Quote from: RPGPundit on November 21, 2023, 07:15:22 PM
nor do they need to make videos because small-time OSR youtubers (mostly would-be "influencer" types that don't actually design games)

Are these people actually influencers though?  That is, do they actually have any significant influence?  How many people in the hobby even know who they are?  I am a bit disconnected but I had never even heard of the BroSR before hearing you mention it on your Youtube channel?  How much influence do they actually have in OSR circles? 

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 21, 2023, 11:55:59 AM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 21, 2023, 02:45:33 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 20, 2023, 11:39:14 PM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 20, 2023, 08:51:46 PM
I think something Pundit has missed is that the number of right identitarians and actual Yahtzees are very different. You can be one without being the other. Most men in the West 100 years ago would be in this category by default.

If someone is denying the holocausts on twitter, or talking about how Jews secretly control the gay pride movement and the BLM movement to attack white men, you may not have a literal membership card, but you're basically a real Nazi.

Fair enough. I suppose you can assign that type of standard if you want to. But I would submit that just as Libertarianism or Stalinism are political philosophies, so too is Identitarianism. A Libertarian could accept a market failure in some particular situation as being the cause of an economic downturn, but still advocate  government non-intervention in the economy on moral grounds. Someone could accept that the Holodomor occurred and still be a Stalinist.

All three of those examples you gave are independent of Identitarianism as a political philosophy. Like all other political philosophies, it also holds to certain priori commitments, independent of claims about historical events, or hypothetical involvement of people in political movements.

Also, that's a lovely garden you have, Pundit. 

I'm not sure what you could define as "identitarianism" in this context. Do you mean someone who thinks that race is the single most important feature of an individual and of a social order?

Well for "Identitarian," Collins Dictionary has, "concerned with promoting the interests of one's own cultural group"

But generally, if you're going to argue against a what someone believes, it might be a good idea to actually find out from the person what they believe. So in this case, John Morgan posted on Counter Currents the following definition, "Identitarianism is essentially the belief that the various elements which go to make up one's ethnicity – the language, culture, traditions, religions, and so on – are unique, valuable, and worth preserving. Biological factors are important as well, but identitarianism goes beyond race alone."

Once again, with this as an operating definition of identitarianism, most men in the West 100 years ago would have been identitarians. It's fine if you disagree with that definition, but then we're playing a word game. It's the actual semantic content of a proposition that matters. Given all of that, someone could easily affirm this proposition, and not be a Yahtzee, a KKK member, a Holocaust-denier, or have any other unusual political affiliations or historical claims.

I would go further and suggest that Morgan's basic concept of identitarianism is historically typical, with any form of negation of the basic principle being highly unusual.

Quote from: yosemitemike on November 22, 2023, 02:02:00 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 21, 2023, 07:15:22 PM
nor do they need to make videos because small-time OSR youtubers (mostly would-be "influencer" types that don't actually design games)

Are these people actually influencers though?  That is, do they actually have any significant influence?  How many people in the hobby even know who they are?  I am a bit disconnected but I had never even heard of the BroSR before hearing you mention it on your Youtube channel?  How much influence do they actually have in OSR circles?

Well, in the OSR not as much as the designers, thank Christ. That's an unusual characteristic of the OSR, compared to 5e for example, where youtube influencers are vastly more influential than any of the writers/designers.

There never used to really be any significant OSR youtubers that weren't already designers (Grimjim, me and Venger were the main ones for a while); the closest maybe was Tenkar.  But then gradually the influencer culture started to filter in, with dudes like Aaron the Pedantic. And this past year or so we got a whole bunch of them. And while many of their channels are very interesting and produce good content, it does seem like they are changing the nature of the OSR as a movement.

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 22, 2023, 03:14:48 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 21, 2023, 11:55:59 AM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 21, 2023, 02:45:33 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 20, 2023, 11:39:14 PM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 20, 2023, 08:51:46 PM
I think something Pundit has missed is that the number of right identitarians and actual Yahtzees are very different. You can be one without being the other. Most men in the West 100 years ago would be in this category by default.

