site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6mo ago (text post)   25602 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 20, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Man, the Assassin's Creed series. My take can be succinctly summarized. Disclaimer, I haven't played any in the series since Black Flag, which to my mind is as damn near perfect as a game can get.

  1. The series has prided itself on broad historical accuracy. The events it depicts as historical actually happened, the historical figures actually existed and are mostly true to their recorded personas.

  2. Even so, the whole premise is that a secret order of Illuminati-like villains has been both guiding history AND rewriting the historical record as part of a propaganda war.

  3. Even even so, the magical technology that enables the plot to happen is 'genetic memory' or whatever, which holds that the historical periods being experienced by the players actually happened and thus are telling a 'true story.'

  4. So they can just say that Yasuke's history was rewritten by the Villains to downplay his role, and the story in the game is the accurate retelling in the game universe even if 'real world' events are different.

  5. YET, this starts to undermine the general premise that you're a stealthy assassin who kills, then blends in with the crowd. The ONE black dude in Japan is not going to be able to just break line of sight and evade detection by pulling on a mask and sitting on a bench.

  6. But who cares, the gameplay is optimized for fun, not realism.

  7. But but... one point someone made is that the playable protagonist of EVERY game before this has been a fictional character made up specifically for the series, with no historical parallel, which is perhaps in order to give the player the 'blank slate' avatar and avoid any major historical inaccuracies by having some well-known historical figure being an extremely dangerous assassin in their spare time.

So, to the extent Ubisoft has broken a longstanding convention in the series in order to create a playable black character in Japan of all places it bodes ill because it is clear evidence of a point I've made before: If they are specifically advertising their game on grounds of how diverse it is, and they're taking pains to enforce that diversity, it betrays that their priority is not on quality of writing or game design, they're counting on something else to sell the product or, at least, to mask criticism.

But then again, Ubi's whole model is to spit out iterations of a specific formula with small innovations on a regular schedule. Hence there's a new Ghost Recon game, Far Cry, or AC game on the schedule for release just about every year. And while admittedly the AC games tend to be a cut above in terms of average quality, one can understand that Ubisoft isn't in it for the art, it is just another franchise they can milk indefinitely, as long as they don't alienate the fanbase too much with any one entry.

I'd argue Yasuke is very close to being a fictional character that whoever's writing whatever media can project their own 'ooh there's a black guy in Japan' views upon. His historical context is like 2 lines of 'woah there's a black guy in Japan'.

But but... one point someone made is that the playable protagonist of EVERY game before this has been a fictional character made up specifically for the series, with no historical parallel, which is perhaps in order to give the player the 'blank slate' avatar and avoid any major historical inaccuracies by having some well-known historical figure being an extremely dangerous assassin in their spare time.

I think you're right that they obviously want to make this all about Yasuke, and that wouldn't work unless he's the main character because you could always just ignore him otherwise. I also think part of it why previous historical figures weren't playable characters is that it's often more inspiring to imagine hanging out with and earning the respect of your heroes rather than literally being them. Taking the example of AC2, it was quite cool for a lot of people to have their character become friends with Leonardo Da Vinci, but I don't think a game where you play as Da Vinci would have generated quite as much excitement.

I don't think a game where you play as Da Vinci would have generated quite as much excitement.

I mean, a game where you play as mad scientist Leonardo would, in fact, be pretty awesome.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats