Ex Infantry, ex Air Force ATC, Gen X. I fix jets and really love my country. I'm a gamer, reader and enjoy talking politics. I'm here to join with patriots.
Miami, FL
Joined January 2021
- Tweets45.5K
- Following3.8K
- Followers4.5K
- Likes21.1K
Pinned Tweet
If I see you use the word “fascism” in a negative context concerning America, I’ll immediately know you’re retarded, and block the shit out of you.
Seems like all of the most virulent and aggressive assholes on the left are either sports fanatics, potheads or habitual gamblers. I sense a pattern here.
What is it with leftists and their stupid ass “lists”? Don’t they realize all that gets them is a block and me off the list? Jesus Christ, it doesn’t take much to stroke their egos. 🙄
And there it is. This is what it was all about. Enjoy your suffering lefties, while your “saviors” waste time on a vendetta. This is so hilarious.
They keep trying, and they keep losing. You can hand it to them for determination, but that’s it, they’ll still always lose and look like fools.
I’m sorry, but the whole “it’s because I’m fucking trans” bullshit, spoken in the most nasally and irritating voice, by Super Victims is nauseating. No one would be even noticing your dumb ass, if you weren’t constantly making threats or demands. That shit is done.
I don’t give a shit what argument you try to use when talking about BioWare. The bottom line is, if your game doesn’t sell, your company will cease to exist.
I for one, am thrilled to see the indie game industry booming, while the AA slop factories are shutting down. If you don’t love making games, stay the fuck away from them! It’d be nice if the big boys learned their lesson, but I don’t see that happening.
Common$3nse retweeted
You guys ready to drop BOMBS on these left-wing culture war leeches rising up to "blame and fight with the chuds", in the face of the closure of BioWare?
Let's go:
DEBUNKING EVERY. SINGLE. LEFT-WING CULTURE WAR ARGUMENT & STRAW MAN IN GAMING DISCOURSE 💣💥:
"Games were always political!"––
Everyone understands the difference between telling a fictional political story, and politicization. Political stories created for the purpose of entertainment are great. Doing veiled gender propaganda is just subversive, obnoxious, and annoying.
It also muddies the waters and damages the quality of games/the hobby at large.
"If the chuds know games so well, why aren't they making their own games?!"––
Nearly every single successful video game IP that has EVER been created in the west, was originally developed by "the chuds." Aka overwhelmingly straight white nerds and dudebros.
You're seeing less of that today because leftists brought DEI to the industry, allowing them to subvert merit and actually get jobs. Then they refuse to hire anyone who isn't also a leftist. Hence why all the beloved IPs keep getting coopted then destroyed. Oh and Japanese/eastern games are chud games.
"You just hate diversity!"––
Diversity has been a thing in video games since their inception. You'd know that if you weren't a tourist. It was never a problem. We hate *manufactured* / inauthentic diversity that breeds caricatures, rather than characters born from a genuine creative vision.
"You just think gay/trans = woke!"––
See above. No we don't. Though there's a lot less tolerance for gay shit in the industry now because there's an overt agenda to force 100x more of it into everything, regardless of whether it fits. Literally shit like the "ExecuPride LGBTQ+ Ratings System" that scores companies from 0-7 for their "queer inclusion" and financially incentivizes more of it.
"You just hate fictional women who weren't created to appeal to you!"––
Uh yeah, no shit. We also hate men who weren't created to appeal to us. When you make a video game you should aim to appeal to your audience. Crazy, I know. Men and women have different preferences for what we think is "cool" or "appealing," depending on the gender of the characters, but we actually align more than you think of female characters. A
A baddie who is also cool, intelligent, and exciting is going to be 100x more interesting to a dude than some mopey, androgynous turbodyke who "misses mah gurl" and is always sad about her problems.
"That's misogyny/objectification!"––
No it isn't, you don't know what those words mean. We're discussing fictional characters not real women. If I refused to engage with a real woman because she's ugly, that would be misogyny/sexism/objectification.
If I refuse to play a video game or dislike a female fictional character because she's ugly, that's just me having preferences and standards for fiction like a normal person. Learn the difference between fiction and reality, it's not complicated. How we feel about fictional characters says nothing, zero, about how we treat or feel about real women.