If someone is denying the holocausts on twitter, or talking about how Jews secretly control the gay pride movement and the BLM movement to attack white men, you may not have a literal membership card, but you're basically a real Nazi.

Fair enough. I suppose you can assign that type of standard if you want to. But I would submit that just as Libertarianism or Stalinism are political philosophies, so too is Identitarianism. A Libertarian could accept a market failure in some particular situation as being the cause of an economic downturn, but still advocate  government non-intervention in the economy on moral grounds. Someone could accept that the Holodomor occurred and still be a Stalinist.

All three of those examples you gave are independent of Identitarianism as a political philosophy. Like all other political philosophies, it also holds to certain priori commitments, independent of claims about historical events, or hypothetical involvement of people in political movements.

Also, that's a lovely garden you have, Pundit. 

I'm not sure what you could define as "identitarianism" in this context. Do you mean someone who thinks that race is the single most important feature of an individual and of a social order?

Well for "Identitarian," Collins Dictionary has, "concerned with promoting the interests of one's own cultural group"

But generally, if you're going to argue against a what someone believes, it might be a good idea to actually find out from the person what they believe. So in this case, John Morgan posted on Counter Currents the following definition, "Identitarianism is essentially the belief that the various elements which go to make up one's ethnicity – the language, culture, traditions, religions, and so on – are unique, valuable, and worth preserving. Biological factors are important as well, but identitarianism goes beyond race alone."

Once again, with this as an operating definition of identitarianism, most men in the West 100 years ago would have been identitarians. It's fine if you disagree with that definition, but then we're playing a word game. It's the actual semantic content of a proposition that matters. Given all of that, someone could easily affirm this proposition, and not be a Yahtzee, a KKK member, a Holocaust-denier, or have any other unusual political affiliations or historical claims.

I would go further and suggest that Morgan's basic concept of identitarianism is historically typical, with any form of negation of the basic principle being highly unusual.

As a rule, in practical common language, "Identitarian" means someone (typically self-identifying as conservative) who places RACE above all other factors. In contrast for example to a civic nationalist, who places national identity over everything else but does not see 'nationality' as being limited to race.
Could you have Identitarians that aren't racist? I suppose in theory. But in practice the racial obsession is something that marks them as separate from regular nationalists.

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 22, 2023, 03:48:27 AM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 22, 2023, 03:14:48 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 21, 2023, 11:55:59 AM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 21, 2023, 02:45:33 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 20, 2023, 11:39:14 PM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 20, 2023, 08:51:46 PM
I think something Pundit has missed is that the number of right identitarians and actual Yahtzees are very different. You can be one without being the other. Most men in the West 100 years ago would be in this category by default.

If someone is denying the holocausts on twitter, or talking about how Jews secretly control the gay pride movement and the BLM movement to attack white men, you may not have a literal membership card, but you're basically a real Nazi.

Fair enough. I suppose you can assign that type of standard if you want to. But I would submit that just as Libertarianism or Stalinism are political philosophies, so too is Identitarianism. A Libertarian could accept a market failure in some particular situation as being the cause of an economic downturn, but still advocate  government non-intervention in the economy on moral grounds. Someone could accept that the Holodomor occurred and still be a Stalinist.

All three of those examples you gave are independent of Identitarianism as a political philosophy. Like all other political philosophies, it also holds to certain priori commitments, independent of claims about historical events, or hypothetical involvement of people in political movements.

Also, that's a lovely garden you have, Pundit. 

I'm not sure what you could define as "identitarianism" in this context. Do you mean someone who thinks that race is the single most important feature of an individual and of a social order?

Well for "Identitarian," Collins Dictionary has, "concerned with promoting the interests of one's own cultural group"

But generally, if you're going to argue against a what someone believes, it might be a good idea to actually find out from the person what they believe. So in this case, John Morgan posted on Counter Currents the following definition, "Identitarianism is essentially the belief that the various elements which go to make up one's ethnicity – the language, culture, traditions, religions, and so on – are unique, valuable, and worth preserving. Biological factors are important as well, but identitarianism goes beyond race alone."

