Would a CCG with biblical characters be blasphemous?

[Anon]

We've never seen a completely woke society yet (some are definitely nearer than others, but still far from being full woke), so I can't judge. I myself believe a full woke society can't prosper, the normal people will always become disgusted to the point they'll rebel and put the wokes back to their place. And normal people will always win as they are the absolute majority.

Meanwhile there were plenty fanatical theocracies throughout history, some still exist as a matter of fact.

So answering more objectively, a full woke state sounds worse, but a fanatically zealous one is a way more tangible threat.

You place unfounded faith in normal people to order and run a functional society. Normal people are sheep. I agree we're the majority by a far margin, and we're absolutely necessary to "power" a society. But so long as very basic needs are met, normal people can be led around in the most comically outrageous conditions imaginable without significant change/revolution.

I can't think of a single historical example of the overthrow of an existing society/culture/what have you, that didn't involve the organization, leadership and resourcing of some kind of counter-elite.

Very few people in the West want to hear this. But we need a King. Or a Lord. The form of that king or aristocrat may differ from time to time or place to place, the selection criteria, the quirks and foibles, all of that may change, but a ruling elite is an absolute necessity. At least, it's required to keep a society from enthusiastically eating itself alive in the wake of any revolutionary movement (see France, Cambodia, Zimbabwe etc for excellent examples).

I mean, just look at gamergate, SBI etc. Whenever the wokeism grows too much, reaction grows proportionately where the wokies feel overwhelmed and forced to cower.

I'm not placing faith in anything, just analyzing reality. I've yet to see a place where the wokies have absolutely dominated (some are definitely nearing it like Canada but still got a lot to do). If/when that happens, I'll reevaluate my opinion.

About that ruling elite, every society has one already. When you think it doesn't, it's most likely jews running it.

[WhiteShark]

I could never play a game that put me in control of Christ, God the Father, or the Holy Spirit in any way. That would feel absolutely wrong to me. Pitting saints against each other wouldn't make sense, and putting them in a fictional situation in which they could lose would rub me the wrong way, for it would be an indirect mockery of God's might. Maybe a game that doesn't revolve around direct conflict, but the building of a pious society? I'm not sure. If they were to be fighting, it would have to have some conceit like, "These aren't supposed to be the figures themselves, but the mythologized perceptions thereof."

About that ruling elite, every society has one already. When you think it doesn't, it's most likely jews running it.

Of course, but historically we had ruling elites of people who were natives (or went native) and who were both morally obligated and financially inclined to make the people prosper. That's what the aristocracy was, and it was a great victory for the jews when they managed to have them removed all across the western world.

[Red7]

when goy gets spanked he should offer another buttcheek to spank as well

i personally love bible action figures

[Kalarion]

We've never seen a completely woke society yet (some are definitely nearer than others, but still far from being full woke), so I can't judge. I myself believe a full woke society can't prosper, the normal people will always become disgusted to the point they'll rebel and put the wokes back to their place. And normal people will always win as they are the absolute majority.

Meanwhile there were plenty fanatical theocracies throughout history, some still exist as a matter of fact.

So answering more objectively, a full woke state sounds worse, but a fanatically zealous one is a way more tangible threat.

You place unfounded faith in normal people to order and run a functional society. Normal people are sheep. I agree we're the majority by a far margin, and we're absolutely necessary to "power" a society. But so long as very basic needs are met, normal people can be led around in the most comically outrageous conditions imaginable without significant change/revolution.

I can't think of a single historical example of the overthrow of an existing society/culture/what have you, that didn't involve the organization, leadership and resourcing of some kind of counter-elite.

Very few people in the West want to hear this. But we need a King. Or a Lord. The form of that king or aristocrat may differ from time to time or place to place, the selection criteria, the quirks and foibles, all of that may change, but a ruling elite is an absolute necessity. At least, it's required to keep a society from enthusiastically eating itself alive in the wake of any revolutionary movement (see France, Cambodia, Zimbabwe etc for excellent examples).

I mean, just look at gamergate, SBI etc. Whenever the wokeism grows too much, reaction grows proportionately where the wokies feel overwhelmed and forced to cower.

