Well after years of bubbling frustration, we saw a grand explosion of sentiment that won’t be forgotten. Make no mistake that though the issue was said to center around corrupt journalism, we all know that it was the growing menace of the Pink Palace was the deeper cause.
The danger we face presently is that this initial explosion just fizzles out; as combatants become despondent, battle-fatigued and compromised, which means that ultimately, nothing will change.
Recently, we saw the (in)glorious exit of Internet Aristocrat who was sickened with the recent developments; and what he felt was a compromise and failure to maintain the rage. Matt Forney gave a podcast on this topic while Jordan Owen responds to the Aristocrat and breaks down the current phase as he sees it.
The Internet Aristocrat’s burnout was likely the result of unrealistic expectations. In a web discussion on #gamergate, Roosh was accurately pessimistic about the valiant efforts—thereby displaying a better (red pill inspired) understanding of the social media establishment (AKA the system) than many of the people directly involved.
My own variation (and addition) to his concern is that the many of the gamers who went on the attack just weren’t going to be able to keep up the assault. Why? It is unnatural to act like the SJWs—whining, foaming, boycotting, taking everything ultra seriously and with zero self-reflection.
Just recently, 41k signatures forced Target Australia to stop selling GTA V for “violence against women” reasons. Ultimately, pro-GGers (or core-gamers as I call them) will just never match this kind of activism despite the odd counter-attack from major players like TotalBiscuit.
They have taken the castle
Sadly, you are not going to eradicate Kotaku or Gawker or any of these SJW type sites. Whether it’s their endless funding streams or the ideology of those who run them, they simply will not change. Rather, they might occasionally appear to so as to retain some credibility.
The correct “reaction” was/is simply to create your own faction or wing (like Reaxxion is doing) and leave sites like Kotaku to continually drown themselves in their absurdity. Jordan Owen describes this action as “reshaping the industry.”
Owen tried to liken it to the separation of Church and State (using the early USA as an example) though technically he was inversely misleading—it was generally the various religious groups who wanted freedom of worship, which created the numerous sects and thus forcing a liberal set of state laws. As strange as it may seem, it illustrates why it’s unwise to apply loosely related ideological descriptions to either side of the gamergate “movement.”
Owen was correct in suggesting that we should be looking to create new or rival Kingdom(s) free from the “tyranny,” but do we truly understand the menace?
A method designed to fail?
Given that the SJW crowd is largely aligned with the modern liberal left (Cultural Marxist) wing of western politics, there is a tendency for some to assume a “conservative” or political dialectic in dealing with them—what the Internet Aristocrat calls compromise. This will not work.
Anyone with a basic awareness of politics in the last 100+ years will understand that it’s largely devolved into a “progressive vs conservative” game and guess what—the progressives always get their way. It’s a rigged game. All people naturally want “progress”; new ideas, new methods, and so on, even if they are all wrong. Hope and change right? The old ways just never quite return as they once were.
If the red pill (and manosphere) scenes can teach us anything—whether your focus is gaming or banging—is that you must adapt to the battlefield and fight fire with fire. The SJW crowd came to power by completely deconstructing everything traditional and functional about society (and gaming). And so what did the red pill types do? Did they accept the situation, hoping to maintain some basic order like the failing conservatives? No, they doubled-down on the “deconstruction of values” and used the same chaotic psychologies against them.
If this world is completely in chaos—then let’s get nuts
The TotalBiscuit stratagem?
Given that the enemy controls the dialogue—not just in the gaming world but society in general—it’s almost impossible to counter certain claims. If Anita Sarkeesian says the Damsel In Distress trope is sexist or chain mail bikinis are degrading to women—then it is. There’s no point arguing the matter since they get to define the terms.
When TB was forced to defend his view on Bayonetta, he couldn’t just speak the truth that most male gamers want their female characters to have sex appeal. Do you think we want to see Lea Dunhams and Zoe Quinns on our screens?
TB reverted to the ‘democratic’ or special interest counter. He said that some women/feminists saw the character as “sex-positive” (whatever that means) so their view should be respected. Logically, this kind of argument is absurd if taken to the extreme. Technically, any character type (even the most purely evil) is now fine if they have some fan base. Fascist-positive? Serial-Killer-Positive?
Well why not? If we’re forced to endure the celebration of every strange degenerate idea they can invent then surely we too can have our special interest characters (within reason of course)?
So in the next big RPG that comes out, I will expect to see a character creation screen that allows true choice, since catering to diversity is so important.
The SJWs want a complete end to the characters you might see in GTA or The Witcher.The beauty of #gamergate is now that the situation has been exposed, studios will be forced to tread carefully—and if they don’t provide the experience most gamers desire, then their treachery is more easily identified.
So as long as the red flames continue to burn bright—by maintaining the siege on their palace—then that is true victory against the totalitarian agenda of the enemy.