Once again, with this as an operating definition of identitarianism, most men in the West 100 years ago would have been identitarians. It's fine if you disagree with that definition, but then we're playing a word game. It's the actual semantic content of a proposition that matters. Given all of that, someone could easily affirm this proposition, and not be a Yahtzee, a KKK member, a Holocaust-denier, or have any other unusual political affiliations or historical claims.

I would go further and suggest that Morgan's basic concept of identitarianism is historically typical, with any form of negation of the basic principle being highly unusual.

As a rule, in practical common language, "Identitarian" means someone (typically self-identifying as conservative) who places RACE above all other factors. In contrast for example to a civic nationalist, who places national identity over everything else but does not see 'nationality' as being limited to race.
Could you have Identitarians that aren't racist? I suppose in theory. But in practice the racial obsession is something that marks them as separate from regular nationalists.

That's interesting. I am not finding any sources that corroborate that definition. Since I provided two, would you mind linking at least one?

You know, it's kind of odd. Typically when you have a term that people ever self-identify with, you can typically see come common ground in how the term is used. For example, I am not a Christian. So, if I were to look for a definition of it, Merriam-Webster seems as good as any to me, "one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ." But, if instead I go look for one from someone who professes faith in Christianity, say https://www.christianity.com/wiki/christian-terms/what-is-a-christian-11541516.html, the author actually says of an almost identical definition, "That's actually quite helpful..."

Here's another example. You seem to be of a political persuasion that's relatively similar to Enlightenment-era style Classical Liberalism. I apologize if I have misunderstood your position, but grant the example for a moment. Let's say that I disagree with you. I could say all kinds of nasty things like, Classical Liberalism means believing that it's okay to destroy the planet to make the economy grow. Or that Classical Liberals believe private people should be able to own nuclear weapons. Or Classical Liberals believe it is fine to shoot someone if they sneeze while on the Liberal's property. But if, instead, I provided a working definition, and then consulted someone who is a Classical Liberal, perhaps you, perhaps Ron Paul, we can then begin to have productive dialogue from that point forward.

You see what's happening here? We're establishing a baseline definition for a term based on common agreement from people who do and do not hold a given position. If people can do that, it allows them to be objective, and then to proceed with honest discussion about a topic, even among ideological opponents. To refuse to do that is merely to engage in character assassination and emotional attacks.

Pundit is falling into the same pitfall of thinking the BroSR and Woke are opposing forces instead of the same thing wearing different colored uniforms.

The Nazis have always been socialists (its literally in the name) and the socialists/communists have always been laser focused on identity as a tool of division to tear apart and conquer society. Left/Right, Blue/Red, Black/White; they're all just rhetorical tools to keep people too divided to deal with the real divide of authoritarians vs. the people they want to control.

The BroSR is just the same authoritarianism as the Woke. It even divides them into the same camps, it just seeks its authority in the opposite artificial divide.

The solution is a different type of identarian that is desperately needed in RPGs (and entertainment in general); we need Pro-Western Civilization identarians by the truckload putting out media that supports the traditional values of Western Civilization that the authoritarians seek to destroy.

QuoteIf someone is denying the holocausts on twitter, or talking about how Jews secretly control the gay pride movement and the BLM movement to attack white men, you may not have a literal membership card, but you're basically a real Nazi.

Only... not?
Nazism is quite specific political ideology that does not equal prejudice against Jews. And of course you can be prejudiced againt Jews, and plenty other people, while holding very very un-Nazi political ideologies. After spending few decades in various political discussions I think various prejudices against various groups are rampant everything. And yes also among libertarians and aligned liberal conservatists. That of course because a) as I said you need another trappings of ideology: rampant militarism, blood-and-soil attitude towards nationality, imperialism to spread ethnic presence of own people, corporatism blocking class warfare, social darwinism both in external politics (see imperialism) and internal - like eugenics, one party totalism, duce like leadership, that's keeping aspects that could be interpreted more as specific German culture trappings.

