[misc]late reply: Politically Correct paint jobs
Ratman
correctness thing again.
I personally disapprove of the sun rune to be used on models,
it is somehow embarrassing. Using fascist emblems is simply
unnecessairy, even in satire. I know a lot of people like it,
but I do not.
The excuse that the swastika is of indian origin seems very
poor to me when looking at the stormboyz, they simply lack the
feathers (sorry for the misused pun).
The whole 40K background is full of fascist/racist fluff
(e.g. kill the aliens/billions of psykers have to die for the
holy emperor each year...).The brits like that for satire, to
me it only seems all right for the gothic dark future setting,
but I do not like the links back to history (I sometimes even
have bad feelings about the skaven army, thinking that they have
certain similarities to WWI, with those crazy warmachines and
gas attacks, but I hope it's just my imagination and a bit to
far fetched for other sane people.).
I did not buy the new 40k boxed set for a long time, because
I think even the black templars on the box are politically
offensive.
These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
not be done.
Arguing that wargaming is not a fascist/warmonger hobby is
difficult enough without black/white/red flags being used on
the battlefield.
I have about the same feelings for people playing WWII themed
armies as I have for people converting their slaanesh demonettes
to show scenes of child abuse.
Hatred would be wrong, pity is better, both is about right.
No offence meant, but honesty seems important to me in this case.
The "correct" answers will be rewarded with postings to the
"Hated-Regs" thread o:)
d.e.m.
ps: Sorry in case that the tag was wrong, other suggestions?
Mikael Halila
>
> I just have to add some thoughts on this whole political
> correctness thing again.
>
> I personally disapprove of the sun rune to be used on models,
> it is somehow embarrassing. Using fascist emblems is simply
> unnecessairy, even in satire. I know a lot of people like it,
> but I do not.
>
> The excuse that the swastika is of indian origin seems very
> poor to me when looking at the stormboyz, they simply lack the
> feathers (sorry for the misused pun).
> I did not buy the new 40k boxed set for a long time, because
> I think even the black templars on the box are politically
> offensive.
>
> These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
> people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
> not be done.
Tell me you're kidding. Please.
--
Mikael Halila, #118
--
C:RGMW fluff master
Champion of the titanic .sig
"This guy is certainly the dude of the retards."
-Robert Singers, RGMW
"Hey, everyone is a bit bi. I just haven't found the guy I want to
guzzle the semen of."
-someone, RGMW
Masterful troll response #1:
"I'm not wrong. You're an idiot."
_____
Viikon Linnanvuori:
"Minun mielestäni voi olla nationalistisia liberaaleja ja libertaarisia
kommunisteja."
_____
Mikael the Eccentric St:14 Dx:10 Co:8 In:10 Wi:10 Ch:8
Dlvl:0 $:0 HP:20(20) Pw:0(0) AC:9 Xp:1/2 T:19 Conf
Terarin
[snip crap]
> d.e.m.
>
> ps: Sorry in case that the tag was wrong, other suggestions?
Who are you, agian?
.T
Arhes
The Blue Raja
news:5b8f549d.0205...@posting.google.com...
<big ol' snip>
So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
--
The Blue Raja
"It wouldn't make sense, for a midget riding a golden retriever, armed with
drool and a short bow to be able to keep pace with a rip-roaring marine
motorcycle, now would it?" - Mark Story
RGMW FAQ - Just read the damn thing
http://www.sheppard.demon.co.uk/rgmw_faq/rgmw_faq.htm
Ratman
> "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.0205...@posting.google.com...
> <big ol' snip>
>
> So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
I would not like to take part in a war for real, and I do understand people
who do not want to be reminded of such things. I consider playing nazi armies
more than just bad style.
I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly related
to history.
d.e.m.
Ratman
> Ratman wrote:
> >
> > I just have to add some thoughts on this whole political
> > correctness thing again.
> >
> > I personally disapprove of the sun rune to be used on models,
> > it is somehow embarrassing. Using fascist emblems is simply
> > unnecessairy, even in satire. I know a lot of people like it,
> > but I do not.
> >
> > The excuse that the swastika is of indian origin seems very
> > poor to me when looking at the stormboyz, they simply lack the
> > feathers (sorry for the misused pun).
> <snip>
> > I did not buy the new 40k boxed set for a long time, because
> > I think even the black templars on the box are politically
> > offensive.
> >
> > These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
> > people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
> > not be done.
>
> Tell me you're kidding. Please.
No I am not, I can't stand nazis.
d.e.m.
Ratman
> Are you in the right NG?
We shall see, and I think that even if no one else
agrees with me then I am a one person minority perhaps.
So whats the matter?
If everyone in a NG was to have the same opinion on everything
it would be quite boring.
d.e.m.
Mikael Halila
So how on earth do the Black Templars come into this at all? There's not
a swastika in sight. And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
Terarin
How sad... one of the best Epic armies I'd evr seen was Nationalist
Socialist Squats. They were Squat-zi's. It was an awesome theme. I'm
glad I didn't start this game around you.
Why don't you start throwing in comparative religion, too. I mean, you
already started the Templar angle... or do you really know who the
Templars were?
.T
The Archdeacon
> correctness thing again.
Ok. go for it.
> The excuse that the swastika is of indian origin seems very
> poor to me when looking at the stormboyz, they simply lack the
> feathers (sorry for the misused pun).
This is very true, but they do wear uniforms and helmets similar to
nazi one
> The whole 40K background is full of fascist/racist fluff
> (e.g. kill the aliens/billions of psykers have to die for the
> holy emperor each year...).The brits like that for satire,
We do? I like it because it is dark and gothicy and shows that
mankinds future is not necessarily the americanised Star Trek view.
> to
> me it only seems all right for the gothic dark future setting,
> but I do not like the links back to history (I sometimes even
> have bad feelings about the skaven army, thinking that they have
> certain similarities to WWI, with those crazy warmachines and
> gas attacks, but I hope it's just my imagination and a bit to
> far fetched for other sane people.).
I think you are reading to much into a game. Ok this whole over
sensitive vibe might work for you and others who would burn books
because of an offensive reference, just do not force it onto me. I
want to read about a dark future for mankind.
> I did not buy the new 40k boxed set for a long time, because
> I think even the black templars on the box are politically
> offensive.
Mmm, now I am beginning to think this is a troll.
> These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
> people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
> not be done.
Why does this not surprise me. Tell me what armies would you allow.
Would you allow me to field a british colonial IG army? Perhaps the US
army? Or perhaps you would rather have no armies what so ever, with no
background., that way you can be guarenteed that nothing will offend
you. Sure you can remove the earth historical references to it, but
then what do we really have since you are offended by 'black templars'
and skaven gas weapons. I guess you would remove everything. Perhaps
we should remove bretonnian knights, after all these have disturbing
paralells with historical knights, then of course there are the dark
eldar with the evil slave trade paralells. Dont even get me started on
the tau and the viscious comparison of their use of propoganda to
spread their message, with the nazis attempts to control peoples
minds.
> Arguing that wargaming is not a fascist/warmonger hobby is
> difficult enough without black/white/red flags being used on
> the battlefield.
It is just a game for god's sake. I play historical wargames as well,
I have a large SS platoon perhaps I shouldnt play that because someone
feels that it is inappropriate.
> I have about the same feelings for people playing WWII themed
> armies as I have for people converting their slaanesh demonettes
> to show scenes of child abuse.
that is pretty strong. Next you will be saying duping minis is worse
than killing babies.
> Hatred would be wrong, pity is better, both is about right.
I guess you hate and pity me then, being a historical wargamer.
> No offence meant, but honesty seems important to me in this case.
Of course not. this is the joy of living in a reasonably free society,
you can express your opinion and others have the right to disagree
with it.
The Archdeacon
> > > These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
> > > people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
> > > not be done.
> >
> > Tell me you're kidding. Please.
>
> No I am not, I can't stand nazis.
Do you know many Nazis then?
The Archdeacon
>
> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
you take for granted? damn BHL's.
> and I do understand people
> who do not want to be reminded of such things.
Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
amount of wars we have fought. Humanity is a warlike race, not some
rose-tinted liberal utopia, we may not like the killing but there is a
need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the needs of others.
> I consider playing nazi armies
> more than just bad style.
Even in a historical wargame. I last played a desert encounter where
my opponent was a German tank platoon and I was an entrenched british
force. Was this morally wrong by your books.
> I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly related
> to history.
So what can we base the wargame on?
Janet Quick
bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com, "The Archdeacon" dared to
opine:
>> I consider playing nazi armies
>> more than just bad style.
>
> Even in a historical wargame. I last played a desert encounter where
> my opponent was a German tank platoon and I was an entrenched british
> force. Was this morally wrong by your books.
Oh dear, when I play Civ II (computer civilization building game) as the
Persians, one of my best cities is Kabul. Kabul has bombed New York City
many, many times in my games. And I never once felt politically incorrect.
You know why? It's a game!
Ratman
> Ratman wrote:
> >
> > Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message news:<3CDAC30B...@pp.inet.fi>...
> > > Ratman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I just have to add some thoughts on this whole political
> > > > correctness thing again.
> > > >
> > > > I personally disapprove of the sun rune to be used on models,
> > > > it is somehow embarrassing. Using fascist emblems is simply
> > > > unnecessairy, even in satire. I know a lot of people like it,
> > > > but I do not.
> > > >
> > > > The excuse that the swastika is of indian origin seems very
> > > > poor to me when looking at the stormboyz, they simply lack the
> > > > feathers (sorry for the misused pun).
> <snip>
> > > > I did not buy the new 40k boxed set for a long time, because
> > > > I think even the black templars on the box are politically
> > > > offensive.
> > > >
> > > > These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
> > > > people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
> > > > not be done.
> > >
> > > Tell me you're kidding. Please.
> >
> > No I am not, I can't stand nazis.
>
> So how on earth do the Black Templars come into this at all? There's not
> a swastika in sight.
I just told you this one to point out that I am (perhaps) a bit shy about
40K militairy background.
The black painted Templars with small white contrasts,all their impirial
insignias and the black crosses remind *me* of the ss, with all the sm
gene-seed fluff in mind.
> And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
I do not like them very much, as any other (modern) history based wargames.
d.e.m.
Ratman
"Know" in the sense of talking with them a lot no, I am not a social worker.
Know in the sense of meeting and learn to despice their hateful aggressive
demeanor yes.
Talking with some older people indoctrinated in the past telling you everything
was better in the past, everyone had work, if he had just not started/lost this
war...
Well, there are some borderlines of taste I do not want to cross myself.
d.e.m.
Ratman
d.e.m.
Ratman
d.e.m.
Ratman
> Ratman wrote:
> >
> > "The Blue Raja" <the_bl...@dingoblue.net.au.spamless> wrote in message news:<3cdb090c$0$2526$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> > > "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> > > news:5b8f549d.0205...@posting.google.com...
> > > <big ol' snip>
> > >
> > > So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
> >
> > I would not like to take part in a war for real, and I do understand people
> > who do not want to be reminded of such things. I consider playing nazi armies
> > more than just bad style.
> > I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly related
> > to history.
> >
> > d.e.m.
>
> How sad... one of the best Epic armies I'd evr seen was Nationalist
> Socialist Squats. They were Squat-zi's. It was an awesome theme. I'm
> glad I didn't start this game around you.
Perhaps :-t
> Why don't you start throwing in comparative religion, too. I mean, you
> already started the Templar angle... or do you really know who the
> Templars were?
There is still this stupid, dusty jar on the shelf in the cellar...
Sorry I just don't get it, what are you talking about?
d.e.m.
Ratman
> >
>> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
> So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
> you take for granted? damn BHL's.
I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
>> and I do understand people
>> who do not want to be reminded of such things.
> Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
> amount of wars we have fought.
Yes, human history is a poor thing.
> Humanity is a warlike race, not some rose-tinted liberal utopia,
That seems to be a rather bad excuse.
> we may not like the killing
I certainly do not.
>but
No "but"
> there is a need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the
> needs of others.
But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
>> I consider playing nazi armies
>> more than just bad style.
> Even in a historical wargame. I last played a desert encounter where
> my opponent was a German tank platoon and I was an entrenched british
> force. Was this morally wrong by your books.
I do not like historical wargames, but there at least you know what you
are doing on your own choice.
My initial posting was meant as an answer to the thread named in the title.
The given question was if a stormboyz mob should be included in the
tournament army or if this might not be that good an idea.
A lot of people answered that they like WWII themed armies, and I wanted
to point out that this is not everybodies point of view.
>> I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly
>> related to history.
>So what can we base the wargame on?
The more imaginative minds try to use creativity to make up their own fictional
history, instead of simply using the given past...
d.e.m.
Ratman
Yes,it's just a game, and you do not need that much enthusiasm to turn
on your
computer and simply consume Civ II.
Painting an army in a certain style takes much more effort and
deciding to spend
your time making those little nazi-men look fine and cruel is just a
bit more
then two or three mouse clicks.
I think that makes most of the difference to me. Playing a more or
less fictional wargame you are free to choose your own background
theme, invent your
own history, instead of copying the least likeable part of history you
could
lay your hands on to make your army really "cool".
d.e.m.
Ratman
>> correctness thing again.
>Ok. go for it.
>> The excuse that the swastika is of indian origin seems very
>> poor to me when looking at the stormboyz, they simply lack the
>> feathers (sorry for the misused pun).
> This is very true, but they do wear uniforms and helmets similar to
> nazi one
Yes, that is why the above given excuse is just plain stupid.
>> The whole 40K background is full of fascist/racist fluff
>> (e.g. kill the aliens/billions of psykers have to die for the
>> holy emperor each year...).The brits like that for satire,
> We do?
Not for satire perhaps, but some years ago the british TV always
had one channel showing a ww-movie (and that was the time with not
that
many channels to choose from at all).
> I like it because it is dark and gothicy and shows that
> mankinds future is not necessarily the americanised Star Trek view.
I agree on that one.
>> to
>> me it only seems all right for the gothic dark future setting,
>> but I do not like the links back to history (I sometimes even
>> have bad feelings about the skaven army, thinking that they have
>> certain similarities to WWI, with those crazy warmachines and
>> gas attacks, but I hope it's just my imagination and a bit to
>> far fetched for other sane people.).
> I think you are reading to much into a game.
I hope I do, thanks for the reassurance ;)
> Ok this whole over sensitive vibe might work for you
I am sensitive and I think some people around lack this ability.
Or perhaps it's just empathy.
> and others who would burn books because of an offensive reference,
I just do not like to glorify people who burn books, there is a
difference.
> just do not force it onto me.
I can not and I do not want to do so.
>I want to read about a dark future for mankind.
Sometimes I do too, but I hate to do so in the news.
>> I did not buy the new 40k boxed set for a long time, because
>> I think even the black templars on the box are politically
>> offensive.
>Mmm, now I am beginning to think this is a troll.
I am not, I am over sensitive ;). (see answer to Mikael Halila too)
>> These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
>> people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
>> not be done.
> Why does this not surprise me. Tell me what armies would you allow.
All which are not to closely related to real earth history.
And I am able to make compromises, I do not force anyone to share
my opinion.
> Would you allow me to field a british colonial IG army?
I would not recommend it, but I would not deny you to do so.
I like fiction and reality to stay apart in 40K.
> Perhaps the US army?
Those usurping war criminals that bombed vietnam/nuked hiroshima?
> Or perhaps you would rather have no armies what so ever, with no
> background., that way you can be guarenteed that nothing will offend
> you. Sure you can remove the earth historical references to it,
That is what I think would be sensible.
> but
> then what do we really have since you are offended by 'black templars'
> and skaven gas weapons.
OK, this was an exageration, as you might have noticed, I do play
skaven.
> I guess you would remove everything.
Guess again.
> Perhaps we should remove bretonnian knights, after all these have
> disturbing paralells with historical knights,
Sorry, I am not that over sensitive to medieval background.
My complexes begin in the time about less than 500 years back only.
> then of course there are the dark eldar with the evil slave trade
> paralells.
They even do it for religious reasons, if I am not completly wrong.
I think they are beyond my grip to be connected back to sweet mother
earth.
> Dont even get me started on the tau and the viscious comparison of
> their use of propoganda to spread their message, with the nazis
> attempts to control peoples minds.
Do tau not fight for "the common good" or something? I would think
they are more related to the fascist-comunists then. The nazi
propaganda is all part to the human empire with the holy emperor.
I do not like the tau, because this japanese anime high-tech culture
messes with the technologically entropic gothic backgraound which was
the 40k fluff until the tau appeared.
>> Arguing that wargaming is not a fascist/warmonger hobby is
>> difficult enough without black/white/red flags being used on
>> the battlefield.
> It is just a game for god's sake.
Yes, it is. I never said anything else.
> I play historical wargames as well,
> I have a large SS platoon perhaps I shouldnt play that because someone
> feels that it is inappropriate.
It's your choice to do that, go on with it if you want to.
>> I have about the same feelings for people playing WWII themed
>> armies as I have for people converting their slaanesh demonettes
>> to show scenes of child abuse.
> that is pretty strong.
I don't think so, what the SS did in WWII was as disgusting as that.
I would not like to play a scenario like:
Eldar: Free your farseer from the impirial-psyker-kz,
IG : Hold the trenches until the psykers are sacrificed to the
emperor,
roll a d6 to see if the opponents mission object was destroyed
And look at the nice starved, half-decomposed fugitives hanging on the
barbed wire, funny isn't it? Can you see the small sign on the gate?
I says "AusWitz" and "Death makes free".
Sorry, but I do not like that much more than the demonettes.
> Next you will be saying duping minis is worse
> than killing babies.
Duping? Like putting varnish on your minis? It makes them shine
terribly
and is very bad for environment.
Hope you are kidding and use watercolour only instead.
>> Hatred would be wrong, pity is better, both is about right.
>I guess you hate and pity me then, being a historical wargamer.
Sorry, I got carried away at the end. I was a bit angry because some
people
seem to have no scruples at all and could be a bit more carefull/less
thoughtless about real war events (indian stormboyz is thoughtless
isn't it?).
>> No offence meant, but honesty seems important to me in this case.
> Of course not. this is the joy of living in a reasonably free society,
> you can express your opinion
No sarcasm please.
> and others have the right to disagree with it.
You have *all* the right to do so, and I have to beg for
forgiveness for a lot of generalizations in my monologue.
d.e.m.
Jack & Co.
Ratman wrote:
> archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
> > >
> >> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
>
> > So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
> > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
>
> I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
> >> and I do understand people
> >> who do not want to be reminded of such things.
>
> > Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
> > amount of wars we have fought.
>
> Yes, human history is a poor thing.
>
> > Humanity is a warlike race, not some rose-tinted liberal utopia,
>
> That seems to be a rather bad excuse.
90% of human social change has been brought about through violence. probably more.
> > we may not like the killing
>
> I certainly do not.
Good fer you! Yer an exemplary example. But your kids will. Just to piss you off, but they will...
> >but
>
> No "but"
>
> > there is a need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the
> > needs of others.
>
> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
>
> >> I consider playing nazi armies
> >> more than just bad style.
>
> > Even in a historical wargame. I last played a desert encounter where
> > my opponent was a German tank platoon and I was an entrenched british
> > force. Was this morally wrong by your books.
>
> I do not like historical wargames, but there at least you know what you
> are doing on your own choice.
> My initial posting was meant as an answer to the thread named in the title.
> The given question was if a stormboyz mob should be included in the
> tournament army or if this might not be that good an idea.
> A lot of people answered that they like WWII themed armies, and I wanted
> to point out that this is not everybodies point of view.
>
> >> I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly
> >> related to history.
>
> >So what can we base the wargame on?
>
> The more imaginative minds try to use creativity to make up their own fictional
> history, instead of simply using the given past...
Yes, but there are those who always think, "What was that fool doing! The war would have been over years earlier if I
was in charge..." and want to try it out.
Octavulg
The Blue Raja
> > So how on earth do the Black Templars come into this at all? There's not
> > a swastika in sight.
>
> I just told you this one to point out that I am (perhaps) a bit shy about
> 40K militairy background.
> The black painted Templars with small white contrasts,all their impirial
> insignias and the black crosses remind *me* of the ss, with all the sm
> gene-seed fluff in mind.
Maybe you should try researching something before you decide it's evil.
The Black Templars are based on the Knights Templar. Notice the
similarities in device, goals and origin.
Old Dead Eye
news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
>
> >> (e.g. kill the aliens/billions of psykers have to die for the
> >> holy emperor each year...).The brits like that for satire,
>
> > We do?
>
> Not for satire perhaps, but some years ago the british TV always
> had one channel showing a ww-movie (and that was the time with not
> that
> many channels to choose from at all).
Of course now we have The Execution Channel, WarMonger TV,
LetsGoToWarWithGermany24/7 and lets not forget
Big Brother UK where people from 12 ethnic minorites compete not to be
exterminated on a Friday night,decided by a phone in vote by the good ole
warmongering facist British general public.
Get real. Warhammer is a game. Personally I would rather see a unit of
"colonial british IG" get slaughtered by some nazi ork
troops that see a real war where real people die. Perhaps Saddam Hussein and
George W Bush could play"Loser goes into exile Warhammer" GMed by Kofi Annan
Old Dead Eye
"Give me a Nuke and I will conquer the World, but Give me a D6 and I will
conquer the Table."
Myrmidon
d_e...@gmx.net, Ratman shouted out the following words of wit...
> archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
> > >
> >> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
>
> > So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
> > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
>
> I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
>
No, instead you rely on others to do it for you. Your freedom
that society wants to 'cut' was bought and paid for to begin with in
blood, steel, and tears. Now, relying on others to help defend those
freedoms wouldn't be a bad thing in and of itself as there are many
people who simply aren't mentally and physically equipped to do the
things needed to defend themselves. The difference here however, is
that most individuals like that with any grasp of reality don't pretend
that violence is never an appropriate response, nor do they attempt to
assume a morally and ethically superior mental stance about it because
they're not the ones doing the violence. (And yes, it's a direct
implication of your statement "Yes, human history is a poor thing. {I.e.
because of the violence}) If you pay your taxes, then you are helping
to pay the salaries of violence specialists (law enforcement, and
military personnel) that society uses ever single day. To say 'I'd be
unhappy to be reminded of 'real war and death' in a science fiction WAR
game' is the height of asinine stupidity.
> >> and I do understand people
> >> who do not want to be reminded of such things.
I don't. The only people that have any right to NOT want to be
reminded of such things are folks that were part of the conflict in
question. Those folks have paid their dues, and if they don't wish to
be reminded of past fear and suffering, I can well agree. But since we
we're talking about Nazi symbols from World War II on 40K orks - I have
to ask, exactly how many WW II veterans do you game with? None? Wow,
what a surprise.
As for the "I don't want to be reminded" crowd that has never
served or fought - fuck them. I'd suggest the game of choice for these
lack luster individuals would be a large sand box - that way when
they're not building fairy tale castles in the sand (ooh can't have any
scary parts on them - might remind someone of medieval warfare and
offend them) they can bury their heads in the sand instead. I could buy
the 'I don't want to be reminded' comments from people that don't watch
television, surf the net, or read the news - but NOT from people
voluntarily participating in a hobby about WAR - which is EXACTLY what
we are talking about.
I have to ask, what do you do during holidays like "Veterans Day"
and "Memorial Day"? Hide in your basement with your fingers in your
ears and wish real hard until the 'bad days' go away?
>
> > Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
> > amount of wars we have fought.
>
> Yes, human history is a poor thing.
No, human history simply is. There are instances of real horror,
but I point out ignoring it is a great way to repeat it. Sadly, folks
like you would gladly forget everything that was learned so more people
that are brave can go out and pay to learn those lessons yet again. The
sick part is your false pretence that somehow the reality of the
situation will bend to your 'beliefs' if only you can convince everyone
else that it's their view of history and reality that's distorted. All
I can say is I'm glad you're not my neighbor, you'd be useless in a
crisis.
>
> > Humanity is a warlike race, not some rose-tinted liberal utopia,
>
> That seems to be a rather bad excuse.
Coming from a person who voluntarily plays a game about KILLING
PEOPLE and blowing things up??? This is the height of hypocrisy and
stupidity! Whether the game is based on some real or fiction event is
irrelevant to the fact that the GOAL of the game is to crush your
opponent by annihilating his or her forces. JUST LIKE REAL WAR - the
idea is to control territory, resources, or just out right kill lots of
opposing troops.
>
> > we may not like the killing
>
> I certainly do not.
>
> >but
>
> No "but"
- Yes 'but' as in the unspoken "But I'll play fictional games about
killing ~ just so long as I can pretend that the goal of the game isn't
about 'real' (tm) killing". In other words, you're making a weak
attempt to argue semantics to avoid the issue.
>
> > there is a need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the
> > needs of others.
>
> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
This is complete and UTTER BULLSHIT! If you pay your taxes and
are NOT attempting to have the police and military disbanded, then you
are damn well accepting that others do the bleeding and dying on your
behalf. This sort of self deceiving LIE that isn't even vaguely
credible under the most charitable of situations. I know good and well
that you would call the police, fire department, bomb squad, or other
specialized social service for support if you were in a life-threatening
situation. And yet here you sit spouting...
> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
Who the fuck do you think you're kidding? That's about the most vile
lie I've heard in a long time. This makes you out to be a social
parasite of the lowest order. In other words, you'll accept the
sacrifices of other people, and pretend that you personally aren't in
their debt while spouting 'Politically Correct' crap about how it might
'offend' someone who plays war games by reminding them of real
historical events.
> >> I consider playing nazi armies
> >> more than just bad style.
Well, in light of the utter lack of judgement and extremely poor
grasp of reality you've displayed so far - I have to ask, what makes you
think that this even vaguely relevant?
>
> > Even in a historical wargame. I last played a desert encounter where
> > my opponent was a German tank platoon and I was an entrenched british
> > force. Was this morally wrong by your books.
