Barothmuk

Gosh, that's quite specific. Source? And yet their half-baked undergrad 'critiques' are apparently a monstrous abomination worthy of this ridiculous campaign. Can't we all just be good little free-market consumers and simply not consume their journalism or even better "make your own". This vocalization seems to blaspheme the wisdom of the free-market.

"Instead of being heckled by liberal arts majors and armchair activists, publishers would be heckled by direct consumers of videogames." The poster may back-peddle from this point but the content points directly to idea that the armchair SJWs are somehow not "direct consumers of videogames". Lol. Ah yes, the glorious freedom of the free-market wherein content and ideas can be freely exchanged but don't you dare critique existing products, organize with others and in any way try to influence the mystical sagely wisdom of the market. You guys are so transparent.

Shock but these groups are not mutually exclusive. It's quite amusing when the "Gamer Gate" side shouts rhetoric about representing some mythological "true gamer" who scorns the tyranny of social-justice-warriors and feminism. But you know "ethics in game journalism" or whatever.

Honestly I lost interest when I found out the civ options were basically "Oh all the Asians got together and made a country and all the Africans got together and made a country etc".

Because it shows how unimportant having a western government is when you're one of these dumb brown countries who don't tow the line and completely submit to the will and exploitation of the superior "western governments". You've made the mistake of looking at the supposed greatness of the "western governments" without addressing the reality of how they're maintained.

Looting? "Looting" is what you got out of that? I wonder ****ing why? I don't have the patience for this.

Let’s look at the poorest country in the Western hemisphere: Haiti. In 1915 the Yanks invaded them, massacred thousands of civilians, occupied the land, had the Haitian government dissolved and forbid elections. Of course America’s intentions were noble: “It was obvious that if our occupation was to be beneficial to Haiti and further her progress it was necessary that foreign capital should come to Haiti. Americans could hardly be expected to put their money into plantations and big agricultural enterprises in Haiti if they could not themselves own the land on which their money was to be spent.” After 20 years of occupations America offloaded the occupation onto their despotic puppet dictator Papa Doc and later his son ‘Baby Doc’. Under their rule (with CIA support) tens of thousands were executed, living conditions plummeted and foreign aid went directly into their hands (e.g. In 1980, the IMF provided $22 million to Haiti but $16 million of it ‘disappeared’.) By 1985 (with U.S support) 60% of Haiti’s population had an annual per capita income of $60 or less, sex-slavery was booming, child malnutrition had soared and infant mortality was at an all time high. In 1985 protests began, in 1986 Papa Doc was overthrown and in 1990 “free and fair elections” were held. Competing against 10 comparatively wealthy candidates, it was leftist priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide captured who captured 68 percent of the vote and within 7 months of office crime was beginning to reduce and the flow of refugees had dropped significantly. Unfortunately after only 7 months of office Aristide was overthrown by the American backed Tonton Machoute, Baby’s Doc’s police force, who proceeded a long reign of terror to stamp out those sympathetic to Aristide and those hostile to the previous Doc regime. Naturally the CIA had a active part to play; as popular opinion demanded Aristide’s return the CIA funded a smear campaign painting the priest as mentally insane. Also 300 Haitian refugees were intercepted and sent to Guantanamo Bay. In 1993 the chaos had gotten so bad that Clinton was forced to remove the Haitian military dictator Raol Cedra however rather than punishing military war criminals the Americans instead ensured their safety against the rabble and provided rich retirements. Whilst this was happening the CIA run terror group FRAPH conducted paramilitary death squads to spread terror throughout the countryside. In 1994 Clinton made a deal with Aristide and he returned to Haiti with an American led ‘peacekeeping’ force, the agreement being he can’t stray too far from policies that are acceptable to America. Of course being the lunatic he was Aristide did not stick to his word; instead choosing charge “human rights violators”, raise the minimum wage (which could not support a reasonable standard of living) and abolish the military believing they were simply doing more harm than good. According to Haitian law the President could not run for consecutive five year terms. Because Aristide was overthrown for three years during his first term, which ended in 1996 he should have been allowed these three years. America refused to allow his term to be extended for the three years that he spent in exile. In the 1995 parliamentary elections a pro-Aristide coalition won an overwhelming victory. In the 1996 Presidential elections a pro-Aristide candidate, Rene Preval, won with 88% of the vote. In 2000 another Presidential election was held, this time with Aristide running again. He won, this time with 92% of the vote. America was not fond of these results or Aristides policies and thus heavily funded the opposition parties and various right-wing paramilitary groups. Eventually in 2004 the Aristide government was outgunned (he had significantly shrunk the military) and was overthrown. Clearly this story (which is by no means a unique one) is simply a case of dumb brown people failing to implement the glorious virtues of Western wisdom. Had they done this Haiti would no doubt be an affluent liberal-democratic society. Certainly doesn't imply that imperial countries (and their allies) some how profiteer from the poverty, instability and exploitation of these 'unhappy peoples'.

Because those topics certainly don't have any relevance here. No siree. Couldn't possibly be the complete destruction caused by colonialism and on-going neo-colonialism. Nope.

Lol. Last I checked Cuba (a 'third world' country) has provided more aid then the U.S.

Annnd this thread went from adorably naïve to butt**** insane. Conservatives and neolibs are the worst.

Oh Bruce.

source Lol.

"Yeah stupid injuns go back where you came from!"

Of the 11 or so films I've seen at the cinemas this year Gone Girl and the new Robocop were the best.

Amazingly they're more obnoxious.

Nah, my condemnation is primarily due to how much of a non-issue this whole fiasco is and yet how these people treat it as the greatest injustice of our times. The fact that so many are quoting 'revolutionary' figures is merely the icing on the cake.

**** like this makes me think that somewhere there is a marketing department trying to make "gaming" into a totes rebellious and revolutionary activity. Who knows maybe next year Oliver Cromwell will advertising the next COD or something.

It's probably the best film I've seen in cinemas this year. (Not that there's been much competition)

I know your kidding but yes, When your using quotes such as this to support something as stupid as Gamergate you have clearly lost all touch with reality.

The ending is pretty disturbing and more or less the same as the book. Don't know why you heard otherwise.

It's kind of hard not to when far too often I've seen so-called "Gamergaters" unironically quote MLK and Malcolm X in support for their complete non-issue of a cause.

Your accent is pretty thick. I'll bookmark this for later.

I personally have no issue with over-the-top dumb**** nonsense. Just don't throw it in and expect me to still take the setting seriously.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0G9Np6TqVo Backflipping dwarves, exploding bodies: Combat looks as stupid as DA2's.

"I absolutely insist on protecting private property." "We stand for the maintenance of private property ... We shall protect free enterprise as the most expedient, or rather the sole possible economic order." So in theory they believed in protecting private property (although with regulation) and I've already explained how their economic policies played out in practice. This is pretty basic stuff, lay off the Glenn Beck.