B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

[Dinh AaronMk]

<Snipped quote by Dinh AaronMk>

I knew all that. That's why I was a bit thrown off by the idea that it created libertarians.

@Vilageidiotx

Yea, the material doesn't support that notion.

It's like saying the Communist Manifesto or Mao's Little Red Book only empowered people to become Fascist, or the reverse with Mein Kampf.

If that's the case, then I wonder what reading Wealth of Nations would make someone. What's the opposite of being industrious, but not lazy?

[Vilageidiotx]

What's the opposite of being industrious, but not lazy?

@Dinh AaronMk

A word for somebody who isn't lazy, but doesn't produce anything?

That's called management, brother.

[Pair of Hearts]

@Dinh AaronMk
Stagnant?

[ScreenAcne]

@Dinh AaronMk

The classware happened because two people came into play to destroy it. In this fake universe Rapture did create a utopia and there go proved itself to be the ultimate ideology. It was right, in this universe it succeeded in its mission. It beat everyone on wealth, living standards, technology and art in a ten year period. What killed Rapture was that it had one regulation. Nothing may come in from outside or go outside.If you end up in rapture you can't leave and you can't have things from the outside world. This is how fontane started the whole entire criminal coup, while also establishing himself as fontane. The guy who made plasmids and ignored it's genetically addictive state.

Fontane then basically gained control over most if not all the charity houses. In order to use them, which is how he got a lot of the poor addicted to plasmids and in his pocket as usurpers. Then Ryan basically has a break down and decides to turn the place into national state. Hence he nationalized places in service of rapture/ himself such as turning museums in order to promote his isolationist campaign- to scare kids of the surface- and then double down on the one rule that created all this mess.

he also took away people who spoke bad about rapture and commissioned songs like "Rise rapture rise"

In this story. A man led people into a pot, offering them freedom. Then he put the lid on (no outside work, items or people nor may you leave) and then turned on the stove as a way to "filter out" the none believers who might side with Atlas/fontane.

There are a lot of things wrong with this story:

Rapture had a minimalist state. Which meant it still had a government and they still had basic health and safety concerns. Why dosen't selling genetic material that makes you crazy and literally melt your flesh fall under this very basic, minimal regulation ideas. Who knows. Apparently free market= anarchy capitalism now.

2: How did ryan achieve all of this corruption. He lives in a place filled with guns and super humans, in a cramped conditions. And gave public talks. You're telling me one guy couldn't lift a revolver and shot him near point blank from a crowd while he was in the process of pissing off everyone to start a civil war.

The point is trying to make is.....it's a story. It dosen't matter if Bioshock portrayed anything positive or negative. If stories validated philosophies every religion in the world would of created utopia by now. It captures spirit and personality fine but I think if anyone takes these games as an anything else they're looking for "prove" for something that isn't there.


I'm nerding a bit vindictively here. RL pissing me off, specifically about philosophy so I might be over doing it. I'll stop here.

On on your actual point. Yeah. It did capture Ayn Rand...uhh...style. I think it's one of things where. People have certain moral concerns as a person and Ayn Rand or Bioshock would tap into it. These people were probably leaning to libertarians due to their personal concerns and values, it's just these things help articulate their worries and issues.

Everyone is something these days on the internet. Unless they actually take steps to practice it in real life I wouldn't take them seriously.

[Dolerman]

@Vilageidiotx@Dinh AaronMk it created libertarians BECAUSE of the attack on the ideology. They were united under fire. Sort of how you saw more psuedo intellectual creationists pop up after richard dawkins got popular.

[Weird Tales]

@Vilageidiotx I know, but I know my heritage and I find the blanket term of African American or black to be way too generalizing in my opinion. There are hundred of different ethnic groups in Africa so the term is pretty ridiculous when you think about it. Using the term black or white is pretty ridiculous as well since both races have countless ethnics and cultures that separate them. If you say an Irishman and a British man are just both white then there is a good chance you'll piss them off, Americans and a good amount of the world in my opinion are have very simplistic views on human identity.

I think humanity as a whole would be far better off if we stopped obsessing over collectivism and embraced more individualistic views when it came to identity and heritage. People should proud of who they are regardless of their identity, that's why I support all pride regardless of race, gender, sexuality and religion. I view society as having too many Identitarians and way too many people are wearing the ideological lens, which gives them a view of the world that they are wanting to see regardless of what it might really be.

[Weird Tales]

@Vilageidiotx@Dinh AaronMk it created libertarians BECAUSE of the attack on the ideology. They were united under fire. Sort of how you saw more psuedo intellectual creationists pop up after richard dawkins got popular.

@Dynamo Frokane

you hate Libertarians?

[SleepingSilence]

@Dynamo Frokane Not to get into the weeds but yeah...Bioshock infinite was liberal as shit. XD

[SleepingSilence]

Part 2: It also seems like such a broad bizarre generalization, it would be like saying Ferngully created Liberals or Call of Duty created right wingers. (Please don't make the argument for either or I'll get very sad.)

@Vilageidiotx
If you say an Irishman and a British man are just both white then there is a good chance you'll piss them off, Americans and a good amount of the world in my opinion are have very simplistic views on human identity.

I think humanity as a whole would be far better off if we stopped obsessing over collectivism and embraced more individualistic views when it came to identity and heritage. People should proud of who they are regardless of their identity, that's why I support all pride regardless of race, gender, sexuality and religion.

@Weird Tales

Also you brought up something interest I wanted to comment on. I'd like to agree with you that people should stop taking words so seriously. If they were called white they shouldn't get pissed they should feel apathetic at worst. Like I get people using words to hurt and verbal abuse is still a thing, but people take getting offensive to words a little too far...

I'd argue america is basically the only nation that over complicates race and gender and things that should be pretty fucking easy to figure out while at least I bet it started from here...Because of the very loud minority, though now the U.K has 71 genders apparently exist now and I honestly would be surprised if it only got more and more extreme in upcoming years, like people laugh at otherkin now but just wait humans will claim their different species, and it will be taken seriously...eventually it WILL happen.

I actually don't think you should be "PROUD" of something you have no control over, why should I be happy I'm white? I didn't achieve it. I just am. Race, Gender etc. It's not something you should ever feel ashamed for of course...but it also shouldn't really matter. Religion (or lack thereof) is a choice...so maybe you could feel some kind of achievement. Though that's debatable.

[Weird Tales]

Part 2: It also seems like such a broad bizarre generalization, it would be like saying Ferngully created Liberals or Call of Duty created right wingers. (Please don't make the argument for either or I'll get very sad.)

<Snipped quote by Weird Tales>

Also you brought up something interest I wanted to comment on. I'd like to agree with you that people should stop taking words so seriously. If they were called white they shouldn't get pissed they should feel apathetic at worst. Like I get people using words to hurt and verbal abuse is still a thing, but people take getting offensive to words a little too far...

I'd argue america is basically the only nation that over complicates race and gender and things that should be pretty fucking easy to figure out while at least I bet it started from here...Because of the very loud minority, though now the U.K has 71 genders apparently exist now and I honestly would be surprised if it only got more and more extreme in upcoming years, like people laugh at otherkin now but just wait humans will claim their different species, and it will be taken seriously...eventually it WILL happen.

I actually don't think you should be "PROUD" of something you have no control over, why should I be happy I'm white? I didn't achieve it. I just am. Race, Gender etc. It's not something you should ever feel ashamed for of course...but it also shouldn't really matter. Religion (or lack thereof) is a choice...so maybe you could feel some kind of achievement. Though that's debatable.

@SleepingSilence

Because pride helps with respecting oneself. I see way too many people who have destroyed themselves because they lack respect and pride in themselves.

In my opinion almost all of the worlds social problems stem from extreme collectivism

[ScreenAcne]

I hate when I rant about things I'm not actually angry about. Like Bioshock deeper meaning. A game I haven't played in 2 years and can barely remember because I have actual Real life issues like my possible future, my income and shelter all being on the table for the bartering of doing what I feel need to. Why the hell am I being obtuse on a public board.

@SleepingSilence

Good commentary. I think you got a point there. I think though that some pride in your geographic race- as in your area. Such as England- is healthy as a sign of the capacity of the culture to overcome adversity. While I have no strong support for collectivism, I do believe that individuals are touched by the culture they are in. More out of proximity than anything and psyche associations/ need for group validation.

Looking at your past not as a sign as an obligation to your home land nor genetic traits but as a sign that your home land is as strong as the individuals in it, and you are woven from the same hardy folk isn't bad. As long as it's a decoration to your self, rather than say put before it or considered key part of it.

[Vilageidiotx]

@Vilageidiotx I know, but I know my heritage and I find the blanket term of African American or black to be way too generalizing in my opinion. There are hundred of different ethnic groups in Africa so the term is pretty ridiculous when you think about it. Using the term black or white is pretty ridiculous as well since both races have countless ethnics and cultures that separate them. If you say an Irishman and a British man are just both white then there is a good chance you'll piss them off, Americans and a good amount of the world in my opinion are have very simplistic views on human identity.