I'm not placing faith in anything, just analyzing reality. I've yet to see a place where the wokies have absolutely dominated (some are definitely nearing it like Canada but still got a lot to do). If/when that happens, I'll reevaluate my opinion.

About that ruling elite, every society has one already. When you think it doesn't, it's most likely jews running it.

I've been thinking on this, and I believe I failed to actually address why your idea of, "the normies will wake up and push change", is (and I mean this in the most anodyne way possible) a cope. Keep what I wrote earlier in mind as context.

The deal is, that what causes, pushes for, and enforces change on a social or civilizational level (such as would now be needed for Current Year) are elites, not normal people (henceforth, again in a non-derogatory fashion, sheep, or normies). Normie demands only matter if some set of the ruling elite, or some dispossessed group with elitist qualities, pick those demands up. Now it is correct to then conclude that normal people are integral to societal change, in the sense that our complaints and/or demands will signal a power leak (read Moldbug for a full definition, but briefly: political/physical etc capital that's available for capture/subversion) for counter-elites to make use of. But if the ruling elite are as monolithic as, say, Current Year, that leaking power isn't going to be picked up and will be ultimately be wasted. Consider something like the Yellow Jacket riots in France, the truckers in Canada, the rioters on Jan 6th and so forth. They all represent potential power that discharges wildly. They may cause damage and create a ruckus. But ultimately, if no elites are available and either (a) smart enough or (b) interested enough to make use of the leak, nothing comes of it but a lot of very sad, very angry, and very jailed and persecuted sheep.

Gamergate and so on are in fact perfect examples counter to your hopes vv normies: movements that had a great deal of dynamism and volubility to start, subsequently subverted and absorbed by existing elite structures, normalized and contained (consider the Kotaku in Action sub, patriots.win and so forth). There's something there, power for change is being generated, but the normies can't effect change on our own. Again: we need a King. I don't mean someone sitting on a throne with a crown on his head (though I don't have a problem with that per se). I mean the archetype of a sovereign leader, who captures and utilizes the power of the sheep for our good, to promote virtue and order.

[J1M]

Maybe you could have this discussion about the woke mind virus in any of the dozen threads about the topic instead of here where I wanted to know what God fearing men thought about how their history can be portrayed in gaming.

[Mondain]

Why does Arcane Lurker not defend his wife's honor but laugh alongside her humiliators?

Because the husband is @BobT

hahaha, and you'd know about that, would you?

Small amount of posts, default avatar (keeping a low profile?), joined Dec 10th, suspiciously around the time Orin's work was making waves. Suspiciously husband-like, Hmmm...

Except unlike you I don't speak the King's English.
search.php?keywords=Arse favour analyse ... mit=Search


And one of your first posts here was about a problem Orin kept nagging Rusty about: download counts.

+1 for this. Come on, Rusty!
Considering the notoriety that NoAlphabets and this forum got recently, there will be a LOT of lurkers. Many of those might not trust the mods, but would trust them more if they see tonnes of other people downloading them.

It's NPC / Herd-tier but people tend to gravitate to what's "popular".
Allow sorting by download count too, of course.

They also thought you were Indian because you kept defending Indians: search.php?keywords=Indian&terms=all&au ... mit=Search

But it seems more likely you're just inside an Indian.

[Acrux]

Isn't he from the UK? He's Indian, then.

[BobT]

Except unlike you I don't speak the King's English.
search.php?keywords=Arse favour analyse ... mit=Search

Indeed, and your point is?

And one of your first posts here was about a problem Orin kept nagging Rusty about: download counts.

+1 for this. Come on, Rusty!
Considering the notoriety that NoAlphabets and this forum got recently, there will be a LOT of lurkers. Many of those might not trust the mods, but would trust them more if they see tonnes of other people downloading them.

It's NPC / Herd-tier but people tend to gravitate to what's "popular".
Allow sorting by download count too, of course.

Again, AND?
Have more than two brain cells and you'll see and support sensible changes. Read the rest of that sentence. I've emboldened it for you so your smoothbrain won't struggle too much.
You conveniently ommitted that I also posted about switching the quote / report icons the same day I joined too, however no-one seemed bothered about that.

They also thought you were Indian because you kept defending Indians: search.php?keywords=Indian&terms=all&au ... mit=Search

But it seems more likely you're just inside an Indian.

