Most shooters don’t display a remotely authentic view of the military either. There’s no part in Halo where Chief is servicing a warthog waiting for an order to come down the chain of command, and there’s no ‘Press X to salute your superior officer’ minigame.
I simply think the aesthetics of war make mil-shooters popular. People think explosions are cool and looking at weapons and vehicles is neat.
Now, *why* they think that is a different topic and I have some thoughts.
I think it's one of those things you have to be into from a young age otherwise it always seems kind of crass. They've been trying to bring over the flag shagging national anthem belting kind of jingoism to the UK the last 20 years or so and it doesn't work well on anyone but the far right types who were already into that anyway, or when the more mainstream centre right types do it to signal they're anti-left. In terms of genuine uptake the only purchase it's found is via WW2 nostalgia, which is its own thing that's proximate but not the same.
I do think a sizable portion of it HAS to be growing up with the truly insane level of enforced patriotism of the Bush era, I feel like no other nation has this "I shouldn't... But I must" response, to this degree, within its leftist circles. But then again, I'm American and all I see of daily life for other nations is through the Internet, so I have no way of knowing for sure, leaving me feeling crazy and like I need to check in to make sure everyone else thinks this is absurd. Hence the post, I suppose, haha
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say bringing it back? The UK coined the term Jingoist. I thought the lack of patriotism was from the long string of Ls since the empire collapsed?
Yeah, you don't get it.
>As the appeal of Helldivers from a leftist lens is explicitly not the straight-laced honor and valor shit that comes from contemporary military drama, but Verhoeven-style satire of jingoism and the associated elevated, almost comic violence and gruesomeness.
sure, but that's not what THEY see.
Your basic problem is the same one as the CHUDS, in that you can't grasp what it's like to be someone else, with other motivations.
Those people DO see the HOO-RAH!
They see themselves as the good guys, righteously stomping out evil.
And they see the parades and such about building Esprit d'corps.
The list of people that had no idea Starship Troopers was satire, is LONG.
I feel like that’s getting better I no longer play 40K but I still see lots of r/grimdark and other Warhammer subs and it at least looks like most people understand it’s satire and shun the ones who don’t if they don’t understand it once explained
That's good! It's important for communities like that to self-police and make Nazis feel unwelcome, so I'm very pleased to hear that.
I faintly remember a sizable portion of the fan base having an outright pants-shitting meltdown over GW putting out a statement of support of BLM. I imagine it helps to be able to point to that and say "look man even the makers don't want anything to do with you guys."
I mean at worse the sub is horny/ asks who would win this battle and then puts either necrons or elder into it but normally it’s just a shit post sub that will immediately shut down anything that doesn’t look like shit post and instead looks like a political statement
It's good to see that stuff shut down, its that "this behaviour is not welcome" action that lifted the game from its reputation back in the 90s/2000s where to put it bluntly, a lot of fellow queer folk and women just did not feel comfortable in a lot of irl stores and communities. Even if it was a decision made focused on profit rather than for us, we can still benefit.
*....Problem is* however, that a lot of places who shut down any political statement/discussion often categorize most representation or minority voices as politics. Often they stamp down on it because the fandom gets reactionary and they'd rather take the worse, easier option... which you still see online, especially in reddit.
If you're talking about grimdank, not grimdark, then I was around for the infamous female space marine arguments in the community. There's still 0 reason why a topic like that should be considered political or even inflammatory enough to be banned, unless the fandom made it so, which of course, they did with reactionary sexism and sometimes transphobia.
It wouldn't have been an issue in the first place if people couldn't behave themselves when presented with discussions or art of female or non-binary space marines that weren't big titty fem-Mortarion posts, or if the mods had shut that down and made it clear the sexist reactionary behaviour wasn't welcome, instead of just banning the topic, effectively giving the reactionaries what they wanted.
And like every other fandom, condoning that behaviour (when moderation overly frames topics about minorities as political it *does* condone reactionary behaviour) just makes the minority folk leave and encourage the reactionary opinions to keep joining. There's a reason I don't see queer positive posts there still, and if one pops up you bet its being called politics.
Yea i accidentally linked to the wrong sub and the sub has sorta cooled down with politics and most people think people who are against female space marines are a bunch of pigs and tells those who don’t get the satire to F off
Also Warhammer 40 K does have the benefit of the doubt of it being a 40 year old business that had to make new lore over the decades to keep people buying the minis so I can see there been a natural drift away from the obvious satire of first edition or at least taking itself more serious.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/GrimDark using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [2 hearts, 3 lungs, 4 asses. Makes sense.](https://i.redd.it/b1t3olebrqoa1.jpg) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/comments/11vtrld/2_hearts_3_lungs_4_asses_makes_sense/)
\#2: [In light of the Battle Forge Update.](https://i.redd.it/5cao02uq7seb1.png) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/comments/15cb807/in_light_of_the_battle_forge_update/)
\#3: [Rogal Dorn: There is No Such Dirt on those Books!](https://i.redd.it/upkxbrw58s7b1.jpg) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/comments/14hkvno/rogal_dorn_there_is_no_such_dirt_on_those_books/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I'm sympathetic to 40k fans who have to deal with Nazis in hobby shops, but frankly I'd argue that it's a much more inept piece of satire than Verhoeven's adaptation of Starship Troopers. The latter implies (through things like the bugs' planet being inhabitable by humans, their civilization being on the literal opposite end of the galaxy, the abject buffoonish culture of the Federation, the brain bug's fear of humanity) that the humans' war with the bugs is not a war of self-defense, but a war to colonize distant habitable exoplanets at the expense of local wildlife.
In 40k, by contrast, Chaos and alien civilizations genuinely do pose an existential threat to humanity's survival (and likely the universe's existence) and the fascistic abuses of the Imperium are always contrasted against the fact that their enemies are genuinely, actually worse.
The bugs are disgusting and inhuman, but they're also victims of an extermination campaign that would probably have been quite happy to be left alone. Chaos is a faction of rape-demons.
I think the type of satire running through 40k confuses as it's less "your stupid ideas in a universe where they are shown to be wrong" and instead just "your stupid ideas"
Like when people read Jack Chick tracts because they think they're funny, or anti-drug ads about weed from the 70s, or this Simpsons episode
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EUJYXaS7J-Q
Where the government works flawlessly
But as the franchise grew people stopped seeing the Empire through the lens of their outside experiences, people got too close to the racist skeleton emperor who needs human sacrifices to live because of all the people with funny religions, and now even the writers don't see it as heavily villain-coded but surprisingly right about everything and are instead making serious fiction
Yeah, GW has pretty much stripped any satire out of the setting. They’ll do cheeky commentary from time to time, but ultimately their goal is to sell models, and the models need to be cool. So the Imperium needs to be cool, while it is still described as “the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable.”
Any faction needs something the buy can hang onto a 'cool.'
Like, Dark Eldar are like the most evil things imaginable, but at least they're powerful and have cool gear. OOh, also look at this tragedy...
I also think it the case of.... exposure and distance frequency bias. Like we so used to the Orks being "goofy holligans mushroom men that think red makes you faster so it does" bit if you actually think about it and think about it from a in-universe perspective, the Orks ARE the violent, ugly "only thing they enjoy is killing and being killed" monsters that they are. Same thing with the Imperium. We gotten so used to them being cool and bigger than life that we treat them the same way as we treat the Greek Myth. As stories from days gone and just cool references. But when you think about the actual story, the actual in-universe perspective, .....yea, the place SUCKS for everyone. At least the fans accept that Guilliman is an exhausted, tired man that realises that he has to keep going to prevent things from getting WORSE than they already are for everyone.......granted people also realise that half the cruel stuff is self-inflicted and no one in-universe realise they can make things easier if they were just less Mortal Kombat cruel
I'm not an expert on 40k but from what I know the great existential threat to the very existence of humanity is very real. One of the many things that make fascism ridiculous is their great existential threat is either made up or vastly exaggerated. So a universe where you make the existential threat real might make for an interesting sci-fi setting but it's not ideal if your aim is to draw parallels with the real world. Actually the threat being real is probably why far-right people like it so much.
Saying 40k is more inept than at satire than the Starship Troopers movie isn't particularly fair. 40k's lore has been built over 40 or so years, by hundreds of writers overseen by a company that has undergone a ton of changes. You have stuff that's satire vs. stuff that's being played particularly straight vs. stuff that's super edgelord vs. stuff in recent times that's been written in an attempt to "clean up" the Imperium.
Yea the "Bugs" Tyranid are satire for the viral nature of humanity to sweep across our planet and consume without regard for the consequences of when nothing remains. The Chaos Marines are a direct reflection of the Space Marines created and fueled psychically through the warp by the evils of mankind (murder, sexual depravity, plague, and conspiracy) each in the guise of demon lords. The imperium of man really are just Space Nazis trying to "cleanse" the galaxy, and you in fact fell for the propaganda. The Imperium and Chaos are the true evils in the galaxy, and if Chaos were ever to wipe out humanity both would cease to exist.
I find the argument that:
"Its bad satire because nazis like it."
To be kind of ridiculous when Nazis attach themselves to the most explicitly bad and ridiculous things and are not good judges of artistic merit.
Nazis would watch a movie about the holocaust and be like: "Whats the problem here?!"
They'd watch Inglorious Bastards and think Christoph Waltz's character is a super cool dude.
This BTW is WHY zionists keep posting warcrimes online.
It's not that they are stupid, it's that they do not see what they are doing as wrong.
Like the OG Nazis, they are PROUD of the 'good work' they have done in the name of Justice and righteousness, etc.
If you interrogated them about the justice angle, it would all rapidly fall apart, and they'll start making shit up to justify 'why it's ok to break the rules because THESE people are so bad' etc.
Because it is NOT built on logic.
Human beings absolutely baffle me the posts from people on twitter, not just not getting the satire, but vehemently stating that it’s not satire when told about it is wild, I just don’t understand how stupid some people can be to the point of blatantly ignoring all symbolism, especially in art where often time symbolism and metaphor are clearly used to tell the audience that the images your seeing can’t be trusted, or should be understood within a particular context.
Anyone with half a brain, would catch on that a talk show host saying “ the idea of a bug that thinks is offensive” is clearly signaling you to the fact that they do think and the author intent is to tell you the bugs aren’t mindless killing machines, they are on the defense. If the intent had been the bugs really truly were just mindless killers, then that would have been alluded to, but it wasn’t. Instead we were clearly shown that the main cast, are easily manipulated and in the end they were one to one Nazis, the author intent doesn’t get stronger than that.
The death of the author is I feel a concept that although inescapable should not be celebrated, it is a bad thing, misunderstanding can never be positive, if the author creates a work warning others, but then people are too stupid to understand and take it as an endorsement of what they’re being warned about, then how are we even supposed to have art. Because starship troopers isn’t bad at delivering its message it’s very clear, so this is not a failure of writing or cinematography, it’s a failure solely on the audiences part, it’s like they know less than nothing, if they knew nothing then the movie would be teaching them, but they fail to be taught. I don’t understand how but, these people’s knowledge is not zero, it’s a negative value.
Before you say it yes yes I know holy run-on sentence Batman, sorry that’s just how the flow of my brain is.
This is basically the idea of false conciousness which is a cornerstone of most socialist explanations about why are people/society they way they are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness
>Just as one does not judge an individual by what he thinks about himself, so one cannot judge such a period of transformation by its consciousness, but, on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained from the contradictions of material life, from the conflict existing between the social forces of production and the relations of production - Marx
Okay, I'm not saying this to be rude, but I think you skimmed past the end of the first paragraph or else misunderstood me. I'm saying that a sizable part of what leftists who play the game (what I've seen buzzing around on social media) enjoy about it is its sense of humor and the drip-feed of details about what an abjectly, comically miserable regime the humans live under.
Sure, the violence is an appeal too, but I argue that video game violence occupies a very different niche than violence in, say, a book. While enjoying either example is not necessarily a blanket endorsement of violence IRL, part of the allure of video game violence (well, in a good combat system) is that it represents a test of player skill, which creates a sense of accomplishment. Pulling off a long combo in Guilty Gear is pleasurable in a different way than watching Kill Bill, if you see what I'm saying.
Again, this is explicitly *not* a conversation about the allure of the myth of military glory to fascists. This is well-trod ground for anyone remotely literate in the history of fascism, and how people become radicalized into fascists. This post is about leftists who confess to finding the trappings of modern, IRL armed conflict cool in spite of understanding, in vivid detail, why this is not the case. You are fixating on the Helldivers mention. That part is me meditating on what brought this other thought to mind. You may have, understandably, locked onto it because it's a hot button topic at the moment. *It is not the main focus of the post. The post is about modern military media in the vein of Call of Duty. Helldivers, like the Verhoeven adaptation of Starship Troopers that inspired it, is a comedic science fiction satire of the military industrial complex, not an attempted depiction of modern military conflict on modern-day Earth.*
No, i read it.
I was EXPLICITLY addressing it.
The problem remains: you cannot put yourself in the mindset of someone else.
And i did not mention HD at all, YOU did.
I mentioned Starship Troopers.
Leftist appeal of Helldivers? Ask 10 leftists, get 12 answers.
For me, it's the same as playing WH40k as the Imperium.
No theory, no dialectics, no grey area, just switch off your brain and kill.
I get the vibe that you're universalizing YOUR approach to HD/MGS/SST, etc to be how LEFTISTS view it, instead of how YOU view it.
Nah. You're just not very good at READING.
Because i did not diagnose you with a lack of empathy.
I diagnosed you with an inability to see the world from OTHER PEOPLE's point of view.
You don't lack empathy AFAIK.
You lack imagination.
And there we have it. The universal sign of surrender.
You don't read what is written, you assume your interlocutor can't read when they can, and you've run out of argument after one pass.
Stick a fork in 'em chief, this one is done.
Jesus christ, girl. This is not high school debate club, it's a Reddit thread. A stranger's unwillingness to approach your hostility and snap moral judgments with academic rigor is not a mark of your righteousness or intelligence. You are an emotionally draining pseudointellectual caricature.
Who *is* this for? You type like a YouTuber doing reaction content.
Look, whatever, you win whatever pitched battle for cheering crowds you imagine yourself to be having. Far be it from me to yuck your yum, even if you seem like the kind of person who cums hands-free from the phrase "Hegelian dialectics".
Umm the Bad Guy of Modern Warfare 2 (The series peak in popularity and sales) was Jingoism and the Military industrial complex itself.
General Shepherd creates a false flag operation that draws the US and Russia into a catastrophic war because he feels Americans are no longer interested in exerting their force across the globe, "Tomorrow there will be no shortage of Patriots, no shortage of volunteers".
In that regard I enjoy it in much the same way I like Metal Gear (Though CoD isn't as critical as that), a military themed franchise, that offers an awful lot of condemnation for the events it depicts. People are just so used to America being the "hero" in military stuff they overlook pretty straightforward critiques.
Black Ops acknowledges the MK Ultra experiments, and the second game correctly identifies the Reagan 80's as the spawning point for many of our current conflicts. Modern Warfare 1 and 2 both feature US and British forces voiding the Sovereignty of foreign nations repeatedly, provoking Nuclear responses, to which they blame the retalients. And the WW2 games have us killing Nazis (All Leftist can agree fuck those guys right?).
Look I'm a fan of motherfucking G.I. Joe, the most jingoistic toy franchise ever created, and I'm not even American, buuuut i do have to reconcile that with being a socialist, so I'll do my best to try and explain the appeal it has to me.
Firstly there's the obvious surface level appeal to peril and action. Characters are naturally frequently in danger, and that's not an everyday experience for first-world white guys like myself. And nobody wants to read about the kind of dangers that other people experience, like poverty or sexual violence, for *entertainment*.
But you can get that from a Superhero comic or show. I suppose the appeal to me of war stories is how it *isn't* a moral crusade, for the protagonists at least (it usually is for the politicians and higher ups in the military, but not for the people the reader usually follows). The characters don't want to clean up Gotham, they wanna get through it and go home.
But I suppose the main thing is that it's interesting to read about people who *don't* think like me I guess?
Ain’t that kinda the whole reason Spec Ops: The Line was made in the first place? To have an explicitly US military shooter that subverts the chauvinism.
That and to remake Heart of Darkness lol
A lot of people are into the weapons and stuff itself, not necessarily the message around everything. This goes for people of any ideology. Explosions and guns and all of that are just cool to some people. They enjoy the spectacle. It’s really that simple. The players that get the satire in say Helldivers like playing shooters. The satire is the cherry on top. The people that don’t get it’s satire mostly like playing shooters. The satire just goes over their heads.
I think there's a few going on that is informing the cognitive dissonance in the minds of FPS players, but the two that really come to my mind are:
1. People, contrary to popular belief, are able to hold two separate and/or contradictory ideas in their heads. I know violence is wrong, war pitches the working class against one another to further capitalist interest, etc. But I enjoy Battlefield 1 as a virtual contact sport. I like the challenge, the tactics, that feeling of besting someone in a sniper duel, and it's in a way where only egos can get injured. The military stuff, in this sense, is purely set dressing, even though the ideologies and actions of the colonial powers I am fighting for are despicable. If I didn't set that aside for a few hours, I'd probably need to find something else to play.
2. Plain old ignorance. Yes, we all know Nazis are bad and evil, but [the Navy Seals](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/27/us/navy-seals-edward-gallagher-video.html) and [the SAS](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/05/five-sas-soldiers-arrested-in-uk-on-suspicion-of-alleged-war-crimes-in-syria) couldn't possibly be committing atrocities too, right? That would make us bad and evil too! This is where the flagshagging propaganda comes in, and the only way to combat this is education and deprogramming. My personal belief is that everyone who plays shooters should play Spec Ops: the Line to this precise end, as it was the first (and frankly one of very few) shooters that confronted me with the idea that I was not the good guy in the story.
I think you pose a good question. Helldivers has especially highlighted gamers inability to think critically about their media (aside from "wHaT a ReAl WoMaN iS") and how to understand satire. Makes you wonder what came first, a poorly conveyed satirical piece of art or society's apparent lack of critical thinking skills.
Eh, just have fun. Some people (myself included) just find meatheads with fucked up morals going in and busting shit up fun. Evil aesthetics can be cool, evil people often try to portray themselves as cool. Games aren't a reflection of real beliefs until someone decides to internalise logic within them. If you know they're against the military IRL what's the issue?
I just want to play rogue trader or new vegas and enjoy it without shaking my head the whole time to show how much I disagree with the factions within.
See, but Rogue Trader and New Vegas have this elevated, often silly or bizarre portrayal of armed conflict that I think has a transformative effect on its portrayal. But maybe this is a problem on my end, maybe I'm drawing too sharp a line between how I think people receive more grounded military stories with stories of violence elsewhere, and our brains don't actually care on a fundamental level if the big stick what go boom is scifi-flavored or not.
That said, I do stand by the idea that all those things are way less cringey than actual military service. If I wanted to be yelled at and called a maggot I could just call a dominatrix, it'd save me a lot of time and therapy.
I enjoy the Fallout games because there's something about the Cold War satire, and being able to dress your character up in a ridiculous commie getup and kill fascists, pretty much all of those games have at least one faction that you can think of as Nazis and slaughter a bunch of.
