans").
Given that I openly support closing Mexico's borders and deporting ALL the illegals you could hardly say I'm an open borders proponent, no I have no problem with country X deciding they do not want Immigration.

OK. I saw your earlier labelling Wakanda as an ethnostate here:

So, Wakanda being a place where ONLY ethnic wakandans can live fits perfectly the definition of an Ethnostate.

And I thought that you were implying that it was morally wrong that only Wakandans can live in Wakanda.


This sounds like a critique of isolationism. I'm sympathetic to that. As another example, the isolationism of Star Trek's Federation Prime Directive often seemed like moral cowardice to me - like when they would let a whole planet perish rather than interfere. However, I also have to admit that historically, real countries going out to be world police has most often been conquest and domination rather than making the world better.

Based on the Christopher Priest comics (which I'm a fan of), I'm not convinced that centuries of Wakandan domination would have necessarily been better for history. The modern Wakandans are a decent country overall - with their own flaws and strengths - but they're not an enlightened utopia. If they became a superpower in medieval times, they might well have participated in the slave trade just like most Europeans, Arabs, and Africans did. I could easily picture a "What If" comic set in an alternate 18th century after centuries of Wakandan domination, where the New World Wakandan colonies are having debates over their own rights and freedom -- along with those of their Gaulish and Celtic slaves.

I suppose my ideal case would be Wakanda as a center of learning - who spread knowledge like especially medical and ecological knowledge, and participating in international debate, but don't get militarily involved in territorial wars.

Stopping the slave trade can hardly be described as intervening in foreign wars, and since I do admire the Brits for spending blood and treasure to stop it I do think that if someone else had the power and choose to do nothing then that's morally wrong.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

To do nothing to stop an evil when it's within your power (supertech compared to other nations) it's morally wrong, I would even say it's downright evil.

From our modern view, it's obvious that slavery is evil and so any good country should act to go out and stop slavery.

But in the 16th century, slavery was common. Countries across Europe, Africa, and the Middle East all participated in it. You're suggesting that 16th century Wakanda was evil for not stopping slavery -- and I would technically agree, but I'd also say that it was no more evil than countries like England, Spain, Egypt, and others who actively promoted slavery. Not better, but also not worse.

Now, it's true that in the early 19th century Britain outlawed the slave trade and worked to stop it. So was 19th century Wakanda more evil than 19th century Britain? Possibly so, but it's also complicated. The British outlawed the slave trade in 1807 only after they lost their American colonies. Because of this, they were no longer making money on slaves, so they economically benefited by disrupting the profitable slave trade of their enemies. This decision was influenced by genuine abolitionists, but it was also economic.

Actual history is rarely clear good vs evil.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 28, 2023, 08:25:25 PM
From this it sounds like you don't have a problem with Wakanda's no-immigration policy (i.e. "Wakanda for Wakandans").
Given that I openly support closing Mexico's borders and deporting ALL the illegals you could hardly say I'm an open borders proponent, no I have no problem with country X deciding they do not want Immigration.

OK. I saw your earlier labelling Wakanda as an ethnostate here:

So, Wakanda being a place where ONLY ethnic wakandans can live fits perfectly the definition of an Ethnostate.

And I thought that you were implying that it was morally wrong that only Wakandans can live in Wakanda.


This sounds like a critique of isolationism. I'm sympathetic to that. As another example, the isolationism of Star Trek's Federation Prime Directive often seemed like moral cowardice to me - like when they would let a whole planet perish rather than interfere. However, I also have to admit that historically, real countries going out to be world police has most often been conquest and domination rather than making the world better.

Based on the Christopher Priest comics (which I'm a fan of), I'm not convinced that centuries of Wakandan domination would have necessarily been better for history. The modern Wakandans are a decent country overall - with their own flaws and strengths - but they're not an enlightened utopia. If they became a superpower in medieval times, they might well have participated in the slave trade just like most Europeans, Arabs, and Africans did. I could easily picture a "What If" comic set in an alternate 18th century after centuries of Wakandan domination, where the New World Wakandan colonies are having debates over their own rights and freedom -- along with those of their Gaulish and Celtic slaves.

I suppose my ideal case would be Wakanda as a center of learning - who spread knowledge like especially medical and ecological knowledge, and participating in international debate, but don't get militarily involved in territorial wars.