>
> I do not like historical wargames, but there at least you know what you
> are doing on your own choice.
> My initial posting was meant as an answer to the thread named in the title.
> The given question was if a stormboyz mob should be included in the
> tournament army or if this might not be that good an idea.
> A lot of people answered that they like WWII themed armies, and I wanted
> to point out that this is not everybodies point of view.
And again, this statement as ZERO CREDIBILITY coming from ANYONE
voluntarily participating in a hobby that is centered around WARFARE.
The fact that it may or may not be a fictional event is NOT relevant to
the intent and goal of the game - which is to win through the skillful
employment of violence against an opponent. Have you modeled your 40K
armies into 'kinder & gentler' armies? Have you convinced all your
fellow area gamers to convert their minis' weapons to 'Nerf Bolters' and
'Nerf Rocket Launchers'??? No? Gosh! What a bunch of sickos - next
thing you know they'll be pretending to fire those simulated weapons,
and working out simulated casualties representing simulated death and
destruction... OH THE HUMANITY!
>
> >> I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly
> >> related to history.
Apparently you live in "Never Never Land" too - does that mean we
should change the history books so as not to damage your delicate
sensibilities?
>
> >So what can we base the wargame on?
>
> The more imaginative minds try to use creativity to make up their own fictional
> history, instead of simply using the given past...
>
> d.e.m.
First off, to quote a mind much better than yours when it comes to
writing - "There is nothing new under the sun." So much for the
argument about fiction equaling originality and thus creating a clear
distinction from real world events. (If that attempt to dodge the issue
had been any weaker, it would be receiving medical treatment for
anemia.) Now then, as to the heart of the argument - is it reasonable
for someone playing a game about violence and killing to complain about
the use of historical symbols or imagery from real world conflicts in
that game? HELL NO! In short, it's a crock of shit. Doubtless you're
the same sort of brainless spineless weenie that would refuse to play
the guy who was featured on NewWave's web site with the World War II
"U.S. Grunts" themed Marine army from one of the GT's. After all, it
would remind you of real world events - and we all know how little you
and reality have in common. It would have been one thing if the poster
had been using an entire army themed after the Nazis - but that was NOT
the case, nor was the poster an advocate of Nazi ideals - which leaves
people NO GROUND on which to stand when it comes to the issue of
'violence related imagery' in a war game. The damn game is called
WARhammer not NERFhammer. Duh!
I might kindly suggest that in an attempt to become a marginally useful
member of society you might want to remove your head from the vicinity
of your colon, and start searching for a clue.
Myrmidon
(Who does NOT admire pacifists and other forms of social parasites!)
--
"Conan, what is best in life?"
"To paint your miniatures, to see them driven before you on the table,
and to hear the lamentation of the cheese-mongers!"
- Del Webb
RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org
Or...
Myrmidon
d_e...@gmx.net, Ratman shouted out the following words of wit...
You know, it would help if you possibly had the slightest fucking
clue as to what you were talking about. The Ork "Storm Boyz" figures in
question were modeled after World War II Nazi / SS 'Storm Troopers'. As
in the GW miniatures designers MADE them that way in obvious reference
to the German WW II troops in question - including German WW II style
caps and equipment. Even the current ork 'Tank Bustas' figures take
some of their design details from WW II German troops - note the German
style 'stick grenades'. Now then, the person who originally posted the
thread had two (2) basic questions. One, was it wrong (in bad taste) to
have put little 'swastikas' on the back of his ork 'Storm Boyz'? And
two, was someone likely to be offended? The answers are pretty straight
forward. One, no it wasn't inappropriate to put swastikas on 'Storm
boyz' in the context of the game, and it's background and basis. The
person didn't 'modify' the miniatures to look like WW II German troops -
they came that way to begin with. Using symbols from that time period
certainly was NOT an attempt on the part of the gamer to endorse or
justify the Nazi mind set or in your words to make it "really 'cool' ".
As for part two - Yes, someone is bound to complain. Because the gamer
was endorsing or advancing a hateful racist viewpoint? No. But rather,
because the folks who whine about these sorts of non-issues have no
brains and even less spine. Rather than confront real racists and deal
with difficult (and possibly personally dangerous) issues, they can
contentedly pat themselves on the back about how they 'stood up' for a
strong moral issue like a symbol from a historical WAR on a fictional
WAR game miniature. And of course, we all know how 'out of character'
it is in the fictional background of 40K to portray the Orks as 'cruel'
or 'barbaric' and willing to slaughter millions of helpless non-
combatants.
The real frosting on the cake there is your comments about 'two or
three mouse clicks' verse taking 'your time making those little nazi-men
look fine and cruel'. WTF? We're glad to know your comfortable with
racism and genocide - as long as it's quick and easy. (We'll
conveniently ignore the time the programmers had to put in to creating
that 2 or 3 mouse click game that lets one bloodlessly simulate mass
death and destruction.) I think we've pretty well captured the real
essence of the issue here, which is that YOU personally are
uncomfortable with the idea that you should have to honestly think about
the fact you're participating in a hobby that simulates and draws much
of it's basis from real death and destruction. Apparently as long as
YOU personally can pretend that there isn't the slightest connection
between real world violence and WarHammer, why then it's just fine and
dandy for you to play. But heaven forbid if someone should somehow
remind you of what the nature of the game truly is... Boo hoo hoo.
So, you want to play war games, but you're attempting to convince
others that there's even the slightest merit to the idea that it's
offensive or in bad taste to include imagery from historical conflicts
in fictional games about violence and death just because historical
conflicts are about real death and violence? That rates up there as one
of the most pathetic cop-outs of all time. It would be one thing if
someone were using war games (whether historical, fictional, or science
fiction based) as a means of advancing the idea that racism and genocide
are acceptable. But that is clearly NOT the case here. The fact that
this is clearly evident and yet you continue to whine about how it's
'bad style' highlights the fact that you personally have a problem
reconciling conflicting self-images.
</begin Ratman internal dialogue mode>
"I'm a nice sensitive guy, and sensitive guys don't say or do anything
that might be 'Politically Incorrect" or otherwise offend someone or
even remind others that the world isn't a 'and they lived happily ever
after.' fairy tale."
And...
"I'm a guy who likes playing miniatures WAR games about conquering
others through the use of death and destruction."
"Playing games about beating others through the use of violence just
isn't PC. What ever am I going to do? I know, I'll play 'science
FICTION' war games. That way I can continue to view myself as a
'sensitive guy' while pretending that 'make believe' war is NOT about
the use of violence to gain a desired end. That way I can hold the
moral high ground, and still not have to give up any personal pleasures
due to having a personal belief that would require some self sacrifice
on my part. Better still, I can wrap myself in the cloak of 'false
virtue' when others present me with things that might remind me of the
reality of the world. If I whine, piss, and moan about it long enough
people are sure to see the virtues of my ideas..."
</end Ratman internal dialogue mode>
In short, fuck that, fuck you, and while you're at it - just plain FUCK
OFF. Everything you've spouted so far has been bullshit semantics used
in a lame attempt to justify why you and people like you should be
handled with velvet gloves by those grounded in reality so that the
messy and unpleasant reality of our world and of war in general doesn't
intrude on your personal fantasy. Why don't you take your bullshit 'Ow
Mommy, it hurts' Never Never Land fantasy peddling ass to a news group
full of tards who like cluelessness - I hear the Wicca NG is big on that
at the moment.
Myrmidon
Blackheart
<c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
>Ratman wrote:
>
>> archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
>> > > > So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
>> > >
>> >> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
>>
>> > So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
>> > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
>>
>> I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
>> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
>
>Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
>
tyring to win the annual "Tubman Maturity Award"?
Jack & Co.
Blackheart wrote:
I thought you'd bribed the judging panel for the net ten years...
Octavulg, would love to point out that at no point in the past have you ever been remotely mature towards ANYTHING...
Myrmidon
c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca, Jack & Co. shouted out the following words
of wit...
> > >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
> > >
> > >Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
> > >
> >
> > tyring to win the annual "Tubman Maturity Award"?
>
> I thought you'd bribed the judging panel for the net ten years...
>
> Octavulg, would love to point out that at no point in the past have you ever been remotely mature towards ANYTHING...
>
While Blackheart may not fit your definition of 'mature' about
things - he's very often dead on with his replys. Now which do you
think is more appreciated on the NG? Someone like you who replys a lot
without adding anything valueable, or someone like Blackheart who can
shoot straight even if he doesn't use polite language because he doesn't
really care if he offends your fragile little ego? Your reply to Ratman
was no less clueless than Ratman's continued nattering bullshit. I'll
take Blackheart over you any day.
Jack & Co.
Myrmidon wrote:
> In article <3CDD6534...@pei.sympatico.ca>,
> c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca, Jack & Co. shouted out the following words
> of wit...
This is out of tone with the rest of your post, you know...
> > > >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
> > > >
> > > >Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
> > > >
> > >
> > > tyring to win the annual "Tubman Maturity Award"?
> >
> > I thought you'd bribed the judging panel for the net ten years...
> >
> > Octavulg, would love to point out that at no point in the past have you ever been remotely mature towards ANYTHING...
> >
>
> While Blackheart may not fit your definition of 'mature' about
> things - he's very often dead on with his replys.
Good for him. He also randomly flames people. How wonderful. Such an upstanding member of the community.
> Now which do you
> think is more appreciated on the NG? Someone like you who replys a lot
> without adding anything valueable, or someone like Blackheart who can
> shoot straight even if he doesn't use polite language because he doesn't
> really care if he offends your fragile little ego?
Ah yes. His wonderful post about the Tubman maturity award contributed on many levels and in more ways than I can count.
I have NEVER seen Blackheart make a constructive, on-topic post about ANYTHING. I have, on rare occasion, said something,
deep insightful, and innovative. Or at least mildly contributive. Your definition of valuable and mine, as well as that of
others on this newsggroup probably don't agree. The fact that a large number of people on this NG have been playing since
the days of Rogue Trader might also help make them more constructive than me.
> Your reply to Ratman
> was no less clueless than Ratman's continued nattering bullshit.
THAT'S insulting. I'd like to think it was at least 0.1% less clueless. I made a (semi) valid point, which can hold up in
90% of the time, 9 times out of ten.
> I'll
> take Blackheart over you any day.
Goody. Perhaps you'll both be so enamored of each other you'll forget about the rest of the world.
Octavulg, wonders why his keyboard is making dull thudding sounds when he hits the keys...
Blackheart
<c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
>Myrmidon wrote:
>
>> In article <3CDD6534...@pei.sympatico.ca>,
>> c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca, Jack & Co. shouted out the following words
>> of wit...
>
>This is out of tone with the rest of your post, you know...
>
>> > > >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
>> > > >
>> > > >Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > tyring to win the annual "Tubman Maturity Award"?
>> >
>> > I thought you'd bribed the judging panel for the net ten years...
>> >
>> > Octavulg, would love to point out that at no point in the past have you ever been remotely mature towards ANYTHING...
>> >
>>
>> While Blackheart may not fit your definition of 'mature' about
>> things - he's very often dead on with his replys.
>
>Good for him. He also randomly flames people. How wonderful. Such an upstanding member of the community.
>
look up the definition of random... everyone that I flame got flamed
for a reason.
>> Now which do you
>> think is more appreciated on the NG? Someone like you who replys a lot
>> without adding anything valueable, or someone like Blackheart who can
>> shoot straight even if he doesn't use polite language because he doesn't
>> really care if he offends your fragile little ego?
>
>Ah yes. His wonderful post about the Tubman maturity award contributed on many levels and in more ways than I can count.
>
what did you -really- expect to get with some half assed mother
comment?
>I have NEVER seen Blackheart make a constructive, on-topic post about ANYTHING. I have, on rare occasion, said something,
>deep insightful, and innovative. Or at least mildly contributive. Your definition of valuable and mine, as well as that of
>others on this newsggroup probably don't agree. The fact that a large number of people on this NG have been playing since
>the days of Rogue Trader might also help make them more constructive than me.
>
>> Your reply to Ratman
>> was no less clueless than Ratman's continued nattering bullshit.
>
>THAT'S insulting. I'd like to think it was at least 0.1% less clueless. I made a (semi) valid point, which can hold up in
>90% of the time, 9 times out of ten.
>
the problem is that no one of any importantce gives a flying fuck
about you (semi) valid points that might hold up 90% of the time
simply because they're so pathetically inane that most people aren't
going to bother looking at them closely.
>> I'll
>> take Blackheart over you any day.
>
>Goody. Perhaps you'll both be so enamored of each other you'll forget about the rest of the world.
>
but then you'd get jealous.. it's pretty obvious that I've left a
lasting impression on you... it's starting to appear that you fancy
me.
>Octavulg, wonders why his keyboard is making dull thudding sounds when he hits the keys...
>
if you stop banging your head against the keyboard, you'll stop
hearing that dull thudding sound...
Blackheart
>I just have to add some thoughts on this whole political
>correctness thing again.
>
>
it would be a better troll if you cross posted it
Jack & Co.
Blackheart wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2002 19:35:52 GMT, "Jack & Co."
> <c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Myrmidon wrote:
> >
> >> In article <3CDD6534...@pei.sympatico.ca>,
> >> c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca, Jack & Co. shouted out the following words
> >> of wit...
> >
> >This is out of tone with the rest of your post, you know...
> >
> >> > > >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > tyring to win the annual "Tubman Maturity Award"?
> >> >
> >> > I thought you'd bribed the judging panel for the net ten years...
> >> >
> >> > Octavulg, would love to point out that at no point in the past have you ever been remotely mature towards ANYTHING...
> >> >
> >>
> >> While Blackheart may not fit your definition of 'mature' about
> >> things - he's very often dead on with his replys.
> >
> >Good for him. He also randomly flames people. How wonderful. Such an upstanding member of the community.
> >
>
> look up the definition of random... everyone that I flame got flamed
> for a reason.
Um..me? Perhaps it was a few months ago, ut I have no idea how that could be construed as anything but random.
> >> Now which do you
> >> think is more appreciated on the NG? Someone like you who replys a lot
> >> without adding anything valueable, or someone like Blackheart who can
> >> shoot straight even if he doesn't use polite language because he doesn't
> >> really care if he offends your fragile little ego?
> >
> >Ah yes. His wonderful post about the Tubman maturity award contributed on many levels and in more ways than I can count.
> >
>
> what did you -really- expect to get with some half assed mother
> comment?
Something besides Myrmidon commenting on how wonderful you were and how you should shut up.
> >I have NEVER seen Blackheart make a constructive, on-topic post about ANYTHING. I have, on rare occasion, said something,
> >deep insightful, and innovative. Or at least mildly contributive. Your definition of valuable and mine, as well as that of
> >others on this newsggroup probably don't agree. The fact that a large number of people on this NG have been playing since
> >the days of Rogue Trader might also help make them more constructive than me.
> >
> >> Your reply to Ratman
> >> was no less clueless than Ratman's continued nattering bullshit.
> >
> >THAT'S insulting. I'd like to think it was at least 0.1% less clueless. I made a (semi) valid point, which can hold up in
> >90% of the time, 9 times out of ten.
> >
>
> the problem is that no one of any importantce gives a flying fuck
> about you (semi) valid points that might hold up 90% of the time
> simply because they're so pathetically inane that most people aren't
> going to bother looking at them closely.
Name three for me. Perhaps it'll help me improve.
> >> I'll
> >> take Blackheart over you any day.
> >
> >Goody. Perhaps you'll both be so enamored of each other you'll forget about the rest of the world.
> >
>
> but then you'd get jealous.. it's pretty obvious that I've left a
> lasting impression on you... it's starting to appear that you fancy
> me.
You stole that from Big Al.
> >Octavulg, wonders why his keyboard is making dull thudding sounds when he hits the keys...
> >
>
> if you stop banging your head against the keyboard, you'll stop
> hearing that dull thudding sound...
Impossible. You see, I use my hands to hit the keys.
Octavulg
Myrmidon
of wit...
>
>
> Myrmidon wrote:
>
> > In article <3CDD6534...@pei.sympatico.ca>,
> > c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca, Jack & Co. shouted out the following words
> > of wit...
>
> This is out of tone with the rest of your post, you know...
It's called sarcasm look it up in a dictionary, ya nimrod.
>
> > > > >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
> > > > >
> > > > >Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > tyring to win the annual "Tubman Maturity Award"?
> > >
> > > I thought you'd bribed the judging panel for the net ten years...
> > >
> > > Octavulg, would love to point out that at no point in the past have you ever been remotely mature towards ANYTHING...
> > >
> >
> > While Blackheart may not fit your definition of 'mature' about
> > things - he's very often dead on with his replys.
>
> Good for him. He also randomly flames people. How wonderful. Such an upstanding member of the community.
I point out that there's nothing random about who he flames. I
also point out that that comment is particularly ironic coming from
someone who has been flamed up and down this news group by a good number
of posters for some of your 'deep' posts.
>
> > Now which do you
> > think is more appreciated on the NG? Someone like you who replys a lot
> > without adding anything valueable, or someone like Blackheart who can
> > shoot straight even if he doesn't use polite language because he doesn't
> > really care if he offends your fragile little ego?
>
> Ah yes. His wonderful post about the Tubman maturity award contributed on many levels and in more ways than I can count.
No, he was quite plainly pointing out that you're an asshole.
>
> I have NEVER seen Blackheart make a constructive, on-topic post about ANYTHING.
Gee, you haven't been around very long - have you. But then the
folks who have been here already knew that... I've seen some great
stuff from Blackheart - like why you won't be seeing Squats coming back
any time soon.
> I have, on rare occasion, said something,
> deep insightful, and innovative. Or at least mildly contributive.
Slick, mentally speaking, you're out of your depth in a chemistry
dish or a dixie cup, much less in any of the threads I've seen you post
to to date.
> Your definition of valuable and mine, as well as that of
> others on this newsggroup probably don't agree. The fact that a large number of people on this NG have been playing since
> the days of Rogue Trader might also help make them more constructive than me.
No shit! And yet you continue to drop your little turds of wisdom
all over the NG - oh joy!
>
> > Your reply to Ratman
> > was no less clueless than Ratman's continued nattering bullshit.
>
> THAT'S insulting. I'd like to think it was at least 0.1% less clueless. I made a (semi) valid point, which can hold up in
> 90% of the time, 9 times out of ten.
>
You made a historically inaccurate generalization to a moron. Wow
- that's deep.
>
> Octavulg, wonders why his keyboard is making dull thudding sounds when he hits the keys...
>
It's probably just echoing through your empty little skull.
Arhes
I don't know. What is some one so worried about being politicaly correct
doing playing a politicaly incorrect game?
I my self have gotten tired of the stupidity of political correctness. If I
offend some one by this, too bad. People do things that I don't like, but
I'm not going to make a federal case out of it.
incrdbil
>
>> So how on earth do the Black Templars come into this at all? There's not
>> a swastika in sight.
>
>I just told you this one to point out that I am (perhaps) a bit shy about
>40K militairy background.
>The black painted Templars with small white contrasts,all their impirial
>insignias and the black crosses remind *me* of the ss, with all the sm
>gene-seed fluff in mind.
I've seen pathetically stupid PC dumbasses before, but this takes the
cake.
Guess he wouldn't care for my old plastic IG Stormtroopers, one in SA
Brown Shirt Color Scheme.
arache
fictional
> history, instead of simply using the given past...
Shame your superior imagination doesn't extend to language.
cheers,
The poster formerly known as "Contrary to popular belief Craig Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted him." now going for an even longer Usenet handle!!
"incrdbil" <incr...@flinthills.com> wrote in message
news:3cdda889...@usenet.flinthills.com...
cross theme, clearly reminiscent of
a) The crusades where hundreds of Saracens, Muslims etc. were slaughtered in
the middle east
b) Religous overtones, especially Templars
c) English football hooligans and the trail of violence left across Europe
in the late 70's/early 80's (mostly)
--
Craig (Gadzooks)
C:RGMW Roolzboy
The above message may contain traces of peanut
Laugh at my unfinished website:
http://www.freewebz.com/chaplaingrabthar
Newbies, read your FAQ!
http://www.rgmw.org
Ratman
I forgot that as well as the faq hint not to post on political themes...
By now I regret what I did. But I would like to hear just once in this
thread that having second thoughts about nazi-symbolism is not a crime.
d.e.m.
The poster formerly known as "Contrary to popular belief Craig Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted him." now going for an even longer Usenet handle!!
>
> I forgot that as well as the faq hint not to post on political themes...
> By now I regret what I did. But I would like to hear just once in this
> thread that having second thoughts about nazi-symbolism is not a crime.
>
fuck's sake) should be.
Jack & Co.
Myrmidon wrote:
> In article <3CDD7295...@pei.sympatico.ca>,
> c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca, Jack & Co. shouted out the following words
> of wit...
> >
> >
> > Myrmidon wrote:
> >
> > > In article <3CDD6534...@pei.sympatico.ca>,
> > > c.c.s...@pei.sympatico.ca, Jack & Co. shouted out the following words
> > > of wit...
> >
> > This is out of tone with the rest of your post, you know...
>
> It's called sarcasm look it up in a dictionary, ya nimrod.
I've decided to take you literally. It helps sooth my aching ego.
> >
> > > > > >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Unfortunately, yer average activist for social change is A) violent, B) thicker than Blackheart's mother's thighs...
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > tyring to win the annual "Tubman Maturity Award"?
> > > >
> > > > I thought you'd bribed the judging panel for the net ten years...
> > > >
> > > > Octavulg, would love to point out that at no point in the past have you ever been remotely mature towards ANYTHING...
> > > >
> > >
> > > While Blackheart may not fit your definition of 'mature' about
> > > things - he's very often dead on with his replys.
> >
> > Good for him. He also randomly flames people. How wonderful. Such an upstanding member of the community.
>
> I point out that there's nothing random about who he flames. I
> also point out that that comment is particularly ironic coming from
> someone who has been flamed up and down this news group by a good number
> of posters for some of your 'deep' posts.
The only person who has really flamed me that I can think of is Blackheart. And he did try really hard, but not quite up and
down this newsgroup. That would require about 400 or more posts per day, far to many for even the great and wonderful
Blackheart. Well, and you flamed me too. But that IS all I can think of.
> >
> > > Now which do you
> > > think is more appreciated on the NG? Someone like you who replys a lot
> > > without adding anything valueable, or someone like Blackheart who can
> > > shoot straight even if he doesn't use polite language because he doesn't
> > > really care if he offends your fragile little ego?
> >
> > Ah yes. His wonderful post about the Tubman maturity award contributed on many levels and in more ways than I can count.
>
> No, he was quite plainly pointing out that you're an asshole.
Ah. How clear.
>
> >
> > I have NEVER seen Blackheart make a constructive, on-topic post about ANYTHING.
>
> Gee, you haven't been around very long - have you.
No. I haven't. I'm judging things based ON WHAT I'VE SEEN. And you seem to be judging me on that exact premise.
> But then the
> folks who have been here already knew that... I've seen some great
> stuff from Blackheart - like why you won't be seeing Squats coming back
> any time soon.
Anyone can tell you why you won't be seeing Squats coming back soon. It can be boiled down to the fact that GW are assholes when
we don't want them to be.
> > I have, on rare occasion, said something,
> > deep insightful, and innovative. Or at least mildly contributive.
>
> Slick, mentally speaking, you're out of your depth in a chemistry
> dish or a dixie cup, much less in any of the threads I've seen you post
> to to date.
Pitri dish, oh incarnation of all that's wonderful and holy about the world. And you're out of yourr depth on mountain peaks.
And perhaps I'm just out of my depth by your standards. After all, if Blackheart is mature by yours, I know not what may be
wrong with you...
> > Your definition of valuable and mine, as well as that of
> > others on this newsggroup probably don't agree. The fact that a large number of people on this NG have been playing since
> > the days of Rogue Trader might also help make them more constructive than me.
>
> No shit! And yet you continue to drop your little turds of wisdom
> all over the NG - oh joy!
Your exuberance is truly gratifying.
> >
> > > Your reply to Ratman
> > > was no less clueless than Ratman's continued nattering bullshit.
> >
> > THAT'S insulting. I'd like to think it was at least 0.1% less clueless. I made a (semi) valid point, which can hold up in
> > 90% of the time, 9 times out of ten.
> >
> You made a historically inaccurate generalization to a moron. Wow
> - that's deep.
Explain to me how it was inaccurate. Name three historical events which cannot be somehow linked to violence.
Octavulg
Ratman
I know.
> Even the current ork 'Tank Bustas' figures take
> some of their design details from WW II German troops - note the German
> style 'stick grenades'.
I am not a specialist in german WWII weapons, I never noticed that.
Stick grenades are typically german then?
> Now then, the person who originally posted the
> thread had two (2) basic questions. One, was it wrong (in bad taste) to
> have put little 'swastikas' on the back of his ork 'Storm Boyz'?
> And two, was someone likely to be offended?
That have been the questions more or less.
> The answers are pretty straight forward.
Could have been, but the discussion grew and the answers got worse.
> One, no it wasn't inappropriate to put swastikas on 'Storm
> boyz' in the context of the game, and it's background and basis. The
> person didn't 'modify' the miniatures to look like WW II German troops -
> they came that way to begin with.
You just state the obvious, whats your point?
> Using symbols from that time period
> certainly was NOT an attempt on the part of the gamer to endorse or
> justify the Nazi mind set or in your words to make it "really 'cool' ".
I never said that HE tried to do so, this post was more in answer to those who
tried to make petty excuses like this indian stormboy story.
> As for part two - Yes, someone is bound to complain. Because the gamer
> was endorsing or advancing a hateful racist viewpoint? No. But rather,
> because the folks who whine about these sorts of non-issues have no
> brains and even less spine. Rather than confront real racists and deal
> with difficult (and possibly personally dangerous) issues, they can
> contentedly pat themselves on the back about how they 'stood up' for a
> strong moral issue like a symbol from a historical WAR on a fictional
> WAR game miniature. And of course, we all know how 'out of character'
> it is in the fictional background of 40K to portray the Orks as 'cruel'
> or 'barbaric' and willing to slaughter millions of helpless non-
> combatants.
I do not like people to be that indifferent to comon usage of fascist
symbolism. One should not get used to it to much.
> The real frosting on the cake there is your comments about 'two or
> three mouse clicks' verse taking 'your time making those little nazi-men
> look fine and cruel'. WTF? We're glad to know your comfortable with
> racism and genocide - as long as it's quick and easy.
OK, better would have been determined practicing in the art of duplicating
fascist symbolism in miniaturised detail verse consuming a computer wargame
without thinking about it a lot.
> (We'll conveniently ignore the time the programmers had to put in to creating
> that 2 or 3 mouse click game that lets one bloodlessly simulate mass
> death and destruction.)
> I think we've pretty well captured the real
> essence of the issue here, which is that YOU personally are
> uncomfortable with the idea that you should have to honestly think about
> the fact you're participating in a hobby that simulates and draws much
> of it's basis from real death and destruction.
Might be true, but that's not what this is about. It's about political correctness,
and this (to me) forbids nazi symbolism.
> Apparently as long as
> YOU personally can pretend that there isn't the slightest connection
> between real world violence and WarHammer, why then it's just fine and
> dandy for you to play. But heaven forbid if someone should somehow
> remind you of what the nature of the game truly is... Boo hoo hoo.
Perhaps it's even more disgusting, I am thinking about what other people
might think of me playing warhammer.
> So, you want to play war games, but you're attempting to convince
> others that there's even the slightest merit to the idea that it's
> offensive or in bad taste to include imagery from historical conflicts
> in fictional games about violence and death just because historical
> conflicts are about real death and violence? That rates up there as one
> of the most pathetic cop-outs of all time. It would be one thing if
> someone were using war games (whether historical, fictional, or science
> fiction based) as a means of advancing the idea that racism and genocide
> are acceptable. But that is clearly NOT the case here.
It is not...Wow, if YOU say so...
> The fact that this is clearly evident
Please make it evident to me then, that should solve all my problems then.
> and yet you continue to whine about how it's
> 'bad style' highlights the fact that you personally have a problem
> reconciling conflicting self-images.
I never had problems with warhammer, but I have problems with people using
fascist symbolism.
></begin Ratman internal dialogue mode>
> "I'm a nice sensitive guy, and sensitive guys don't say or do anything
> that might be 'Politically Incorrect" or otherwise offend someone or
> even remind others that the world isn't a 'and they lived happily ever
> after.' fairy tale."
Most of the time yes...I am just to good to be true.
> And...
>
> "I'm a guy who likes playing miniatures WAR games about conquering
> others through the use of death and destruction."
As I do like other strategy games, but most are not that much fun.
> "Playing games about beating others through the use of violence just
> isn't PC.
I think you think of PC in other terms then I do.
> What ever am I going to do? I know, I'll play 'science
> FICTION' war games. That way I can continue to view myself as a
> 'sensitive guy'
Yes, fits me better than historical ones.
> while pretending that 'make believe' war is NOT about
> the use of violence to gain a desired end.
Never sasid so.
> That way I can hold the
> moral high ground, and still not have to give up any personal pleasures
> due to having a personal belief that would require some self sacrifice
> on my part.
Good thinking, right?
> Better still, I can wrap myself in the cloak of 'false
> virtue' when others present me with things that might remind me of the
> reality of the world. If I whine, piss, and moan about it long enough
> people are sure to see the virtues of my ideas..."
No, I never thought about it this way, and I did not do more than write a
few lines, so please stop exagerating
</end Ratman internal dialogue mode>
> In short, fuck that,
That is what to many of you seem to think in my opinion, leave it at that.
> fuck you,
Tried hard, did not work.
> and while you're at it - just plain FUCK OFF.
Just because some people do not like my attitude to nazi-designs?
> Everything you've spouted so far has been bullshit semantics
Bullshit and semantics are your part not mine.
> used in a lame attempt to justify why you and people like you should be
> handled with velvet gloves by those grounded in reality so that the
> messy and unpleasant reality of our world and of war in general doesn't
> intrude on your personal fantasy.
If you were "grounded in reality" just a little bit more than you are,
you might learn some politeness even to those who do not share your point
of view, as well as the less obvious effects your actions might have.
> Why don't you take your bullshit 'Ow
> Mommy, it hurts' Never Never Land
You like Peter Pan too?
> fantasy peddling ass to a news group
> full of tards who like cluelessness - I hear the Wicca NG is big on that
> at the moment.
No need they are already here, but I do not like them very much either.
Perhaps I'll have a look at ARW later.
I read the
> RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org
and (much the same)
> Or...
> http://www.sheppard.demon.co.uk/rgmw_faq/rgmw_faq.htm
I'll remember the politics part next time, but you too should read the faq
once again, the part about your internet relative.
d.e.m.
Ratman
d_e...@gmx.net, Ratman shouted out the following words of wit...
>> archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
>> > > > So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
>> > >
>> >> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
>> > So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
>> > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
>>
>> I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
>> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
>>
> No, instead you rely on others to do it for you. Your freedom
> that society wants to 'cut' was bought and paid for to begin with in
> blood, steel, and tears.
No, it's been there all the time.
> Now, relying on others to help defend those
> freedoms wouldn't be a bad thing in and of itself as there are many
> people who simply aren't mentally and physically equipped to do the
> things needed to defend themselves.
I'd like it more, if there is no need for anyone to defend himself.
> The difference here however, is
> that most individuals like that with any grasp of reality don't pretend
> that violence is never an appropriate response, nor do they attempt to
> assume a morally and ethically superior mental stance about it because
> they're not the ones doing the violence.
But your ethics know a difference between attacker and defender?
> (And yes, it's a direct
> implication of your statement "Yes, human history is a poor thing. {I.e.
> because of the violence})
Violence produces violence, I used to much verbal violence at the beginning
it seems. Violence is evil in itself, but it certainly is not always equally
wrong.
> If you pay your taxes, then you are helping
> to pay the salaries of violence specialists (law enforcement, and
> military personnel) that society uses ever single day.
I can't do a lot about that without loosing even more of my freedom.
> To say 'I'd be
> unhappy to be reminded of 'real war and death' in a science fiction WAR
> game' is the height of asinine stupidity.
Would seeing other people fancying certein politically inadequately themed
armies sound any better then?
> >> and I do understand people
> >> who do not want to be reminded of such things.
> I don't. The only people that have any right to NOT want to be
> reminded of such things are folks that were part of the conflict in
> question.
The very same, age about 60+.
> Those folks have paid their dues, and if they don't wish to
> be reminded of past fear and suffering, I can well agree.
Thanks a lot.
> But since we we're talking about Nazi symbols from World War II on 40K orks -
> I have to ask, exactly how many WW II veterans do you game with? None? Wow,
> what a surprise.
And how many of them pass the shops with the fitting displays?
Watching younger people playing with their past?
> As for the "I don't want to be reminded" crowd that has never
> served or fought - fuck them.
OK with me.
> I'd suggest the game of choice for these
> lack luster individuals would be a large sand box - that way when
> they're not building fairy tale castles in the sand (ooh can't have any
> scary parts on them - might remind someone of medieval warfare and
> offend them) they can bury their heads in the sand instead. I could buy
> the 'I don't want to be reminded' comments from people that don't watch
> television, surf the net, or read the news - but NOT from people
> voluntarily participating in a hobby about WAR - which is EXACTLY what
> we are talking about.
The hobby is more about playing and painting than about war, the rules are
not near to a simulation, but the war part is all right with me in the game.
It's the political hints some people have a strong affinity to which bother
me (these people as well as the allusions themselves).
> I have to ask, what do you do during holidays like "Veterans Day"
> and "Memorial Day"? Hide in your basement with your fingers in your
> ears and wish real hard until the 'bad days' go away?
We do not have those here.
>>
>> > Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
>> > amount of wars we have fought.
>>
>> Yes, human history is a poor thing.
> No, human history simply is. There are instances of real horror,
> but I point out ignoring it is a great way to repeat it.
40K instead of history lessons then? That's just what I am afraid of.
Everything in it's place.
> Sadly, folks like you would gladly forget everything that was learned
> so more people that are brave can go out and pay to learn those lessons
> yet again.
Which lessons, veteran?
> The sick part is your false pretence that somehow the reality of the
> situation will bend to your 'beliefs' if only you can convince everyone
> else that it's their view of history and reality that's distorted.
Next thing you tell me is that the poles attacked germany in a blitz attack.
>> All I can say is I'm glad you're not my neighbor, you'd be useless in a
>> crisis.
>>
>> > Humanity is a warlike race, not some rose-tinted liberal utopia,
>>
>> That seems to be a rather bad excuse.
> Coming from a person who voluntarily plays a game about KILLING
> PEOPLE and blowing things up??? This is the height of hypocrisy and
> stupidity! Whether the game is based on some real or fiction event is
> irrelevant to the fact that the GOAL of the game is to crush your
> opponent by annihilating his or her forces. JUST LIKE REAL WAR - the
> idea is to control territory, resources, or just out right kill lots of
> opposing troops.
And I still never wanted to kill anyone for real, but if that is all the
same to you I am too glad you're not my neighbor.
>>
>> > we may not like the killing
>>
>> I certainly do not.
>>
>> >but
>>
>> No "but"
> - Yes 'but' as in the unspoken "But I'll play fictional games about
>killing ~ just so long as I can pretend that the goal of the game isn't
>about 'real' (tm) killing". In other words, you're making a weak
>attempt to argue semantics to avoid the issue.
Please give me the semantic phrase about "thoughts can kill".
You really belief killing is the same as playing wargames?
>>
>> > there is a need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the
>> > needs of others.
>>
>> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
As in killing other people...
> This is complete and UTTER BULLSHIT! If you pay your taxes and
>are NOT attempting to have the police and military disbanded, then you
>are damn well accepting that others do the bleeding and dying on your
>behalf.
Paying taxes kills people stop it right now! Good try.
> This sort of self deceiving LIE that isn't even vaguely
>credible under the most charitable of situations. I know good and well
>that you would call the police, fire department, bomb squad, or other
>specialized social service for support if you were in a life-threatening
>situation. And yet here you sit spouting...
>> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
As in kill other people...
> Who the fuck do you think you're kidding? That's about the most vile
> lie I've heard in a long time. This makes you out to be a social
> parasite of the lowest order.
Just because I do not want to kill anyone?
> In other words, you'll accept the
> sacrifices of other people, and pretend that you personally aren't in
> their debt while spouting 'Politically Correct' crap about how it might
> 'offend' someone who plays war games by reminding them of real
> historical events.
Or people who do not play wargames at all.
> >> I consider playing nazi armies
> >> more than just bad style.
> Well, in light of the utter lack of judgement and extremely poor
> grasp of reality you've displayed so far - I have to ask, what makes you
> think that this even vaguely relevant?
Same question to you...
But you got me wrong several times, most likely due to my mediocre english skills.
>>
>> > Even in a historical wargame. I last played a desert encounter where
>> > my opponent was a German tank platoon and I was an entrenched british
>> > force. Was this morally wrong by your books.
>>
>> I do not like historical wargames, but there at least you know what you
>> are doing on your own choice.
>> My initial posting was meant as an answer to the thread named in the title.
>> The given question was if a stormboyz mob should be included in the
>> tournament army or if this might not be that good an idea.
>> A lot of people answered that they like WWII themed armies, and I wanted
>> to point out that this is not everybodies point of view.
> And again, this statement as ZERO CREDIBILITY coming from ANYONE
> voluntarily participating in a hobby that is centered around WARFARE.
> The fact that it may or may not be a fictional event is NOT relevant to
> the intent and goal of the game - which is to win through the skillful
> employment of violence against an opponent. Have you modeled your 40K
> armies into 'kinder & gentler' armies? Have you convinced all your
> fellow area gamers to convert their minis' weapons to 'Nerf Bolters' and
> 'Nerf Rocket Launchers'???
That would remind me of larp, which would be even more offensive than the way the
minis already are.
> No? Gosh! What a bunch of sickos - next
> thing you know they'll be pretending to fire those simulated weapons,
> and working out simulated casualties representing simulated death and
> destruction... OH THE HUMANITY!
You missed the topic altogether, didn't you?
>
> >> I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly
> >> related to history.
> Apparently you live in "Never Never Land" too - does that mean we
> should change the history books so as not to damage your delicate
> sensibilities?
You should not mix them with wargames.
>
> >So what can we base the wargame on?
>
> The more imaginative minds try to use creativity to make up their own fictional
> history, instead of simply using the given past...
>
> d.e.m.
> First off, to quote a mind much better than yours when it comes to
> writing - "There is nothing new under the sun." So much for the
> argument about fiction equaling originality and thus creating a clear
> distinction from real world events. (If that attempt to dodge the issue
> had been any weaker, it would be receiving medical treatment for
> anemia.) Now then, as to the heart of the argument - is it reasonable
> for someone playing a game about violence and killing to complain about
> the use of historical symbols or imagery from real world conflicts in
> that game? HELL NO!
Just tell me in two or three short sentences that even I should be able to
understand why that is the case? Why am I to like SS-signs or Hakenkreuze
on wargame miniatures? Because I do wargames?
> In short, it's a crock of shit. Doubtless you're
> the same sort of brainless spineless weenie that would refuse to play
> the guy who was featured on NewWave's web site with the World War II
> "U.S. Grunts" themed Marine army from one of the GT's. After all, it
> would remind you of real world events - and we all know how little you
> and reality have in common.
If that only was true.
> It would have been one thing if the poster
> had been using an entire army themed after the Nazis - but that was NOT
> the case, nor was the poster an advocate of Nazi ideals - which leaves
> people NO GROUND on which to stand when it comes to the issue of
> 'violence related imagery' in a war game. The damn game is called
> WARhammer not NERFhammer. Duh!
I am not accusing the stormboyz player. He posted because he was uncertain
what he should do. I was worried, because he was almost blamed for doing so.
> I might kindly suggest that in an attempt to become a marginally useful
> member of society you might want to remove your head from the vicinity
> of your colon, and start searching for a clue.
Always trying,sir!
> Myrmidon
>(Who does NOT admire pacifists and other forms of social parasites!)
but I still do
d.e.m.
Ratman
news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
>
>> >> The whole 40K background is full of fascist/racist fluff
>> >> (e.g. kill the aliens/billions of psykers have to die for the
>> >> holy emperor each year...).The brits like that for satire,
>> > We do?
>>
>> Not for satire perhaps, but some years ago the british TV always
>> had one channel showing a ww-movie (and that was the time with not
>> that
>> many channels to choose from at all).
> Of course now we have The Execution Channel, WarMonger TV,
> LetsGoToWarWithGermany24/7 and lets not forget
> Big Brother UK where people from 12 ethnic minorites compete not to be
> exterminated on a Friday night,decided by a phone in vote by the good ole
> warmongering facist British general public.
:)
> Get real.
Not on purpose.
> Warhammer is a game. Personally I would rather see a unit of
> "colonial british IG" get slaughtered by some nazi ork
> troops that see a real war where real people die.
Good tooo hear.
> Perhaps Saddam Hussein and
> George W Bush could play"Loser goes into exile Warhammer" GMed by Kofi Annan
Just try to persuade them.
d.e.m.
Ratman
> "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> posted it
> >
> > I forgot that as well as the faq hint not to post on political themes...
> > By now I regret what I did. But I would like to hear just once in this
> > thread that having second thoughts about nazi-symbolism is not a crime.
> >
> It's not a crime,
> but objecting to WAR-related imagery
War-related imagery is too much a generalization, it's the fascist
part that I
wanted to criticize.
Other ojections have been included saying more or less: "But thats
just me".
Next time, if I ever try to talk about politics this place I'll put
more emphasis to what it's really about. I can see by now that the
posting has not
been a good one.
> in a WARgame (for fuck's sake) should be.
Such a game can not do without, which is why I am not against it.
I never wanted pink marines petting each other to death...
d.e.m.
The poster formerly known as "Contrary to popular belief Craig Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted him." now going for an even longer Usenet handle!!
> part that I
> wanted to criticize.
Have you read the background fluff for the Imperium? That's pretty much your
Uber-Fascist theocracy right there, so it's built right into the game.
As one of the very few 'bearded liberal peaceniks' on the group, I do
understand where your coming from witht his, but it is something of an
over-reaction in my view. I also believe that the acts of the Third Reich
are something that should never be repeated, so reminders of what people are
capable of, no matter how subtle, serve as subliminal warnings not to let
such a state of affirs happen again (naive, huh?)
> Other ojections have been included saying more or less: "But thats
> just me".
Welcome to usenet.
> Next time, if I ever try to talk about politics this place I'll put
> more emphasis to what it's really about.
It does help to talk about what you're talking about.
I can see by now that the
> posting has not
> been a good one.
>
No, this is pretty much par for the course for political threads (which is
why I general avoid them) on here. Particularly as this group leans strongly
againts "political correctness" (good thing too)
> > in a WARgame (for fuck's sake) should be.
>
> Such a game can not do without, which is why I am not against it.
You certainly came across as against it
> I never wanted pink marines petting each other to death...
>
Boy, are you ever in the wrong ng...
incrdbil
>
>Violence produces violence, I used to much verbal violence at the beginning
>it seems. Violence is evil in itself, but it certainly is not always equally
>wrong.
What a lame Pc dumbass statement. Violence in itself is evil. you
may as well say breathing is evil. Shooting someone is is currently
attacking and skullfucking your (non compliant) mother is oh so evil
>
>> If you pay your taxes, then you are helping
>> to pay the salaries of violence specialists (law enforcement, and
>> military personnel) that society uses ever single day.
>
>I can't do a lot about that without loosing even more of my freedom.
Ah, so you don't havethe strength of your convictiosn then. Do you
even try to lift a feeble finger in protest or to motivate change?
>
>> But since we we're talking about Nazi symbols from World War II on 40K orks -
>> I have to ask, exactly how many WW II veterans do you game with? None? Wow,
>> what a surprise.
>
>And how many of them pass the shops with the fitting displays?
>Watching younger people playing with their past?
I'm trying to rememeber the last time some WWII vets attacked a
micr-armor gaming convention. Can't recal many Vietnam Vets beating
up crowds outside movies such as Apoclaypse now, Platoon. Hmm, Civil
War recreation games go one without the NAACP protesting the
confederate players.
>
>> Who the fuck do you think you're kidding? That's about the most vile
>> lie I've heard in a long time. This makes you out to be a social
>> parasite of the lowest order.
>
>Just because I do not want to kill anyone?
pretty much. Your willing to let others take opn that moral burden
and risk their lives to benefit you, because you can't have your
precious sensabilities disturned--those really tighly held morals of
you that you do nothing to support. Those oh so precious beliefs that
you just can't be bothered to go out and protest for, or lobby for
changes that work more in line with your 'beliefs'.
>
>Just tell me in two or three short sentences that even I should be able to
>understand why that is the case? Why am I to like SS-signs or Hakenkreuze
>on wargame miniatures? Because I do wargames?
We don't give a fuck if you like it. Just shut your fucking trap when
it comes to complaining what others like.
Mikael Halila
>
> Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message news:<3CDBB77F...@pp.inet.fi>...
> > Ratman wrote:
> > >
> > > Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message news:<3CDAC30B...@pp.inet.fi>...
> > > > Ratman wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I just have to add some thoughts on this whole political
> > > > > correctness thing again.
> > > > >
> > > > > it is somehow embarrassing. Using fascist emblems is simply
> > > > > unnecessairy, even in satire. I know a lot of people like it,
> > > > > but I do not.
> > > > >
> > > > > The excuse that the swastika is of indian origin seems very
> > > > > poor to me when looking at the stormboyz, they simply lack the
> > > > > feathers (sorry for the misused pun).
> > <snip>
> > > > > I did not buy the new 40k boxed set for a long time, because
> > > > > I think even the black templars on the box are politically
> > > > > offensive.
> > > > >
> > > > > These are the main reason that I am not surprised that many
> > > > > people decide to use WWII themed armies, which I think should
> > > > > not be done.
> > > >
> > > > Tell me you're kidding. Please.
> > >
> > > No I am not, I can't stand nazis.
> >
> > So how on earth do the Black Templars come into this at all? There's not
> > a swastika in sight.
>
> I just told you this one to point out that I am (perhaps) a bit shy about
> 40K militairy background.
> The black painted Templars with small white contrasts,all their impirial
> insignias and the black crosses remind *me* of the ss, with all the sm
> gene-seed fluff in mind.
Excuse my language, but you are fucking joking. BLACK ARMOR makes you
think of the SS? Damn it, I wear black clothes most of the time. Some of
them have small white print on the front. Would you be offended by my
choice of clothes?
Since the German Army wore feldgrau (=grey) uniforms in the Second World
War, I'm sure you'll find the Space Marine chapter based on our NG
offensive because it uses grey uniforms. Come to think of it, Finnish
regular officers wear grey. Offensive, innit?
> > And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
>
> I do not like them very much, as any other (modern) history based wargames.
You know, no-one's forcing you to play them. If you really have
attitudes like this, maye you shouldn't.
--
Mikael Halila, #118
--
C:RGMW fluff master
Champion of the titanic .sig
"This guy is certainly the dude of the retards."
-Robert Singers, RGMW
"Hey, everyone is a bit bi. I just haven't found the guy I want to
guzzle the semen of."
-someone, RGMW
Masterful troll response #1:
"I'm not wrong. You're an idiot."
_____
Viikon Linnanvuori:
"Minun mielestäni voi olla nationalistisia liberaaleja ja libertaarisia
kommunisteja."
_____
Mikael the Eccentric St:14 Dx:10 Co:8 In:10 Wi:10 Ch:8
Dlvl:0 $:0 HP:20(20) Pw:0(0) AC:9 Xp:1/2 T:19 Conf
Mikael Halila
>
> I don't know. What is some one so worried about being politicaly correct
> doing playing a politicaly incorrect game?
> I my self have gotten tired of the stupidity of political correctness. If I
> offend some one by this, too bad. People do things that I don't like, but
> I'm not going to make a federal case out of it.
And what is someone who top-posts doing in this NG? See the FAQ, at
http://www.rmgw.org , and clean up your act.
Mikael Halila
Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint
whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted
>
> As one of the very few 'bearded liberal peaceniks' on the group,
Are we "very few", then? Although I'm a libertarian, so I might not
necessarily count.
The poster formerly known as "Contrary to popular belief Craig Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted him." now going for an even longer Usenet handle!!
> "The poster formerly known as \"Contrary to popular belief Craig
> Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint
> whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted
> him.\" now going for an even longer Usenet handle!!" wrote:
> >
> > As one of the very few 'bearded liberal peaceniks' on the group,
>
> Are we "very few", then?
Perception says so, but if you're curious, run a poll :p
> Although I'm a libertarian, so I might not
> necessarily count.
>
Sure you count, but I don't think many on this ng would describe themselves
as liberals
Myrmidon
d_e...@gmx.net, Ratman shouted out the following words of wit...
> In article <5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com>,
> d_e...@gmx.net, Ratman shouted out the following words of wit...
> >> archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
> >> > > > So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
> >> > >
> >> >> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
> >> > So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
> >> > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
> >>
> >> I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
> >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
> >>
>
> > No, instead you rely on others to do it for you. Your freedom
> > that society wants to 'cut' was bought and paid for to begin with in
> > blood, steel, and tears.
>
> No, it's been there all the time.
Malarkey! Name a single Non-third world country in existence
today that has NOT fought a war at some point in its history for the
right to exist as a nation. Your reply is more BS basically saying "I'm
not in debted to someone else" - in your words your freedom has "been
there all the time". Lame
>
> > Now, relying on others to help defend those
> > freedoms wouldn't be a bad thing in and of itself as there are many
> > people who simply aren't mentally and physically equipped to do the
> > things needed to defend themselves.
>
> I'd like it more, if there is no need for anyone to defend himself.
Who cares! I didn't say "Wouldn't it be nice if..." or "If you
were God, how would you remake the world..." I'm plainly talking about
the way the world IS. It's called reality - and I point out again that
it seems to be something you spend a lot of time doing your best to
avoid dealing with.
>
> > The difference here however, is
> > that most individuals like that with any grasp of reality don't pretend
> > that violence is never an appropriate response, nor do they attempt to
> > assume a morally and ethically superior mental stance about it because
> > they're not the ones doing the violence.
>
> But your ethics know a difference between attacker and defender?
In the vast majority of cases it's fairly obvious. As an example,
lets say I walk into a bank and there are 8 people who are lying on the
floor, and one person standing up holding a gun and wearing a ski mask.
While I'm sure this would be a tough call for you to make, I'm also sure
that the overwhelming majority of humans familiar with how a bank works
and possessing 2 working brain cells could figure out the "difference
between attacker and defender" here.
Or perhaps you'd like to go with historical examples? I can name
a great many. I find it entertaining that suddenly my ethics are in
question because I point out how the world is - which apparently
conflicts with your view of 'how it should be'.
>
> > (And yes, it's a direct
> > implication of your statement "Yes, human history is a poor thing. {I.e.
> > because of the violence})
>
> Violence produces violence, I used to much verbal violence at the beginning
> it seems. Violence is evil in itself, but it certainly is not always equally
> wrong.
More thoughtless platitudes. Let's start with the fallacy
"Violence is evil in itself". Gee, I guess there's a lot of animals on
this planet that are "evil" as they routinely use violence. Lets see,
dogs are know to attack and kill humans (rottweilers anyone?), tigers
are very efficient killers and are known to kill humans, bears, and
lions... Lions and Tigers and Bears! OH MY! Rather than being part of
nature - violence must some how be evil. And of course when it's
pointed out that violence is part of nature the reaction of the bleeding
hearts is always "Humans are above nature". Yawn, yeah, whatever.
As for the "Violence produces violence" comment, geee and here I
thought nature produced violence too. I guess thousands of scientists
and biologists must be wrong compared to your vast wisdom. I'll run
right off to tell them of their simple minded errors in light of your
true genius. Or maybe not.
When I pointed out that what you first offered was an overly
simplistic platitude, you of course counter with yet more useless
platitudes. Better still, your 'violence is evil, but not always
wrong' statement is a contradiction in terms. Should I take it you're
in favor of 'righteous evil' but not 'wrongful evil'? Or should I take
it you spouted those platitudes without really thinking about it? Both
of your platitudes attempt to categorize violence in terms of 'good or
evil' and/or 'right or wrong' and fail utterly to note two basic things.
1. Violence is a real part of the world (personal like or dislike of
violence in no way negates the reality of this.)
and
2. Nature never forgets how to breed predators - whether they walk on
four legs or on two.
Knowing this, it is the height of foolishness to sit here and tell me
that "Violence is evil". By your reasoning, police officers who use
violence to subdue violent criminals are evil - just because they used
violence. Lets forget about the fact that they do so to prevent
criminals from inflicting more violence on otherwise law abiding people
who are unable or unwilling to defend themselves. And of course there's
the historical aspect. I guess the Allies were all evil. After all,
they used violence to defeat the Nazis. Isn't it obvious? If they'd
been good people they'd have just had giant peace rallies and complained
about swastikas being displayed in public. Following the logic of your
arguments leads us to some plain stupid conclusions.
>
> > If you pay your taxes, then you are helping
> > to pay the salaries of violence specialists (law enforcement, and
> > military personnel) that society uses ever single day.
>
> I can't do a lot about that without loosing even more of my freedom.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you're in Germany? Last I knew
Germany had local and national government that was open to influence by
the citizens of Germany. In short you could petition your local and
national government in an attempt to have your law enforcement and
military organizations disbanded - after all, they do violence on your
behalf and according to you 'violence is evil' and 'violence produces
violence'. Which leads me to the point about the difference between
giving an idea 'lip service' (ie I'll talk about it, but I'm not going
to take action for that ideal - I might have to make personal
sacrifices) and having conviction (ie working towards achieving one's
personal ideals even if it means personal sacrifice.) Again, correct me
if I'm wrong, but if you petitioned the local and/or national government
to have law enforcement and military organizations disbanded - the
government wouldn't have you thrown in jail, tormented, or murdered,
would they? Now, odds are that the attempt would fail due to your
friends and fellow countrymen having some common sense, and would
probably subject you to a lot of ridicule for being foolish, but nothing
really prevents you for following up on your 'convictions'. Nothing
except for the obvious observation that what you're really doing is
giving lip service to another brainless 'PC' platitude.
>
> > To say 'I'd be
> > unhappy to be reminded of 'real war and death' in a science fiction WAR
> > game' is the height of asinine stupidity.
>
> Would seeing other people fancying certein politically inadequately themed
> armies sound any better then?
Um, exactly what army would be more 'politically inadequately
themed' than one based on the Nazis? Know of any other real historical
army that systematically slaughtered more non-combatants than the Nazis?
>
> > >> and I do understand people
> > >> who do not want to be reminded of such things.
>
> > I don't. The only people that have any right to NOT want to be
> > reminded of such things are folks that were part of the conflict in
> > question.
>
> The very same, age about 60+.
Which means you were a very small child during the war.
>
> > Those folks have paid their dues, and if they don't wish to
> > be reminded of past fear and suffering, I can well agree.
>
> Thanks a lot.
Which once again begs the central question - if you're so bothered
by the knowledge that people have been and continue be killed by violent
means, why the hell are you playing a game based on violence and
killing? That fact that it's supposed to be 'fictional' violence in no
way negates the fact that it's goals are the same as real violence.
Your 'real violence (and the symbols there of) is evil' but 'fictional
violence is ok' stance lacks any credibility what so ever.
>
> > But since we we're talking about Nazi symbols from World War II on 40K orks -
> > I have to ask, exactly how many WW II veterans do you game with? None? Wow,
> > what a surprise.
>
> And how many of them pass the shops with the fitting displays?
> Watching younger people playing with their past?
Are we talking about non-participants in the war gaming hobby
being offended by the idea of others making a 'war game' out of a real
event that they were involved in? No. We're talking about people who
actively participate in a hobby who's theme is the use of violence to
achieve one's goals complaining about the use of symbols from real world
events where people attempted to use the same types of methods to
achieve the same types of goals. It lacks credibility and intelligence.
>
> > As for the "I don't want to be reminded" crowd that has never
> > served or fought - fuck them.
>
> OK with me.
>
> > I'd suggest the game of choice for these
> > lack luster individuals would be a large sand box - that way when
> > they're not building fairy tale castles in the sand (ooh can't have any
> > scary parts on them - might remind someone of medieval warfare and
> > offend them) they can bury their heads in the sand instead. I could buy
> > the 'I don't want to be reminded' comments from people that don't watch
> > television, surf the net, or read the news - but NOT from people
> > voluntarily participating in a hobby about WAR - which is EXACTLY what
> > we are talking about.
>
> The hobby is more about playing and painting than about war, the rules are
> not near to a simulation, but the war part is all right with me in the game.
More Malarkey! If you simply want to collect and paint the
figures - there's absolutely nothing forcing you to play the war game
part. And yet, that's the point here. We are NOT talking about people
who simply collect and display the miniatures without playing the game.
(I collect fantasy battle figures, but I don't own the rules and have
never played the game - so it's definitely possible to collect without
playing.) What we ARE talking about is people PLAYING THE WAR GAME
itself. Your arguments about "the rules are not near to a simulation" is
yet another weak attempt at semantics. The intent of the rules have
NEVER EVER been in doubt. It's called "WARhammer" note the word WAR
right in the title of the game. Next lets examine the turn rules. Gee,
what do you know - there's a 'shooting phase'. Wow, that's not war-
like. No one in a real war tries to shoot at other people. And of
course there's the 'assault phase' - how unrealistic, everyone knows
real wars never involve hand to hand combat. And of course there's
those rules for resolving hits and wounds and saves. In short, the
intent of the game rules are to provide a simplified simulation of the
effects of weapons fire and hand to hand combat on a battlefield in
times of war. Your "not near to a simulation" crap doesn't cut it. You
could argue that it isn't a 'very true to life' simulation, which I'd
agree with. But again, the INTENT OF THE RULES TO SIMULATE WAR on a
table top using miniatures to represent real life troops has never been
in doubt.
> It's the political hints some people have a strong affinity to which bother
> me (these people as well as the allusions themselves).
>
So? That's a personal problem - YOUR personal problem. Just
because YOU'D like to play a fictional game without reference to real
world politics and events doesn't mean everyone else is bothered by
them. If you feel that way, write your own game rules and stop whining
about the fact that people make political and historical references in
this gaming system.
> > I have to ask, what do you do during holidays like "Veterans Day"
> > and "Memorial Day"? Hide in your basement with your fingers in your
> > ears and wish real hard until the 'bad days' go away?
>
> We do not have those here.
>
Last I knew, Germany still celebrated holidays, including one or
more that celebrated contributions to German history by individuals who
were warriors and preformed valorous acts during times of war...
> >>
> >> > Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
> >> > amount of wars we have fought.
> >>
> >> Yes, human history is a poor thing.
>
> > No, human history simply is. There are instances of real horror,
> > but I point out ignoring it is a great way to repeat it.
>
> 40K instead of history lessons then? That's just what I am afraid of.
> Everything in it's place.
No. No were did I say or imply that 40K was a replacement for
history. That's another lame attempt to dodge the issue. If fact if
you actually read what I wrote above - I pointed out that ignoring
history is a good way to repeat it's tragedies.
>
> > Sadly, folks like you would gladly forget everything that was learned
> > so more people that are brave can go out and pay to learn those lessons
> > yet again.
>
> Which lessons, veteran?
Pfff! This from you? According to your own statements you were
what 6, maybe 7 years old at most when World War II was going on. Were
you a 7 year old Platoon leader, or a 7 year old tank commander?
>
> > The sick part is your false pretence that somehow the reality of the
> > situation will bend to your 'beliefs' if only you can convince everyone
> > else that it's their view of history and reality that's distorted.
>
> Next thing you tell me is that the poles attacked germany in a blitz attack.
Ok, dickhead, care to quote the portion of the text where I
mentioned Poland or Germany and the blitz? Perhaps you're confusing me
for Shitzer, nice try but no cigar. I'm not the one here who keeps
spouting about how 'violence is evil' and how I wish that there was no
violence in the world - that's your argument. I'm pointing out that
your argument is rather devoid of reality and long on 'wishing'.
>
> >> All I can say is I'm glad you're not my neighbor, you'd be useless in a
> >> crisis.
>
>
>
> >>
> >> > Humanity is a warlike race, not some rose-tinted liberal utopia,
> >>
> >> That seems to be a rather bad excuse.
>
> > Coming from a person who voluntarily plays a game about KILLING
> > PEOPLE and blowing things up??? This is the height of hypocrisy and
> > stupidity! Whether the game is based on some real or fiction event is
> > irrelevant to the fact that the GOAL of the game is to crush your
> > opponent by annihilating his or her forces. JUST LIKE REAL WAR - the
> > idea is to control territory, resources, or just out right kill lots of
> > opposing troops.
>
> And I still never wanted to kill anyone for real, but if that is all the
> same to you I am too glad you're not my neighbor.
You never wanted to kill anyone for real, but you'll complain
bitterly if reminded about real killing while playing a game about
fictional killing. Wow - there's a sentiment worthy of respect. NOT!
>
> >>
> >> > we may not like the killing
> >>
> >> I certainly do not.
> >>
> >> >but
> >>
> >> No "but"
>
> > - Yes 'but' as in the unspoken "But I'll play fictional games about
> >killing ~ just so long as I can pretend that the goal of the game isn't
> >about 'real' (tm) killing". In other words, you're making a weak
> >attempt to argue semantics to avoid the issue.
>
> Please give me the semantic phrase about "thoughts can kill".
> You really belief killing is the same as playing wargames?
Wow, you got me there. There's no connection between real world
warfare and war gaming. I guess that explains why military
organizations throughout the world design and have their officers and
troops play various table top and computer war games to increase their
combat proficiency in a variety of skills. I guess those copies of
"Fire Fight" and "City Fight" (which were designed expressly for the US
military modeled off of military data about various weapons, wound
effects and battlefield psychology) sitting with my other war games must
be figments of my imagination. I did NOT state that playing war games
is the same as killing, but I AM stating that war games have a very
strong connection to real world warfare and killing. War games - just
like real war - advocate the idea of using weapons and violence to
achieve a desired end. War gaming is used by the military to train real
world soldiers in the arts of (real) war in much the same way the
military uses 'lazer tag' style gear and smoke rounds to conduct mock
military actions - no one really dies intentionally in either one, but
the intent of both is to make the soldiers more proficient at the arts
of war and killing. Wait, let me guess - you'll be telling me that the
military does war gaming because they 'enjoy painting and collecting'
the miniatures. Yeah, that's it.
As for the "thoughts can kill" comment - are you normally this
stupid, or are you working extra hard at it now? Yeah, thoughts can
kill. Concentration Camps weren't a 'natural terrain feature' of
Germany and Europe prior to World War II were they? Someone thought up
the idea of rounding up non-combatants and putting them in camps for use
as slave labor, or for easy extermination, and they then set those
thoughts into motion and made 'real' concentration camps.
>
> >>
> >> > there is a need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the
> >> > needs of others.
> >>
> >> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
>
> As in killing other people...
What do you think police officers do when violent criminals resist
arrest? When all other means of restraining them fail, police officers
KILL criminals (and last I knew criminals were 'other people'). Not to
mention the fact that police officers are killed in the line of duty
from time to time. And of course there's the anti-terrorist units,
they never kill anyone on behalf of civilians, nor do military units.
Yeah, you've done a fine job of proving that good people never kill or
die on your behalf. I guess the folks who have done so for your society
must ALL have been people of 'evil'. This isn't a sign of bad behavior
on the part of your government or society - this is a sign of your
struggle against reality. Sorry about your luck, must suck to be you.
>
> > This is complete and UTTER BULLSHIT! If you pay your taxes and
> >are NOT attempting to have the police and military disbanded, then you
> >are damn well accepting that others do the bleeding and dying on your
> >behalf.
>
> Paying taxes kills people stop it right now! Good try.
And as I pointed out above - if you are able to work towards the
goal of stopping violence but aren't doing so, then what you ARE doing
is nothing more than giving lip service to the idea. In effect - if
you're not working to stop it, then your condoning it or purposely
turning a blind eye to the problem. I'm not impress. It's pathetic
whining bullshit.
>
> > This sort of self deceiving LIE that isn't even vaguely
> >credible under the most charitable of situations. I know good and well
> >that you would call the police, fire department, bomb squad, or other
> >specialized social service for support if you were in a life-threatening
> >situation. And yet here you sit spouting...
>
> >> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
>
> As in kill other people...
Already answered this - see above.
>
> > Who the fuck do you think you're kidding? That's about the most vile
> > lie I've heard in a long time. This makes you out to be a social
> > parasite of the lowest order.
>
> Just because I do not want to kill anyone?
No, because you stand back and let others doing the killing and
dying on your behalf, and then claim you're a better or more 'noble'
because hey, you personally have never lifted a hand in violence. Of
course, you're in no way in debted to those people who did serve society
for better or ill, after all you're much to 'noble' for that. And being
such a 'noble' guy, it's ok for you to claim that it's 'bad style' for
others to remind you of real death while playing a game about fictional
death. You certainly know how to do a fine job of claiming the moral
high ground - even if you have to ignore reality to do.
>
> > In other words, you'll accept the
> > sacrifices of other people, and pretend that you personally aren't in
> > their debt while spouting 'Politically Correct' crap about how it might
> > 'offend' someone who plays war games by reminding them of real
> > historical events.
>
> Or people who do not play wargames at all.
Are we talking about non-wargamers? No. Try to stick with the
subject.
And again, all you're telling us is that you're ok with
'fictional' violence - just as long as it doesn't look to much like
'real' violence for your personal taste. Which is inane and asinine
when one is talking about voluntarily participating in a hobby about war
and destruction. Heaven forbid that people playing 'fictional' war
games should be forced to think about the fact that warfare is bloody
and violent. Worse still, what if they came to the conclusion that real
warfare killed real people - and that historical war games were about
'real' events that really killed 'real' people...
</begin mock hand wringing and facial expressions of horror!>
>
> > No? Gosh! What a bunch of sickos - next
> > thing you know they'll be pretending to fire those simulated weapons,
> > and working out simulated casualties representing simulated death and
> > destruction... OH THE HUMANITY!
>
> You missed the topic altogether, didn't you?
>
No. Once again I'm pointing out through the use of sarcasm that
your stance that 'fictional' violence is ok, while reminders of 'real'
violence are not in a war game is idiotic. And I'll say it again... If
you're playing a war game - whining about reminders of 'real' violence
is petty and damn stupid. I would much rather have players reminded
that war is a violent and bloody affair, rather than some bloodless
event. If it makes them think about real people who really lost their
lives, so much the better. It'll make the smart ones less likely to be
in favor of war without exhausting all the other social possibilities
first.
> >
> > >> I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly
> > >> related to history.
>
> > Apparently you live in "Never Never Land" too - does that mean we
> > should change the history books so as not to damage your delicate
> > sensibilities?
>
> You should not mix them with wargames.
So, we outlaw historical war gaming? Only military personal will
be allowed to play games like "Battle of the Bulge" or "Napoleon at
Waterloo"? Sure, right after we outlaw any news broadcast that makes
mention of violence. Sigh - more 'ignore it and it'll go away' mental
midget behavior. Goodness knows we wouldn't want people to learn about
history by gaming, would we? I mean after all, it wasn't my History
classes that taught me about Waterloo - it was war gaming. None of my
high school teachers would have been allowed to accurately describe what
the carnage was like after the battle - 35,000 dead bodies in a 3 & 1/2
square mile area. Places where the bodies of the slain had fallen and
were stacked so deeply upon one another that the areas were impassible
to horse calvary and nearly so to foot troops. Historical war gaming
does 3 things. It teaches about real world events (even if it often
fails to convey the full horror of those events). It teaches those
interested in strategy and tactics a means to test and improve their
skills without real world killing. And it provides entertainment to
those interested recreating historical events after a limited fashion.
If you can't handle any or all of those reasons - then YOU picked the
wrong hobby.
>
> >
> > >So what can we base the wargame on?
> >
> > The more imaginative minds try to use creativity to make up their own fictional
> > history, instead of simply using the given past...
> >
> > d.e.m.
>
> > First off, to quote a mind much better than yours when it comes to
> > writing - "There is nothing new under the sun." So much for the
> > argument about fiction equaling originality and thus creating a clear
> > distinction from real world events. (If that attempt to dodge the issue
> > had been any weaker, it would be receiving medical treatment for
> > anemia.) Now then, as to the heart of the argument - is it reasonable
> > for someone playing a game about violence and killing to complain about
> > the use of historical symbols or imagery from real world conflicts in
> > that game? HELL NO!
>
> Just tell me in two or three short sentences that even I should be able to
> understand why that is the case? Why am I to like SS-signs or Hakenkreuze
> on wargame miniatures? Because I do wargames?
No one forced you to participate in 40K. As you yourself noted in
your opening post to this thread - you knew the game involved satire and
reference to real world events that you found distasteful. And now you
want to tell us all that you'd be offended if someone had miniatures
that included reference to real world events you personally don't like
in a game you knew ALREADY CONTAINED THEM!?! If you don't like it in
40K - DON'T PLAY 40K. How many brain cells does it take to figure that
out? There are untold numbers of other science fiction war games that
do NOT draw on the part of history that you find offensive, and 40K
does. Play one of the others. No one said you have to like SS-signs on
a miniature, what folks ARE SAYING is that it's retarded to complain
about that sort of thing in a fiction game that's BASED off the same
REAL WORLD events. The game designers of 40K have never hidden the fact
that they drew a lot of their background - and even details of models
and minis from the historical events of World War I & II. If that bugs
you - don't play - it's that simple. It simply makes you look like a
jerk when you pretend that 40K doesn't draw it's feel and look for those
conflicts and then whine when someone reminds you that it does.
>
> > In short, it's a crock of shit. Doubtless you're
> > the same sort of brainless spineless weenie that would refuse to play
> > the guy who was featured on NewWave's web site with the World War II
> > "U.S. Grunts" themed Marine army from one of the GT's. After all, it
> > would remind you of real world events - and we all know how little you
> > and reality have in common.
>
> If that only was true.
>
> > It would have been one thing if the poster
> > had been using an entire army themed after the Nazis - but that was NOT
> > the case, nor was the poster an advocate of Nazi ideals - which leaves
> > people NO GROUND on which to stand when it comes to the issue of
> > 'violence related imagery' in a war game. The damn game is called
> > WARhammer not NERFhammer. Duh!
>
> I am not accusing the stormboyz player. He posted because he was uncertain
> what he should do. I was worried, because he was almost blamed for doing so.
No, you aren't accusing him, but you're the very sort of person
that he was concerned about - someone who would complain about it even
though it was a non-issue. It's a reference to real world death and
warfare in a science fiction game about death and warfare that draws
it's feel and background from the very same real world events.
Complaining about a particular symbol in a game FULL of symbolism to the
exact same historical event as referenced by the symbol in question is
just moronic. By your own admission you knew the game was that way when
you started, and still you want to voice an objection to it? I'm sorry,
but that ill founded idea is NOT worthy of respect.
Mikael Halila
Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint
whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted
him.\" now going for an even longer Usenet handle!!" wrote:
>
> "Mikael Halila" <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message
> news:3CDEADBD...@pp.inet.fi...
> > "The poster formerly known as \"Contrary to popular belief Craig
> > Little's mother wasn't a hamster, though his father did have a faint
> > whiff of elderberries when the Spanish Inquisition unexpectedly abducted
> > him.\" now going for an even longer Usenet handle!!" wrote:
> > >
> > > As one of the very few 'bearded liberal peaceniks' on the group,
> >
> > Are we "very few", then?
>
> Perception says so, but if you're curious, run a poll :p
=P
> > Although I'm a libertarian, so I might not
> > necessarily count.
> >
> Sure you count, but I don't think many on this ng would describe themselves
> as liberals
If you mean "liberal" in the American sense, where it means socialist
(don't ask me how it got twisted), I'm not a liberal. I'm a libertarian.
Trust me, there's one hell of a difference...
Ratman
> "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > War-related imagery is too much a generalization, it's the fascist
> > part that I
> > wanted to criticize.
>
> Have you read the background fluff for the Imperium?
Yes, I did.
> That's pretty much your
> Uber-Fascist theocracy right there, so it's built right into the game.
>
I know and they already included the imperial eagle and the terra
home-planet
to make certain where this derives from. I just don't see any good
point in
adding even more to this scenery, using more direct links to WWII or
other
such themes. My approach once too has been modifying a Tallarn Desert
Raider
squad to be my Necromunda Kaddaffi Gang, but right now I think this is
not that good an idea either.
> As one of the very few 'bearded liberal peaceniks' on the group, I do
> understand where your coming from with this, but it is something of an
> over-reaction in my view.
This was what I wanted to hint at with my thoughts on the Skaven.
No one really understood that, and I still have to get used to read
my own text with the eyes of the readers to be.
> I also believe that the acts of the Third Reich
> are something that should never be repeated, so reminders of what people are
> capable of, no matter how subtle, serve as subliminal warnings not to let
> such a state of affirs happen again (naive, huh?)
>
It's just that some parties still use certain symbols or similair
ones, which
I would not want to do advertisement for. There are lots of rather
young players
at the stores or at tournaments.
> > Other ojections have been included saying more or less: "But thats
> > just me".
>
> Welcome to usenet.
I'll get used to be more precise (and I still hope my english to
improve).
>
> > Next time, if I ever try to talk about politics this place I'll put
> > more emphasis to what it's really about.
>
> It does help to talk about what you're talking about.
Sorry, I did not read it a third time but I was sure it was
understandable.
I know better now.
>
> I can see by now that the
> > posting has not
> > been a good one.
> >
>
> No, this is pretty much par for the course for political threads (which is
> why I general avoid them) on here. Particularly as this group leans strongly
> againts "political correctness" (good thing too)
Which one is the good thing leaning against it or pc?
See? It's not always that easy to understand each other.
>
> > > in a WARgame (for fuck's sake) should be.
> >
> > Such a game can not do without, which is why I am not against it.
>
>
> You certainly came across as against it
Wargame without war, ehm...? No maybe I'm stupid, but it's not that
bad.
But I do not like people to use historical (in some ways still active)
political
designs, and this even more if these copied armies are of
right-fundamental origins.
>
> > I never wanted pink marines petting each other to death...
> >
> Boy, are you ever in the wrong ng...
lol
:O-8
Should this be the new rgmw-chapter insignia then?
d.e.m.
Old Dead Eye
Ratman <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> Ratman <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message
news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
> >
> >> >> The whole 40K background is full of fascist/racist fluff
> >> >> (e.g. kill the aliens/billions of psykers have to die for the
> >> >> holy emperor each year...).The brits like that for satire,
> >> > We do?
> >>
> >> Not for satire perhaps, but some years ago the british TV always
> >> had one channel showing a ww-movie
So just how long did you spend in the UK? A whole weekend?
> > Of course now we have The Execution Channel, WarMonger TV,
> > LetsGoToWarWithGermany24/7 and lets not forget
> > Big Brother UK where people from 12 ethnic minorites compete not to be
> > exterminated on a Friday night,decided by a phone in vote by the good
ole
> > warmongering facist British general public.
> :)
>
> > Get real.
>
> Not on purpose
"Not on purpose." What sort of lame bullshit is that? You come in here
spouting shit about swastikas
on orks and being oh-so-fucking-pc-it-hurts and then say that! Your the one
who wants US to not put
facist symbols on figures it case it upsets someone. Man you should try and
lighten up. OR are you some sort of spy
from Twats-r-us.com trying to infiltrate this group, just in case groups of
people who meet up to play wargames are
secretly neo-nazis plotting to kill all minorities and planning our
operations using miniatures.
Myrmidon
Your statement "deciding to spend your time making those little nazi-men
look fine and cruel is just a bit more" implies otherwise.
>
> > Even the current ork 'Tank Bustas' figures take
> > some of their design details from WW II German troops - note the German
> > style 'stick grenades'.
>
> I am not a specialist in german WWII weapons, I never noticed that.
> Stick grenades are typically german then?
Yes. Along with the Swastika, the Iron Cross, and the Reich
Eagle, the German stick grenade, Hitler Youth / SS boot knife, the
German Luger Pistol, the German sub machine gun (MP-40?), the German
Machine Gun (MG-42), and the German Panzer and Tiger tanks have all come
to be seen as symbols of Germany's WW II armies.
>
> > Now then, the person who originally posted the
> > thread had two (2) basic questions. One, was it wrong (in bad taste) to
> > have put little 'swastikas' on the back of his ork 'Storm Boyz'?
> > And two, was someone likely to be offended?
>
> That have been the questions more or less.
>
> > The answers are pretty straight forward.
>
> Could have been, but the discussion grew and the answers got worse.
As far as I saw it, it boiled down to two groups. Those who complained
about the appearance of 'real world' racist images in a game who's
background is entirely about racial intolerance and genocide. And those
who did not complain about it and thought that considering the nature of
the game, it was in fact foolish to raise that issue in context of the
game in question.
>
> > One, no it wasn't inappropriate to put swastikas on 'Storm
> > boyz' in the context of the game, and it's background and basis. The
> > person didn't 'modify' the miniatures to look like WW II German troops -
> > they came that way to begin with.
>
> You just state the obvious, whats your point?