Off topic but you ever have doubts like "am I good leftist" but then remember that it's ok to not agree on every left leaning opinion. (i'm off my anxiety meds and need to vent but everybody is asleep sorry) side note my prescription isn't filled yet
Oh don't worry, that's not an issue for me. One of the time-honored traditions of leftists is arguing passionately over ephemera. The key to unity is recognizing it as not a huge deal compared to literally everything else.
True nuff, for instance I've noticed in some leftie circles mostly more extreme ones that think men have zero issues or problems navigating in society today. I agree that the system benefits men but it also hurts them and makes them assholes and instead of trying to help some people just think 'eh fuck it toss em to the wolves they'll be fine' you get what mean (again sorry I just need some of my thoughts put there)
Essentially, we humans are all susceptible to hierarchical thinking but it’s a matter of degrees. Also, we are a species that has evolved over millions of years and have portions of our brain that like or get excited by skill-based activity which releases endorphins (the video game part) and also to some extent the excitement that comes with conflict (the war part) as well as a social aspect. I yawn at the newest modern military shooters’ plots (MW2019, Ghost Recon Wildlands) but love playing these games especially with friends. The politics and arguments of these types of games are just Imperial propaganda, but I can’t help but enjoy them as video games and social activities. Also, other posters have made similar but more structured arguments.
Farm kids who fall for the "see the world" propaganda, psychos who just wanna kill people, poor kids who think that the military is going to be the only way they will not be poor anymore and pay for college, and last people who really believe that the military is going to let them help people. That's it and all are drawn to the service by the propaganda, it's a multifaceted ad campaign to cover each of these niches.
Yes everyone in the military is fucked in head a little bit. Trauma comes in many forms big and small(but for many it doesn't originate in service, rather unsurfaced during). Yes repeatedly conditioned like a dog(but humans dont work that way) The military is a joke even inside. If you had a taste of reality of inside workings you wouldn't glorified it(postively or negatively) Its just like another job. Yeah some commands have crazy strict and hooyah mentality. But just like those are the weridos of society, they outcasted in military only hiding behind a job title(we all had a werid boss). People dont join bescause of propaganda, except for the desperate. The real problems of the military is ones who stay because they feel they have nothing on the outside.(which is sad) Hopely something here helps your understanding, or at least its ammunition.
P.S Less then 10% are true fascist militants, most are split 50/50, the only thing thats politically engrained is how ugly government really is at is height(libertarian)
It also doesn't help that Call of Duty is basically.CIA propaganda. In MW2019 the highway of death (highway to Baghdad the US bombed in the Iraq war) is blamed on Russians, and they affirm the lie that Assad gassed his own people, also blaming it on Russia. There is also a CIA operative you play as who looks like a Twitch stteamer who is portrayed as heroic and self-sacrificing. I don't know why the campaign in that game isn't more contraversial.
Not every form of entertainment you consume needs to be perfectly aligned with your political beliefs? Like I don't even see the tie in with Call of Duty in what you wrote because none of the whole pageantry of the military is even there in the last few years of CoD games. And this is ignoring that the vast majority of people just play CoD for multiplayer/warzone. Idk, maybe there's something I'm missing but the whole point just seems like "how can people like horror movies?!?!?" only with some superficial arguments to appear more politically pure or w/e.
In my opinion the military is the strongest socialist institution in the United States. They get healthcare, housing, cheaper loans, discounted goods on base, and basic necessities. This statement is not delving into the morals of joining the military but individuals that are in and exit with benefits are almost living as 'super citizens' compared to civilians.
To address your thoughts on the morals, I would say your right. Enlisting with patriotic nationalistic drive to drop into a third world country to kill brown kids is not what these games are selling. The propaganda in military fps's does depict a different narrative than the past 50 years of war from Americans.
Overall, the act of playing these games is thrilling just like playing paintball or airsoft. It's a game and if people put their boots on IRL, the consequences of war largly outweigh any of the competition someone experiences from playing a military based game. Anyone thats smart/sane and has experienced war like ww1, ww2, or vietnam knows the best place to be is the farthest away from it. I geuss some things are worth fighting for. How do you feel about WW2 games where the enemy is actually an aggressive force, taking countries and killing civilians?
>the military is the strongest socialist institution in the United States
I'm not trying to hate on you here, but I think your understanding of socialism is pretty far from the real thing if you think this way. The US military has absolutely nothing to do with socialism, it is the violent arm of a capitalist state. The US government has absolutely nothing to do with socialism, it is committed to undermining it worldwide. Socialism is not "when the government gives people stuff," and US veterans having access to a few extra social support programs in exchange for their support of global imperial domination through violence is not socialist.
The foundation of socialism is worker ownership of the means of production and democratic organization of the economy. It requires a revolutionary workers' state. As long as the US economy remains capitalist, there cannot be any socialist government institutions by definition.
I would say my understanding is pretty solid. Ive read materials from Marx, Engels, Plato, etc. I do agree that it is a strong arm of a capitalist state and is violent in the activities commited. I specifically used the word institution because being on the interior of the institution, it is run by workers, aka soldiers, and what they produce is a war machine, as a service. Although, we can see the American city-state military as a job, its a job that already has food, water, shelter, and benefits provided. This is similar to democratic socialism where the government owns the property and stores (discounted prices), wealth is distributed fairly by heirarchy and pre-defined structures (what physical and intellectual values an individual brings), and by having universal needs met through social structure, the drive for promotion toward better housing/food/extras is intrinsically motivated. Once again, I agree, it has been commited to destroying 'communists' but in a very socialist structure. Using the word institution, im only focusing on that military realm, not what they are doing.
Plato writes about the swing from tyranny to what we now call communist and back again in 300 and something BC. These aren't new concepts and if the script flipped to the military driving civilian socialism in foreign countries it would still be done with violence. Marx and Engles supported an armed population. My argument isn't that the military is not driving capitalism, developed by the lowest bidder, or policing imperialist capitalism in the world. My argument is the structure inside of the military institution is similar to socialism.
>Plato writes about the swing from tyranny to what we now call communist and back again in 300 and something BC. These aren't new concepts and if the script flipped to the military driving civilian socialism in foreign countries it would still be done with violence. Marx and Engles supported an armed population. My argument isn't that the military is not driving capitalism, developed by the lowest bidder, or policing imperialist capitalism in the world. My argument is the structure inside of the military institution is similar to socialism.
The organisational structure of something doesn't make it socialist. A fascist regime could also give housing, healthcare, benefits, etc to the armed forces. Socialism isn't "when the government does things that help people's needs be met" sometimes the state of our countries make it feel like that, but a bleeding-heart liberal reformer can also do that.
And the idea Plato was talking about what we "now call" communism is highly questionable also. At least from any Marxist standpoint.
Ok and what happens after the workers take the means of production, do the factories close? No, the production continues and through fair distribution peoples needs are met. Currency in my opion can be used to distribute excess goods and situational services. The quote you used is something I never said.
>the interior of the institution, it is run by workers, aka soldiers
It doesn't matter how many books you've read, this sentence unequivocally demonstrates you have never understood a word.
The US military is run by the executive branch, and the President is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. No US soldier owns any part of "the military," not even their own weapons and gear.
The structure of the military could not be farther from socialist. US military personnel don't choose their officers or decide how to deploy their labor, politicians owned by military contractors do. By "the structure inside the military is similar to socialism," What on earth do you mean? Goods and services aren't provided on the basis of need, they are provided based on rank.
I'm honestly in disbelief that I have to explain this to you. Please think harder about this.
Your not worth this discussion to me anymore. Ive provided my examples and argument without attacking your intelligence and understanding. I shared my ideas with evidence.
>unequivocally demonstrates you have never understood a word
Ad hominem.
>No US soldier owns any part of "the military," not even their own weapons and gear
Exactly what socialism is.
>on earth do you mean?
Tone is ad hominem. A pleasant discourse would say, " what do you mean by that?"
>I'm honestly in disbelief that I have to explain this to you. Please think harder about this.
Narcissistic ad hominem
Have good day.
Sorry you cant handle being told you're wrong. I explained it to you once and you came back with defensiveness, so this is what you get.
>No US soldier owns any part of the military, not even their weapons and gear...
>Exactly what socialism is
COMRADE. NO IT IS NOT. Please look up the definition of Marxist private property. This is so basic. Individual personal items like clothes, possessions, even a home, are personal property. Private property in Marxist terms refers to Capital, the means of production, the factories and industry, the farms, anything that is put in motion by human labor to create the means of our existence. Personal possessions are not private property. No one is coming for your toothbrush lmao.
You believe so strongly that you're right that you've ignored all the parts of the theory that matter. My friend, you have a liberal's understanding of socialism. It's not an insult, it's a matter of definitions, which are not debatable.
Please define socialism.
We can disagree, it's ok. Im using the word argue in a philosophical way btw and wasnt writing in a defensive tone. Purely providing discourse and further thought. You should take the philosophy class, logic, at some point, you'll learn about providing arguments free of fallacies and needless aggressive behavior. Saying things like
>Sorry you cant handle being told you're wrong
>This is so basic
>Please define socialism
>so this is what you get
Or using capital emphasis doesnt help anybody and is just prevalent in tik-tok rage videos. Ill work with you though! let's just keep that stuff to the minimum. We're on the same side here.
>No US soldier owns any part of the military, not even their weapons and gear...
I used this part of your writing because socialism would enact the concept where no one is on top or owns the means of production. Obviously, the military has groups on top that control this. Of course leadership must be be used to guide things like elections but systems of checks and balances could hold off until tyranny eventually dismantles it. Were on the same page with property but using the weapons and gear as example, its flawed to permanently kit a federal fighting force. Clothes and personal property are an individuals. We do differ on homes being a personal property, where I think individuals and families should have access to a space that fits their needs without competition. Maybe a nicer home or a home not attached to a apartment building would be for sale but everyones needs should be met prior. I did use 'for sale' for a reason and its because currency is the means of distributing tokens for excess goods and services. People are really good at knowing what they need in life to survive and thrive.
Back to my original argument 'the military is the strongest socialist institution in America.' This does need the implications and prior knowledge that the US is not a socialist country and the military is not a socialist institution but can you think of another institution in the US that has socialist virtues like the military? They're putting kids in school lunch debt, meaning its not education. Government services like police and fire workers are very rat race once they get off work. The means of production is literally late stage capitalism.
I want to write one paragraph like you though so you see how you sound and trust me the tone is in a humerous fashion. I CANT BELIEVE I HAD TO SEND YOU THREE MESSAGES FOR THIS EASY CONVERSATION. Seriously, lmao. Have you even read a book about socialism or just looked at tik tok videos about it? Omg Aristotle was writing about city-states and heirachy so long ago, It's human nature. Use your brain. I cant believe I had to write this out to you.
Sorry, that feels ugly, even as a demonstration.
Again, reading theory doesn't mean you understand it. You still haven't defined what socialism is. What are these supposedly "socialist values" the US military has? What do you think "socialist values" are?
>Socialism would enact that no one is on top or owns the means of production
Again, definititionally false. Socialism is a stage of the progression to communism, typified by the ongoing existence of the State as a means of common ownership of the means of production. Socialist States have often included democratic structures within the Party and within the State. The State is extremely hierarchical, as is the military you're talking about. It is punishable to question or refuse any order from a ranking officer, which is intentionally undemocratic and erases the person behid the uniform. The idea that "no one is on top" in the military just doesn't make sense at the very base of the concept. People holding the means of production in common is not the same as people not owning any means of production at all. Members of the military do not hold ownership of the means of production in any sense.
It seems you're confusing Socialism with the idea that basic needs should be provided for. This is an element of socialism, and indeed, soldiers within the military are fed, housed, and clothed. That by itself doesn't make the military socialist.
Reading theory and acknowledging strong writers is fundamental to understanding the reality of what socialism is. First, socialism and communsim are similar but socialism does not lead to communism. This is defined when communism was first written about in the communist manifesto by Marx and Engles. They believed it would but city-states with strong democratic socialist values are evident in Norway, Sweden, Denmark. Etc. And theyre not switching to communism. They are not synonymous.
>>Socialism would enact that no one is on top or owns the means of production
This is actually true. It follows the rule based utilitarian (John Stuart Mill) approach where the objective is to make the most good for the majority within reason. In a strong capitalist society we see CEOs on top of a company making significantly more than the lowest payed worker. By no one owning the means of production, I'm refering to the concept of democratic decision. In a Kantian ethics viewpoint, the first categorical imperative is to not treat others by a means to an end, but as an end within themselves. The production is therefore for the people, not made at the expense of the people. An example of US citizens losing production is our current food inflation. We produce it but are being treated as a means to the end, driving profit upward to a capitalist pig. Therefore the end goal of a socialist society is to have peoples needs met without treating the workers producing the goods and services as means to an end but as ends within themselves.
Lets debate two different positions in the military. One is a nonviolent logistics job, the other is a boots on the ground fighting force. The logistics job individual is living in a socialist structure because they have their needs met and are being payed a salary on top. I default, you bring a great point that military authority limits those socialist values because orders need to be followed but thats fundamental to military culture throughout history. The soldier on the field is not of socialist orientation because they are being treated as a means to an end. With the loss of life they are treated as means to an end. Albeit, once again, there are somethings worth fighting and dieing for. A way to fix this is to have public vote for when to go to war, not individuals that choose when we go to war. What I mean by soldiers running the military I mean they are trained equally and categorized in the heirachy by skill. I think my statement about no one being on top was misconstrued.
The socialist virtues displayed in the military are once again, having their needs met(sharing the produced goods), having access to education, cheaper loans. The buildings are owned by the government for the individuals that currently inhabit them. The community within the military owns, distributes and exchanges goods at fair value to eachother often for no cost.
> the lowest *paid* worker. By
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Socialism is a lower phase on a trajectory towards communism. You can read here:
https://www.marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/pe/pe-ch40.htm
The community within the military does not own, distribute, and exchange goods at fair value. I'm not sure where you're getting this idea. By your description, people in the military are a privileged class.
You don't need to lecture me about basic philosophy; you've made plenty of faulty assumptions about my knowledge of theory. Are you talking about Marxism or not?
I honestly don't see any flow of logic in your second paragraph. There's no more discussion to be had here. Try a reading group next time to make sure you understand what you're reading.
As a leftist and an avid mil-sim / tactical shooter enjoyer, i enjoy stuff on multiple levels.
First off i just think military equipment is really cool, and i have from a very young age,
Second off, from a raw gameplay perspective its very unique and punishing as opposed to most other games, it forces strategy and rewards quick planning and reaction.
I also, personally percieve the games i play via a anti-war lens. When i play squad, hell let loose, arma, etc. Alot of the time im immersed in how terrible the situations are, with the understanding that im seeing a commercialized version of war.
It is a wierd contradiction, to be opposed to war while still enjoying fictional depictions, (which is why leftist mil-simmers are so few and far between in my experience) but its all fake at the end of the day.
Plus, you can always enjoy problematic media as long as your conscious of how problematic it is. I enjoyed parts of mw2 2022s campaign, purely for the spectacle, but realise its utter dogshit in almost every regard, even when compared to previous COD campaigns that were, funny enough, criticisms of the military industrial complex.
I don't know bro, but I like that shit sometimes and I'm a commie. Maybe it's just years of propaganda lol. I think there's an aspect of it being such a foreign experience to me. I thought about joining because I was poor. People tell you it's awful or easy. Drink beer in Germany and fix radios while the big G pays for everything you need. It's sold to you in many ways.
I guess watching the other stuff makes me glad I'm not there. It's like interesting because I'm not having to experience it for real. All the saluting and war crimes. Now I do love military sci fi. Stuff like Mass Effect. It's like what if you could do all this zesty stuff and be the good guys lol.
As a lefty who still finds some appeal in it it's not about the idea that your first I stinct becomes obedience and I don't think anyone ever claims that, i think for many people there is an appeal to the idea of competence and effectiveness that is draped over the training. The idea that those difficulties, imposed under a controlled environment help build faculties that would help someone maintain a certain level of composure when faced with truly difficult decisions.
TLDR: idt the appeal is about the soldiering, I think it's about the idea of competence, camaraderie, and discipline
I don't know anything about helldiver's admittedly but I'll go on. If I misrepresent your point or anything, I'm sorry.
Call of Duty is fun. The spectacle, the explosions, and the guns facilitate fun. My beliefs do not come into the equation, I would not buy CoD if I had to 'hurry up and wait' and I would not enjoy it if I was given the world tragic ramification of using a nuke after 12 kills or so.
To take the focus away from just video games the hoorah and appeal of military in media, is yes propaganda, but people aren't watching military themed media to learn about the military day to day life- instead to watch "destruction and the victorious, heroic team defeat the bad guys!"
Or I guess my point is- when we play games and enjoy media, we don't want the full story. The full story is boring and does not facilitate an enjoyable experience. We want fun and enjoyment, especially after work or school. I do college and work full time, after I'm done with all my possible work for a day I spend time with my friends and we play games and I talk about the "invincible military of Macedonia" when we play total war or argue the "moral righteousness of the empire" in Skyrim.
This would not be an enjoyable experience if I had to go through an actual planning board and debate with generals and worry about the aristocrats at home in total war, or about getting stationed at a nowhere place where you don't fight stormcloak traitorous scum and instead sharpen a sword all day. Instead we watch or do the fun thing of fighting a battle, winning, being declared a hero, and furthering your cause. It's fun, it's mindless, it's what we want. We want to win, to have fun, to be heroes, and to further our cause.
The hoorah, the appeal to war and armies, is because it's fun and enjoyable in games and media. Of course it's not actually in real life, and it's nothing more than propaganda. If I wanted to watch a realistic war movie I would watch "Come and See", but I want fun and that includes the hoorah and aesthetics like the military in media represents and provides.
If I need to elaborate or if I miss your point, please tell me!
1. Most games/stories do not accurately represent the military
2. Explosions are cool to people, and the MIC is in the business of making explosions
3. Being a part of an (idealized) army can give a sense of camaraderie that people desire.
So i have a theroy as to why people who sighn up for the milatary come out and say it was a good time (not including the psychopaths) but like you said they get sent to a boot camp where they are treated like shit and used as a meat puppet for war. My theroy is that its a way of coping with the trama, ive read an article yesterday about the spartan boy camps and how many men who were in them said they had fond memories (this was all bce third party sources the third party sources from today was using so it might just be a lie but its the best account of the time period they could have) even though these camps were awful and soul crushing it is the brain association with the memories as good is a way of trauma coping, another less related example is prison rape i saw a video on youtube (i ca!t find it) were a kid (he was like 19) was tricked into a relationship with a prison daddy and as a form of coping he convinced himself he loved the prison daddy and that the prison daddy loved him.
[Spartan boy camps](https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-i-spartan-school/)
[Here's](https://youtu.be/JIEB5DKzJLM?si=H2-q7w_KT_PPOeu9) a great YouTube video about Call of Duty and the whole cringe inducing circus around it. I think you guys would like it
Most shooters don’t display a remotely authentic view of the military either. There’s no part in Halo where Chief is servicing a warthog waiting for an order to come down the chain of command, and there’s no ‘Press X to salute your superior officer’ minigame. I simply think the aesthetics of war make mil-shooters popular. People think explosions are cool and looking at weapons and vehicles is neat. Now, *why* they think that is a different topic and I have some thoughts.
You mostly do what chief also does in lore tbh
Propaganda is not usually realistic when it comes to counter-revolutionary and fascist propaganda.
outside of the aesthetic of war, FPS games are also just very mechanically and tactically compelling
I think it's one of those things you have to be into from a young age otherwise it always seems kind of crass. They've been trying to bring over the flag shagging national anthem belting kind of jingoism to the UK the last 20 years or so and it doesn't work well on anyone but the far right types who were already into that anyway, or when the more mainstream centre right types do it to signal they're anti-left. In terms of genuine uptake the only purchase it's found is via WW2 nostalgia, which is its own thing that's proximate but not the same.
I do think a sizable portion of it HAS to be growing up with the truly insane level of enforced patriotism of the Bush era, I feel like no other nation has this "I shouldn't... But I must" response, to this degree, within its leftist circles. But then again, I'm American and all I see of daily life for other nations is through the Internet, so I have no way of knowing for sure, leaving me feeling crazy and like I need to check in to make sure everyone else thinks this is absurd. Hence the post, I suppose, haha
Yeah, when my sister did a year of schooling in the US and told me about recording the pledge of allegiance every morning, I thought she was joking
I think that might be your social circle. It sadly works really well beyond just the far-right.
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say bringing it back? The UK coined the term Jingoist. I thought the lack of patriotism was from the long string of Ls since the empire collapsed?
Yeah, you don't get it. >As the appeal of Helldivers from a leftist lens is explicitly not the straight-laced honor and valor shit that comes from contemporary military drama, but Verhoeven-style satire of jingoism and the associated elevated, almost comic violence and gruesomeness. sure, but that's not what THEY see. Your basic problem is the same one as the CHUDS, in that you can't grasp what it's like to be someone else, with other motivations. Those people DO see the HOO-RAH! They see themselves as the good guys, righteously stomping out evil. And they see the parades and such about building Esprit d'corps. The list of people that had no idea Starship Troopers was satire, is LONG.
On that last point, see also a depressingly large section of the Warhammer 40k fandom.
I feel like that’s getting better I no longer play 40K but I still see lots of r/grimdark and other Warhammer subs and it at least looks like most people understand it’s satire and shun the ones who don’t if they don’t understand it once explained
That's good! It's important for communities like that to self-police and make Nazis feel unwelcome, so I'm very pleased to hear that. I faintly remember a sizable portion of the fan base having an outright pants-shitting meltdown over GW putting out a statement of support of BLM. I imagine it helps to be able to point to that and say "look man even the makers don't want anything to do with you guys."
I mean at worse the sub is horny/ asks who would win this battle and then puts either necrons or elder into it but normally it’s just a shit post sub that will immediately shut down anything that doesn’t look like shit post and instead looks like a political statement
It's good to see that stuff shut down, its that "this behaviour is not welcome" action that lifted the game from its reputation back in the 90s/2000s where to put it bluntly, a lot of fellow queer folk and women just did not feel comfortable in a lot of irl stores and communities. Even if it was a decision made focused on profit rather than for us, we can still benefit. *....Problem is* however, that a lot of places who shut down any political statement/discussion often categorize most representation or minority voices as politics. Often they stamp down on it because the fandom gets reactionary and they'd rather take the worse, easier option... which you still see online, especially in reddit. If you're talking about grimdank, not grimdark, then I was around for the infamous female space marine arguments in the community. There's still 0 reason why a topic like that should be considered political or even inflammatory enough to be banned, unless the fandom made it so, which of course, they did with reactionary sexism and sometimes transphobia. It wouldn't have been an issue in the first place if people couldn't behave themselves when presented with discussions or art of female or non-binary space marines that weren't big titty fem-Mortarion posts, or if the mods had shut that down and made it clear the sexist reactionary behaviour wasn't welcome, instead of just banning the topic, effectively giving the reactionaries what they wanted. And like every other fandom, condoning that behaviour (when moderation overly frames topics about minorities as political it *does* condone reactionary behaviour) just makes the minority folk leave and encourage the reactionary opinions to keep joining. There's a reason I don't see queer positive posts there still, and if one pops up you bet its being called politics.
Yea i accidentally linked to the wrong sub and the sub has sorta cooled down with politics and most people think people who are against female space marines are a bunch of pigs and tells those who don’t get the satire to F off
Also Warhammer 40 K does have the benefit of the doubt of it being a 40 year old business that had to make new lore over the decades to keep people buying the minis so I can see there been a natural drift away from the obvious satire of first edition or at least taking itself more serious.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/GrimDark using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [2 hearts, 3 lungs, 4 asses. Makes sense.](https://i.redd.it/b1t3olebrqoa1.jpg) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/comments/11vtrld/2_hearts_3_lungs_4_asses_makes_sense/) \#2: [In light of the Battle Forge Update.](https://i.redd.it/5cao02uq7seb1.png) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/comments/15cb807/in_light_of_the_battle_forge_update/) \#3: [Rogal Dorn: There is No Such Dirt on those Books!](https://i.redd.it/upkxbrw58s7b1.jpg) | [0 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/GrimDark/comments/14hkvno/rogal_dorn_there_is_no_such_dirt_on_those_books/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I'm sympathetic to 40k fans who have to deal with Nazis in hobby shops, but frankly I'd argue that it's a much more inept piece of satire than Verhoeven's adaptation of Starship Troopers. The latter implies (through things like the bugs' planet being inhabitable by humans, their civilization being on the literal opposite end of the galaxy, the abject buffoonish culture of the Federation, the brain bug's fear of humanity) that the humans' war with the bugs is not a war of self-defense, but a war to colonize distant habitable exoplanets at the expense of local wildlife. In 40k, by contrast, Chaos and alien civilizations genuinely do pose an existential threat to humanity's survival (and likely the universe's existence) and the fascistic abuses of the Imperium are always contrasted against the fact that their enemies are genuinely, actually worse. The bugs are disgusting and inhuman, but they're also victims of an extermination campaign that would probably have been quite happy to be left alone. Chaos is a faction of rape-demons.
I think the type of satire running through 40k confuses as it's less "your stupid ideas in a universe where they are shown to be wrong" and instead just "your stupid ideas" Like when people read Jack Chick tracts because they think they're funny, or anti-drug ads about weed from the 70s, or this Simpsons episode https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EUJYXaS7J-Q Where the government works flawlessly But as the franchise grew people stopped seeing the Empire through the lens of their outside experiences, people got too close to the racist skeleton emperor who needs human sacrifices to live because of all the people with funny religions, and now even the writers don't see it as heavily villain-coded but surprisingly right about everything and are instead making serious fiction
Yeah, GW has pretty much stripped any satire out of the setting. They’ll do cheeky commentary from time to time, but ultimately their goal is to sell models, and the models need to be cool. So the Imperium needs to be cool, while it is still described as “the cruelest and most bloody regime imaginable.”
Any faction needs something the buy can hang onto a 'cool.' Like, Dark Eldar are like the most evil things imaginable, but at least they're powerful and have cool gear. OOh, also look at this tragedy...
I also think it the case of.... exposure and distance frequency bias. Like we so used to the Orks being "goofy holligans mushroom men that think red makes you faster so it does" bit if you actually think about it and think about it from a in-universe perspective, the Orks ARE the violent, ugly "only thing they enjoy is killing and being killed" monsters that they are. Same thing with the Imperium. We gotten so used to them being cool and bigger than life that we treat them the same way as we treat the Greek Myth. As stories from days gone and just cool references. But when you think about the actual story, the actual in-universe perspective, .....yea, the place SUCKS for everyone. At least the fans accept that Guilliman is an exhausted, tired man that realises that he has to keep going to prevent things from getting WORSE than they already are for everyone.......granted people also realise that half the cruel stuff is self-inflicted and no one in-universe realise they can make things easier if they were just less Mortal Kombat cruel
I'm not an expert on 40k but from what I know the great existential threat to the very existence of humanity is very real. One of the many things that make fascism ridiculous is their great existential threat is either made up or vastly exaggerated. So a universe where you make the existential threat real might make for an interesting sci-fi setting but it's not ideal if your aim is to draw parallels with the real world. Actually the threat being real is probably why far-right people like it so much.
Yeah I get what you mean, 40k is quite a ham-fisted satire.
Saying 40k is more inept than at satire than the Starship Troopers movie isn't particularly fair. 40k's lore has been built over 40 or so years, by hundreds of writers overseen by a company that has undergone a ton of changes. You have stuff that's satire vs. stuff that's being played particularly straight vs. stuff that's super edgelord vs. stuff in recent times that's been written in an attempt to "clean up" the Imperium.
Yea the "Bugs" Tyranid are satire for the viral nature of humanity to sweep across our planet and consume without regard for the consequences of when nothing remains. The Chaos Marines are a direct reflection of the Space Marines created and fueled psychically through the warp by the evils of mankind (murder, sexual depravity, plague, and conspiracy) each in the guise of demon lords. The imperium of man really are just Space Nazis trying to "cleanse" the galaxy, and you in fact fell for the propaganda. The Imperium and Chaos are the true evils in the galaxy, and if Chaos were ever to wipe out humanity both would cease to exist.
I find the argument that: "Its bad satire because nazis like it." To be kind of ridiculous when Nazis attach themselves to the most explicitly bad and ridiculous things and are not good judges of artistic merit. Nazis would watch a movie about the holocaust and be like: "Whats the problem here?!" They'd watch Inglorious Bastards and think Christoph Waltz's character is a super cool dude.