Most of people bearing antisemitic sentiments in modern USA does not fit under that moniker. Mostly they are someone, and from my contact I had with broOSR I think they generally fit in this category - anti-globalists, close to paleolibertarianism, and as usually with anti-globalists full of conspiratory thinking. Where disdain for Jews came from seeing them precisely as part of collectivist, globalist estabilishment. Of course it's a risky way - and those people commonly fall into - all official history was globalist Jewish-masonic-jesuitic-babylonian false flag, or other bullshit, based only on their strong irrational desire to consider everything official to always be a lie.

And one can condemn it without falling into "everyone I hate is a nazi" meme. Especially since most of broOSR are generally obnoxious assholes on all fields. Honestly reducing all type of ethnic prejudice into literally Waffen-SS is indeed very woke thing to do. Someone so proud from his medieval authentic works should know it, because medieval period was ripe with prejudice. And yet distinctly not-Nazi.

QuoteBut you don't need millions of Soros bucks to take over smaller cultural spaces that are already by their nature counter-cultural. And the OSR is certainly a small enough cultural space that an organized entryist incursion by Identitarians of either stripe is a threat.

And yet only entrance of broOSR of any significance was small tour of Jeffro about 1:1 time, and that's it. I get you are angry for whole Twitter thing, but let's be real, you are like medium fish in OSR pond. BroOSR are plankton. And they do not seem to get really better. By far there is much more wokesters in OSR, than bros, and that's among serious players.

QuoteKeep in mind that some of these so-called BrOSR and extreme right types are very likely Leftists pulling a false flag maneuver. We have been seeing it with other hate groups. And it is very a tactic of the woke.

This is ironically simmilar to mentality I pointed out up in this post, for anti-globalist conspiratists.
Everything that does not fit your manichean division is false-flag by our enemies.

Now sure like we know such thing happens - we know for instance well that nationalist parties in Germany were highly infiltrated to the point when many had probably more agents than actual neo-nazis. However well that still need evidence, and I spent enough time discussion weirdos from left and right and libertarian and authoritarian side over internets to know that basically every possible ideological combination will found it followers sooner or later.

QuoteNo, wrong. We're seeing a perfect example of what's happening with the BroSR. Antisemitic identitarians who have created a facade of being "OSR lifters" but are actully ANTI-OSR, and want to essentially undo the entire movement and replace it into a "Only play AD&D1e"

TBH why I was delving into OSR Discords and what not, I noticed that it's common among AD&D players to feel disdain towards BX and it's derivatives. Plenty of calling them "no-games". Aaron the Pedantic Discord shifted quite strongly this way.
Now I understand from publisher perspective people who want to play OS- and not new things based on it - are dangerous for business, but in terms of some social dynamics it's quite clear all proponents of old D&D variants and their derivatives are in one bucket, and esoteric distinctions between fractions are irrelevant for any outsider.

But honestly it's quite normal when there is competition in entertainment especially comunal one - like various games - RPG, card, video and so on - any multiplayer that people gonna peddle superiority of their own favourite subset - especially against those subsets that are relatively close. That's why edition wars are often heated compared to more general discussion.

But still broOSR did basically jackshit to dismantle OSR movement, other that tweeting "Gygax King, BECMI sucks". If that's this big dismantling movement then..

Quotenor do they need to make videos because small-time OSR youtubers (mostly would-be "influencer" types that don't actually design games) will give their cult leaders a platform in exchange for the promise of getting the members of the BroSR to subscribe to their channel, and after that they're trapped of their own volition; they will stand with everything and anything the BroSR does or says, because otherwise they might lose followers; and likewise, the influencers now won't themselves say or do anything on their channels and social media that would risk upsetting their BroSR masters.

QuoteSo without producing ANYTHING, the BroSR has been able to destablize the OSR in a major way, while their membership is composed ENTIRELY of people who hate and do not play OSR games, and many people who don't care about ANY games, they're just along for the exciting opportunity to hate Jews in public.

Ok and what previously non-bro channels bend this way? Because from what I've seen whole bro community seems to be circlejerk of few dozens men. That's not a lot even for small youtubers.
Where is this MAJOR destabilisation?

QuoteThe solution is a different type of identarian that is desperately needed in RPGs (and entertainment in general); we need Pro-Western Civilization identarians by the truckload putting out media that supports the traditional values of Western Civilization that the authoritarians seek to destroy.