I think humanity as a whole would be far better off if we stopped obsessing over collectivism and embraced more individualistic views when it came to identity and heritage. People should proud of who they are regardless of their identity, that's why I support all pride regardless of race, gender, sexuality and religion. I view society as having too many Identitarians and way too many people are wearing the ideological lens, which gives them a view of the world that they are wanting to see regardless of what it might really be.

@Weird Tales

This gets really complicated with blacks in America because the majority don't have a clear idea of where exactly it is the come from. Immigrants from Europe have an easier time trace because so many can trace their ancestry back through records and such until one finds exactly where they came from. But most blacks in America descend from slaves, and though most of those were taken from the west coast of Africa, the slave trade itself was a messy thing that permeated most of central and southern Africa as well so that slave forts on the Ivory Coast and the Congo coast acted on the continent as a straw sucking up captives from the rest of the continent. Those slaves mixed without their ancestries being recorded so that generic black identity is inevitable.

As for the individual thing, it sounds nice but it isn't going to happen. Humans aren't tigers, we are a tribal species. I guarantee you do it just as much as any the rest of us in this thread do, and your singular obsession with specific political movements would indicate that you've chosen your identity through groups possibly more strongly than anyone else here even if you are too proud to admit it. We define ourselves by group. It's a complicating factor but it's entirely human and we are as likely to shake it as we are to shake sexuality. I do say this as someone who more or less agrees with you on that point and honestly would prefer it if people stepped back and stopped beating their chest in the tribal battle-line to think about these things more thoroughly. But what are you going to do, people be people, and we aren't going to avoid that.

@Vilageidiotx@Dinh AaronMk it created libertarians BECAUSE of the attack on the ideology. They were united under fire. Sort of how you saw more pseudo intellectual creationists pop up after richard dawkins got popular.

@Dynamo Frokane

That wouldn't create Libertarians though, just sharpen the resolve of those who already exist.

[SleepingSilence]

@Vilageidiotx
Though the party system could be argued to literally be a cancer destroying politics. And labels aren't always going to mean all individuals under that banner are the same. But I don't think the opposite ever means that they know any more...usually it means they don't follow politics so they simply are ignorant to it's effects to the world and their every day life. Basically what I'm saying, call yourself a democrat or conservative. You at least know what you are in general. (though you could argue people DON'T even know that. And you'd be right.) But my main point is, being politically active and voting and being under a political label is still more legit than being proud of your eye color. Or you being 1/16 wiccan. When you likely know absolutely nothing of that culture or have ever been there or experience any of it. (I am sort of a hypocrite in that regard, as I say I'm Irish/Polish and never actually been there either.) But I say it non-seriously, some people take their culture they know very little of, a little too seriously. imo. :/

[Slypheed]

@Vilageidiotx
Though the party system could be argued to literally be a cancer destroying politics. And labels aren't always going to mean all individuals under that banner are the same. But I don't think the opposite ever means that they know any more...usually it means they don't follow politics so they simply are ignorant to it's effects to the world and their every day life. Basically what I'm saying, call yourself a democrat or conservative. You at least know what you are in general. (though you could argue people DON'T even know that. And you'd be right.) But my main point is, being politically active and voting and being under a political label is still more legit than being proud of your eye color. Or you being 1/16 wiccan. When you likely know absolutely nothing of that culture or have ever been there or experience any of it. (I am sort of a hypocrite in that regard, as I say I'm Irish/Polish and never actually been there either.) But I say it non-seriously, some people take their culture they know very little of, a little too seriously. imo. :/

@SleepingSilence

Are you stating that Independents are ignorant, stupid, and/or self-centered? That they have no interest in politics and only care for themselves?

[SleepingSilence]

@Slypheed Nope, because independent is a label for politics now isn't it? ;) Honestly independent, at least most that I'm aware of actually are a part of a political party but are so ashamed of the current two party system that they don't want the label and are unaware other ones exist (or fear using another label will paint them in a negative light.) But, that's just my experiance. My brothers says he's an independant and I can assure you there's something far more fitting for him. I honestly don't know where the self centered thing came from.