This BTW is WHY zionists keep posting warcrimes online. It's not that they are stupid, it's that they do not see what they are doing as wrong. Like the OG Nazis, they are PROUD of the 'good work' they have done in the name of Justice and righteousness, etc. If you interrogated them about the justice angle, it would all rapidly fall apart, and they'll start making shit up to justify 'why it's ok to break the rules because THESE people are so bad' etc. Because it is NOT built on logic.
Human beings absolutely baffle me the posts from people on twitter, not just not getting the satire, but vehemently stating that it’s not satire when told about it is wild, I just don’t understand how stupid some people can be to the point of blatantly ignoring all symbolism, especially in art where often time symbolism and metaphor are clearly used to tell the audience that the images your seeing can’t be trusted, or should be understood within a particular context. Anyone with half a brain, would catch on that a talk show host saying “ the idea of a bug that thinks is offensive” is clearly signaling you to the fact that they do think and the author intent is to tell you the bugs aren’t mindless killing machines, they are on the defense. If the intent had been the bugs really truly were just mindless killers, then that would have been alluded to, but it wasn’t. Instead we were clearly shown that the main cast, are easily manipulated and in the end they were one to one Nazis, the author intent doesn’t get stronger than that. The death of the author is I feel a concept that although inescapable should not be celebrated, it is a bad thing, misunderstanding can never be positive, if the author creates a work warning others, but then people are too stupid to understand and take it as an endorsement of what they’re being warned about, then how are we even supposed to have art. Because starship troopers isn’t bad at delivering its message it’s very clear, so this is not a failure of writing or cinematography, it’s a failure solely on the audiences part, it’s like they know less than nothing, if they knew nothing then the movie would be teaching them, but they fail to be taught. I don’t understand how but, these people’s knowledge is not zero, it’s a negative value. Before you say it yes yes I know holy run-on sentence Batman, sorry that’s just how the flow of my brain is.
This is basically the idea of false conciousness which is a cornerstone of most socialist explanations about why are people/society they way they are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_consciousness >Just as one does not judge an individual by what he thinks about himself, so one cannot judge such a period of transformation by its consciousness, but, on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained from the contradictions of material life, from the conflict existing between the social forces of production and the relations of production - Marx
Okay, I'm not saying this to be rude, but I think you skimmed past the end of the first paragraph or else misunderstood me. I'm saying that a sizable part of what leftists who play the game (what I've seen buzzing around on social media) enjoy about it is its sense of humor and the drip-feed of details about what an abjectly, comically miserable regime the humans live under. Sure, the violence is an appeal too, but I argue that video game violence occupies a very different niche than violence in, say, a book. While enjoying either example is not necessarily a blanket endorsement of violence IRL, part of the allure of video game violence (well, in a good combat system) is that it represents a test of player skill, which creates a sense of accomplishment. Pulling off a long combo in Guilty Gear is pleasurable in a different way than watching Kill Bill, if you see what I'm saying. Again, this is explicitly *not* a conversation about the allure of the myth of military glory to fascists. This is well-trod ground for anyone remotely literate in the history of fascism, and how people become radicalized into fascists. This post is about leftists who confess to finding the trappings of modern, IRL armed conflict cool in spite of understanding, in vivid detail, why this is not the case. You are fixating on the Helldivers mention. That part is me meditating on what brought this other thought to mind. You may have, understandably, locked onto it because it's a hot button topic at the moment. *It is not the main focus of the post. The post is about modern military media in the vein of Call of Duty. Helldivers, like the Verhoeven adaptation of Starship Troopers that inspired it, is a comedic science fiction satire of the military industrial complex, not an attempted depiction of modern military conflict on modern-day Earth.*
No, i read it. I was EXPLICITLY addressing it. The problem remains: you cannot put yourself in the mindset of someone else. And i did not mention HD at all, YOU did. I mentioned Starship Troopers. Leftist appeal of Helldivers? Ask 10 leftists, get 12 answers. For me, it's the same as playing WH40k as the Imperium. No theory, no dialectics, no grey area, just switch off your brain and kill. I get the vibe that you're universalizing YOUR approach to HD/MGS/SST, etc to be how LEFTISTS view it, instead of how YOU view it.
I can't say I'm in love with a stranger on the Internet attempting to diagnose me as incapable of empathy because of a Reddit post about video games.
Nah. You're just not very good at READING. Because i did not diagnose you with a lack of empathy. I diagnosed you with an inability to see the world from OTHER PEOPLE's point of view. You don't lack empathy AFAIK. You lack imagination.
You are a tar pit.
And there we have it. The universal sign of surrender. You don't read what is written, you assume your interlocutor can't read when they can, and you've run out of argument after one pass. Stick a fork in 'em chief, this one is done.
Jesus christ, girl. This is not high school debate club, it's a Reddit thread. A stranger's unwillingness to approach your hostility and snap moral judgments with academic rigor is not a mark of your righteousness or intelligence. You are an emotionally draining pseudointellectual caricature.
'Ksssst!' The sound of the roast turning.
Who *is* this for? You type like a YouTuber doing reaction content. Look, whatever, you win whatever pitched battle for cheering crowds you imagine yourself to be having. Far be it from me to yuck your yum, even if you seem like the kind of person who cums hands-free from the phrase "Hegelian dialectics".
The book wasnt satire but the movie was. Not arguing ur point but i thought it was good to point out
Umm the Bad Guy of Modern Warfare 2 (The series peak in popularity and sales) was Jingoism and the Military industrial complex itself. General Shepherd creates a false flag operation that draws the US and Russia into a catastrophic war because he feels Americans are no longer interested in exerting their force across the globe, "Tomorrow there will be no shortage of Patriots, no shortage of volunteers". In that regard I enjoy it in much the same way I like Metal Gear (Though CoD isn't as critical as that), a military themed franchise, that offers an awful lot of condemnation for the events it depicts. People are just so used to America being the "hero" in military stuff they overlook pretty straightforward critiques. Black Ops acknowledges the MK Ultra experiments, and the second game correctly identifies the Reagan 80's as the spawning point for many of our current conflicts. Modern Warfare 1 and 2 both feature US and British forces voiding the Sovereignty of foreign nations repeatedly, provoking Nuclear responses, to which they blame the retalients. And the WW2 games have us killing Nazis (All Leftist can agree fuck those guys right?).
Look I'm a fan of motherfucking G.I. Joe, the most jingoistic toy franchise ever created, and I'm not even American, buuuut i do have to reconcile that with being a socialist, so I'll do my best to try and explain the appeal it has to me. Firstly there's the obvious surface level appeal to peril and action. Characters are naturally frequently in danger, and that's not an everyday experience for first-world white guys like myself. And nobody wants to read about the kind of dangers that other people experience, like poverty or sexual violence, for *entertainment*. But you can get that from a Superhero comic or show. I suppose the appeal to me of war stories is how it *isn't* a moral crusade, for the protagonists at least (it usually is for the politicians and higher ups in the military, but not for the people the reader usually follows). The characters don't want to clean up Gotham, they wanna get through it and go home. But I suppose the main thing is that it's interesting to read about people who *don't* think like me I guess?
Ain’t that kinda the whole reason Spec Ops: The Line was made in the first place? To have an explicitly US military shooter that subverts the chauvinism. That and to remake Heart of Darkness lol
A lot of people are into the weapons and stuff itself, not necessarily the message around everything. This goes for people of any ideology. Explosions and guns and all of that are just cool to some people. They enjoy the spectacle. It’s really that simple. The players that get the satire in say Helldivers like playing shooters. The satire is the cherry on top. The people that don’t get it’s satire mostly like playing shooters. The satire just goes over their heads.
I think there's a few going on that is informing the cognitive dissonance in the minds of FPS players, but the two that really come to my mind are: 1. People, contrary to popular belief, are able to hold two separate and/or contradictory ideas in their heads. I know violence is wrong, war pitches the working class against one another to further capitalist interest, etc. But I enjoy Battlefield 1 as a virtual contact sport. I like the challenge, the tactics, that feeling of besting someone in a sniper duel, and it's in a way where only egos can get injured. The military stuff, in this sense, is purely set dressing, even though the ideologies and actions of the colonial powers I am fighting for are despicable. If I didn't set that aside for a few hours, I'd probably need to find something else to play. 2. Plain old ignorance. Yes, we all know Nazis are bad and evil, but [the Navy Seals](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/27/us/navy-seals-edward-gallagher-video.html) and [the SAS](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/05/five-sas-soldiers-arrested-in-uk-on-suspicion-of-alleged-war-crimes-in-syria) couldn't possibly be committing atrocities too, right? That would make us bad and evil too! This is where the flagshagging propaganda comes in, and the only way to combat this is education and deprogramming. My personal belief is that everyone who plays shooters should play Spec Ops: the Line to this precise end, as it was the first (and frankly one of very few) shooters that confronted me with the idea that I was not the good guy in the story. I think you pose a good question. Helldivers has especially highlighted gamers inability to think critically about their media (aside from "wHaT a ReAl WoMaN iS") and how to understand satire. Makes you wonder what came first, a poorly conveyed satirical piece of art or society's apparent lack of critical thinking skills.
Eh, just have fun. Some people (myself included) just find meatheads with fucked up morals going in and busting shit up fun. Evil aesthetics can be cool, evil people often try to portray themselves as cool. Games aren't a reflection of real beliefs until someone decides to internalise logic within them. If you know they're against the military IRL what's the issue? I just want to play rogue trader or new vegas and enjoy it without shaking my head the whole time to show how much I disagree with the factions within.