Stopping the slave trade can hardly be described as intervening in foreign wars, and since I do admire the Brits for spending blood and treasure to stop it I do think that if someone else had the power and choose to do nothing then that's morally wrong.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

To do nothing to stop an evil when it's within your power (supertech compared to other nations) it's morally wrong, I would even say it's downright evil.

From our modern view, it's obvious that slavery is evil and so any good country should act to go out and stop slavery.

But in the 16th century, slavery was common. Countries across Europe, Africa, and the Middle East all participated in it. You're suggesting that 16th century Wakanda was evil for not stopping slavery -- and I would technically agree, but I'd also say that it was no more evil than countries like England, Spain, Egypt, and others who actively promoted slavery. Not better, but also not worse.

Now, it's true that in the early 19th century Britain outlawed the slave trade and worked to stop it. So was 19th century Wakanda more evil than 19th century Britain? Possibly so, but it's also complicated. The British outlawed the slave trade in 1807 only after they lost their American colonies. Because of this, they were no longer making money on slaves, so they economically benefited by disrupting the profitable slave trade of their enemies. This decision was influenced by genuine abolitionists, but it was also economic.

Actual history is rarely clear good vs evil.

Why would you assume that? Could it be because when you think about ethnostates you think about a white ethnostate?

Mexico isn't an ethnostate and wouldn't be even if we closed our borders.

If immigration is morally neutral then it follows that not allowing it is also morally neutral.

I've explained why Wakanda is evil, but I can't claim that of a fictional black country so you must make claims about the UK's motives, did you know they just recently finished paying of the debt they acquired to stop the slave trade? that it was illegal to own slaves in the UK before they started their war? that many British citizens died stopping this objectively evil trade?

I seriously doubt incurring in such debt was to their economic benefit.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 29, 2023, 03:05:11 PM
I've explained why Wakanda is evil, but I can't claim that of a fictional black country so you must make claims about the UK's motives, did you know they just recently finished paying of the debt they acquired to stop the slave trade? that it was illegal to own slaves in the UK before they started their war? that many British citizens died stopping this objectively evil trade?

I seriously doubt incurring in such debt was to their economic benefit.

So if I rank evil and good based on this, it might be:

"Extreme evil" - participate, promote, and profit from slavery
"Evil" - don't participate, but do nothing to stop slavery and the slave trade
"Good" - work to stop the slave trade

In 1770, England was a major player in the transatlantic slave trade. Then in 1807, England outlawed the slave trade and worked to shut the trade down. So do you think that England suddenly jumped from extreme evil to good in the span of 37 years? That seems abrupt to me. The U.S. then also started as extreme evil, and jumped to good later in the 1800s?

If that isn't how you see them, then can you unpack how you conceive of it?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Grognard GM on April 29, 2023, 04:11:21 PM
In 1770, England was a major player in the transatlantic slave trade. Then in 1807, England outlawed the slave trade and worked to shut the trade down. So do you think that England suddenly jumped from extreme evil to good in the span of 37 years? That seems abrupt to me. The U.S. then also started as extreme evil, and jumped to good later in the 1800s?

See that's the problem with your ideology, you give people no reason to do better.

Hey, you were one of the first peoples to decide that slavery was evil, and not only banned it, but spent a vast fortune, and bled your military to enforce your ban internationally? Tough shit, you're still not good, and all people will talk about in 200 years is how you were shitty slave traders.

Between the woke stances of one-strike-and-evil-forever, and constantly shifting standards for 'allyship,' people may as well embrace being Istaphobes. Why crawl over broken glass, just to be told it's not good enough? Wokeness has permanently damaged race and sexual relations in the West.

PS - You think not doing something to stop slavery is evil, but if a Western nation rolled in to Africa or China, you'd call them cultural imperialists, and run cover for the slave nations.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on April 29, 2023, 07:26:48 PM
In 1770, England was a major player in the transatlantic slave trade. Then in 1807, England outlawed the slave trade and worked to shut the trade down. So do you think that England suddenly jumped from extreme evil to good in the span of 37 years? That seems abrupt to me. The U.S. then also started as extreme evil, and jumped to good later in the 1800s?

See that's the problem with your ideology, you give people no reason to do better.
PS - You think not doing something to stop slavery is evil, but if a Western nation rolled in to Africa or China, you'd call them cultural imperialists, and run cover for the slave nations.

Grognard GM, the post you are quoting isn't a declaration of my own ideology. It is questions for GeekyBugle to try to understand his ideology.