[Vilageidiotx]

@Vilageidiotx
Though the party system could be argued to literally be a cancer destroying politics. And labels aren't always going to mean all individuals under that banner are the same. But I don't think the opposite ever means that they know any more...usually it means they don't follow politics so they simply are ignorant to it's effects to the world and their every day life. Basically what I'm saying, call yourself a democrat or conservative. You at least know what you are in general. (though you could argue people DON'T even know that. And you'd be right.) But my main point is, being politically active and voting and being under a political label is still more legit than being proud of your eye color. Or you being 1/16 wiccan. When you likely know absolutely nothing of that culture or have ever been there or experience any of it. (I am sort of a hypocrite in that regard, as I say I'm Irish/Polish and never actually been there either.) But I say it non-seriously, some people take their culture they know very little of, a little too seriously. imo. :/

@SleepingSilence

I agree, I agree completely. But I don't think we can avoid it. There is a part of us that takes serious comfort from belonging to a group. Even those of us who don't like it are actively identifying with some group somewhere, even if we don't think about it like that. If it isn't politics or race, it'll be religion or career-type or economic class or social group or region or even just sports team. All of these things benefit nothing from a single person joining them, but despite their irrelevance any single person in the group will identify proudly with the accomplishments and history of the entirety. Perhaps when it comes down to it, most people aren't ever going to accomplish much more than maybe having a kid, or perhaps being able to say it was them that found the fried chicken place they and their friends all go to now. Our lives a unimpressive individually, but when added up to groups we get long lists of accomplishments. Vilageidiotx as an individual can proudly claim to have never shat his pants as an adult. Vilageidiotx as an American can claim an entire history starting up in 1776. The former might be my accomplishment, but the latter feels better to claim.

[Dolerman]

<Snipped quote by Weird Tales>

This gets really complicated with blacks in America because the majority don't have a clear idea of where exactly it is the come from. Immigrants from Europe have an easier time trace because so many can trace their ancestry back through records and such until one finds exactly where they came from. But most blacks in America descend from slaves, and though most of those were taken from the west coast of Africa, the slave trade itself was a messy thing that permeated most of central and southern Africa as well so that slave forts on the Ivory Coast and the Congo coast acted on the continent as a straw sucking up captives from the rest of the continent. Those slaves mixed without their ancestries being recorded so that generic black identity is inevitable.

As for the individual thing, it sounds nice but it isn't going to happen. Humans aren't tigers, we are a tribal species. I guarantee you do it just as much as any the rest of us in this thread do, and your singular obsession with specific political movements would indicate that you've chosen your identity through groups possibly more strongly than anyone else here even if you are too proud to admit it. We define ourselves by group. It's a complicating factor but it's entirely human and we are as likely to shake it as we are to shake sexuality. I do say this as someone who more or less agrees with you on that point and honestly would prefer it if people stepped back and stopped beating their chest in the tribal battle-line to think about these things more thoroughly. But what are you going to do, people be people, and we aren't going to avoid that.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

That wouldn't create Libertarians though, just sharpen the resolve of those who already exist.

@Vilageidiotx

it brought them out of the woodwork, just as bad really.

[Slypheed]

@SleepingSilence
Ok

And where the self-centered thing came from was I had gotten into a political argument with someone. And they had said something similar to what you had said. Though they were using it as an attack on the Independent party. So I wasn't sure if you were doing the same.

[Dinh AaronMk]

@Vilageidiotx@Dinh AaronMk it created libertarians BECAUSE of the attack on the ideology. They were united under fire. Sort of how you saw more psuedo intellectual creationists pop up after richard dawkins got popular.

@Dynamo Frokane

They weren't new, they were drawn out of the wood-work.

In much the same ways Memeard Dawkins drew out more creationist in his popularity in his powerful public stance against creationism.

[SleepingSilence]

@SleepingSilence
Ok

And where the self-centered thing came from was I had gotten into a political argument with someone. And they had said something similar to what you had said. Though they were using it as an attack on the Independent party. So I wasn't sure if you were doing the same.

@Slypheed

Fair enough then. :3

@Vilageidiotx

Basically true. Could be expanded to a lot of different discussions, that everyone wants to belong and that most things basically boil down to most people are not special. But I think the realization of this, makes certain people act different for the sake of it. But that itself is something else entirely. I'm frankly too lazy busy to discuss things of that nature. lol. :P

@Dynamo Frokane

I don't think enthusiasm in politics is really a bad thing. (though it can become it or annoying at the very least. :P) And that political group, agree with them or not, usually are the most passionate. I mean I think hating any one group is a little misguided. I suppose like a fandom, yes particular ones can be annoying as all hell. But eh...