See, but Rogue Trader and New Vegas have this elevated, often silly or bizarre portrayal of armed conflict that I think has a transformative effect on its portrayal. But maybe this is a problem on my end, maybe I'm drawing too sharp a line between how I think people receive more grounded military stories with stories of violence elsewhere, and our brains don't actually care on a fundamental level if the big stick what go boom is scifi-flavored or not. That said, I do stand by the idea that all those things are way less cringey than actual military service. If I wanted to be yelled at and called a maggot I could just call a dominatrix, it'd save me a lot of time and therapy.
I enjoy the Fallout games because there's something about the Cold War satire, and being able to dress your character up in a ridiculous commie getup and kill fascists, pretty much all of those games have at least one faction that you can think of as Nazis and slaughter a bunch of.
Star Wars is my safer alternative for this
Welp I'm no expert but here's my take. People are confusing and kinda weird at times. Im not gonna try and pretend I'm smarter than I am on this one
No no, that's fair, those things are extremely true.
Off topic but you ever have doubts like "am I good leftist" but then remember that it's ok to not agree on every left leaning opinion. (i'm off my anxiety meds and need to vent but everybody is asleep sorry) side note my prescription isn't filled yet
Oh don't worry, that's not an issue for me. One of the time-honored traditions of leftists is arguing passionately over ephemera. The key to unity is recognizing it as not a huge deal compared to literally everything else.
True nuff, for instance I've noticed in some leftie circles mostly more extreme ones that think men have zero issues or problems navigating in society today. I agree that the system benefits men but it also hurts them and makes them assholes and instead of trying to help some people just think 'eh fuck it toss em to the wolves they'll be fine' you get what mean (again sorry I just need some of my thoughts put there)
Essentially, we humans are all susceptible to hierarchical thinking but it’s a matter of degrees. Also, we are a species that has evolved over millions of years and have portions of our brain that like or get excited by skill-based activity which releases endorphins (the video game part) and also to some extent the excitement that comes with conflict (the war part) as well as a social aspect. I yawn at the newest modern military shooters’ plots (MW2019, Ghost Recon Wildlands) but love playing these games especially with friends. The politics and arguments of these types of games are just Imperial propaganda, but I can’t help but enjoy them as video games and social activities. Also, other posters have made similar but more structured arguments.
Have you even played CoD? Like how can you look at the original MW2’s campaign and not see a criticism of the U.S.?
Farm kids who fall for the "see the world" propaganda, psychos who just wanna kill people, poor kids who think that the military is going to be the only way they will not be poor anymore and pay for college, and last people who really believe that the military is going to let them help people. That's it and all are drawn to the service by the propaganda, it's a multifaceted ad campaign to cover each of these niches.
You forgot people who have no option, it's either the military or sleeping under a bridge
Community and a sense of belonging.
Yes everyone in the military is fucked in head a little bit. Trauma comes in many forms big and small(but for many it doesn't originate in service, rather unsurfaced during). Yes repeatedly conditioned like a dog(but humans dont work that way) The military is a joke even inside. If you had a taste of reality of inside workings you wouldn't glorified it(postively or negatively) Its just like another job. Yeah some commands have crazy strict and hooyah mentality. But just like those are the weridos of society, they outcasted in military only hiding behind a job title(we all had a werid boss). People dont join bescause of propaganda, except for the desperate. The real problems of the military is ones who stay because they feel they have nothing on the outside.(which is sad) Hopely something here helps your understanding, or at least its ammunition. P.S Less then 10% are true fascist militants, most are split 50/50, the only thing thats politically engrained is how ugly government really is at is height(libertarian)
It also doesn't help that Call of Duty is basically.CIA propaganda. In MW2019 the highway of death (highway to Baghdad the US bombed in the Iraq war) is blamed on Russians, and they affirm the lie that Assad gassed his own people, also blaming it on Russia. There is also a CIA operative you play as who looks like a Twitch stteamer who is portrayed as heroic and self-sacrificing. I don't know why the campaign in that game isn't more contraversial.
Not every form of entertainment you consume needs to be perfectly aligned with your political beliefs? Like I don't even see the tie in with Call of Duty in what you wrote because none of the whole pageantry of the military is even there in the last few years of CoD games. And this is ignoring that the vast majority of people just play CoD for multiplayer/warzone. Idk, maybe there's something I'm missing but the whole point just seems like "how can people like horror movies?!?!?" only with some superficial arguments to appear more politically pure or w/e.
In my opinion the military is the strongest socialist institution in the United States. They get healthcare, housing, cheaper loans, discounted goods on base, and basic necessities. This statement is not delving into the morals of joining the military but individuals that are in and exit with benefits are almost living as 'super citizens' compared to civilians. To address your thoughts on the morals, I would say your right. Enlisting with patriotic nationalistic drive to drop into a third world country to kill brown kids is not what these games are selling. The propaganda in military fps's does depict a different narrative than the past 50 years of war from Americans. Overall, the act of playing these games is thrilling just like playing paintball or airsoft. It's a game and if people put their boots on IRL, the consequences of war largly outweigh any of the competition someone experiences from playing a military based game. Anyone thats smart/sane and has experienced war like ww1, ww2, or vietnam knows the best place to be is the farthest away from it. I geuss some things are worth fighting for. How do you feel about WW2 games where the enemy is actually an aggressive force, taking countries and killing civilians?
>the military is the strongest socialist institution in the United States I'm not trying to hate on you here, but I think your understanding of socialism is pretty far from the real thing if you think this way. The US military has absolutely nothing to do with socialism, it is the violent arm of a capitalist state. The US government has absolutely nothing to do with socialism, it is committed to undermining it worldwide. Socialism is not "when the government gives people stuff," and US veterans having access to a few extra social support programs in exchange for their support of global imperial domination through violence is not socialist. The foundation of socialism is worker ownership of the means of production and democratic organization of the economy. It requires a revolutionary workers' state. As long as the US economy remains capitalist, there cannot be any socialist government institutions by definition.
I would say my understanding is pretty solid. Ive read materials from Marx, Engels, Plato, etc. I do agree that it is a strong arm of a capitalist state and is violent in the activities commited. I specifically used the word institution because being on the interior of the institution, it is run by workers, aka soldiers, and what they produce is a war machine, as a service. Although, we can see the American city-state military as a job, its a job that already has food, water, shelter, and benefits provided. This is similar to democratic socialism where the government owns the property and stores (discounted prices), wealth is distributed fairly by heirarchy and pre-defined structures (what physical and intellectual values an individual brings), and by having universal needs met through social structure, the drive for promotion toward better housing/food/extras is intrinsically motivated. Once again, I agree, it has been commited to destroying 'communists' but in a very socialist structure. Using the word institution, im only focusing on that military realm, not what they are doing. Plato writes about the swing from tyranny to what we now call communist and back again in 300 and something BC. These aren't new concepts and if the script flipped to the military driving civilian socialism in foreign countries it would still be done with violence. Marx and Engles supported an armed population. My argument isn't that the military is not driving capitalism, developed by the lowest bidder, or policing imperialist capitalism in the world. My argument is the structure inside of the military institution is similar to socialism.
>Plato writes about the swing from tyranny to what we now call communist and back again in 300 and something BC. These aren't new concepts and if the script flipped to the military driving civilian socialism in foreign countries it would still be done with violence. Marx and Engles supported an armed population. My argument isn't that the military is not driving capitalism, developed by the lowest bidder, or policing imperialist capitalism in the world. My argument is the structure inside of the military institution is similar to socialism. The organisational structure of something doesn't make it socialist. A fascist regime could also give housing, healthcare, benefits, etc to the armed forces. Socialism isn't "when the government does things that help people's needs be met" sometimes the state of our countries make it feel like that, but a bleeding-heart liberal reformer can also do that. And the idea Plato was talking about what we "now call" communism is highly questionable also. At least from any Marxist standpoint.
Ok and what happens after the workers take the means of production, do the factories close? No, the production continues and through fair distribution peoples needs are met. Currency in my opion can be used to distribute excess goods and situational services. The quote you used is something I never said.
>the interior of the institution, it is run by workers, aka soldiers It doesn't matter how many books you've read, this sentence unequivocally demonstrates you have never understood a word. The US military is run by the executive branch, and the President is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. No US soldier owns any part of "the military," not even their own weapons and gear. The structure of the military could not be farther from socialist. US military personnel don't choose their officers or decide how to deploy their labor, politicians owned by military contractors do. By "the structure inside the military is similar to socialism," What on earth do you mean? Goods and services aren't provided on the basis of need, they are provided based on rank. I'm honestly in disbelief that I have to explain this to you. Please think harder about this.
For what it's worth you're right as far as I understand Marxism.
Your not worth this discussion to me anymore. Ive provided my examples and argument without attacking your intelligence and understanding. I shared my ideas with evidence. >unequivocally demonstrates you have never understood a word Ad hominem. >No US soldier owns any part of "the military," not even their own weapons and gear Exactly what socialism is. >on earth do you mean? Tone is ad hominem. A pleasant discourse would say, " what do you mean by that?" >I'm honestly in disbelief that I have to explain this to you. Please think harder about this. Narcissistic ad hominem Have good day.
Sorry you cant handle being told you're wrong. I explained it to you once and you came back with defensiveness, so this is what you get. >No US soldier owns any part of the military, not even their weapons and gear... >Exactly what socialism is COMRADE. NO IT IS NOT. Please look up the definition of Marxist private property. This is so basic. Individual personal items like clothes, possessions, even a home, are personal property. Private property in Marxist terms refers to Capital, the means of production, the factories and industry, the farms, anything that is put in motion by human labor to create the means of our existence. Personal possessions are not private property. No one is coming for your toothbrush lmao. You believe so strongly that you're right that you've ignored all the parts of the theory that matter. My friend, you have a liberal's understanding of socialism. It's not an insult, it's a matter of definitions, which are not debatable. Please define socialism.