In my own ideology, I wouldn't use labels like good and evil for countries, or for humans. There is always better and worse on different issues, and it always has to be in comparison to others. For example, I wouldn't say the initial U.S. was evil because it practiced slavery and promoted the slave trade. I am opposed to slavery, but it is only one of many practices on which to judge a country.

I would criticize a country that has a past of conquering others, but I'd also give it credit where it participated for positive change. I would criticize a highly isolationist country for failing to contribute enough to make the world better, but also give it credit for doing better than most other countries that engaged in territorial wars and conquest.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Krazz on April 30, 2023, 11:02:26 AM
Now, it's true that in the early 19th century Britain outlawed the slave trade and worked to stop it. So was 19th century Wakanda more evil than 19th century Britain? Possibly so, but it's also complicated. The British outlawed the slave trade in 1807 only after they lost their American colonies. Because of this, they were no longer making money on slaves, so they economically benefited by disrupting the profitable slave trade of their enemies. This decision was influenced by genuine abolitionists, but it was also economic.

Actual history is rarely clear good vs evil.

Britain lost a bunch of colonies that became the US in the 18th century, but it didn't lose all of its colonies in the Americas. In particular it had colonies in the Caribbean which used slave labour on sugar plantations, and those were impacted by Britain abolishing the slave trade, and then abolishing slavery itself. Since those laws only affected the British Empire, it's clear they weren't set up to hurt rivals.

Even if we consider the later British crusade against the wider slave trade, much of the cotton grown in the American south was sent to UK textile mills, which were an important part of the British economy. Impacting the ability of the US to grow cotton would have impacted the British Empire economically, not furthered them.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 30, 2023, 01:22:15 PM
Now, it's true that in the early 19th century Britain outlawed the slave trade and worked to stop it. So was 19th century Wakanda more evil than 19th century Britain? Possibly so, but it's also complicated. The British outlawed the slave trade in 1807 only after they lost their American colonies. Because of this, they were no longer making money on slaves, so they economically benefited by disrupting the profitable slave trade of their enemies. This decision was influenced by genuine abolitionists, but it was also economic.

Actual history is rarely clear good vs evil.

Britain lost a bunch of colonies that became the US in the 18th century, but it didn't lose all of its colonies in the Americas. In particular it had colonies in the Caribbean which used slave labour on sugar plantations, and those were impacted by Britain abolishing the slave trade, and then abolishing slavery itself. Since those laws only affected the British Empire, it's clear they weren't set up to hurt rivals.

Even if we consider the later British crusade against the wider slave trade, much of the cotton grown in the American south was sent to UK textile mills, which were an important part of the British economy. Impacting the ability of the US to grow cotton would have impacted the British Empire economically, not furthered them.

Shhhhh, those pesky facts can't be allowed to disrupt the narrative.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 30, 2023, 01:31:28 PM
In 1770, England was a major player in the transatlantic slave trade. Then in 1807, England outlawed the slave trade and worked to shut the trade down. So do you think that England suddenly jumped from extreme evil to good in the span of 37 years? That seems abrupt to me. The U.S. then also started as extreme evil, and jumped to good later in the 1800s?

See that's the problem with your ideology, you give people no reason to do better.
PS - You think not doing something to stop slavery is evil, but if a Western nation rolled in to Africa or China, you'd call them cultural imperialists, and run cover for the slave nations.

Grognard GM, the post you are quoting isn't a declaration of my own ideology. It is questions for GeekyBugle to try to understand his ideology.

In my own ideology, I wouldn't use labels like good and evil for countries, or for humans. There is always better and worse on different issues, and it always has to be in comparison to others. For example, I wouldn't say the initial U.S. was evil because it practiced slavery and promoted the slave trade. I am opposed to slavery, but it is only one of many practices on which to judge a country.

I would criticize a country that has a past of conquering others, but I'd also give it credit where it participated for positive change. I would criticize a highly isolationist country for failing to contribute enough to make the world better, but also give it credit for doing better than most other countries that engaged in territorial wars and conquest.

I understand my ideology perfectly, people aren't perfect and a country can change for the better or the worse:

The UK changed for the better, while being the world's hegemon they abolished slavery (something no other country had ever done), then went to war to stop the slave trade, against their own economical interests.

