Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lastfutures wrote

I think that play is one of the few redeeming qualities of humans in this world so yes I'm hostile to socialist content mill assholes with shit condemnations of it.

"The competitive urge is a destructive and sociopathic urge"

This is fundamentalist Christian level propagandizing.

2

black_fox wrote

considering you think the author is a loser it’s weird what strong opinions they’ve elicited from you

8

train wrote

Idk why but people really dislike NJR. You find the same kind of reactions to him wherever any of his articles are posted.

7

lastfutures wrote (edited )

People who elicit strong negative opinions from me are who I usually insult, I don't know how that's weird.

2

RadicalConstructivist wrote (edited )

This is fundamentalist Christian level propagandizing.

Ok Evola

This is hardly a "condemnation" of play, did you read the article?

I am not one to apply moral standards to video games, but something does depress me about playing this kind of simulator for too long.

The competitive urge is a destructive and sociopathic urge—it means total dedication to one’s own success and a desire to prevent that of others. The spheres in which this is useful need to be carefully delimited; in foreign policy it is deadly, in economics it creates ceaseless exploitation, in education it puts students under constant pressure to outperform their peers, though on an Xbox or chess board it is relatively harmless.

If the desire to hold and exercise power over others is innate and ineradicable, then let us confine it to empire-simulators and football games.

what exactly are you objecting to here? It certainly doesn't look like it's anything to do with the games given that the author explicitly states they are not condemning them several times

5

lastfutures wrote

Literally everything you put in bold, the very next word is but (you edited around that). Do you accept the performative hedging of every preacher this easily?

2

RadicalConstructivist wrote

And the "but" is followed by a personal preference. Which is the only kind of objection the author gives.

following the first quoted statement:

but something does depress me about playing this kind of simulator for too long.

following the second quoted statement:

But I certainly do not want to spend much of my time coming up with new ways to try to be better than other people, whether at canasta or at maneuvering pixelated paladins across 15th century Europe.

In fact, I confess that I don’t like competitive games generally.

It always seems to me to be somewhat arbitrary.

following the third quoted statement:

But personally, I grew weary of playing Age of Empires again quite quickly, and I doubt I will return to it. I am no longer in the mood to compete with anyone.

so the guy doesn't personally want to play your favourite video games so much anymore. wishing they killed themselves is obviously the only sound reaction to such heresy

3

lastfutures wrote (edited )

If you can't even acknowledge that the author is arguing a point, that this is an essay with a thesis & not a private diary entry, then there is nothing to talk about here. It's hard for me to believe that you really think the use of I and personally mean they aren't condemning anything here, that you would accept that argument in any other context, if you didn't agree with the thesis.

"The competitive urge is a destructive and sociopathic urge" but since I used the word personally in the last paragraph I'm not making a point or trying to get you to agree with anything. Like what the fuck are you talking about?

As for the suicide comment, that was an edit that I didn't keep, because it didn't communicate what I wanted. Life-denying asceticism was the imagery I was going for.

4

RadicalConstructivist wrote

It's hard for me to believe that you really think the use of I and personally mean they aren't condemning anything here, that you would accept that argument in any other context, if you didn't agree with the thesis.

Of course they're arguing something. But that something isn't "video games bad" or "dogs are colonialism" or whatever the fuck you were spouting initially.

"The competitive urge is a destructive and sociopathic urge" but since I used the word personally in the last paragraph I'm not making a point or trying to get you to agree with anything. Like what the fuck are you talking about?

So what you're objecting to is their condemnation of competition and domination - which is what the article is actually about. So just straight up say that instead of dancing around with "ooh this is christian propaganda coming to take away our games". Though I suppose that wouldn't give off as good as an aesthetic

Life-denying asceticism was the imagery I was going for.

and you were going for that because?

2

lastfutures wrote (edited )

Do I need an analytic philosophy degree to talk to you or something, do you need logical formulas? Are you asking me to do your interpretation & reading comprehension for you?

The essay - on the face of it - is about a competitive game & why the author doesn't like it. You just said the article is a condemnation of competition and domination - but that condemnation & the discussion of games is somehow unrelated? Please don't make me go thru this essay line by line to draw the connections.

I haven't danced around anything. Basketball is a competitive game. Therefore, the author has a problem with it, and said so explicitly (Nor do I like prizes or the Olympics or capitalism (note that this is in the list) or card games or anything that involves pitting people against each other to see who is better. It always seems to me to be somewhat arbitrary, given that much of the outcome is predetermined by the random distribution of privilege, money, talent, and free time.). Dogs competitively play-fight with each other, most of us find it cute. If you do a little interpretative work here, you can see that I am mocking the author for his take on play-fighting, being unable to separate it from real fighting for survival. I thought some might find the image of a socialist calling puppies wrestling the seed of colonialism humorous!

When I reference Christianity, I'm referring to Nietzsche's critique of it - resentment, life-denial, & so on. I think the parallel to socialists being against competition in games is an obvious one, that shit belongs in a Stalinist reeducation camp (or Christian opposition to art with evil or sex in it). If you disagree , whatever let's not get into it, a Current Affairs article seems difficult enough here nevermind Nietzsche.

3

RadicalConstructivist wrote

not liking competitive games as a symptom of a pervasive culture that valorises competition is basically the gulags and literally the same as Christians thinking porn is sinful

k

1

lastfutures wrote

So that's how you communicate eh? I untangle one bullshit misinterpretation so you just come up with another without acknowledging you had moved the goalposts. I'm just going to block & move on, every conversation we've had has been a waste of time.

3

inthedustofthisplanet wrote

You literally entered this conversation with useless drivel and now you want to pretend to be some bigbrained.jpeg bringer of civility? Look at yourself lol.

3

GlangSnorrisson wrote

I think that play is one of the few redeeming qualities of humans

With you there.

5