>
Again, my point was that the original poster didn't take ordinary
(ie no racist reference) orks and "spend your time making those little
nazi-men look fine and cruel" which implies that people who have orks
that were Nazi-esque in appearance must have modified them themselves.
> > Using symbols from that time period
> > certainly was NOT an attempt on the part of the gamer to endorse or
> > justify the Nazi mind set or in your words to make it "really 'cool' ".
>
> I never said that HE tried to do so, this post was more in answer to those who
> tried to make petty excuses like this indian stormboy story.
And my point is that they don't need an 'excuse' to be included in
the game as the game itself is based in large part on the events from
which the swastika was made known to the world. It's about as retarded
as complaining about the 'Imperial Eagle' crest. Or did the similarity
to the Reich Eagle crest of the Nazi party conveniently escape your
notice? If you aren't familiar with the older "Rogue Trader" game -
there were tons of satirical symbols in it. The original space orks
were almost entirely modeled after WW II German troops - they had
African corps style caps and uniforms, carried stick grenades and
bolters that looked similar to MP-40's and such, and even the
autocannons on the ork dreadnoughts had heat shrouds similar to the MG-
42. Look at the Imperial Armor codex - the whole forward is about how
GW folks are huge WW II buffs and borrowed directly from historical
designs for the IG armor models. Warhammer 40K has a roughly 15 year
history of satirical reference to WW II. The British game and
miniatures designers made it clear that they routinely drew reference
from WW I & II in both statement, and design. GW openly acknowledges
that. Which makes complaints about Nazi symbolism in a war game who's
look and feel is directly modeled after a well known war involving Nazis
both clueless and pointless.
>
> > As for part two - Yes, someone is bound to complain. Because the gamer
> > was endorsing or advancing a hateful racist viewpoint? No. But rather,
> > because the folks who whine about these sorts of non-issues have no
> > brains and even less spine. Rather than confront real racists and deal
> > with difficult (and possibly personally dangerous) issues, they can
> > contentedly pat themselves on the back about how they 'stood up' for a
> > strong moral issue like a symbol from a historical WAR on a fictional
> > WAR game miniature. And of course, we all know how 'out of character'
> > it is in the fictional background of 40K to portray the Orks as 'cruel'
> > or 'barbaric' and willing to slaughter millions of helpless non-
> > combatants.
>
> I do not like people to be that indifferent to comon usage of fascist
> symbolism. One should not get used to it to much.
You're talking about an ENTIRE GAME modeled on the idea of fascist
behavior, racial intolerance, and Genocide!!! The entire 40K universe
is a macro vision of the darkest parts of WW I & II. Instead of the
world at war with sides fighting for and against tyranny and genocide -
you have an entire galaxy at war and virtually ALL the races involved
are genocidal and tyrannical empires fighting to be the dominate species
in the galaxy. In fact, the only race that doesn't fit that description
currently is the 'johnny come lately' Tau which many folks have pointed
out as being inappropriate to the feel and background of the 4OK
universe. Complaining about 'indifference to common Fascism' in a game
who's whole premise is just that is plain foolish!
>
>
> > The real frosting on the cake there is your comments about 'two or
> > three mouse clicks' verse taking 'your time making those little nazi-men
> > look fine and cruel'. WTF? We're glad to know your comfortable with
> > racism and genocide - as long as it's quick and easy.
>
> OK, better would have been determined practicing in the art of duplicating
> fascist symbolism in miniaturised detail verse consuming a computer wargame
> without thinking about it a lot.
So, consuming it without thought is better? Didn't you just say
"I do not like people to be that indifferent to common usage of fascist
symbolism". Not only are you contradicting yourself here, you're also
ignoring the fact you yourself noted - which is that the whole game is
laden with satirical reference to Fascism, racial intolerance, and
genocide. Sorry, but you don't get to play both ends of the same
argument. In essence you're telling me that computer games with 'quick
and easy' Facism are acceptable because the end user doesn't have to put
much brain power into it, but that miniatures games which required some
time to paint their symbols of Facism are not acceptable. That is just
plain nuts!
>
> > (We'll conveniently ignore the time the programmers had to put in to creating
> > that 2 or 3 mouse click game that lets one bloodlessly simulate mass
> > death and destruction.)
>
>
>
> > I think we've pretty well captured the real
> > essence of the issue here, which is that YOU personally are
> > uncomfortable with the idea that you should have to honestly think about
> > the fact you're participating in a hobby that simulates and draws much
> > of it's basis from real death and destruction.
>
> Might be true, but that's not what this is about. It's about political correctness,
> and this (to me) forbids nazi symbolism.
And my point is that political correctness sucks ass because it's
a 'lets hide the truth' in one way or another mentality that makes
problems worse - not better. I also point out that it's the height of
idiocy to whine about Political correctness in a game who's whole
foundation is NOT politically correct. It's a game about warfare and
destruction in a fictional future full of vast empires bent on
committing genocide on one another. Where the hell is the political
correctness in that??? Answer - there isn't any.
>
> > Apparently as long as
> > YOU personally can pretend that there isn't the slightest connection
> > between real world violence and WarHammer, why then it's just fine and
> > dandy for you to play. But heaven forbid if someone should somehow
> > remind you of what the nature of the game truly is... Boo hoo hoo.
>
> Perhaps it's even more disgusting, I am thinking about what other people
> might think of me playing warhammer.
Now I really pity you. If your self-impression and self worth is
so bound up in what 'other people' think of you that you'll have to
worry about what they think of your hobbies - you don't just have
personal issues, you've got volumes.
>
> > So, you want to play war games, but you're attempting to convince
> > others that there's even the slightest merit to the idea that it's
> > offensive or in bad taste to include imagery from historical conflicts
> > in fictional games about violence and death just because historical
> > conflicts are about real death and violence? That rates up there as one
> > of the most pathetic cop-outs of all time. It would be one thing if
> > someone were using war games (whether historical, fictional, or science
> > fiction based) as a means of advancing the idea that racism and genocide
> > are acceptable. But that is clearly NOT the case here.
>
> It is not...Wow, if YOU say so...
>
> > The fact that this is clearly evident
>
> Please make it evident to me then, that should solve all my problems then.
Have you noticed any place where GW is selling real weapons, or
any place where GW advocates killing other 'real' people because of
cultural differences? No? No kidding. Did the poster of the original
question advocate killing others because of cultural differences? No?
No surprise there. If the use of symbols of genocide and fascismm and
racism are bothering you - then the entire game should bother the hell
out of you and you should never play it again.
>
> > and yet you continue to whine about how it's
> > 'bad style' highlights the fact that you personally have a problem
> > reconciling conflicting self-images.
>
> I never had problems with warhammer, but I have problems with people using
> fascist symbolism.
And yet again I'll attempt to get this through your thick skull -
THE WHOLE GAME IS LOADED WITH FASCIST SYMBOLISM. Ref - Imperial Eagle,
etc. THE BACKGROUND OF THE GAME IS ABOUT VAST EMPIRES BENT ON
GENOCIDE... ALL OF WHICH REFERENCE BACK TO THE HISTORICAL EVENTS OF
WORLD WAR 1 & 2. Which part of that is eluding your mental grasp?
>
>
> ></begin Ratman internal dialogue mode>
>
> > "I'm a nice sensitive guy, and sensitive guys don't say or do anything
> > that might be 'Politically Incorrect" or otherwise offend someone or
> > even remind others that the world isn't a 'and they lived happily ever
> > after.' fairy tale."
>
> Most of the time yes...I am just to good to be true.
>
> > And...
> >
> > "I'm a guy who likes playing miniatures WAR games about conquering
> > others through the use of death and destruction."
>
> As I do like other strategy games, but most are not that much fun.
>
> > "Playing games about beating others through the use of violence just
> > isn't PC.
>
> I think you think of PC in other terms then I do.
I think Political Correctness is any attempt to 'white wash' over or
otherwise cover up the unpleasant parts of human nature and human
history. It's done with the idea that "if we all pretend really hard,
then those problems will go away". It's illusory, and worse still it
leaves people mindless of the problems until they're in over their
heads. It's the kind sentimental nonsense that gets otherwise good
people needlessly killed in bad situations because it teaches them that
it's much better to 'believe in make believe' (where everything is
fuzzy, warm, friendly, and safe) than it is to 'believe in that which is
real' (where things are hard, painful, and sometimes just plain
horrific.) because believing in what's real means you have to make
difficult choices and take personal responsibility. Whether you
intended to or not - you're coming across as a person who will let
others make the difficult choices and make any sacrifices that go with
those choices, while you reap the benefits of their actions.
>
> > What ever am I going to do? I know, I'll play 'science
> > FICTION' war games. That way I can continue to view myself as a
> > 'sensitive guy'
>
> Yes, fits me better than historical ones.
>
> > while pretending that 'make believe' war is NOT about
> > the use of violence to gain a desired end.
>
> Never sasid so.
If you're going to complain about or take issue with the 'ideals
of Fascism' then it doesn't matter if they're in a historical event or a
fictional one does it? Which is the distinction you're trying to draw
between the two. Would you find 'mock Hitler Youth training' more
acceptable than 'real Hitler Youth training'? Or is it fairly evident
that 'any sort' of 'Hitler Youth training' would be less than
politically correct and generally not a good idea?
>
> > That way I can hold the
> > moral high ground, and still not have to give up any personal pleasures
> > due to having a personal belief that would require some self sacrifice
> > on my part.
>
> Good thinking, right?
>
> > Better still, I can wrap myself in the cloak of 'false
> > virtue' when others present me with things that might remind me of the
> > reality of the world. If I whine, piss, and moan about it long enough
> > people are sure to see the virtues of my ideas..."
>
> No, I never thought about it this way, and I did not do more than write a
> few lines, so please stop exagerating
Sorry, but I'm following the reasoning of the arguments you
presented to the logical conclusions that they dictate. If you offer up
an argument and it's logical conclusion isn't what you expected - then
design a better argument. That is after all the purpose of an open
discourse, is it not?
<snipped the Big F.O.>
> Just because some people do not like my attitude to nazi-designs?
No, not simply because you don't like Nazi designs. But because
you're complaining about Nazi designs and the implied 'Fascist'
attitudes that go with them in a game that is LOADED with the same types
of symbolism and all the attendant connotations that go with them WHILE
VOLUNTARILY PLAYING THAT GAME! You'd have some credibility and
respectability if you had said "I disapprove of the symbolism and
implied acceptability of hateful ideas in the 40K game. Therefore while
I like to paint and collect the minis, I refuse to play the game itself
on the grounds that doing so might give others even the illusionary and
false impression that I condone or advance the ideals of Fascism implied
by those symbols." But that isn't what you're talking about here. What
you're talking about here is knowingly getting into a war game loaded
symbolism and connotations that according to your own self description
are objectionable to you - and then making a fuss when someone speaking
of using a different symbol (carrying the same objectionable
connotations) from the exact same historical event. And you wonder why
folks here have shot down your ideas repeatedly?
>
> > Everything you've spouted so far has been bullshit semantics
>
> Bullshit and semantics are your part not mine.
To date, you've done everything to but accept the fact that 40K is
based largely on the worst aspects of human history - particularly the
racism and Fascism that were taken to horrific extremes in WW II. And
because of your unwillingness to accept those facts, you've argued that
a 'swastika' is unacceptable imagery in 40K while wholy ignoring the
'Third Reich Eagle' in the form of the Imperial Eagle icon seen on loads
of GW minis and literature. Can you think of any reason why I should
NOT see your arguments as attempts to ignore inconvenient facts while
also attempting to split hairs on some fairly obvious issues?
>
> > used in a lame attempt to justify why you and people like you should be
> > handled with velvet gloves by those grounded in reality so that the
> > messy and unpleasant reality of our world and of war in general doesn't
> > intrude on your personal fantasy.
>
> If you were "grounded in reality" just a little bit more than you are,
> you might learn some politeness even to those who do not share your point
> of view, as well as the less obvious effects your actions might have.
Sorry if my rude language doesn't appeal to you, but it begs the
question - exactly how much curisty do I owe anyone who ignores
glaringly obvious images and descriptions of Facism, Racism, and
Genocide in 40K drawn from real world events who then complains about
'politically incorrect' usage of similar symbols in 40K? As I pointed
out long ago - it's an asinine argument you're making and it flies
wholely in the face of reality. If you don't like being ridiculed for
that - then learn to apply some more reason to your own arguments before
posting them.
Ratman
> Ratman <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > Ratman <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> > news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > > archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message
> news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
> > >
> > >> >> The whole 40K background is full of fascist/racist fluff
> > >> >> (e.g. kill the aliens/billions of psykers have to die for the
> > >> >> holy emperor each year...).The brits like that for satire,
> > >> > We do?
> > >>
> > >> Not for satire perhaps, but some years ago the british TV always
> > >> had one channel showing a ww-movie
>
>
> So just how long did you spend in the UK? A whole weekend?
About one month.
>
>
> > > Of course now we have The Execution Channel, WarMonger TV,
> > > LetsGoToWarWithGermany24/7 and lets not forget
> > > Big Brother UK where people from 12 ethnic minorites compete not to be
> > > exterminated on a Friday night,decided by a phone in vote by the good
> ole
> > > warmongering facist British general public.
> > :)
>
> > > Get real.
> >
> > Not on purpose
>
> "Not on purpose." What sort of lame bullshit is that? You come in here
> spouting shit about swastikas
> on orks and being oh-so-fucking-pc-it-hurts and then say that! Your the one
> who wants US to not put
> facist symbols on figures it case it upsets someone. Man you should try and
> lighten up. OR are you some sort of spy
> from Twats-r-us.com trying to infiltrate this group, just in case groups of
> people who meet up to play wargames are
> secretly neo-nazis plotting to kill all minorities and planning our
> operations using miniatures.
Not on purpose means just as long as my fairy tale (sub)reality in my mind
is not crumbled to dust by Myrmidons attacks.
d.e.m.
>
> Old Dead Eye
Ratman
Just read the last part of my last sentence above again.
> Damn it, I wear black clothes most of the time. Some of
> them have small white print on the front. Would you be offended by my
> choice of clothes?
If it includes weaponry, large white banners with black crosses on
them
I'd say yes. Does the print say something like "I would willingly die
for the Emperor"?
>
> Since the German Army wore feldgrau (=grey) uniforms in the Second World
> War, I'm sure you'll find the Space Marine chapter based on our NG
> offensive because it uses grey uniforms.
With the flame-insignias on them? No I think it might be good fun
doing this chapter, even if I had prefered a chaos chapter which has
some more possibilities.
John's banner saying "If there is no rule to forbid this, it's
allowed"
should be on a slaanesh squad with the undertitle saying "and if it is
forbidden it is even more tempting.
Right now I start thinking Myrmidon might do as an IG propaganda
minister, no links to history intended (should be a squat model then
;).
I myself would lead the r-ear g-uard m-êlée w-arriors, they have no
weapons at all,this way they can never fight, must always be fielded
behind your own lines of other fighters, all stats 1 but attacks 0
immune to psychology 2p. each.
> Come to think of it, Finnish
> regular officers wear grey. Offensive, innit?
All existing armies are offensive somehow, but not in the sense of
reminding
me or other people of war events. It is disgusting that there is need
of them.
>
> > > And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
> >
> > I do not like them very much, as any other (modern) history based wargames.
>
> You know, no-one's forcing you to play them. If you really have
> attitudes like this, maye you shouldn't.
You are right and I consider quitting 40K. But I think it still
matters how the game is played. I can live with the
make-belief-fascism in the game or even the RT-satire-nazi-fluff
Myrmidon mentioned. As long as the people playing the game do not buy
in the glorifying we-need-this-fascist-politics-to-survive-the-harsh-universe
with all those other war-like aliens around us. Maybe this was better
back in RT I don't know. What I know is that most people these days
are stupid enough to consider the humans/sm to be the good guys. They
totally miss the point that there is no good in 40k at all. I fear
many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion. This is what I
think makes it politically (as in politics) incorrect.
It might be that this problem is a local one, and that people in
germany are easier embarrassed/disgusted in this way.
The more subconscious reminders, as I still see them in the BT, are
perhaps as bad, too. Perhaps the conclusion so far is the
all-satire-old-fluff thing to make it obvious that the imperium is not
the defending-the-good-guys army at all or make them just that (the
good guys) to increase the games mainstreamability as is desired by
gw. The way it is right now is not acceptable to me. Perhaps it is an
all or nothing question then. I, personally, would never feel
comfortable with the fascist symbols all around me.
d.e.m.
Ratman
> the game, it was in fact foolish to raise that issue in context of the
> game in question.
>
>
> >
> > > One, no it wasn't inappropriate to put swastikas on 'Storm
> > > boyz' in the context of the game, and it's background and basis. The
> > > person didn't 'modify' the miniatures to look like WW II German troops -
> > > they came that way to begin with.
> >
> > You just state the obvious, whats your point?
> >
>
> Again, my point was that the original poster didn't take ordinary
> (ie no racist reference) orks and "spend your time making those little
> nazi-men look fine and cruel" which implies that people who have orks
> that were Nazi-esque in appearance must have modified them themselves.
As allready said somewhere else in an answer to you, you might have
read this
posting was not meant as an answer to the owner of the stormboyz in
question, but to parts of the thread mentioned.
Look some lines further.
>
> > > Using symbols from that time period
> > > certainly was NOT an attempt on the part of the gamer to endorse or
> > > justify the Nazi mind set or in your words to make it "really 'cool' ".
> >
> > I never said that HE tried to do so, this post was more in answer to those who
> > tried to make petty excuses like this indian stormboy story.
>
> And my point is that they don't need an 'excuse' to be included in
> the game as the game itself is based in large part on the events from
> which the swastika was made known to the world.
This would have been the better arguement.
> It's about as retarded as complaining about the 'Imperial Eagle' crest.
> Or did the similarity to the Reich Eagle crest of the Nazi party
> conveniently escape your notice?
No it did not, but the eagle is used more commonly. In the more
angular forms
it is not used on the newer models anymore afaik.
> If you aren't familiar with the older "Rogue Trader" game -
> there were tons of satirical symbols in it. The original space orks
> were almost entirely modeled after WW II German troops - they had
> African corps style caps and uniforms, carried stick grenades and
> bolters that looked similar to MP-40's and such, and even the
> autocannons on the ork dreadnoughts had heat shrouds similar to the MG-
> 42.
Ok, you forgot to mention the swastika included on the
orc-transfers-sheet.
> Look at the Imperial Armor codex - the whole forward is about how
> GW folks are huge WW II buffs and borrowed directly from historical
> designs for the IG armor models. Warhammer 40K has a roughly 15 year
> history of satirical reference to WW II.
Not that much anymore.
> The British game and
> miniatures designers made it clear that they routinely drew reference
> from WW I & II in both statement, and design. GW openly acknowledges
> that.
Not to german publicity. It would not be that good for advertisement.
> Which makes complaints about Nazi symbolism in a war game who's
> look and feel is directly modeled after a well known war involving Nazis
> both clueless and pointless.
Back-to-the-roots that might be true, the new design is not that way
anymore I think.
>
> >
> > > As for part two - Yes, someone is bound to complain. Because the gamer
> > > was endorsing or advancing a hateful racist viewpoint? No. But rather,
> > > because the folks who whine about these sorts of non-issues have no
> > > brains and even less spine. Rather than confront real racists and deal
> > > with difficult (and possibly personally dangerous) issues, they can
> > > contentedly pat themselves on the back about how they 'stood up' for a
> > > strong moral issue like a symbol from a historical WAR on a fictional
> > > WAR game miniature.
Do you really know who is not doing anything about fascism?
> > > And of course, we all know how 'out of character'
> > > it is in the fictional background of 40K to portray the Orks as 'cruel'
> > > or 'barbaric' and willing to slaughter millions of helpless non-
> > > combatants.
> >
> > I do not like people to be that indifferent to comon usage of fascist
> > symbolism. One should not get used to it to much.
>
> You're talking about an ENTIRE GAME modeled on the idea of fascist
> behavior, racial intolerance, and Genocide!!! The entire 40K universe
> is a macro vision of the darkest parts of WW I & II. Instead of the
> world at war with sides fighting for and against tyranny and genocide -
> you have an entire galaxy at war and virtually ALL the races involved
> are genocidal and tyrannical empires fighting to be the dominate species
> in the galaxy.
Ok, and all those other war-like races make them think tey are right
in doing this (violence produces violence), the way of fascism gives
them the strength to survive this harsh world (they are the good ones
then non-the-less, as you are favouring violence over pacifism to
survive today), all the doctrine there is then needed as much as yours
today.
This is the point of glorification. I'm not fond of this whatever you
say.
The young gamers buy this, because the satire-level is not that good
anymore, perhaps this was better/more obvious during RT. Giving the
young ones and the more simple-minded gamers (they are not all the
intellectual type) the game as it is right now with direct links to
(still active) political parties of the past with glorified fascist
ideology is wrong to me.
> In fact, the only race that doesn't fit that description
> currently is the 'johnny come lately' Tau which many folks have pointed
> out as being inappropriate to the feel and background of the 4OK
> universe.
I agree on that. I do not like the robotech-army that much. They mess
with the enthropic 40k background.
> Complaining about 'indifference to common Fascism' in a game
> who's whole premise is just that is plain foolish!
Fascism in wargames is not the main point, the glorification is the
bad part.
> >
> >
> > > The real frosting on the cake there is your comments about 'two or
> > > three mouse clicks' verse taking 'your time making those little nazi-men
> > > look fine and cruel'. WTF? We're glad to know your comfortable with
> > > racism and genocide - as long as it's quick and easy.
> >
> > OK, better would have been determined practicing in the art of duplicating
> > fascist symbolism in miniaturised detail verse consuming a computer wargame
> > without thinking about it a lot.
>
> So, consuming it without thought is better? Didn't you just say
> "I do not like people to be that indifferent to common usage of fascist
> symbolism". Not only are you contradicting yourself here, you're also
> ignoring the fact you yourself noted - which is that the whole game is
> laden with satirical reference to Fascism, racial intolerance, and
> genocide. Sorry, but you don't get to play both ends of the same
> argument. In essence you're telling me that computer games with 'quick
> and easy' Facism are acceptable because the end user doesn't have to put
> much brain power into it, but that miniatures games which required some
> time to paint their symbols of Facism are not acceptable. That is just
> plain nuts!
Is fascism a theme in Civ2? Is genocide part of the game as in we want
to kill that special ethnic-group, or is about world domination with
out a certain political background?
>
> >
> > > (We'll conveniently ignore the time the programmers had to put in to creating
> > > that 2 or 3 mouse click game that lets one bloodlessly simulate mass
> > > death and destruction.)
> >
> >
> >
> > > I think we've pretty well captured the real
> > > essence of the issue here, which is that YOU personally are
> > > uncomfortable with the idea that you should have to honestly think about
> > > the fact you're participating in a hobby that simulates and draws much
> > > of it's basis from real death and destruction.
> >
> > Might be true, but that's not what this is about. It's about political correctness,
> > and this (to me) forbids nazi symbolism.
>
> And my point is that political correctness sucks ass because it's
> a 'lets hide the truth' in one way or another mentality that makes
> problems worse - not better.
I do not want to hide it away, but I do not think 40k is the way to
teach others about the past.
> I also point out that it's the height of
> idiocy to whine about Political correctness in a game who's whole
> foundation is NOT politically correct.
GW favours fascism? Yes, in a capitalistic way maybe. I think the
satire aspect got lost on the way to the newer edtions perhaps.
> It's a game about warfare and
> destruction in a fictional future full of vast empires bent on
> committing genocide on one another. Where the hell is the political
> correctness in that??? Answer - there isn't any.
To me it is a playground for political incorrectness then, but I have
drawn a line, which I will not cross. For reasons of pc (see above).
>
> >
> > > Apparently as long as
> > > YOU personally can pretend that there isn't the slightest connection
> > > between real world violence and WarHammer, why then it's just fine and
> > > dandy for you to play. But heaven forbid if someone should somehow
> > > remind you of what the nature of the game truly is... Boo hoo hoo.
> >
> > Perhaps it's even more disgusting, I am thinking about what other people
> > might think of me playing warhammer.
>
> Now I really pity you. If your self-impression and self worth is
> so bound up in what 'other people' think of you that you'll have to
> worry about what they think of your hobbies
No, I just do not want to hurt people that way.
> - you don't just have
> personal issues, you've got volumes.
>
>
> >
> > > So, you want to play war games, but you're attempting to convince
> > > others that there's even the slightest merit to the idea that it's
> > > offensive or in bad taste to include imagery from historical conflicts
> > > in fictional games about violence and death just because historical
> > > conflicts are about real death and violence? That rates up there as one
> > > of the most pathetic cop-outs of all time. It would be one thing if
> > > someone were using war games (whether historical, fictional, or science
> > > fiction based) as a means of advancing the idea that racism and genocide
> > > are acceptable. But that is clearly NOT the case here.
> >
> > It is not...Wow, if YOU say so...
> >
> > > The fact that this is clearly evident
> >
> > Please make it evident to me then, that should solve all my problems then.
>
> Have you noticed any place where GW is selling real weapons,
Does ideology count?
> or
> any place where GW advocates killing other 'real' people because of
> cultural differences? No? No kidding. Did the poster of the original
> question advocate killing others because of cultural differences? No?
> No surprise there.
Yawn...forgive me but forget about that please.
> If the use of symbols of genocide and fascismm and
> racism are bothering you - then the entire game should bother the hell
> out of you and you should never play it again.
It does in the above given context.
>
>
> >
> > > and yet you continue to whine about how it's
> > > 'bad style' highlights the fact that you personally have a problem
> > > reconciling conflicting self-images.
> >
> > I never had problems with warhammer, but I have problems with people using
> > fascist symbolism.