Considering Western Civilisation was build on various authoritarian regimes and basically most of modern ideologies seems rooted in movements centred to destroy authorities of old in name of muh freedom, I kinda feel doubt about branding enemies of Western Civilisation under wide moniker of authoritarians.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked on November 19, 2023, 11:59:54 AM

Quote from: VengerSatanis on November 19, 2023, 10:14:02 AM
Far-right extremism isn't necessarily something to shy away from.

The word 'extremism' is understood as negative by the majority of people, left or right. Don't use it to describe things you believe are reasonable, pick or create another term.

And yes, I agree we don't need tribalism of any political leaning drowning out the hobby. Sadly, many humans need a crusade to feel better about themselves.

Good point.  I was using "extremism" from their point of view.  They'll use "right-wing extremist" to describe Mitt Romney supporters if he decides to run again.  So, we can use other terms, accept whatever dumbass words they decide to use - embracing them and making them work for us, or both (variety of tactics).

Quote from: Chris24601 on November 22, 2023, 09:20:24 AM

Pundit is falling into the same pitfall of thinking the BroSR and Woke are opposing forces instead of the same thing wearing different colored uniforms.

The Nazis have always been socialists (its literally in the name) and the socialists/communists have always been laser focused on identity as a tool of division to tear apart and conquer society. Left/Right, Blue/Red, Black/White; they're all just rhetorical tools to keep people too divided to deal with the real divide of authoritarians vs. the people they want to control.

The BroSR is just the same authoritarianism as the Woke. It even divides them into the same camps, it just seeks its authority in the opposite artificial divide.

The solution is a different type of identarian that is desperately needed in RPGs (and entertainment in general); we need Pro-Western Civilization identarians by the truckload putting out media that supports the traditional values of Western Civilization that the authoritarians seek to destroy.

No, I pretty much totally agree with your definition; most accurately, the Woke and the BroSR are both collectivists (as are both Nazis and Communists). The nature of Western Civilization is such that the traditional values of civilization do not depend on race or ethnicity as such, but on a set of ideals that people either embrace or reject.

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 24, 2023, 03:18:57 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on November 22, 2023, 09:20:24 AM

Pundit is falling into the same pitfall of thinking the BroSR and Woke are opposing forces instead of the same thing wearing different colored uniforms.

The Nazis have always been socialists (its literally in the name) and the socialists/communists have always been laser focused on identity as a tool of division to tear apart and conquer society. Left/Right, Blue/Red, Black/White; they're all just rhetorical tools to keep people too divided to deal with the real divide of authoritarians vs. the people they want to control.

The BroSR is just the same authoritarianism as the Woke. It even divides them into the same camps, it just seeks its authority in the opposite artificial divide.

The solution is a different type of identarian that is desperately needed in RPGs (and entertainment in general); we need Pro-Western Civilization identarians by the truckload putting out media that supports the traditional values of Western Civilization that the authoritarians seek to destroy.

No, I pretty much totally agree with your definition; most accurately, the Woke and the BroSR are both collectivists (as are both Nazis and Communists). The nature of Western Civilization is such that the traditional values of civilization do not depend on race or ethnicity as such, but on a set of ideals that people either embrace or reject.

Presumably then, men such as Aristotle and other Greek speakers who used the word "barbarian" as they meant the word would not qualify as Western? I would assume this would apply equally to the United States' founding generation as well. It would seem that Western Civilization itself under this proposition nation concept is rather young, dating to perhaps the early 20th century at earliest, preceded by earlier alien civilizations. Or do I have your meaning wrong? 

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 18, 2023, 08:53:45 AM
We need to treat the Antisemites and white-favoring race-collectivists the same way we treat entryists to the hobby who are pro-Antifa, pro-BLM or pro-"MAP"; with extreme prejudice.

Fucking Whitey better never imagine he can act in the EXACT SAME ethnic self-interest that EVERY other ethnic group on Earth can do!!!

LOL.