"So you just want oversexualized DOLLS who you can goon to?? Get a girlfriend!"––
People will genuinely come on here and say, "everything around me has to be objectively ugly, covered and modest, or I will compulsively masturbate." You're projecting. We're discussing appeal and preferences for video game characters, not masturbation or fucking porn.
"If you don't intend to masturbate then what does it matter? Wanting romance or sexuality in games is loser behavior."––
On the contrary, relationships and romance have been present in games (especially RPGs) since their inception. It's a perfectly normal thing to want in story games and RPGs. For many, it simply increases their appeal, enhancing immersion, your character's story, and your degree of choice in the fictional world.
"Video games don't revolve around you!"––
Uh, as a straight male, they kind of do. We are the overwhelming majority of the gaming audience, aka the paying customers who are keeping the lights on. I can guarantee you I speak for the majority, even if many of them don't understand the culture war or even realize it. Not every game needs to be for me, but if you're trying to make the next blockbuster hit, good luck if you decide to ignore my preferences.
"Oh yeah? Well they don't NEED to appeal to you!"––
No shit. It's fine if you want to make a game that doesn't appeal to straight men. Just stop deceptively marketing them - market your games to the gay, women, whatever and stop trying to hide it. We have never had a problem with you guys having separate games made especially for you.
The problem is you keep coopting, and changing, established franchises. It's subversive, divisive, harmful, and it deserves criticism... especially when you market them as if nothing at all has changed.
"50% of gamers are women, actually!"––
Sure, if you consider playing a fucking Match5 mobile phone game for 45 minutes once a week or less to be enough to constitute "being a gamer." Men outnumber women in console/PC gaming/handheld gaming, and when you look at who games at least 5+ hours per week (again, not mobile), it's not close.
As you increase the hours from 5/wk, the gap grows even wider. "Serious gamers" who buy the majority of products are still overwhelmingly men. Women are still overwhelmingly more on the casual side.
"It makes no sense for women to wear makeup in combat roles! It makes no sense that she's cute or feminine! We want realism!"––
No you don't. The realism nonsense is an excuse. If you wanted realism, women would barely even be IN combat roles. Also, sorry to burst your bubble, but a 280lbs of solid muscle turbodyke leading a squad of Gears into combat is not "more realistic" than a woman making herself look more presentable in public. What you "want" is to blur the lines between men and women.
You believe the way women are portrayed in games "creates harmful standards." You also believe femininity is a social construct of "the patriarchy." You want to subvert and deny "the male gaze" while making troons feel better. Most women who are *actually gamers* don't even want this, btw.
You took it upon yourselves to change the way women are portrayed, when women were already happy with this overwhelmingly. If you're skeptical, go take a look at the most cosplayed characters. Look at the characters girl-gamers are buying merch for. Ask them their favorite character - it's VASLTY more likely to be Lara Croft, Jill Valentine, Tifa, etc. than it is to be Mags fucking Carter or Abby from TLOU2, lol.
"X franchise, series, or IP was always like... super gay and woke!"––
Shut the fuck up, no it wasn't. You guys always do this weird revisionist shit. You tried this shit with Dragon Age: Origins, when it was one of the most chud games to ever chud. A straight male-centric power fantasy from top to bottom. 1 optional gay romance and 1 gender ambiguous character with 10 minutes of screentime doesn't negate this. If you're still skeptical, see the attached screenshot below.
"Get woke go broke is a myth!"––
It's exaggerated, but not really. There are exceptions to every rule (ex: Spider-Man, enjoyed by kids and normies everywhere). Nearly every woke game sells less than they otherwise would if they weren't woke.
Usually massively - for example selling half or a quarter as much as previous (not woke) franchise entries. And that's setting aside the rapidly growing, insane number of once beloved studios that started doing woke shit, only to completely fucking implode, get hit with mass layoffs, closures, disastrous sales, humiliating game launches, etc.
You idiots also have the foresight of a peanut, so you don't understand the severity of long term reputational damage, either. You might get by unscathed, with relatively high sales for 1-2 games. But keep burning the target audience, creating to spite the majority's preferences, and it WILL catch up.
"This game has progressive politics and themes!"–– If it's done right, we don't give three quarters of a fuck if a game has progressive politics and themes. Go look at the popularity of Metal Gear Solid. Dragon Age. Mass Effect. And many others. As I said, there's an OBVIOUS difference between politicization, and fictional political stories. We all see that difference.