>
> And yet again I'll attempt to get this through your thick skull -
> THE WHOLE GAME IS LOADED WITH FASCIST SYMBOLISM. Ref - Imperial Eagle,
> etc. THE BACKGROUND OF THE GAME IS ABOUT VAST EMPIRES BENT ON
> GENOCIDE... ALL OF WHICH REFERENCE BACK TO THE HISTORICAL EVENTS OF
> WORLD WAR 1 & 2. Which part of that is eluding your mental grasp?
>
The part that the game has not grown out of this for merchandising
reasons.
GW wants people like me to play their games :))
> >
> >
> > ></begin Ratman internal dialogue mode>
>
> > > "I'm a nice sensitive guy, and sensitive guys don't say or do anything
> > > that might be 'Politically Incorrect" or otherwise offend someone or
> > > even remind others that the world isn't a 'and they lived happily ever
> > > after.' fairy tale."
> >
> > Most of the time yes...I am just to good to be true.
> >
> > > And...
> > >
> > > "I'm a guy who likes playing miniatures WAR games about conquering
> > > others through the use of death and destruction."
> >
> > As I do like other strategy games, but most are not that much fun.
> >
> > > "Playing games about beating others through the use of violence just
> > > isn't PC.
> >
> > I think you think of PC in other terms then I do.
>
> I think Political Correctness is any attempt to 'white wash' over or
> otherwise cover up the unpleasant parts of human nature and human
> history.
Being nice to each other is a really disgusting thing to you right?
And being hatefull gives us even more things we should not hide from
each
other then...
> It's done with the idea that "if we all pretend really hard,
> then those problems will go away". It's illusory, and worse still it
> leaves people mindless of the problems until they're in over their
> heads.
Playing a wargame for fun is one thing, but claiming to do it because
you do not want to look away from human misery...Please have a look at
the inner monologue you wrote yourself (it's not much effort to do
right now).
> It's the kind sentimental nonsense that gets otherwise good
> people needlessly killed in bad situations because it teaches them that
> it's much better to 'believe in make believe' (where everything is
> fuzzy, warm, friendly, and safe) than it is to 'believe in that which is
> real' (where things are hard, painful, and sometimes just plain
> horrific.) because believing in what's real means you have to make
> difficult choices and take personal responsibility. Whether you
> intended to or not - you're coming across as a person who will let
> others make the difficult choices and make any sacrifices that go with
> those choices, while you reap the benefits of their actions.
Even if this was not the intended topic:
Simply because I do not think of killing people as a choice does not
mean that I'm not able to "get up/stand up for my rights".
>
> >
> > > What ever am I going to do? I know, I'll play 'science
> > > FICTION' war games. That way I can continue to view myself as a
> > > 'sensitive guy'
> >
> > Yes, fits me better than historical ones.
> >
> > > while pretending that 'make believe' war is NOT about
> > > the use of violence to gain a desired end.
> >
> > Never sasid so.
>
> If you're going to complain about or take issue with the 'ideals
> of Fascism' then it doesn't matter if they're in a historical event or a
> fictional one does it?
It does, the fictional ones are not part of my real life so far.
> Which is the distinction you're trying to draw
> between the two. Would you find 'mock Hitler Youth training' more
> acceptable than 'real Hitler Youth training'? Or is it fairly evident
> that 'any sort' of 'Hitler Youth training' would be less than
> politically correct and generally not a good idea?
>
I think the parody is ok in the case that is well done.
> >
> > > That way I can hold the
> > > moral high ground, and still not have to give up any personal pleasures
> > > due to having a personal belief that would require some self sacrifice
> > > on my part.
> >
> > Good thinking, right?
> >
> > > Better still, I can wrap myself in the cloak of 'false
> > > virtue' when others present me with things that might remind me of the
> > > reality of the world. If I whine, piss, and moan about it long enough
> > > people are sure to see the virtues of my ideas..."
> >
> > No, I never thought about it this way, and I did not do more than write a
> > few lines, so please stop exagerating
>
> Sorry, but I'm following the reasoning of the arguments you
> presented to the logical conclusions that they dictate. If you offer up
> an argument and it's logical conclusion isn't what you expected - then
> design a better argument. That is after all the purpose of an open
> discourse, is it not?
The "cloak of false virtue" is not a logical conclusion, it is an
invented accusation and goes well with most of your other ad personam
"whining".
The logical conclusion right here is what I consider your part of
semantics in this.
>
>
> <snipped the Big F.O.>
>
> > Just because some people do not like my attitude to nazi-designs?
>
> No, not simply because you don't like Nazi designs. But because
> you're complaining about Nazi designs and the implied 'Fascist'
> attitudes
Considering people by what they do (e.g. painting/playing fascist
armies)
is not that easy, I agree on that. I for my self decided to make it
easier
for others not to place me on the wrong political-wing. I care for the
popularity of the game in this way. Other reasons why I do not like
the
usage of fascist symbolism can be found above.
> that go with them in a game that is LOADED with the same types
> of symbolism and all the attendant connotations that go with them WHILE
> VOLUNTARILY PLAYING THAT GAME! You'd have some credibility and
> respectability if you had said "I disapprove of the symbolism and
> implied acceptability of hateful ideas in the 40K game. Therefore while
> I like to paint and collect the minis, I refuse to play the game itself
> on the grounds that doing so might give others even the illusionary and
> false impression that I condone or advance the ideals of Fascism implied
> by those symbols."
Wouldn't it be a better idea to make the game less disapprovable?
> But that isn't what you're talking about here. What
> you're talking about here is knowingly getting into a war game loaded
> symbolism and connotations that according to your own self description
> are objectionable to you - and then making a fuss when someone speaking
> of using a different symbol (carrying the same objectionable
> connotations) from the exact same historical event. And you wonder why
> folks here have shot down your ideas repeatedly?
I do not really wonder, I wonder how many people just "give a fuck
about this shit" to say it in your terms.
I hope I did that now, even if my point of view will still not satisfy
you.
>
> Myrmidon
d.e.m.
The Blue Raja
> > them have small white print on the front. Would you be offended by my
> > choice of clothes?
>
> If it includes weaponry, large white banners with black crosses on
> them
> I'd say yes. Does the print say something like "I would willingly die
> for the Emperor"?
So now you're saying that's it's politically incorrect to die for a cause
you believe worthy?
> I myself would lead the r-ear g-uard m-êlée w-arriors, they have no
> weapons at all,this way they can never fight, must always be fielded
> behind your own lines of other fighters, all stats 1 but attacks 0
> immune to psychology 2p. each.
There is no psych anymore.
> I fear
> many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
> or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
Isn't it more likely that if they decide to explore the background outside
of the game that they'll instead learn about history, about great struggles
and feats of human courage and comradeship?
--
The Blue Raja
"It wouldn't make sense, for a midget riding a golden retriever, armed with
drool and a short bow to be able to keep pace with a rip-roaring marine
motorcycle, now would it?" - Mark Story
RGMW FAQ - Just read the damn thing
http://www.sheppard.demon.co.uk/rgmw_faq/rgmw_faq.htm
Ratman
> In article <5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com>,
> d_e...@gmx.net, Ratman shouted out the following words of wit...
> > In article <5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com>,
> > d_e...@gmx.net, Ratman shouted out the following words of wit...
> > >> archd...@linuxmail.org (The Archdeacon) wrote in message news:<bf486a39.02051...@posting.google.com>...
> > >> > > > So, if you hate everything about war, why do you play wargames?
> > >> > >
> > >> >> I would not like to take part in a war for real,
> > >> > So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
> > >> > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
> > >>
> > >> I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
> > >> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
> > >>
>
> > > No, instead you rely on others to do it for you. Your freedom
> > > that society wants to 'cut' was bought and paid for to begin with in
> > > blood, steel, and tears.
> >
> > No, it's been there all the time.
>
> Malarkey! Name a single Non-third world country in existence
> today that has NOT fought a war at some point in its history for the
> right to exist as a nation. Your reply is more BS basically saying "I'm
> not in debted to someone else" - in your words your freedom has "been
> there all the time". Lame
What else has there been but freedom right from the beginning?
>
> >
> > > Now, relying on others to help defend those
> > > freedoms wouldn't be a bad thing in and of itself as there are many
> > > people who simply aren't mentally and physically equipped to do the
> > > things needed to defend themselves.
> >
> > I'd like it more, if there is no need for anyone to defend himself.
>
> Who cares! I didn't say "Wouldn't it be nice if..." or "If you
> were God, how would you remake the world..." I'm plainly talking about
> the way the world IS. It's called reality - and I point out again that
> it seems to be something you spend a lot of time doing your best to
> avoid dealing with.
Since I found out that I'm not the hero to change it all, I did spend
a long time apart from reality. Now that I'm back I'm frustrated, but
living the way life should be is not something I consider wrong, it
would simply work better if more people joined in.
>
> >
> > > The difference here however, is
> > > that most individuals like that with any grasp of reality don't pretend
> > > that violence is never an appropriate response, nor do they attempt to
> > > assume a morally and ethically superior mental stance about it because
> > > they're not the ones doing the violence.
> >
> > But your ethics know a difference between attacker and defender?
>
> In the vast majority of cases it's fairly obvious. As an example,
> lets say I walk into a bank and there are 8 people who are lying on the
> floor, and one person standing up holding a gun and wearing a ski mask.
> While I'm sure this would be a tough call for you to make, I'm also sure
> that the overwhelming majority of humans familiar with how a bank works
> and possessing 2 working brain cells could figure out the "difference
> between attacker and defender" here.
A more simple answer to the question would have been "yes" then.
>
> Or perhaps you'd like to go with historical examples? I can name
> a great many. I find it entertaining that suddenly my ethics are in
> question because I point out how the world is - which apparently
> conflicts with your view of 'how it should be'.
You started questioning my ethics, because I disagree with the use of
violence.
>
> >
> > > (And yes, it's a direct
> > > implication of your statement "Yes, human history is a poor thing. {I.e.
> > > because of the violence})
> >
> > Violence produces violence, I used to much verbal violence at the beginning
> > it seems. Violence is evil in itself, but it certainly is not always equally
> > wrong.
>
> More thoughtless platitudes. Let's start with the fallacy
> "Violence is evil in itself". Gee, I guess there's a lot of animals on
> this planet that are "evil" as they routinely use violence. Lets see,
> dogs are know to attack and kill humans (rottweilers anyone?), tigers
> are very efficient killers and are known to kill humans, bears, and
> lions... Lions and Tigers and Bears! OH MY! Rather than being part of
> nature - violence must some how be evil. And of course when it's
> pointed out that violence is part of nature the reaction of the bleeding
> hearts is always "Humans are above nature". Yawn, yeah, whatever.
I have a mind to make the decision to use force or not to. If that
makes me stand above nature in your eyes then be it, I do not think
so.
> As for the "Violence produces violence" comment, geee and here I
> thought nature produced violence too.
Add in more conscience beings. If you keep on trying to tear apart the
obvious context you should not rant about semantics.
> I guess thousands of scientists
> and biologists must be wrong compared to your vast wisdom. I'll run
> right off to tell them of their simple minded errors in light of your
> true genius. Or maybe not.
Seems the genius can not follow your line of thinking here.
> When I pointed out that what you first offered was an overly
> simplistic platitude, you of course counter with yet more useless
> platitudes. Better still, your 'violence is evil, but not always
> wrong' statement is a contradiction in terms.
Your quote is wrong. Violence is evil and wrong, but it's not a black
and white thing. This is were your reallity part comes in. Sometimes
violence is used to protect other/yourself. That is still wrong/evil,
but it is by far not as bad as killing without purpose, for
ideological reasons, money or whatever.
Read again.
> Should I take it you're
> in favor of 'righteous evil' but not 'wrongful evil'? Or should I take
> it you spouted those platitudes without really thinking about it? Both
> of your platitudes attempt to categorize violence in terms of 'good or
> evil' and/or 'right or wrong' and fail utterly to note two basic things.
>
> 1. Violence is a real part of the world (personal like or dislike of
> violence in no way negates the reality of this.)
OK
>
> and
>
> 2. Nature never forgets how to breed predators - whether they walk on
> four legs or on two.
People might learn to do bettter one day.
>
> Knowing this, it is the height of foolishness to sit here and tell me
> that "Violence is evil". By your reasoning, police officers who use
> violence to subdue violent criminals are evil - just because they used
> violence.
Yes,I do.
> Lets forget about the fact that they do so to prevent
> criminals from inflicting more violence on otherwise law abiding people
> who are unable or unwilling to defend themselves. And of course there's
> the historical aspect. I guess the Allies were all evil. After all,
> they used violence to defeat the Nazis. Isn't it obvious? If they'd
> been good people they'd have just had giant peace rallies and complained
> about swastikas being displayed in public. Following the logic of your
> arguments leads us to some plain stupid conclusions.
See above. I do not consider all violence as equally evil. I myself
try to live without.
>
> >
> > > If you pay your taxes, then you are helping
> > > to pay the salaries of violence specialists (law enforcement, and
> > > military personnel) that society uses ever single day.
> >
> > I can't do a lot about that without loosing even more of my freedom.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you're in Germany?
That much is obvious.
> Last I knew
> Germany had local and national government that was open to influence by
> the citizens of Germany. In short you could petition your local and
> national government in an attempt to have your law enforcement and
> military organizations disbanded
and I will vote in sept.
> - after all, they do violence on your
> behalf and according to you 'violence is evil' and 'violence produces
> violence'.
They do on the behalf of a society I'm part of. It's a democratic
thing by now.
> Which leads me to the point about the difference between
> giving an idea 'lip service' (ie I'll talk about it, but I'm not going
> to take action for that ideal - I might have to make personal
> sacrifices) and having conviction (ie working towards achieving one's
> personal ideals even if it means personal sacrifice.)
I'm willing to do my part, even if I have some other responsibilities
to other more specific members of this society (e.g. family).
> Again, correct me
> if I'm wrong, but if you petitioned the local and/or national government
> to have law enforcement and military organizations disbanded - the
> government wouldn't have you thrown in jail, tormented, or murdered,
> would they?
No, they ignore you. The only way to do it is to stop paying taxes at
all.
That means you may not work or go to jail for not paying taxes, it
means that you can't buy anything because everything is taxed...
I think there was a person with more considerable income who wanted
guarantee that his taxes are not used for military issues, IIRC it was
not granted and due to his wealth he simply emigrated to switzerland.
Maybe I move on to, but I can't do that right now.
> Now, odds are that the attempt would fail due to your
> friends and fellow countrymen having some common sense, and would
> probably subject you to a lot of ridicule for being foolish, but nothing
> really prevents you for following up on your 'convictions'.
Last conclusion would be building the new RAF, or what?
> Nothing
> except for the obvious observation that what you're really doing is
> giving lip service to another brainless 'PC' platitude.
If you think so. Lip service is more than most people do, and I do not
fear
getting hurt when the situation arises.
>
> >
> > > To say 'I'd be
> > > unhappy to be reminded of 'real war and death' in a science fiction WAR
> > > game' is the height of asinine stupidity.
> >
> > Would seeing other people fancying certein politically inadequately themed
> > armies sound any better then?
>
> Um, exactly what army would be more 'politically inadequately
> themed' than one based on the Nazis? Know of any other real historical
> army that systematically slaughtered more non-combatants than the Nazis?
First thing that comes to my mind is Stalin, I think his score was
even higher.
>
>
> >
> > > >> and I do understand people
> > > >> who do not want to be reminded of such things.
>
> > > I don't. The only people that have any right to NOT want to be
> > > reminded of such things are folks that were part of the conflict in
> > > question.
> >
> > The very same, age about 60+.
>
> Which means you were a very small child during the war.
Not me, I'm 26 now, but a large part of the population still remembers
the war.
> >
> > > Those folks have paid their dues, and if they don't wish to
> > > be reminded of past fear and suffering, I can well agree.
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
>
> Which once again begs the central question - if you're so bothered
> by the knowledge that people have been and continue be killed by violent
> means, why the hell are you playing a game based on violence and
> killing? That fact that it's supposed to be 'fictional' violence in no
> way negates the fact that it's goals are the same as real violence.
> Your 'real violence (and the symbols there of) is evil' but 'fictional
> violence is ok' stance lacks any credibility what so ever.
Why?
>
>
> >
> > > But since we we're talking about Nazi symbols from World War II on 40K orks -
> > > I have to ask, exactly how many WW II veterans do you game with? None? Wow,
> > > what a surprise.
> >
> > And how many of them pass the shops with the fitting displays?
> > Watching younger people playing with their past?
>
> Are we talking about non-participants in the war gaming hobby
> being offended by the idea of others making a 'war game' out of a real
> event that they were involved in? No.
I do.
> We're talking about people who
> actively participate in a hobby who's theme is the use of violence to
> achieve one's goals complaining about the use of symbols from real world
> events where people attempted to use the same types of methods to
> achieve the same types of goals. It lacks credibility and intelligence.
Your arguement mainly is:It's wrong anyway, so why should we not go
for the real thing?
I think : This far and no further.
Both is not ideal, but this is your fucking reality.
You can drop the war, death and violence thing, it's only a
distraction from what this whole thread was intended to be about.
> Next lets examine the turn rules. Gee,
> what do you know - there's a 'shooting phase'. Wow, that's not war-
> like. No one in a real war tries to shoot at other people. And of
> course there's the 'assault phase' - how unrealistic, everyone knows
> real wars never involve hand to hand combat. And of course there's
> those rules for resolving hits and wounds and saves. In short, the
> intent of the game rules are to provide a simplified simulation of the
> effects of weapons fire and hand to hand combat on a battlefield in
> times of war. Your "not near to a simulation" crap doesn't cut it. You
> could argue that it isn't a 'very true to life' simulation, which I'd
> agree with. But again, the INTENT OF THE RULES TO SIMULATE WAR on a
> table top using miniatures to represent real life troops has never been
> in doubt.
At least it is not about collecting and murdering people. The game
itself is about war on a battlefield, OK. But there is still no need
for fascist armies and my pacifist attitude has not much to do with
this at all. And see I can distinguish the game from reality, but I do
not think that making that more difficult with WWII german armies for
example is a good idea. I don't really want to repeat the answer given
to your second post why. It's about spreading fascist ideology.
>
>
> > It's the political hints some people have a strong affinity to which bother
> > me (these people as well as the allusions themselves).
> >
> So? That's a personal problem - YOUR personal problem.
Ok
> Just
> because YOU'D like to play a fictional game without reference to real
> world politics and events doesn't mean everyone else is bothered by
> them. If you feel that way, write your own game rules and stop whining
> about the fact that people make political and historical references in
> this gaming system.
Not all people do, and there are people who agree with me.
That was about all I had to tell here. You got that excited about my
point of view, which was not written well. I beg your forgiveness.
>
>
> > > I have to ask, what do you do during holidays like "Veterans Day"
> > > and "Memorial Day"? Hide in your basement with your fingers in your
> > > ears and wish real hard until the 'bad days' go away?
> >
> > We do not have those here.
> >
> Last I knew, Germany still celebrated holidays, including one or
> more that celebrated contributions to German history by individuals who
> were warriors and preformed valorous acts during times of war...
I must have ignored that all my life. Who is this hero, Hermann?
>
>
> > >>
> > >> > Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
> > >> > amount of wars we have fought.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, human history is a poor thing.
>
> > > No, human history simply is. There are instances of real horror,
> > > but I point out ignoring it is a great way to repeat it.
> >
> > 40K instead of history lessons then? That's just what I am afraid of.
> > Everything in it's place.
>
> No. No were did I say or imply that 40K was a replacement for
> history. That's another lame attempt to dodge the issue. If fact if
> you actually read what I wrote above - I pointed out that ignoring
> history is a good way to repeat it's tragedies.
I agree with you, but I do not think that WWII armies in 40k help
making people
more sensitive to the tragedies of that war (other than those who are
already).
>
>
> >
> > > Sadly, folks like you would gladly forget everything that was learned
> > > so more people that are brave can go out and pay to learn those lessons
> > > yet again.
> >
> > Which lessons, veteran?
>
> Pfff! This from you? According to your own statements you were
> what 6, maybe 7 years old at most when World War II was going on. Were
> you a 7 year old Platoon leader, or a 7 year old tank commander?
Have you ever seen pictures from the last war-days in Berlin?
7 is a good estimation. They were trained forces, remember
Hitlerjugend?
Yes, you know about that, you had your own question about that one.
They did not have a lot of weaponry, pistols and some grenades mostly,
but it is a poor sight to have two young, dirty boys carry a large
machine gun.
And even civilists remember the war here, it was not fought on a small
table in your hobbyroom, which means ALL above 60 have some memories
to share.
>
>
> >
> > > The sick part is your false pretence that somehow the reality of the
> > > situation will bend to your 'beliefs' if only you can convince everyone
> > > else that it's their view of history and reality that's distorted.
> >
> > Next thing you tell me is that the poles attacked germany in a blitz attack.
>
> Ok, dickhead, care to quote the portion of the text where I
> mentioned Poland or Germany and the blitz?
You keep telling me that there is no difference in choosing this army
or that.
You tell me playing a wargame is a bad thing anyway, if I choose to
think so.
You tell me fascism is part of the game anyway.
This is your personall reality, it to bends to your belief.
Perhaps you even belief in the above written nonsense.
I thought you might be able to understand sarcasm as it seemed to be
your mothertongue.
I think fielding certain armies with real historical background is
even less good.
My point of view, my reality.
> Perhaps you're confusing me
> for Shitzer, nice try but no cigar. I'm not the one here who keeps
> spouting about how 'violence is evil'
You are, or do you really think that it was just in Hitlers nature to
kill those people and thus he did nothing wrong?
> and how I wish that there was no
> violence in the world - that's your argument.
This is mine, right.
> I'm pointing out that
> your argument is rather devoid of reality and long on 'wishing'.
I know it is.
>
> >
> > >> All I can say is I'm glad you're not my neighbor, you'd be useless in a
> > >> crisis.
> >
> >
> >
> > >>
> > >> > Humanity is a warlike race, not some rose-tinted liberal utopia,
> > >>
> > >> That seems to be a rather bad excuse.
>
> > > Coming from a person who voluntarily plays a game about KILLING
> > > PEOPLE and blowing things up??? This is the height of hypocrisy and
> > > stupidity! Whether the game is based on some real or fiction event is
> > > irrelevant to the fact that the GOAL of the game is to crush your
> > > opponent by annihilating his or her forces. JUST LIKE REAL WAR - the
> > > idea is to control territory, resources, or just out right kill lots of
> > > opposing troops.
> >
> > And I still never wanted to kill anyone for real, but if that is all the
> > same to you I am too glad you're not my neighbor.
>
> You never wanted to kill anyone for real, but you'll complain
> bitterly if reminded about real killing while playing a game about
> fictional killing. Wow - there's a sentiment worthy of respect. NOT!
It's not about killing but about fascist ideology, you got that mixed
up in the first place.
Shall I send you my swiss army knife, now that I don't need it
anymore?
The militair uses and even produces a lot of thing that are usefull to
me, and the prospect of killing is not what this is about, again.
Soldiers even train running, but I still use my legs, too.
Physical training for killing purposes has not stopped me from giving
my body sustenance so far.
>
> As for the "thoughts can kill" comment - are you normally this
> stupid, or are you working extra hard at it now? Yeah, thoughts can
> kill. Concentration Camps weren't a 'natural terrain feature' of
> Germany and Europe prior to World War II were they? Someone thought up
> the idea of rounding up non-combatants and putting them in camps for use
> as slave labor, or for easy extermination, and they then set those
> thoughts into motion and made 'real' concentration camps.
My strategy in 40k is popor enough that I'm not afraid of inventing a
method effective enough for the militaire to gain interest. My
thoughts playing this game killed no one so far. The fascist ideology
did, and yes I already think about quitting 40k.
>
> >
> > >>
> > >> > there is a need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the
> > >> > needs of others.
> > >>
> > >> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
> >
> > As in killing other people...
>
> What do you think police officers do when violent criminals resist
> arrest? When all other means of restraining them fail, police officers
> KILL criminals (and last I knew criminals were 'other people'). Not to
> mention the fact that police officers are killed in the line of duty
> from time to time. And of course there's the anti-terrorist units,
> they never kill anyone on behalf of civilians, nor do military units.
> Yeah, you've done a fine job of proving that good people never kill or
> die on your behalf. I guess the folks who have done so for your society
> must ALL have been people of 'evil'. This isn't a sign of bad behavior
> on the part of your government or society - this is a sign of your
> struggle against reality. Sorry about your luck, must suck to be you.
It does a lot of times. I know that I live for utopia.
>
>
> >
> > > This is complete and UTTER BULLSHIT! If you pay your taxes and
> > >are NOT attempting to have the police and military disbanded, then you
> > >are damn well accepting that others do the bleeding and dying on your
> > >behalf.
> >
> > Paying taxes kills people stop it right now! Good try.
>
> And as I pointed out above - if you are able to work towards the
> goal of stopping violence but aren't doing so, then what you ARE doing
> is nothing more than giving lip service to the idea. In effect - if
> you're not working to stop it, then your condoning it or purposely
> turning a blind eye to the problem. I'm not impress. It's pathetic
> whining bullshit.
Who are you to judge what I do about stopping violence? Call it
whining,
still better than thoughtlessness, and perhaps I do even more.
>
> >
> > > This sort of self deceiving LIE that isn't even vaguely
> > >credible under the most charitable of situations. I know good and well
> > >that you would call the police, fire department, bomb squad, or other
> > >specialized social service for support if you were in a life-threatening
> > >situation. And yet here you sit spouting...
>
> > >> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
> >
> > As in kill other people...
>
> Already answered this - see above.
> >
> > > Who the fuck do you think you're kidding? That's about the most vile
> > > lie I've heard in a long time. This makes you out to be a social
> > > parasite of the lowest order.
> >
> > Just because I do not want to kill anyone?