Sounds like those BROsr kids are having fun getting you riled up and in doing so, you're only generating attention for them. I've never heard of them outside your posts. A few more tirades and I'm gonna have to check them out

As for the collectivists in the hobby, it's just a reflection of our shattered Western society. That's not going away, instead it's going to get worse. There will never be some kumbaya coming together because ALL the social and economic incentives point toward greater tribalism.

The RPG community is fracturing the same way.

And no surprise. RPGs are a social hobby and humans will gather with those who they feel belong in their circle and thus, form circles of like-minded people.

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 26, 2023, 03:39:18 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 24, 2023, 03:18:57 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on November 22, 2023, 09:20:24 AM

Pundit is falling into the same pitfall of thinking the BroSR and Woke are opposing forces instead of the same thing wearing different colored uniforms.

The Nazis have always been socialists (its literally in the name) and the socialists/communists have always been laser focused on identity as a tool of division to tear apart and conquer society. Left/Right, Blue/Red, Black/White; they're all just rhetorical tools to keep people too divided to deal with the real divide of authoritarians vs. the people they want to control.

The BroSR is just the same authoritarianism as the Woke. It even divides them into the same camps, it just seeks its authority in the opposite artificial divide.

The solution is a different type of identarian that is desperately needed in RPGs (and entertainment in general); we need Pro-Western Civilization identarians by the truckload putting out media that supports the traditional values of Western Civilization that the authoritarians seek to destroy.

No, I pretty much totally agree with your definition; most accurately, the Woke and the BroSR are both collectivists (as are both Nazis and Communists). The nature of Western Civilization is such that the traditional values of civilization do not depend on race or ethnicity as such, but on a set of ideals that people either embrace or reject.

Presumably then, men such as Aristotle and other Greek speakers who used the word "barbarian" as they meant the word would not qualify as Western? I would assume this would apply equally to the United States' founding generation as well. It would seem that Western Civilization itself under this proposition nation concept is rather young, dating to perhaps the early 20th century at earliest, preceded by earlier alien civilizations. Or do I have your meaning wrong?

You have the meaning wrong.

Western Civilization traces its roots to Christendom (which became Roman and had synthesized Greek philosophy into it as it expanded) and to the Germanic cultures that converted in the centuries after.

It is essentially a gestalt of the Christian, Roman, Greek and Germanic cultures that came to exist in Western Europe and eventually spread across the globe via colonization during and following the Renaissance. It is by definition multi-ethnic just as Rome and Christianity were multi-ethnic.

The Collectivists are fundamentally and pridefully elitist (they are the enlightened ones... "we are the ones we've been waiting for") and racist (all those people not like us need special privileges just to get by) based on the fallacy that mankind can be "perfected" (and they, of course, are already more perfect and failing to recognize that makes you fallen and imperfect.

Western civilization broadly rejects their "divine right of kings" claims and so it must be torn down by dividing people against each other and replaced with a system that acknowledges their elite status.

That's why to them Orcs must represent black people (because the traditional depiction of orcs is how THEY see black people) and all their other stupid identitarian garbage shows up in their RPGs. They need everyone divided so they can conquer.

Quote from: Chris24601 on November 26, 2023, 11:14:25 AM

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 26, 2023, 03:39:18 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 24, 2023, 03:18:57 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on November 22, 2023, 09:20:24 AM

Pundit is falling into the same pitfall of thinking the BroSR and Woke are opposing forces instead of the same thing wearing different colored uniforms.

The Nazis have always been socialists (its literally in the name) and the socialists/communists have always been laser focused on identity as a tool of division to tear apart and conquer society. Left/Right, Blue/Red, Black/White; they're all just rhetorical tools to keep people too divided to deal with the real divide of authoritarians vs. the people they want to control.

The BroSR is just the same authoritarianism as the Woke. It even divides them into the same camps, it just seeks its authority in the opposite artificial divide.

The solution is a different type of identarian that is desperately needed in RPGs (and entertainment in general); we need Pro-Western Civilization identarians by the truckload putting out media that supports the traditional values of Western Civilization that the authoritarians seek to destroy.

No, I pretty much totally agree with your definition; most accurately, the Woke and the BroSR are both collectivists (as are both Nazis and Communists). The nature of Western Civilization is such that the traditional values of civilization do not depend on race or ethnicity as such, but on a set of ideals that people either embrace or reject.