On the other side we have countries who had to be forced to stop slavery and then became insidious and found an underhanded way to keep enslaving others while other countries openly practice slavery TODAY.

In YOUR ideology the past sins must ALWAYS be kept to the forefront and no amount of good deeds can ever erase them. A funny thing for someone who calls himself Christian.

The UK (and USA) washed away their sins with the blood of their people and their treasure. Not that they are perfect and haven't done evil things recently.

But if you're going to judge the country for their sins you need to do so for the ones they haven't washed away. For instance the "war on terror", destabilizing countries for profit, etc. While keeping in mind that (like during slavery) there's people in those countries speaking against those evil deeds even if they haven't been allowed to do anything because they are just a bunch of istaphobes.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: SHARK on April 30, 2023, 08:21:03 PM
Greetings!

Geesus. The constant crying about SLAVERY!

You know what? Hundreds of thousands of Americans DIED fighting, to END SLAVERY IN AMERICA. And far more than that gave up crippled limbs ad ruined lives, forever.

None of that sacrifice had to happen.

People could have said, "Heh. Fuck the slaves! Let them stay under the lash! They can stay in fucking chains!"

And there wouldn't have been fuck all that the African slaves could have done about it.

So, how about everyone be fucking happy we ended slavery in America? And fuck all the Libtard bastards that are crying today about "Mum Reparations!" Yeah, that's a real thing, spreading throughout the United Stats right now. California was recently talking about shelling out $300K to each and every citizen that identifies as being an African American. Some cities back east, as well. Black Americans who have never been enslaved in generations, paid fucking TAX MONEY by OTHER citizens that aren't fucking BLACK--who never owned slaves, and even if related to some, haven't owned slaves IN GENERATIONS. Meanwhile, the vast majority of WHITE AMERICANS that never owned slaves--but are related to family that fought and died, and got maimed or crippled--well, too fucking bad. That isn't enough! 150 fucking years later, YOU STILL NEED TO PAY!

Fuck these people crying about slavery and reparations. Life is fucking hard. You get stronger, survive, and move the fuck on. It is never enough with these fucking racist scumbags. Just bow the fuck down and worship the black ass, right? Just make BLACK people a fucking untouchable, noble fucking class that deserves to be fucking worshipped...because. This shit gets so old, especially in recent times. Lets also sweep under the rug that lots of BLACK KINGS IN AFRICA actually started slavery. They introduced slavery to the European traders and ship captains! WHY? So they could get MORE GUNS to crush OTHER BLACK TRIBES that they hated, and wanted to take their land, and in the bargain, get richer themselves FROM ENSLAVING OTHER BLACK AFRICANS. Yeah, that's right. The Black Kings didn't give a fuck who they sold the fucking slaves to, either. Europeans, Americans, MUSLIMS. It was all good, for booty, for gold, and for guns.

And as far as immigration goes, again, who cares? Why is every fucking thing with Libtards some crying moral crsis? Every damned thing with these morons simply HAS TO BE ASSIGNED A MORAL VALUE. Oppressors, and the Oppressed, RIGHT? Gee, where does that kind of thinking come from?

Yes, Alex, I'll take Fucking Communism for $1,000!

Not everything is a huge moral struggle or some crisis, where there simply must pour everything into the damned Marxist language blender. Some things just ARE. It is what it is. Oh, that's right, what does so many sociology and psychology and relationship studies say? THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE PREFER LIVING WITH THEIR OWN RACE. Yeah, you win the cookie! The studies have shown again, and again, that most people prefer to live amongst their own race, and likewise prefer to marry their own race, too. By the way--cosmopolitan trade cities aside--that has been TRUE for all of humanity, everywhere, throughout history. A minority likes to marry outside their race, and even live amongst others. Everywhere.

Again, if you don't want to live with other races of people, GOOD. Stay in your lane. Stay in some mono-cultural neighborhood. Want to live alongside some different people? GREAT! There are lots of places you can easily do that.

None of these choices--or government immigration policies--like restricting who can come into the country--necessarily have a damned thing to do with morality, or racism!--or any other bullshit. It is normal human preferences on one hand, and wanting to safeguard the country's security, economy, and culture on the other hand with immigration policies.

Why the fuck do people care that Japan is a fucking "ETHNOSTATE?" Good for them. Japan does not need to let hordes of fucking foreign immigrants pour into their country. NO COUNTRY NEEDS TO DO THAT.