>
> No, because you stand back and let others doing the killing and
> dying on your behalf, and then claim you're a better or more 'noble'
> because hey, you personally have never lifted a hand in violence. Of
> course, you're in no way in debted to those people who did serve society
> for better or ill, after all you're much to 'noble' for that. And being
> such a 'noble' guy, it's ok for you to claim that it's 'bad style' for
> others to remind you of real death while playing a game about fictional
> death. You certainly know how to do a fine job of claiming the moral
> high ground - even if you have to ignore reality to do.
Everyone has to make his own decisions. Many people decide to kill for
their
goals (whichever goal that may be) I do not.
>
>
> >
> > > In other words, you'll accept the
> > > sacrifices of other people, and pretend that you personally aren't in
> > > their debt while spouting 'Politically Correct' crap about how it might
> > > 'offend' someone who plays war games by reminding them of real
> > > historical events.
> >
> > Or people who do not play wargames at all.
>
> Are we talking about non-wargamers? No. Try to stick with the
> subject.
I am speaking of both, but as you regard keeping other people in mind
makes the event of war return I rethink my attitude.
I do not like to have certain political ideologies to be played in a
game, shared with people as me and younger children, if they take part
as a glorified good force which they are not.
> Heaven forbid that people playing 'fictional' war
> games should be forced to think about the fact that warfare is bloody
> and violent. Worse still, what if they came to the conclusion that real
> warfare killed real people - and that historical war games were about
> 'real' events that really killed 'real' people...
I would like them to understand that fact very much, but many do not.
>
> </begin mock hand wringing and facial expressions of horror!>
>
> >
> > > No? Gosh! What a bunch of sickos - next
> > > thing you know they'll be pretending to fire those simulated weapons,
> > > and working out simulated casualties representing simulated death and
> > > destruction... OH THE HUMANITY!
> >
> > You missed the topic altogether, didn't you?
> >
> No. Once again I'm pointing out through the use of sarcasm that
> your stance that 'fictional' violence is ok, while reminders of 'real'
> violence are not in a war game is idiotic.
Only that this whole thing never was about violence until you started
this well chosen distraction.
> And I'll say it again... If
> you're playing a war game - whining about reminders of 'real' violence
> is petty and damn stupid. I would much rather have players reminded
> that war is a violent and bloody affair, rather than some bloodless
> event. If it makes them think about real people who really lost their
> lives, so much the better.
But they do not, warhammer is fun not thinking about the implicit
violence to many people.
> It'll make the smart ones less likely to be
> in favor of war without exhausting all the other social possibilities
> first.
>
>
> > >
> > > >> I still like playing wargames, with a background which is not directly
> > > >> related to history.
>
> > > Apparently you live in "Never Never Land" too - does that mean we
> > > should change the history books so as not to damage your delicate
> > > sensibilities?
> >
> > You should not mix them with wargames.
>
> So, we outlaw historical war gaming? Only military personal will
> be allowed to play games like "Battle of the Bulge" or "Napoleon at
> Waterloo"? Sure, right after we outlaw any news broadcast that makes
> mention of violence.
It's not about violence, even if this fills your lines...
> Sigh - more 'ignore it and it'll go away' mental
> midget behavior. Goodness knows we wouldn't want people to learn about
> history by gaming, would we? I mean after all, it wasn't my History
> classes that taught me about Waterloo - it was war gaming. None of my
> high school teachers would have been allowed to accurately describe what
> the carnage was like after the battle - 35,000 dead bodies in a 3 & 1/2
> square mile area. Places where the bodies of the slain had fallen and
> were stacked so deeply upon one another that the areas were impassible
> to horse calvary and nearly so to foot troops. Historical war gaming
> does 3 things. It teaches about real world events (even if it often
> fails to convey the full horror of those events). It teaches those
> interested in strategy and tactics a means to test and improve their
> skills without real world killing. And it provides entertainment to
> those interested recreating historical events after a limited fashion.
> If you can't handle any or all of those reasons - then YOU picked the
> wrong hobby.
Perhaps I should try historical wargames then. The hidden fascism in
40k is perhaps the more miserable mistake than the other.
OK.
I like a lot of the background in warhammer as well as in 40k. It is
the only wargame a lot of people I know play here. Some of them share
your point of view, some do not. Having a real world related army is
offensive to a lot of people around here, this way the matter of pc
perhaps plays a greater part.
If 40k was still more parody and satire OK, but some of this was lost
along with a lot of real world references. The state 40k is now that I
started playing is not very well chosen. The last fascist links are
not that obvious anymore, and the story part of the rules is very
small. Perhaps it is the translation, but it lost any satire charm it
might have had and which I can't judge anymore. People shall do as
they want to. But I have my own opinion about those things. I'll have
a closer look at the fluff and then make up my mind again.
d.e.m.
The Archdeacon
> > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
>
> I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
> lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
Personal freedom is awarded as a right for obeying the laws and
traditions of that given society. To be truly free you have to remove
yourself completely from other human contact.
"Naked force has settled more issues in history than any other factor.
The contrary opinion 'violence never solves anything' is wishful
thinking at its worst."
The use of non-violent means to achieve something is the luxury of a
few. Certainly against the panzers in WW2 non-violent means would do
nothing to stop the holocaust.
> > Some of us have an interest in history. Look back on humanity and the
> > amount of wars we have fought.
>
> Yes, human history is a poor thing.
Poor is such a subjective word. As we have no other fully sentient
lifeforms to compare with, I would say that human history has been one
of suffering and violence, to be a scholar of humankind is to study
all aspects of human society not just those that we do not find
pleasent or comfortable.
> > Humanity is a warlike race, not some rose-tinted liberal utopia,
>
> That seems to be a rather bad excuse.
It is not an excuse, it is a fact.
> > we may not like the killing
>
> I certainly do not.
>
> >but
>
> No "but"
>
ER, Yes "but"
> > there is a need from time to time to sacrifice ones life for the
> > needs of others.
>
> But not to sacrifice the lifes of others for my own good.
Exactly.
> >So what can we base the wargame on?
>
> The more imaginative minds try to use creativity to make up their own fictional
> history, instead of simply using the given past...
You mean like the history of 40k? Perhaps you would care to point out
a good war game where you can not draw paralells with human history,
It would certainly make an interesting read. Certainly in works of
fiction I have yet to come accross a book that meets your criteria, I
presume wargames is the same.
The Archdeacon
> > This is very true, but they do wear uniforms and helmets similar to
> > nazi one
>
> Yes, that is why the above given excuse is just plain stupid.
Your argument is becoming circular here.
> > We do?
>
> Not for satire perhaps, but some years ago the british TV always
> had one channel showing a ww-movie (and that was the time with not
> that many channels to choose from at all).
>
True, it still is pretty much like that.
> > I think you are reading to much into a game.
>
> I hope I do, thanks for the reassurance ;)
Without wanting to seem arrogant, have you ever tried to employ your
intelligence on issues of political sensitivity. Having sensitivity is
good but really you can take semiotic analysis too far on some issues.
> Or perhaps it's just empathy.
Empathy. I doubt you can emphasise with these people until you
experience. Where I was brought up there was (and to this day still is
) a lot of hatred and violence used. the government tried to teach us
when they introduced the irish peace protest that it was now wrong to
use certain words, that we should not think of those who had killed
our relatives as the enemy anymore. Most people said bollocks to that
and kept hating. Until you can emphasise with this situation you
should keep war-guilt under lock and key. You can read a lot into
things that wa not intended and often skip over the real message,
> >I want to read about a dark future for mankind.
>
> Sometimes I do too, but I hate to do so in the news.
True, each day that goes by the future seems less prosperous.
> > Dont even get me started on the tau and the viscious comparison of
> > their use of propoganda to spread their message, with the nazis
> > attempts to control peoples minds.
>
> Do tau not fight for "the common good" or something?
There was a excellent fluff (except the kate aidie ref.) that
described the tau propaganda machine. Join us or we zapp u.
> > Next you will be saying duping minis is worse
> > than killing babies.
>
> Duping? Like putting varnish on your minis?
Nope copying minatures (it is a reference from RGMW years ago.)
> >> No offence meant, but honesty seems important to me in this case.
>
> > Of course not. this is the joy of living in a reasonably free society,
> > you can express your opinion
>
> No sarcasm please.
Not sarcasm. just the fact.
Moramarth
Raja <the_bl...@dingoblue.net.au.spamless> writes
>The Black Templars are based on the Knights Templar. Notice the
>similarities in device, goals and origin.
Don't know enough about the fluff to comment on goals and origin, but
the colour scheme and device (this with reversed colours) are derived
from the Templar's rivals, the Hospitallers. I'll post more detail
about this elsewhere on this thread.
>
>
>
Regards,
>The Blue Raja
>
--
Moramarth
Moramarth
<mikael...@pp.inet.fi> writes
>Ratman wrote:
>> The black painted Templars with small white contrasts,all their impirial
>> insignias and the black crosses remind *me* of the ss, with all the sm
>> gene-seed fluff in mind.
Knights of Christ and the Temple of Solomon" (white surcoat, red cross)
but their rivals "the Order of the Hospital of St. John (of Jerusalem)"
not to be confused with other minor Hospitaller Orders such as the
English "Hospitallers of St. Thomas of Canterbury at Acre" or the
Spanish "Hospital of the Holy Redeemer". "The Order of the Hospital of
St. John" originally wore full black monks robes over their armour
(Chaplains?) but switched to a black surcoat with a white cross, the
surcoat changing to red in 1259 A.D. (Anno Domini, that's the non-PC
equivalent of C.E.). I don't know when the style of cross switched to
the Maltese Cross, but IIRC it was actually later than this date, so the
only real combination of White Maltese cross on a black background
(reversed for the BTs) is the St. John's Ambulance Brigade, a civilian
volunteer organisation, the red Maltese Cross on a white background is a
reversal of an historical Hospitaller insignia. It's also worth noting
while the Templars were suppressed in 1312 with their last Grand Master
being burnt at the stake as a heretic, the Hospitaller Order is still
extant although no longer military: it's gone the way of its secular
English equivalent, the Order of the Garter. All this is probably
deliberate, as many of the GW design staff are (or were) very
historically literate.
>
>
>Since the German Army wore feldgrau (=grey) uniforms in the Second World
>War,
colour of the collars (SS had black, Wehrmacht bottle green) and
insignia, but they went their separate ways with camouflage clothing.
The one group of Germans who DID have this style of uniform (complete
with stahlhelm) in black as everyday wear were firefighters, as a result
many were summarily executed by allied troops suffering from Ratman's
mindset......
>I'm sure you'll find the Space Marine chapter based on our NG
>offensive because it uses grey uniforms. Come to think of it, Finnish
>regular officers wear grey. Offensive, innit?
>
>> > And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
>>
>> I do not like them very much, as any other (modern) history based wargames.
>
>
Cheers,
>
--
Moramarth
Mikael Halila
>
> In article <3CDEAC23...@pp.inet.fi>, Mikael Halila
> <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> writes
>
> >offensive because it uses grey uniforms. Come to think of it, Finnish
> >regular officers wear grey. Offensive, innit?
>
> Specimens of Feldgrau I've seen are more a sort of Sage Green.....
Can't have been feldgrau, then. It's definitely grey.
> >> > And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
> >>
> >> I do not like them very much, as any other (modern) history based wargames.
>
> Ratty doesn't seem to have much feel for history, full stop.
Nah, he's just way too PC.
Mikael Halila
>
> > > So you would be happy to let other people die to protect the liberties
> > > you take for granted? damn BHL's.
> >
> > I can not take my rights for granted, society cuts personal freedom in a
> > lot of stupid ways, but I do not try to change things using violence.
>
> Personal freedom is awarded as a right for obeying the laws and
> traditions of that given society.
I've got nothing to say to this. Nothing at all. Nope, I'm all quiet.
<walks outside>
<closes door behind him>
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGH!!!!!!!!!
<steps back in>
My, it was drafty out there.
Mikael Halila
>
> Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message news:<3CDEAC23...@pp.inet.fi>...
> > Ratman wrote:
> > >
> > > I just told you this one to point out that I am (perhaps) a bit shy about
> > > 40K militairy background.
> > > The black painted Templars with small white contrasts,all their impirial
> > > insignias and the black crosses remind *me* of the ss, with all the sm
> > > gene-seed fluff in mind.
> >
> > Excuse my language, but you are fucking joking. BLACK ARMOR makes you
> > think of the SS?
>
> Just read the last part of my last sentence above again.
I did. It doesn't make it any better, because _that_ reminds me of the
"Tolkien was racist" threads on rec.arts.books.tolkien , not to mention
the time our very own Floridiot started that racket here. =) Honestly
speaking, I'll have to apologize for the language. You weren't making
nearly this much sense before, IMHO.
> > Damn it, I wear black clothes most of the time. Some of
> > them have small white print on the front. Would you be offended by my
> > choice of clothes?
>
> If it includes weaponry, large white banners with black crosses on
> them I'd say yes.
What's with the black cross? I don't follow you here. And if weapons are
offensive to you, then I really am going to have to wonder why on earth
you're even posting to a wargaming newsgroup.
> Does the print say something like "I would willingly die
> for the Emperor"?
No, but you're going to get every right-wing nutcase on this NG after
you for saying that. Oops, you already did... =D
<snip>
> > Come to think of it, Finnish
> > regular officers wear grey. Offensive, innit?
>
> All existing armies are offensive somehow, but not in the sense of
> reminding me or other people of war events. It is disgusting that there is need
> of them.
I'm not going to start on this, because the
statists/socialists/right-wing nuts (same thing) are already jumping you
with the totalitarian spiel. I've promised myself not to get into this
particular subject, so let's drop this particular part...
> > > > And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
> > >
> > > I do not like them very much, as any other (modern) history based wargames.
> >
> > You know, no-one's forcing you to play them. If you really have
> > attitudes like this, maye you shouldn't.
>
> You are right and I consider quitting 40K.
I honestly think you ought to consider it. This isn't a
"well-fuck-off-then" type post, but honestly, if this stuff offends you,
don't do it. Not being a totalitarian, I'm perfectly comfortable with
the idea that not everyone likes what I do. If this isn't your thing,
well, another hobby might be in order.
> But I think it still
> matters how the game is played. I can live with the
> make-belief-fascism in the game or even the RT-satire-nazi-fluff
> Myrmidon mentioned.
Actually, not only can I live with it, I think it's an absolutely
essential part of the whole universe. I've always seen the Marines as a
sci-fi Waffen SS.
> As long as the people playing the game do not buy
> in the glorifying we-need-this-fascist-politics-to-survive-the-harsh-universe
> with all those other war-like aliens around us. Maybe this was better
> back in RT I don't know. What I know is that most people these days
> are stupid enough to consider the humans/sm to be the good guys. They
> totally miss the point that there is no good in 40k at all. I fear
> many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook.
Looking at the stuff this thread has generated, I'm sure you've noticed
it's not just the younger players...
> Giving those young
> or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
It's a fair point, but I don't think any of the younger children in
question would get it. If there are overt swastikas on the table, most
Anglo-American children are so thoroughly brainwashed by their
educational systems that it's hardly going to turn them into neo-Nazis.
You have a legitimate concern, but I'd say it's unfounded.
> This is what I
> think makes it politically (as in politics) incorrect.
You may be working with a different definition of political correctness
than most people have. In usual American parlance, politically correct
(or PC) means something that is completely neutered of all content that
could possibly, conceivably, somehow, somewhere, misquoted, taken out of
context, read upside down, misread, however be offensive to anyone
anywhere. In other words, rampant idiocy.
> It might be that this problem is a local one, and that people in
> germany are easier embarrassed/disgusted in this way.
I honestly wish they weren't. I had a really good chat with some German
people my age (=young) a couple of years back, and I really feel that
it's about time Germany stopped carrying collective guilt about WWII
around. I don't want to diminish the things that were done back then,
but it's not like it's the current generation's fault.
> The more subconscious reminders, as I still see them in the BT, are
> perhaps as bad, too.
Most people won't get those reminders at all, really. You're
over-concerned; none of the impressionable kids will understand that BT
marines have extensive Nazi symbology.
> Perhaps the conclusion so far is the
> all-satire-old-fluff thing to make it obvious that the imperium is not
> the defending-the-good-guys army at all or make them just that (the
> good guys) to increase the games mainstreamability as is desired by
> gw. The way it is right now is not acceptable to me.
This is a fair enough point. Remember how the old fluff used to go on
and on about how the universe is a dark place, and the way it would make
damn sure no-one ever equated the Imperium with "good"? The problem is
the way GW is trying to make its products reach down into the 7-8
year-old age bracket.
> Perhaps it is an
> all or nothing question then. I, personally, would never feel
> comfortable with the fascist symbols all around me.
Studying military history for a living probably makes one numb to it,
because I hardly even notice... =) Honestly, it depends on the context.
If John Bailey (IIRC it was him who posted the original question) paints
his Stormboyz up with swastikas and Waffen-SS camo uniforms, I'll have a
good laugh and congratulate him on a wonderful job. I'll admit I was
somewhat troubled when I saw a bloke in junior high school wear a Nazi
armband, though. The devil's in the context here, and I think wargaming
is an acceptable context for Fascist symbology.
--
Mikael Halila, #118
--
Ratman
> "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > > Damn it, I wear black clothes most of the time. Some of
> > > them have small white print on the front. Would you be offended by my
> > > choice of clothes?
> >
> > If it includes weaponry, large white banners with black crosses on
> > them
> > I'd say yes. Does the print say something like "I would willingly die
> > for the Emperor"?
>
> So now you're saying that's it's politically incorrect to die for a cause
> you believe worthy?
You believe in a fascist, self-coronated dictator who needs thousands
of inocecnts to die for his own survival?
Check out your faith then.
>
> > I myself would lead the r-ear g-uard m-êlée w-arriors, they have no
> > weapons at all,this way they can never fight, must always be fielded
> > behind your own lines of other fighters, all stats 1 but attacks 0
> > immune to psychology 2p. each.
>
> There is no psych anymore.
Do not take morale checks, enemy must check morale for pity if not
imune
to morale checks himself.
>
> > I fear
> > many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> > begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
> > or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> > context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
>
> Isn't it more likely that if they decide to explore the background outside
> of the game that they'll instead learn about history, about great struggles
> and feats of human courage and comradeship?
Very funny, really.
d.e.m.
Mikael Halila
>
> "The Blue Raja" <the_bl...@dingoblue.net.au.spamless> wrote in message news:<3cdfb9d3$0$4697$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> > "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> > news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > > many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> > > begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
> > > or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> > > context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
> >
> > Isn't it more likely that if they decide to explore the background outside
> > of the game that they'll instead learn about history, about great struggles
> > and feats of human courage and comradeship?
>
> Very funny, really.
Not at all. I thought it was very nicely put, if a little optimistic.
--
Mikael Halila, #118
--
Arhes
> > I don't know. What is some one so worried about being politicaly correct
> > doing playing a politicaly incorrect game?
> > I my self have gotten tired of the stupidity of political correctness.
If I
> > offend some one by this, too bad. People do things that I don't like,
but
> > I'm not going to make a federal case out of it.
>
> And what is someone who top-posts doing in this NG? See the FAQ, at
> http://www.rmgw.org , and clean up your act.
>
Stuff it!
Mikael Halila
It's considered rude on this group, and is also standard usenet
etiquette.
> Stuff it!
No thanks.
Arhes
> > And what is you problem with top posting?
>
> It's considered rude on this group, and is also standard usenet
> etiquette.
>
no one complains about it on other NG
Mikael Halila
No problem. Everybody screws up...
The Blue Raja
news:humrDiA8B$38E...@moramarth.demon.co.uk...
> >The Black Templars are based on the Knights Templar. Notice the
> >similarities in device, goals and origin.
>
> Don't know enough about the fluff to comment on goals and origin,
I believe the Knights Templar (and possibly also the Hospitallers and the
other ones) were "warrior monk" types, like Marines.
As for goals, the Black Templars are crusaders.
> but
> the colour scheme and device (this with reversed colours) are derived
> from the Templar's rivals, the Hospitallers. I'll post more detail
> about this elsewhere on this thread.
I noticed that the BTs weren't the same as the KTs when I was checking out
some websites actually. Didn't check out the KHs though.
I guess BTs are more like generic crusaders than any particular order.
The Blue Raja
> > So now you're saying that's it's politically incorrect to die for a
cause
> > you believe worthy?
>
> You believe in a fascist, self-coronated dictator who needs thousands
> of inocecnts to die for his own survival?
> Check out your faith then.
The point isn't whether what you believe in is just (after all, there is no
absoloute good). What you said suggested that no cause was worthy of your
life.
> > > I fear
> > > many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> > > begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
> > > or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> > > context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
> >
> > Isn't it more likely that if they decide to explore the background
outside
> > of the game that they'll instead learn about history, about great
struggles
> > and feats of human courage and comradeship?
>
> Very funny, really.
So I'll take that as a typical non-response.
The Blue Raja
> > Does the print say something like "I would willingly die
> > for the Emperor"?
>
> No, but you're going to get every right-wing nutcase on this NG after
> you for saying that. Oops, you already did... =D
Hey, I'm a slightly-left-wing nutcase thank you very much.
wiljoe
<the_bl...@dingoblue.net.au.spamless> wrote:
>"Moramarth" <Mora...@moramarth.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:humrDiA8B$38E...@moramarth.demon.co.uk...
>> >The Black Templars are based on the Knights Templar. Notice the
>> >similarities in device, goals and origin.
>>
>> Don't know enough about the fluff to comment on goals and origin,
>
>I believe the Knights Templar (and possibly also the Hospitallers and the
>other ones) were "warrior monk" types, like Marines.
>As for goals, the Black Templars are crusaders.
>
They were all military orders but the Templars were probably the
most(at least to begin with) militant.
>> but
>> the colour scheme and device (this with reversed colours) are derived
>> from the Templar's rivals, the Hospitallers. I'll post more detail
>> about this elsewhere on this thread.
>
>I noticed that the BTs weren't the same as the KTs when I was checking out
>some websites actually. Didn't check out the KHs though.
>I guess BTs are more like generic crusaders than any particular order.
>
>
The Knights Hospitaller ended up as the Knights of Malta, a catholic
order that still exists to this day. -- They also provided the
background for the St Johns Ambulance(a story in itself) -- both have
the same cross as the BTs (cant remember the heraldic name) but its
white on a red backgound. --- before 1204 they had black robes with a
white cross.
--
>
>The Blue Raja
>"It wouldn't make sense, for a midget riding a golden retriever, armed with
>drool and a short bow to be able to keep pace with a rip-roaring marine
>motorcycle, now would it?" - Mark Story
>RGMW FAQ - Just read the damn thing
>http://www.sheppard.demon.co.uk/rgmw_faq/rgmw_faq.htm
>
>
Life's a die,
then you bitch.
Mikael Halila
>
> "Mikael Halila" <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message
> news:3CE012AB...@pp.inet.fi...
> > > Does the print say something like "I would willingly die
> > > for the Emperor"?
> >
> > No, but you're going to get every right-wing nutcase on this NG after
> > you for saying that. Oops, you already did... =D
>
> Hey, I'm a slightly-left-wing nutcase thank you very much.
Bah, you statists are all the same.
Ratman
> Ratman wrote:
> >
> > "The Blue Raja" <the_bl...@dingoblue.net.au.spamless> wrote in message news:<3cdfb9d3$0$4697$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> > > "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> > > news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > > I fear
> > > > many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> > > > begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
> > > > or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> > > > context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
> > >
> > > Isn't it more likely that if they decide to explore the background outside
> > > of the game that they'll instead learn about history, about great struggles
> > > and feats of human courage and comradeship?
> >
> > Very funny, really.
>
> Not at all. I thought it was very nicely put, if a little optimistic.
>
Yes, let them all go join the indian-orc folclory-group.
d.e.m.
Mikael Halila
Frankly, I'm a bit puzzled by this attitude. If you really think that
BR's thought was that ridiculous, you're far more pessimistic than I
thought. We need to get a grip on reality; the Third Reich is not
something so inherently evil that even thinking about it corrupts you.
This isn't the Ruling Ring we're talking about here, for pity's sake.
Swastikas are a far older symbol than Hitler, and were in much wider
use. For example, the Finnish Air Force used the swastika as its emblem
befor the Nazi party was even founded. I'm sorry, but claiming that all
swastikas everywhere are always links to Nazi Germany is just
ridiculously narrow-minded. And you still haven't properly explained why
Black Templars, of all chapters, are so offensive they've stopped you
from getting the 40K boxed set. If you really keep seeing Nazi symbology
everywhere, the question begs to be asked: what on earth is your
fixation with the Third Reich? This simply isn't healthy any more.
--
Mikael Halila, #118
--
C:RGMW fluff master
Champion of the titanic .sig
"This guy is certainly the dude of the retards."
-Robert Singers, RGMW
"Hey, everyone is a bit bi. I just haven't found the guy I want to
guzzle the semen of."
-someone, RGMW
Masterful troll response #1:
"I'm not wrong. You're an idiot."
Ratman
> Ratman wrote:
> >
> > Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message news:<3CDEAC23...@pp.inet.fi>...
> > > Ratman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I just told you this one to point out that I am (perhaps) a bit shy about
> > > > 40K militairy background.
> > > > The black painted Templars with small white contrasts,all their impirial
> > > > insignias and the black crosses remind *me* of the ss, with all the sm
> > > > gene-seed fluff in mind.
> > >
> > > Excuse my language, but you are fucking joking. BLACK ARMOR makes you
> > > think of the SS?
> >
> > Just read the last part of my last sentence above again.
>
> I did. It doesn't make it any better, because _that_ reminds me
I was more thinking about the "fluff in mind" part, and I'm sure a lot
of
people *here* will be reminded of ss quickly looking at a wargame at
all.
> of the "Tolkien was racist" threads on rec.arts.books.tolkien ,
And was he? He strongly disliked orcs of course...
People from the east and south are evil mostly...
A bit far fetched isn't it?