"Games are woke unless they're good, or you guys personally like them!"––
No, games are woke if they are woke. Woke literally means, "this game was deliberately created to spite the preferences of the majority male audience, despite pretending it wasn't and marketing itself otherwise." Woke refers to games made by devs whose creativity is agenda driven. Woke games often have thinly, or not so thinly veiled propaganda.
"Baldur's Gate 3 was super woke and it sold 20 million units. Take that, chud."––
See screenshots below, and learn to have independent thoughts and arguments rather than just fucking regurgitating the same dumb shit everyone else in your sociology classroom is saying. BG3 is "optionally" woke. And it's *completely* optional. This is not the case AT ALL with most woke games.
The best part about the disaster that is western game development, as chuds we didn’t have to do anything to bring them down except not give them our money. That’s a pretty sweet deal.
The time has come.
Something historic is happening across the West, and the legacy press can't see it, because the press is part of what is collapsing.
Peoples who were told for forty years that they had nothing in common are converging. Americans, French, Italians, Danes, British, Dutch. Different languages, different histories, and the same conclusion reached at the same time. They have all seen the same thing at work in their own countries: what the French call islamo-gauchisme, the alliance between the radical left and political Islam. And they are all saying no.
To understand why their hegemony is close to total collapse, you have to use their own concept. "Hegemony" comes from Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Marxist who understood that power doesn't rest on force. It rests on consent, on people accepting a worldview as obvious, as the only respectable one. That's why the left spent fifty years on what one German activist called the long march through the institutions. Universities, newsrooms, publishing houses, cultural ministries. Own the narrative and you own the country.
But hegemony has a weakness Gramsci himself understood. It dies the moment consent dies. And consent is dying everywhere at once.
They are losing the media war. In the 1970s, around 70% of Americans trusted the mass media. Today it's less than a third. In France, the gap between what the TV news says and what people see on their own street has become a joke. The gatekeepers lost the gate. An engineer with a phone can now reach more people than an evening news broadcast. The monopoly on the narrative, the foundation of the whole edifice, is gone.
And reality is finishing the job. Look at France. A movement that started in high schools ended on October 17 with city halls stormed, Limoges city hall burning and looting across Marseille, while the radical left blamed the police. The French saw it with their own eyes, without a filter. Today's polls show the radical left's candidate losing a presidential runoff by roughly two to one. You can deconstruct a text. You can't deconstruct a burning city hall.
Then comes the blow they can never recover from: abundance.
Collectivism has always been a politics of scarcity. Its whole logic is that the pie is fixed, so someone's gain is someone else's theft, so the state must take and redistribute, ration and control. That's why its latest form is degrowth. Planners need scarcity the way fire needs oxygen.
What is being built right now makes that logic obsolete. AI is collapsing the cost of intelligence. Robotics is about to collapse the cost of labor. Reusable rockets have already slashed the cost of reaching space. Elon Musk and thousands of builders like him are proving every day that the pie is not fixed. It can grow faster than anyone imagined. In a world of abundance, envy loses its grip and the planner loses his excuse. And AI does one more thing: it ends opacity. When any citizen can trace public money in minutes, the networks that live in the dark have nowhere left to hide.
So what comes next? Two things, in this order.
First, the reckoning, and this is where we have to be better than them. There will be no purges and no lists, and nobody will be prosecuted for having been wrong. Being wrong is not a crime, and we will never become what we fought. But aggravated corruption is a crime. Public money diverted to networks, fraud, abuse of office: those must be investigated, proven and judged one by one, by independent courts, with evidence, due process and the presumption of innocence. We don't jail people for their ideas. We jail people for stealing. That difference is the whole difference between a free civilization and the regimes we oppose.
Second, the reunification of the West. That doesn't mean another supranational empire run by unelected officials, which is the model that failed. It means a West of strong, sovereign nations that choose to work together. Agreements between countries that control their borders, produce their own energy, build their own AI and defend themselves, and that trade and cooperate as equals because they share the same foundations: the free individual, the rule of law, the right to build.
Gramsci's heirs spent fifty years winning the institutions. They are losing them in five, because they forgot that hegemony only lasts as long as reality cooperates.
Reality has stopped cooperating. Now it's our turn to build.