Ok. I'm going to smoke a cigar now. Carry on! *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Ruprecht on April 30, 2023, 09:26:22 PM
Can someone explain how having a rare and super-special medal allowed Wakanda to become technologically advanced because I don't see the connection.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 30, 2023, 10:02:43 PM
Can someone explain how having a rare and super-special medal allowed Wakanda to become technologically advanced because I don't see the connection.

Melanin, it must be the melanin.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: SHARK on April 30, 2023, 10:20:47 PM
Now, it's true that in the early 19th century Britain outlawed the slave trade and worked to stop it. So was 19th century Wakanda more evil than 19th century Britain? Possibly so, but it's also complicated. The British outlawed the slave trade in 1807 only after they lost their American colonies. Because of this, they were no longer making money on slaves, so they economically benefited by disrupting the profitable slave trade of their enemies. This decision was influenced by genuine abolitionists, but it was also economic.

Actual history is rarely clear good vs evil.

Britain lost a bunch of colonies that became the US in the 18th century, but it didn't lose all of its colonies in the Americas. In particular it had colonies in the Caribbean which used slave labour on sugar plantations, and those were impacted by Britain abolishing the slave trade, and then abolishing slavery itself. Since those laws only affected the British Empire, it's clear they weren't set up to hurt rivals.

Even if we consider the later British crusade against the wider slave trade, much of the cotton grown in the American south was sent to UK textile mills, which were an important part of the British economy. Impacting the ability of the US to grow cotton would have impacted the British Empire economically, not furthered them.

Shhhhh, those pesky facts can't be allowed to disrupt the narrative.

Greetings!

Exactly, GeekyBugle! The whole Leftist movement hates *facts*. These Marxist troglodytes do not believe in facts, evidence, or even rationality. The only thing they believe in is their ideological cult. Everything MUST conform and bow down to their CULT--or be destroyed.

Just listen to how they talk and think. Forget that BLACK scholars and commentators, like Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, or Candace Owens or police officers like Brandon Tatum all disagree entirely with racist, Leftist, Woke BS--the Woke morons simply dismiss anyone that disagrees with them as "Uncle Toms" or "The Black Face of White Supremacy"--like the LA Times put front and center on an article against Larry Elder, when he ran for Governor of California.

It is sad. You can't talk reason, facts, or logic with these people--let alone Christian morality or ethics. They have spent years in school being brainwashed by the Marxist, Woke propaganda. That is the real tragedy, is they so often can't be saved, like Yuri Bezhmenov described. The brainwashing is too effective, too deep, and too entrenched.

(Cue the Invaders of the Body Snatchers clip with Donald Sutherland, where he in the end gets turned into a pod-zombie).

Black scholars and commentators--and some politicians, too--have described over and over, that 90% of all the problems and BS facing the Black American community are essentially from themselves. Their own fucked up choices; their own social disintegration; their own social and individual dysfunctions--have been cultivated by themselves, by grifters and race hustlers, and through government race programs--and stupid, deceitful college classes that lie to them constantly and seek to mold them into being racist morons. All of this is founded within the Black American community--and has very little to do with White people, Hispanics, or Asians, or anyone else.

The Woke morons dismiss anything, any facts, any sources, that they don't like, as part of "White Supremacy" or Alt Right "Misinformation".

Keep up the fight though!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on May 01, 2023, 02:27:49 AM
In YOUR ideology the past sins must ALWAYS be kept to the forefront and no amount of good deeds can ever erase them. A funny thing for someone who calls himself Christian.

GeekyBugle, you are the one claiming that you judge a modern country by its history of slavery. You're the one who brought up the topic in order to say that Wakanda is evil, citing the history of slavery. Likewise, you recently posted a video where people similarly claimed modern Korea was evil based on its history of slavery.

I haven't said anything about judging modern countries at all by their history of slavery - and certainly not calling them evil. History is important to understand the present, but the important thing is to change the future.

But if you're going to judge the country for their sins you need to do so for the ones they haven't washed away. For instance the "war on terror", destabilizing countries for profit, etc. While keeping in mind that (like during slavery) there's people in those countries speaking against those evil deeds even if they haven't been allowed to do anything because they are just a bunch of istaphobes.