> not to mention
> the time our very own Floridiot started that racket here. =)
Who started what?
> Honestly
> speaking, I'll have to apologize for the language. You weren't making
> nearly this much sense before, IMHO.
No offence taken. I know I should have reread the first posting again.
I was just that relieved I had made my thoughts room after finishing
the text along with a beer that evening...
>
> > > Damn it, I wear black clothes most of the time. Some of
> > > them have small white print on the front. Would you be offended by my
> > > choice of clothes?
> >
> > If it includes weaponry, large white banners with black crosses on
> > them I'd say yes.
>
> What's with the black cross? I don't follow you here. And if weapons are
> offensive to you, then I really am going to have to wonder why on earth
> you're even posting to a wargaming newsgroup.
If you were carrying weapons for real, pose like the BT, wearing the
very same
clothes most skin-heads (www.neo-fascist-youth-groups-germany.de) do
wear,
black in combination with military medals (this very cross is one of
their favorites) I might not like it too much, but this
what-was-if-I-do thing does not help very much.
>
> > Does the print say something like "I would willingly die
> > for the Emperor"?
>
> No, but you're going to get every right-wing nutcase on this NG after
> you for saying that. Oops, you already did... =D
I think I can't do anything about that, standing politically to the
left to Che
would make me one of their favoured preys in politic discusion anyway.
>
> <snip>
> > > Come to think of it, Finnish
> > > regular officers wear grey. Offensive, innit?
> >
> > All existing armies are offensive somehow, but not in the sense of
> > reminding me or other people of war events. It is disgusting that there is need
> > of them.
>
> I'm not going to start on this, because the
> statists/socialists/right-wing nuts (same thing) are already jumping you
> with the totalitarian spiel. I've promised myself not to get into this
> particular subject, so let's drop this particular part...
OK. Still thinking about india though :)
>
> > > > > And how do you feel about WWII wargames, then?
> > > >
> > > > I do not like them very much, as any other (modern) history based wargames.
> > >
> > > You know, no-one's forcing you to play them. If you really have
> > > attitudes like this, maye you shouldn't.
> >
> > You are right and I consider quitting 40K.
>
> I honestly think you ought to consider it. This isn't a
> "well-fuck-off-then" type post, but honestly, if this stuff offends you,
> don't do it.
I've been at the store yesterday afternoon, without commenting my own
position
I asked about fielding ss-armies in 40k and believe it or not every
one looked at me asking if I want to do that kind of crap. I know only
one of the guys, who was not around yesterday, who does not mind
fascist symbols.
Which means that about 90% of the gamers this place should quit.
> Not being a totalitarian, I'm perfectly comfortable with
> the idea that not everyone likes what I do. If this isn't your thing,
> well, another hobby might be in order.
I do not mind people disagreeing with what I'm doing, I just do not
want to
hurt a lot of peoples feelings about the second world war. Wargaming
is a thing most people here consider as politically incorrect all
over, doing it with ss armies is too much even for me, being more
tolerant than most people are.
>
> > But I think it still
> > matters how the game is played. I can live with the
> > make-belief-fascism in the game or even the RT-satire-nazi-fluff
> > Myrmidon mentioned.
>
> Actually, not only can I live with it, I think it's an absolutely
> essential part of the whole universe. I've always seen the Marines as a
> sci-fi Waffen SS.
But this fluff got lost in the new edition and GW-germany denies it
because parent would not buy their children small fascist-soldiers.
Translation for "flayed" (necrons) in german is translated back to
english
"bad-dreams".
They make it sound nice enough to sell to as many people as possible.
>
> > As long as the people playing the game do not buy
> > in the glorifying we-need-this-fascist-politics-to-survive-the-harsh-universe
> > with all those other war-like aliens around us. Maybe this was better
> > back in RT I don't know. What I know is that most people these days
> > are stupid enough to consider the humans/sm to be the good guys. They
> > totally miss the point that there is no good in 40k at all. I fear
> > many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> > begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook.
>
> Looking at the stuff this thread has generated, I'm sure you've noticed
> it's not just the younger players...
OK, make it the more naive and simple-minded.
>
> > Giving those young
> > or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> > context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
>
> It's a fair point, but I don't think any of the younger children in
> question would get it.
The symbols are still in use with many of the german right-wing
parties.
The paroles about:We need our working places ourselves, burn the
immigrants...It still does the trick, the likeness to the 3rd Reich in
40k should be more obvious, making those we solve our problems with
violence sm
what they really are or the fluff change should go along with a change
of symbolism.
> If there are overt swastikas on the table, most
> Anglo-American children are so thoroughly brainwashed by their
> educational systems that it's hardly going to turn them into neo-Nazis.
> You have a legitimate concern, but I'd say it's unfounded.
I think it can't be both legitimate and unfounded. I just do not want
to help those 3% part who still wants to believe that Ausschwitz is
some historicans invention. Even if they only get a few more for their
cause it is a few too much to me.
>
> > This is what I
> > think makes it politically (as in politics) incorrect.
>
> You may be working with a different definition of political correctness
> than most people have. In usual American parlance, politically correct
> (or PC) means something that is completely neutered of all content that
> could possibly, conceivably, somehow, somewhere, misquoted, taken out of
> context, read upside down, misread, however be offensive to anyone
> anywhere. In other words, rampant idiocy.
I'm used to it both ways. I thought it is obvious wargaming is not a
we_do_only_the_nice_part_of_life_peoples thing to do. People
misunderstood a lot of what I wrote, but this is one of my main faults
then too.
>
> > It might be that this problem is a local one, and that people in
> > germany are easier embarrassed/disgusted in this way.
>
> I honestly wish they weren't.
I wish other people were too.
> I had a really good chat with some German people my age (=young)
I'm not that old, too.
> a couple of years back, and I really feel that
> it's about time Germany stopped carrying collective guilt about WWII
> around.
Partly so. Everyone born after the war or to young to change things
does not feel that *guilty* anymore. It is just the thought on many
peoples' minds: Would I have done any better? And it is very
frustrating that some people still believe in the stories about
everything was better those days.
Hitler once promised that jewish graveyards will be parking areas
soon, it took about 40 years after the war until it turned out to be
more or less true.
Thus it is still a sensitive thing.
> I don't want to diminish the things that were done back then,
> but it's not like it's the current generation's fault.
No it is not and I can understand that overreactions (e.g. "whatever
israel does it is ok with us", mind we did that with austria once or
"you shall not wargame") do no good, furthering the goals of the
right-wing parties too.
>
> > The more subconscious reminders, as I still see them in the BT, are
> > perhaps as bad, too.
>
> Most people won't get those reminders at all, really. You're
> over-concerned; none of the impressionable kids will understand that BT
> marines have extensive Nazi symbology.
But the kid might remember its "heros" symbols and paroles. It really
would work better if 40k was still more true to its original fluff,
and the satire part more obvious as well as the designers view on
fascism.
>
> > Perhaps the conclusion so far is the
> > all-satire-old-fluff thing to make it obvious that the imperium is not
> > the defending-the-good-guys army at all or make them just that (the
> > good guys) to increase the games mainstreamability as is desired by
> > gw. The way it is right now is not acceptable to me.
>
> This is a fair enough point. Remember how the old fluff used to go on
> and on about how the universe is a dark place, and the way it would make
> damn sure no-one ever equated the Imperium with "good"? The problem is
> the way GW is trying to make its products reach down into the 7-8
> year-old age bracket.
That is just what I think. Making an easy rule-set for the kids and
then getting rid of the fascist background is just not the way they
should have
done it, unless they had put away ALL the fascist part. Ask one of the
kids what the emperor does all day.
Kid : Gouvernmentwork?
Well how does does he live then for all that time?
Kid : Ah, yes he has this life support-unit, the golden throne!
Right, then tell me what does the gt run on then?
Kid : Erhh,... ehmm... energie?
Very close...
Kid : Psychic Energie!?
Yes, right.
Kid : That is why there are all these astropaths.
Ehrmmm yes...
As long as the IG players these days loose their games, because they
do not get to the "meat is cheap" attitude needed, mourning all their
lossess, the older more experienced gamers should keep in mind that
not everyone knows the games origins. There are no human bombs with
the IG no more!
>
> > Perhaps it is an
> > all or nothing question then. I, personally, would never feel
> > comfortable with the fascist symbols all around me.
>
> Studying military history for a living probably makes one numb to it,
> because I hardly even notice... =)
One can earn money doing that?
> Honestly, it depends on the context.
I said that first :)
> If John Bailey (IIRC it was him who posted the original question)
Yes, he's been doing that.
> paints
> his Stormboyz up with swastikas and Waffen-SS camo uniforms, I'll have a
> good laugh and congratulate him on a wonderful job.
Knowing each others state of mind, doing that is one thing, bringing
the minis to an open tournament is another.
> I'll admit I was
> somewhat troubled when I saw a bloke in junior high school wear a Nazi
> armband, though.
There are few schools in germany you could easily do that.
> The devil's in the context here, and I think wargaming
> is an acceptable context for Fascist symbology.
When you know what you are doing, no hidden fascism as in 40k right
now.
And if you do so somewhere away from people who suffered from this
stupidity.
d.e.m.
Ratman
> "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.0205...@posting.google.com...
> > > So now you're saying that's it's politically incorrect to die for a
> cause
> > > you believe worthy?
> >
> > You believe in a fascist, self-coronated dictator who needs thousands
> > of inocecnts to die for his own survival?
> > Check out your faith then.
>
> The point isn't whether what you believe in
I disagree.
> is just (after all, there is no
> absoloute good). What you said suggested that no cause was worthy of your
> life.
No, I did not say that.
>
> > > > I fear
> > > > many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> > > > begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
> > > > or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> > > > context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
> > >
> > > Isn't it more likely that if they decide to explore the background
> outside
> > > of the game that they'll instead learn about history, about great
> struggles
> > > and feats of human courage and comradeship?
> >
> > Very funny, really.
>
> So I'll take that as a typical non-response.
If you think of the third reich as feats of human courage and
comradeship it is time for sarcasm from my side.
d.e.m.
Ratman
> Ratman wrote:
> >
> > Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message news:<3CE0181E...@pp.inet.fi>...
> > > Ratman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "The Blue Raja" <the_bl...@dingoblue.net.au.spamless> wrote in message news:<3cdfb9d3$0$4697$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> > > > > "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > > I fear
> > > > > > many of the younger players (I met a lot of them at the GW-store)
> > > > > > begin to believe the doctrin-parts of the rulebook. Giving those young
> > > > > > or simple-minded ones the direct link to the Third Reich in this
> > > > > > context only is not a good thing at all in my opinion.
> > > > >
> > > > > Isn't it more likely that if they decide to explore the background outside
> > > > > of the game that they'll instead learn about history, about great struggles
> > > > > and feats of human courage and comradeship?
> > > >
> > > > Very funny, really.
> > >
> > > Not at all. I thought it was very nicely put, if a little optimistic.
> >
> > Yes, let them all go join the indian-orc folclory-group.
>
> Frankly, I'm a bit puzzled by this attitude. If you really think that
> BR's thought was that ridiculous, you're far more pessimistic than I
> thought.
I'm not an optimist most of the time. But saying that they might find
out about
"feats of human courage and comradeship" as an answer why I do not
like to promote fascism sarcastic enough. If I misunderstood him, I'm
sorry. This thread
made me a bit paranoid about word turned around on ones tongue.
> We need to get a grip on reality; the Third Reich is not
> something so inherently evil that even thinking about it corrupts you.
No, thinking about it can be a good thing too. That is what memorials
are there for, for example.
> This isn't the Ruling Ring we're talking about here, for pity's sake.
Now I think you misunderstand me. I do not want to dishonor all those
people who fought in this war. Many of them would have been shot had
they tried not to do it. Propaganda has been one of the main problems.
No one could trust the others to disagree with the NSDAPs view on
things.
But to make my point of view more acceptable in this matter I still
like movies like "Das Boot", don't know it's english title. It's about
a german submarine. If this is the kind of stories BR refers to I
agree with him whole-hearted.
The quality of gw-literature is not that good though. Wargames are
somehow a different matter, as well as the games roots are avoided
within gw-germany.
> Swastikas are a far older symbol than Hitler, and were in much wider
> use. For example, the Finnish Air Force used the swastika as its emblem
> befor the Nazi party was even founded.
But they are not that famous for it, are they? Most, but those like
you who are more deeply in this kind of lore, will have the germans on
their mind.
> I'm sorry, but claiming that all
> swastikas everywhere are always links to Nazi Germany is just
> ridiculously narrow-minded.
But it is true in most cases. Media simply is not that much after
finnish militair. In more than 90% I see a swastika it is related to
the 3rd reich.
I've certainly seen metall-amulets from the bronce-age which show the
rune too.
No need to travel to india to find it's origins, it has been found in
europe IIRC.
> And you still haven't properly explained why
> Black Templars, of all chapters, are so offensive they've stopped you
> from getting the 40K boxed set.
I can't really say anything more. The BT on the cover in their black
armour, contrasted with white, skulls for details (which is what I
remember to be the ss uniform style), the black cross which to is a
symbol commonly used in the violent right-wing scene in germany did
not look that good to me. I bought it non the less.
> If you really keep seeing Nazi symbology
> everywhere, the question begs to be asked: what on earth is your
> fixation with the Third Reich?
Cultural-disease?
> This simply isn't healthy any more.
That would be yes then to my once rethorical question.
I do not think it's a fixation. A lot of people feel like me. And
seeing it in a game which most people say it includes it can't be
that wrong. As for the BT once more: I knew about the fascist fluff
before, but it was not really part of the game anymore as far as I
could see at the games in the store. I really wondered what had
happened to the orcs and to the IG too. Did they get rid of this
fascist fluff? No they just hide it for merchandising reasons,
comissars are not the models to be put on the displays here. I have
been looking out for some traces since then. If I am seeing too much
in the black templars colourscheme it's just too bad. But I'm not
always and everywhere seeing nazis passing by.
I just wonder if I should do an IG-Command for the german golden demon
on games day. I do doubt that it would be that much fun after all.
d.e.m.
Ratman
> > > This is very true, but they do wear uniforms and helmets similar to
> > > nazi one
> >
> > Yes, that is why the above given excuse is just plain stupid.
>
> Your argument is becoming circular here.
No telling me that using a swastika on a stormboy is not that bad
because the swastika is of indian origins is a stupid excuse because
they were nazi uniforms. They are NOT indian stormboyz.
>
> > > We do?
> >
> > Not for satire perhaps, but some years ago the british TV always
> > had one channel showing a ww-movie (and that was the time with not
> > that many channels to choose from at all).
> >
>
> True, it still is pretty much like that.
>
> > > I think you are reading to much into a game.
> >
> > I hope I do, thanks for the reassurance ;)
>
> Without wanting to seem arrogant, have you ever tried to employ your
> intelligence on issues of political sensitivity. Having sensitivity is
> good but really you can take semiotic analysis too far on some issues.
OK, I know that there is a lot of educational stuff done here in
germany that to make the guilt live on, because everyone reasonable
tries to make everything to make things never happen again and to feel
less guilty yourself afterwards. The better your education the better
your feeling of guilt.
This never worked for me that way. I have no feeling of guilt, this
much for political correctness, but I still learned a lot about what
people are able to do if all others seem to agree with their methods.
This is why I do not like fascist themed armies. I do not like to show
alliance to this kind of ideology, and do not even want people to get
me wrong for doing wargames with such models.
> > Or perhaps it's just empathy.
>
> Empathy. I doubt you can emphasise with these people until you
> experience.
But I can try not to hurt peoples feelings to much.
> Where I was brought up there was (and to this day still is
> ) a lot of hatred and violence used. the government tried to teach us
> when they introduced the irish peace protest that it was now wrong to
> use certain words,
Like what? :C
> that we should not think of those who had killed
> our relatives as the enemy anymore.
And others killed theirs. I don't really know what to think of
northern ireland.
It's been irish, but 95% living there are british by now. Not an easy
task to handle. I hope that peace can be restored there, but that will
take some time.
> Most people said bollocks to that
> and kept hating. Until you can emphasise with this situation
I can't. You are right. I visited Londonderry once, but all the closed
shops with thick steel-plates in front of the windows as well as the
new citygates and the car shaped smoke signs on the street were very
spooky.
Yes, I have to admit that I was happy to leave.
> you
> should keep war-guilt under lock and key.
Trained reflex, sorry. As said above it is not guilt. Guilt is a
feeling I have if I ever did something wrong. People here do stay away
from using swastika on game models. This is because only those who do
not dislike the 3rd reichs politic use it, some exceptions (1 of 50,
40k gamers is my guess).
This is why I got that angry.
I guessed that my opinion is not what a lot of people think in this
ng, but I thought that many of them might do there decisions to play
with WWII themed armies to easy. That was what I wanted to tell, but I
got just a very little bit overexcited at the very end, and had some
rather bad understandable parts added in between.
> You can read a lot into
> things that wa not intended and often skip over the real message,
That is true, but I still think I'm not doing like Däniken (If this is
part of the crime of including dispute about religious belief in a
posting it is my second sin around here, and I will leave into exile
for at least some month).
More than that I have a more or less open ear for your advice and
reasoning.
>
> > >I want to read about a dark future for mankind.
> >
> > Sometimes I do too, but I hate to do so in the news.
>
> True, each day that goes by the future seems less prosperous.
Not all days, but I just can't remember any good news right now too.
>
> > > Dont even get me started on the tau and the viscious comparison of
> > > their use of propoganda to spread their message, with the nazis
> > > attempts to control peoples minds.
> >
> > Do tau not fight for "the common good" or something?
>
> There was a excellent fluff (except the kate aidie ref.) that
> described the tau propaganda machine. Join us or we zapp u.
>
Sounds like communist fascism for a change. Hope they made it more
obvious that the tau are not the good guys either.
btw What is tau society like then (A.H.:Brave New World?)
mind the initials hidden
symbolism
> > > Next you will be saying duping minis is worse
> > > than killing babies.
> >
> > Duping? Like putting varnish on your minis?
>
> Nope copying minatures (it is a reference from RGMW years ago.)
I can't tell you then, I never killed a baby.
>
> > >> No offence meant, but honesty seems important to me in this case.
>
> > > Of course not. this is the joy of living in a reasonably free society,
> > > you can express your opinion
> >
> > No sarcasm please.
>
> Not sarcasm. just the fact.
Argueable, but I hoped for it not to be sarcastic. Your answer was far
more reasonable than my first posting deserved then, thanks for your
patience.
d.e.m.
john bailey
I should have known better than to start this thread.
--
john bailey
Mikael Halila
>
> Good lord, is this debate still dragging on?
>
> I should have known better than to start this thread.
I'm intending to refer to _this_ mess every time someone complains about
the FAQ forbidding political topics.
john bailey
> john bailey wrote:
>>
>> Good lord, is this debate still dragging on?
>>
>> I should have known better than to start this thread.
>
> I'm intending to refer to _this_ mess every time someone complains about
> the FAQ forbidding political topics.
>
Good idea. Please make sure you spell my name right when villifying me in
said FAQ for starting it. :)
--
john bailey
Mikael Halila
What, have I misspelled it somewhere? Must have been a typo.
Berto
too am mystified by this Black Templar thing. I agree. I brought up the
issue of the nazi symbol, like the symbol that Castro used, but this has
gotten out of hand. Even I can say unequivaquivally that Black Templars are
not in any way make me think of Nazis, Castro, Al-Quoeda, or Homer Simpson.
I agree, it is not healthy. I lived the Castro regime, even I am not that
egocentric. Mikael is right. it is not healthy.
Berto
john bailey
>> Good idea. Please make sure you spell my name right when villifying
>> me in said FAQ for starting it. :)
>
> What, have I misspelled it somewhere? Must have been a typo.
>
Kidding.
--
john bailey
Mikael Halila
Good to hear it, jonh.
john bailey
> john bailey wrote:
>>
>> Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in
>> news:3CE1892A...@pp.inet.fi:
>>
>> >> Good idea. Please make sure you spell my name right when villifying
>> >> me in said FAQ for starting it. :)
>> >
>> > What, have I misspelled it somewhere? Must have been a typo.
>> >
>>
>> Kidding.
>
> Good to hear it, jonh.
>
No prob, Mickey.
--
john bailey
Mikael Halila
> >
> > Frankly, I'm a bit puzzled by this attitude. If you really think that
> > BR's thought was that ridiculous, you're far more pessimistic than I
> > thought. We need to get a grip on reality; the Third Reich is not
> > something so inherently evil that even thinking about it corrupts you.
> > This isn't the Ruling Ring we're talking about here, for pity's sake.
> > Swastikas are a far older symbol than Hitler, and were in much wider
> > use. For example, the Finnish Air Force used the swastika as its emblem
> > befor the Nazi party was even founded. I'm sorry, but claiming that all
> > swastikas everywhere are always links to Nazi Germany is just
> > ridiculously narrow-minded. And you still haven't properly explained why
> > Black Templars, of all chapters, are so offensive they've stopped you
> > from getting the 40K boxed set. If you really keep seeing Nazi symbology
> > everywhere, the question begs to be asked: what on earth is your
> > fixation with the Third Reich? This simply isn't healthy any more.
> >
>
> too am mystified by this Black Templar thing.
I was wondering where you were. =)
> I agree. I brought up the
> issue of the nazi symbol, like the symbol that Castro used, but this has
> gotten out of hand. Even I can say unequivaquivally that Black Templars are
> not in any way make me think of Nazis, Castro, Al-Quoeda, or Homer Simpson.
> I agree, it is not healthy. I lived the Castro regime, even I am not that
> egocentric. Mikael is right. it is not healthy.
Thanks for backing me on this. Unfortunately, it seems we Europeans have
managed to demonize Hitler so completely that we've pushed a lot of
people this far. I'm puzzled by it, but I must say I'm not really
surprised. The problem is that once we turn a certain symbol into a
complete taboo, it just increases the propaganda value of the damn thing
for extreme political movements. The forbidden fruit...
--
Mikael Halila, #118
--
Mikael Halila
>
> Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in
> news:3CE18B96...@pp.inet.fi:
>
> > john bailey wrote:
> >>
> >> Mikael Halila <mikael...@pp.inet.fi> wrote in
> >> news:3CE1892A...@pp.inet.fi:
> >>
> >> >> Good idea. Please make sure you spell my name right when villifying
> >> >> me in said FAQ for starting it. :)
> >> >
> >> > What, have I misspelled it somewhere? Must have been a typo.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Kidding.
> >
> > Good to hear it, jonh.
> >
>
> No prob, Mickey.
i hate you. <c> Whoopi Goldberg 2002
Berto
orks. Templars are templars, IG, etc. I have a lot of baggage regarding the
issue of the swastika, the brown armband with the black and red diamond on
it, we could go on, but the game itself is that. It is just a game. If
everything in the game reminds the individuals of atrocities, dont play the
game. get out, and if every game seems like the third Reich, therapy is in
order. My issue was the swastika on the stormboyz and my thoughts of symbols
in general and this one in particular, and whether I would play with an
individual with those symbols on his minis. It would bother me so I would
sit out the game. My bad, his good, and I also said that if everyone had the
swastikas on all of the minis armies, I am in the wrong room. We need to get
this thread to die. And you know, after all of this conversation, maybe I
will fight the guy with the swastika on his stormboyz a little harder, you
never know. :) Now what really sets me off is the polka-dot ones. you know
those guys..... :P
Berto
The Blue Raja
> like movies like "Das Boot", don't know it's english title.
"The Boat", although it's referred to as "Das Boot" in English speaking
countries.
> It's about
> a german submarine. If this is the kind of stories BR refers to I
> agree with him whole-hearted.
Yeah, this is the sort of thing I was talking about.
I certainly wasn't saying something like "Nazis are great, we should all try
to be heroic like them", but rather that war has a quite unique quality of
binding people together, leading them to risk their lives to save their
friends. There are very few places that you'll find that sort of loyalty
anymore, so I admire that effect.
Ratman
> "Ratman" <d_e...@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:5b8f549d.02051...@posting.google.com...
> > But to make my point of view more acceptable in this matter I still
> > like movies like "Das Boot", don't know it's english title.
>
> "The Boat", although it's referred to as "Das Boot" in English speaking
> countries.
Ok, never knew it was ever translated.
>
> > It's about
> > a german submarine. If this is the kind of stories BR refers to I
> > agree with him whole-hearted.
>
> Yeah, this is the sort of thing I was talking about.
Sorry, for my reply then. I really misread your intentions, too much
mockery
coming in from other parts of the thread.
> I certainly wasn't saying something like "Nazis are great, we should all try
> to be heroic like them",
Sounded a bit like that to me in the context given.
> but rather that war has a quite unique quality of
> binding people together, leading them to risk their lives to save their
> friends.
I like it because it makes parts of the war visible you can not find
in a war game. As other "antiwar" movies (e.g. apocalypse now,
platoon) it is about human misery as well as the tension, this is what
makes the difference to wargames played for fun, not for historical
education or showing effects of war on human minds.
My favorit movies on the theme would be Eisensteins "Panzerkreuzer
Potemkin" and Kubricks "Dr Seltsam", subtitle is something like "How I
learned to love the bomb".
> There are very few places that you'll find that sort of loyalty
> anymore, so I admire that effect.
I still hope that this is not really true. Certainly most relationsips
are superficial our days, but family and long-time friends are surely
a thing to consider. Many people risk life for others without the need
of "trench-friendship".
d.e.m.
Mikael Halila
>
> My favorit movies on the theme would be Eisensteins "Panzerkreuzer
> Potemkin" and Kubricks "Dr Seltsam", subtitle is something like "How I
> learned to love the bomb".
What? Isn't it translated Dr. Merkwürdichliebe??? I'm disappointed.
--
Mikael Halila, #118
--
C:RGMW fluff master
"This guy is certainly the dude of the retards."
-Robert Singers, RGMW