Yes SOME Indians, that I've personally worked with. (As I posted in the thread).

Your reading comprehension is terrible and your post-digging is worse than even a fucking redditor is capable of. Is portraying yourself as such a dumbshit part of a clever ruse to draw attention away from you?

[Anon]

About that ruling elite, every society has one already. When you think it doesn't, it's most likely jews running it.

Of course, but historically we had ruling elites of people who were natives (or went native) and who were both morally obligated and financially inclined to make the people prosper. That's what the aristocracy was, and it was a great victory for the jews when they managed to have them removed all across the western world.

Overthrowing the royal families around Europe was obviously a work of the burgeoisie jews, there's no doubt about it.

But on the other hand, while I definitely try to rationalize and understand your kind of argument, I really can't agree with the idea that I'm inherently inferior to another person because he was born in a privileged family while I was not. Do you really agree with you having no political rights and no access to some aristocratic privileges because you weren't born among the privileged?

In that case, when talking about autocratic governments, I think China does it best. There is a ruling elite yes, they are authoritarian yes, but anybody can join their ranks and ascend in the party mostly by merit, where even the poorest camponese has a chance of becoming a great politician if he's good enough. Bureaucratic elitism sounds like the best kind of authoritarian government for me, not a kingdom. Though I get you may not like it because it's absolutely secular, and you want a sacred royal family rule.

Another issue in that merit is that I can't trust in a truly sacred royal family being formed because religious institute are so corrupt nowadays, and I say that deeply saddened. The nearest to your ideal nowadays are leaders like Putin, but he's neither sacred nor can we say the russian orthodox church is completely immaculate.

I've been thinking on this, and I believe I failed to actually address why your idea of, "the normies will wake up and push change", is (and I mean this in the most anodyne way possible) a cope. Keep what I wrote earlier in mind as context.

The deal is, that what causes, pushes for, and enforces change on a social or civilizational level (such as would now be needed for Current Year) are elites, not normal people (henceforth, again in a non-derogatory fashion, sheep, or normies). Normie demands only matter if some set of the ruling elite, or some dispossessed group with elitist qualities, pick those demands up. Now it is correct to then conclude that normal people are integral to societal change, in the sense that our complaints and/or demands will signal a power leak (read Moldbug for a full definition, but briefly: political/physical etc capital that's available for capture/subversion) for counter-elites to make use of. But if the ruling elite are as monolithic as, say, Current Year, that leaking power isn't going to be picked up and will be ultimately be wasted. Consider something like the Yellow Jacket riots in France, the truckers in Canada, the rioters on Jan 6th and so forth. They all represent potential power that discharges wildly. They may cause damage and create a ruckus. But ultimately, if no elites are available and either (a) smart enough or (b) interested enough to make use of the leak, nothing comes of it but a lot of very sad, very angry, and very jailed and persecuted sheep.

Gamergate and so on are in fact perfect examples counter to your hopes vv normies: movements that had a great deal of dynamism and volubility to start, subsequently subverted and absorbed by existing elite structures, normalized and contained (consider the Kotaku in Action sub, patriots.win and so forth). There's something there, power for change is being generated, but the normies can't effect change on our own. Again: we need a King. I don't mean someone sitting on a throne with a crown on his head (though I don't have a problem with that per se). I mean the archetype of a sovereign leader, who captures and utilizes the power of the sheep for our good, to promote virtue and order.

I think you present very valid points here, at minimum they are good food for thought, I certainly have to reflect in this matter more. I think that we see nowadays is still a process that is consolidating, where we can analyze things as they are presented now, but they can always change so abruptly the next day.

Btw I also think there are ruling elites opposing the wokeism, like Elon Musk, the republican conservatives, Putin etc, so it can't really be said the ruling elites are (all) against the "sheep" in that matter. There's an ongoing cultural war right now whose winner still isn't clearly defined.

[AmericanMonarchist]

The use would be sacrilege rather than blasphemous. You are not verbally insulting God, but you are trivializing the sacred by gamifying it. Anyone looking to include Christian icons in an entertainment medium without falling into sacrilege needs to ask themselves the purpose of their endeavor. If the reason is anything other than to honor Christ by spreading his teachings then they risk being sacrilegious.