I'd love more voices speaking against the "war on terror" and destabilizing countries for profit. We need to convince more people on both sides that its wrong, since it is a program that is thoroughly supported by the uniparty.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: Eirikrautha on May 01, 2023, 06:49:09 AM
In YOUR ideology the past sins must ALWAYS be kept to the forefront and no amount of good deeds can ever erase them. A funny thing for someone who calls himself Christian.

GeekyBugle, you are the one claiming that you judge a modern country by its history of slavery. You're the one who brought up the topic in order to say that Wakanda is evil, citing the history of slavery. Likewise, you recently posted a video where people similarly claimed modern Korea was evil based on its history of slavery.

I haven't said anything about judging modern countries at all by their history of slavery - and certainly not calling them evil. History is important to understand the present, but the important thing is to change the future.

And this is why people accuse you of being disingenuous and a liar.  Because each of the points you object to was a direct response to something you had said or implied.  This is also the reason that neither you nor anyone who thinks like you should ever be in a position of authority:  because your inability to take responsibility for your half of the discussion shows that you will never solve any problems, only attempt to deflect them onto others.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on May 01, 2023, 12:28:45 PM
In YOUR ideology the past sins must ALWAYS be kept to the forefront and no amount of good deeds can ever erase them. A funny thing for someone who calls himself Christian.

GeekyBugle, you are the one claiming that you judge a modern country by its history of slavery. You're the one who brought up the topic in order to say that Wakanda is evil, citing the history of slavery. Likewise, you recently posted a video where people similarly claimed modern Korea was evil based on its history of slavery.

I haven't said anything about judging modern countries at all by their history of slavery - and certainly not calling them evil. History is important to understand the present, but the important thing is to change the future.

And this is why people accuse you of being disingenuous and a liar.  Because each of the points you object to was a direct response to something you had said or implied.  This is also the reason that neither you nor anyone who thinks like you should ever be in a position of authority:  because your inability to take responsibility for your half of the discussion shows that you will never solve any problems, only attempt to deflect them onto others.

Eirikrautha, GeekyBugle started his point that Wakanda is evil because of the history of slavery in reply #104 (https://www.therpgsite.com/the-rpgpundit-s-own-forum/towards-a-more-inclusive-sword-sorcery/msg1252239/#msg1252239).

Prior to that, I was focused on Wakanda's no-immigration policy, using the parallel of Brigadoon. I don't see that I said anything about slavery. If you can see a place where I did, please point it out to me. It seems to me more that posters are making assumptions about me rather than anything that I actually say. That's why I try to ask more questions rather than assume someone else's position.

For the point going forward -- do you think that Wakanda's history with regards to slavery means that it is evil, as GeekyBugle holds?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 01, 2023, 02:33:26 PM
In YOUR ideology the past sins must ALWAYS be kept to the forefront and no amount of good deeds can ever erase them. A funny thing for someone who calls himself Christian.

GeekyBugle, you are the one claiming that you judge a modern country by its history of slavery. You're the one who brought up the topic in order to say that Wakanda is evil, citing the history of slavery. Likewise, you recently posted a video where people similarly claimed modern Korea was evil based on its history of slavery.

I haven't said anything about judging modern countries at all by their history of slavery - and certainly not calling them evil. History is important to understand the present, but the important thing is to change the future.

And this is why people accuse you of being disingenuous and a liar.  Because each of the points you object to was a direct response to something you had said or implied.  This is also the reason that neither you nor anyone who thinks like you should ever be in a position of authority:  because your inability to take responsibility for your half of the discussion shows that you will never solve any problems, only attempt to deflect them onto others.

Eirikrautha, GeekyBugle started his point that Wakanda is evil because of the history of slavery in reply #104 (https://www.therpgsite.com/the-rpgpundit-s-own-forum/towards-a-more-inclusive-sword-sorcery/msg1252239/#msg1252239).

Prior to that, I was focused on Wakanda's no-immigration policy, using the parallel of Brigadoon. I don't see that I said anything about slavery. If you can see a place where I did, please point it out to me. It seems to me more that posters are making assumptions about me rather than anything that I actually say. That's why I try to ask more questions rather than assume someone else's position.

For the point going forward -- do you think that Wakanda's history with regards to slavery means that it is evil, as GeekyBugle holds?

Which was AFTER you switched from asserting that it WASN'T an Ethnostate to why do I find Wakanda morally evil.

Which you THEN switched to say that the UK ONLY abolished slavery because it wanted to hurt it's former colonies.

You were proven wrong but didn't concede the point.