Presumably then, men such as Aristotle and other Greek speakers who used the word "barbarian" as they meant the word would not qualify as Western? I would assume this would apply equally to the United States' founding generation as well. It would seem that Western Civilization itself under this proposition nation concept is rather young, dating to perhaps the early 20th century at earliest, preceded by earlier alien civilizations. Or do I have your meaning wrong?

You have the meaning wrong.

Western Civilization traces its roots to Christendom (which became Roman and had synthesized Greek philosophy into it as it expanded) and to the Germanic cultures that converted in the centuries after.

It is essentially a gestalt of the Christian, Roman, Greek and Germanic cultures that came to exist in Western Europe and eventually spread across the globe via colonization during and following the Renaissance. It is by definition multi-ethnic just as Rome and Christianity were multi-ethnic.

The Collectivists are fundamentally and pridefully elitist (they are the enlightened ones... "we are the ones we've been waiting for") and racist (all those people not like us need special privileges just to get by) based on the fallacy that mankind can be "perfected" (and they, of course, are already more perfect and failing to recognize that makes you fallen and imperfect.

Western civilization broadly rejects their "divine right of kings" claims and so it must be torn down by dividing people against each other and replaced with a system that acknowledges their elite status.

That's why to them Orcs must represent black people (because the traditional depiction of orcs is how THEY see black people) and all their other stupid identitarian garbage shows up in their RPGs. They need everyone divided so they can conquer.

I appreciate your input. That is the typical formula for Western civilization I have seen, if a bit surface level in the case of the core of Western civilization, and perhaps debatably too specific for its peripheries. Still, it seems a good starting place.

That said, is your inclination to view these issues as related to their preference by Western civilization at present in prescriptive or merely descriptives terms? In the latter case, things like collectivism, elitism, and racism would need their own separate refutations, of course. If the former, it would be interesting to see why adhering to a civilization's typical standards of ideology is preferable, without direct reference to their justice or factuality. Of course that view itself could take multiple forms, manifesting in one way in a kind if normative cultural relativism or perhaps Western chauvinism, possibly among other options I am not thinking of.

Quote from: RulesLiteOSRpls on November 26, 2023, 03:39:18 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on November 24, 2023, 03:18:57 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on November 22, 2023, 09:20:24 AM

Pundit is falling into the same pitfall of thinking the BroSR and Woke are opposing forces instead of the same thing wearing different colored uniforms.

The Nazis have always been socialists (its literally in the name) and the socialists/communists have always been laser focused on identity as a tool of division to tear apart and conquer society. Left/Right, Blue/Red, Black/White; they're all just rhetorical tools to keep people too divided to deal with the real divide of authoritarians vs. the people they want to control.

The BroSR is just the same authoritarianism as the Woke. It even divides them into the same camps, it just seeks its authority in the opposite artificial divide.

The solution is a different type of identarian that is desperately needed in RPGs (and entertainment in general); we need Pro-Western Civilization identarians by the truckload putting out media that supports the traditional values of Western Civilization that the authoritarians seek to destroy.

No, I pretty much totally agree with your definition; most accurately, the Woke and the BroSR are both collectivists (as are both Nazis and Communists). The nature of Western Civilization is such that the traditional values of civilization do not depend on race or ethnicity as such, but on a set of ideals that people either embrace or reject.

Presumably then, men such as Aristotle and other Greek speakers who used the word "barbarian" as they meant the word would not qualify as Western? I would assume this would apply equally to the United States' founding generation as well. It would seem that Western Civilization itself under this proposition nation concept is rather young, dating to perhaps the early 20th century at earliest, preceded by earlier alien civilizations. Or do I have your meaning wrong?

Of course they did. The concept of "barbarian" was not on account of "they have a different skin color from us", it was because they did not have the education, the civilizational ideals that the Greeks had. That's what a barbarian is, someone who does not have the culture of civilization.  We have a huge number of barbarians now, as the ruling classes have gone out of their way to try to import them and to create them at home by dismantling the methods by which we educate people in our civilizational values.