But do you want MORE reasons why Wakanda (if it was real) would be the most EVIL country ever to exist? Supertech, super-science that they REFUSE to share with the rest of the world, one would imagine this is due to their ethno-supremacist stances.

BTW, you were also proven wrong about Israel being an Ethnostate, and you didn't concede the point either.

So, let's drag the conversation back to before it was derailed:

Wakanda IS an Ethnostate by all definitions.

Israel ISN'T an Ethnostate even if you stretch the definition.

Those points have been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, will you concede the points?
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 01, 2023, 02:38:20 PM
In YOUR ideology the past sins must ALWAYS be kept to the forefront and no amount of good deeds can ever erase them. A funny thing for someone who calls himself Christian.

GeekyBugle, you are the one claiming that you judge a modern country by its history of slavery. You're the one who brought up the topic in order to say that Wakanda is evil, citing the history of slavery. Likewise, you recently posted a video where people similarly claimed modern Korea was evil based on its history of slavery.

I haven't said anything about judging modern countries at all by their history of slavery - and certainly not calling them evil. History is important to understand the present, but the important thing is to change the future.

But if you're going to judge the country for their sins you need to do so for the ones they haven't washed away. For instance the "war on terror", destabilizing countries for profit, etc. While keeping in mind that (like during slavery) there's people in those countries speaking against those evil deeds even if they haven't been allowed to do anything because they are just a bunch of istaphobes.

I'd love more voices speaking against the "war on terror" and destabilizing countries for profit. We need to convince more people on both sides that its wrong, since it is a program that is thoroughly supported by the uniparty.

Nope, but IF Wakanda was real it would still be evil on the face of their present actions. As I have argued in my prior post.

Agreed, I would also love to hear voices on the left arguing their traditional anti-immigration stances, since they always called it a Koch Brothers scheme (and they weren't wrong), and more leftist voices arguing AGAINST the Islamization of the west, but they don't because it's a "brown" religion and Christianity is a "white" one, so they hate the later and love the former.
Title: Re: Towards a more inclusive Sword & Sorcery
Post by: jhkim on May 01, 2023, 06:13:39 PM
BTW, you were also proven wrong about Israel being an Ethnostate, and you didn't concede the point either.

So, let's drag the conversation back to before it was derailed:

Wakanda IS an Ethnostate by all definitions.

Israel ISN'T an Ethnostate even if you stretch the definition.

Those points have been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, will you concede the points?

I never claimed a definition of the term "ethnostate", nor have I said that any country is or is not an ethnostate. What I said about Israel was to verbatim quote its own law regarding the definition of the country, and to truthfully describe its immigration policy. You have done nothing to disprove what I said -- you just claim that doesn't make Israel an "ethnostate". I will quote SHARK here:

Why the fuck do people care that Japan is a fucking "ETHNOSTATE?" Good for them. Japan does not need to let hordes of fucking foreign immigrants pour into their country. NO COUNTRY NEEDS TO DO THAT.

I agree with SHARK on this point. Wakanda has a no-immigration policy. You imply that by itself makes it an ethnostate. Fine, if that's how you want to define it. Why the fuck should we care?

You yourself said (in reply #106) that you have no problem with country X deciding they do not want immigration, and (in reply #102) that immigration alone isn't inherently a moral good or moral bad.

-------------

But do you want MORE reasons why Wakanda (if it was real) would be the most EVIL country ever to exist? Supertech, super-science that they REFUSE to share with the rest of the world, one would imagine this is due to their ethno-supremacist stances.

Like immigration, technology itself is neither good nor evil -- and thus sharing technology isn't inherently good or evil. If Wakanda were to be like the US and sell and/or supply powerful arms to half the world, I don't think that would make it better.

I would criticize Wakanda for its isolation at times, which is also what the MCU movies do. T'Challa decides to establish Wakandan outreach centers precisely because he criticizes the absolute isolationism of the past. Wakanda also cooperates with the Avengers in order to save the world.

I think Iron Man is a good parallel. Tony Stark keeps most of his advanced technology a secret from everyone, rather than freely sharing it. I don't think that makes him evil, but I do think that it is often a flaw rather than a heroic trait. His impulsive choices in using his technology lead to many of the MCU's problems -- like the harm caused by Ultron and EDITH.

On the other hand, I think both Stark and Wakanda have good reason to think that freely sharing their technology could lead to problems.