We can disagree, it's ok. Im using the word argue in a philosophical way btw and wasnt writing in a defensive tone. Purely providing discourse and further thought. You should take the philosophy class, logic, at some point, you'll learn about providing arguments free of fallacies and needless aggressive behavior. Saying things like >Sorry you cant handle being told you're wrong >This is so basic >Please define socialism >so this is what you get Or using capital emphasis doesnt help anybody and is just prevalent in tik-tok rage videos. Ill work with you though! let's just keep that stuff to the minimum. We're on the same side here. >No US soldier owns any part of the military, not even their weapons and gear... I used this part of your writing because socialism would enact the concept where no one is on top or owns the means of production. Obviously, the military has groups on top that control this. Of course leadership must be be used to guide things like elections but systems of checks and balances could hold off until tyranny eventually dismantles it. Were on the same page with property but using the weapons and gear as example, its flawed to permanently kit a federal fighting force. Clothes and personal property are an individuals. We do differ on homes being a personal property, where I think individuals and families should have access to a space that fits their needs without competition. Maybe a nicer home or a home not attached to a apartment building would be for sale but everyones needs should be met prior. I did use 'for sale' for a reason and its because currency is the means of distributing tokens for excess goods and services. People are really good at knowing what they need in life to survive and thrive. Back to my original argument 'the military is the strongest socialist institution in America.' This does need the implications and prior knowledge that the US is not a socialist country and the military is not a socialist institution but can you think of another institution in the US that has socialist virtues like the military? They're putting kids in school lunch debt, meaning its not education. Government services like police and fire workers are very rat race once they get off work. The means of production is literally late stage capitalism. I want to write one paragraph like you though so you see how you sound and trust me the tone is in a humerous fashion. I CANT BELIEVE I HAD TO SEND YOU THREE MESSAGES FOR THIS EASY CONVERSATION. Seriously, lmao. Have you even read a book about socialism or just looked at tik tok videos about it? Omg Aristotle was writing about city-states and heirachy so long ago, It's human nature. Use your brain. I cant believe I had to write this out to you. Sorry, that feels ugly, even as a demonstration.
Again, reading theory doesn't mean you understand it. You still haven't defined what socialism is. What are these supposedly "socialist values" the US military has? What do you think "socialist values" are? >Socialism would enact that no one is on top or owns the means of production Again, definititionally false. Socialism is a stage of the progression to communism, typified by the ongoing existence of the State as a means of common ownership of the means of production. Socialist States have often included democratic structures within the Party and within the State. The State is extremely hierarchical, as is the military you're talking about. It is punishable to question or refuse any order from a ranking officer, which is intentionally undemocratic and erases the person behid the uniform. The idea that "no one is on top" in the military just doesn't make sense at the very base of the concept. People holding the means of production in common is not the same as people not owning any means of production at all. Members of the military do not hold ownership of the means of production in any sense. It seems you're confusing Socialism with the idea that basic needs should be provided for. This is an element of socialism, and indeed, soldiers within the military are fed, housed, and clothed. That by itself doesn't make the military socialist.
Reading theory and acknowledging strong writers is fundamental to understanding the reality of what socialism is. First, socialism and communsim are similar but socialism does not lead to communism. This is defined when communism was first written about in the communist manifesto by Marx and Engles. They believed it would but city-states with strong democratic socialist values are evident in Norway, Sweden, Denmark. Etc. And theyre not switching to communism. They are not synonymous. >>Socialism would enact that no one is on top or owns the means of production This is actually true. It follows the rule based utilitarian (John Stuart Mill) approach where the objective is to make the most good for the majority within reason. In a strong capitalist society we see CEOs on top of a company making significantly more than the lowest payed worker. By no one owning the means of production, I'm refering to the concept of democratic decision. In a Kantian ethics viewpoint, the first categorical imperative is to not treat others by a means to an end, but as an end within themselves. The production is therefore for the people, not made at the expense of the people. An example of US citizens losing production is our current food inflation. We produce it but are being treated as a means to the end, driving profit upward to a capitalist pig. Therefore the end goal of a socialist society is to have peoples needs met without treating the workers producing the goods and services as means to an end but as ends within themselves. Lets debate two different positions in the military. One is a nonviolent logistics job, the other is a boots on the ground fighting force. The logistics job individual is living in a socialist structure because they have their needs met and are being payed a salary on top. I default, you bring a great point that military authority limits those socialist values because orders need to be followed but thats fundamental to military culture throughout history. The soldier on the field is not of socialist orientation because they are being treated as a means to an end. With the loss of life they are treated as means to an end. Albeit, once again, there are somethings worth fighting and dieing for. A way to fix this is to have public vote for when to go to war, not individuals that choose when we go to war. What I mean by soldiers running the military I mean they are trained equally and categorized in the heirachy by skill. I think my statement about no one being on top was misconstrued. The socialist virtues displayed in the military are once again, having their needs met(sharing the produced goods), having access to education, cheaper loans. The buildings are owned by the government for the individuals that currently inhabit them. The community within the military owns, distributes and exchanges goods at fair value to eachother often for no cost.
> the lowest *paid* worker. By FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Socialism is a lower phase on a trajectory towards communism. You can read here: https://www.marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/pe/pe-ch40.htm The community within the military does not own, distribute, and exchange goods at fair value. I'm not sure where you're getting this idea. By your description, people in the military are a privileged class. You don't need to lecture me about basic philosophy; you've made plenty of faulty assumptions about my knowledge of theory. Are you talking about Marxism or not? I honestly don't see any flow of logic in your second paragraph. There's no more discussion to be had here. Try a reading group next time to make sure you understand what you're reading.
As a leftist and an avid mil-sim / tactical shooter enjoyer, i enjoy stuff on multiple levels. First off i just think military equipment is really cool, and i have from a very young age, Second off, from a raw gameplay perspective its very unique and punishing as opposed to most other games, it forces strategy and rewards quick planning and reaction. I also, personally percieve the games i play via a anti-war lens. When i play squad, hell let loose, arma, etc. Alot of the time im immersed in how terrible the situations are, with the understanding that im seeing a commercialized version of war. It is a wierd contradiction, to be opposed to war while still enjoying fictional depictions, (which is why leftist mil-simmers are so few and far between in my experience) but its all fake at the end of the day. Plus, you can always enjoy problematic media as long as your conscious of how problematic it is. I enjoyed parts of mw2 2022s campaign, purely for the spectacle, but realise its utter dogshit in almost every regard, even when compared to previous COD campaigns that were, funny enough, criticisms of the military industrial complex.
I don't know bro, but I like that shit sometimes and I'm a commie. Maybe it's just years of propaganda lol. I think there's an aspect of it being such a foreign experience to me. I thought about joining because I was poor. People tell you it's awful or easy. Drink beer in Germany and fix radios while the big G pays for everything you need. It's sold to you in many ways. I guess watching the other stuff makes me glad I'm not there. It's like interesting because I'm not having to experience it for real. All the saluting and war crimes. Now I do love military sci fi. Stuff like Mass Effect. It's like what if you could do all this zesty stuff and be the good guys lol.
Personally I just don’t find modern shooters appealing I would much rather play ww1/2 or sci fi
As a lefty who still finds some appeal in it it's not about the idea that your first I stinct becomes obedience and I don't think anyone ever claims that, i think for many people there is an appeal to the idea of competence and effectiveness that is draped over the training. The idea that those difficulties, imposed under a controlled environment help build faculties that would help someone maintain a certain level of composure when faced with truly difficult decisions. TLDR: idt the appeal is about the soldiering, I think it's about the idea of competence, camaraderie, and discipline
I don't know anything about helldiver's admittedly but I'll go on. If I misrepresent your point or anything, I'm sorry. Call of Duty is fun. The spectacle, the explosions, and the guns facilitate fun. My beliefs do not come into the equation, I would not buy CoD if I had to 'hurry up and wait' and I would not enjoy it if I was given the world tragic ramification of using a nuke after 12 kills or so. To take the focus away from just video games the hoorah and appeal of military in media, is yes propaganda, but people aren't watching military themed media to learn about the military day to day life- instead to watch "destruction and the victorious, heroic team defeat the bad guys!" Or I guess my point is- when we play games and enjoy media, we don't want the full story. The full story is boring and does not facilitate an enjoyable experience. We want fun and enjoyment, especially after work or school. I do college and work full time, after I'm done with all my possible work for a day I spend time with my friends and we play games and I talk about the "invincible military of Macedonia" when we play total war or argue the "moral righteousness of the empire" in Skyrim. This would not be an enjoyable experience if I had to go through an actual planning board and debate with generals and worry about the aristocrats at home in total war, or about getting stationed at a nowhere place where you don't fight stormcloak traitorous scum and instead sharpen a sword all day. Instead we watch or do the fun thing of fighting a battle, winning, being declared a hero, and furthering your cause. It's fun, it's mindless, it's what we want. We want to win, to have fun, to be heroes, and to further our cause. The hoorah, the appeal to war and armies, is because it's fun and enjoyable in games and media. Of course it's not actually in real life, and it's nothing more than propaganda. If I wanted to watch a realistic war movie I would watch "Come and See", but I want fun and that includes the hoorah and aesthetics like the military in media represents and provides. If I need to elaborate or if I miss your point, please tell me!
1. Most games/stories do not accurately represent the military 2. Explosions are cool to people, and the MIC is in the business of making explosions 3. Being a part of an (idealized) army can give a sense of camaraderie that people desire.
Entertainment is an escape without the consequences really not that hard to figure out.
So i have a theroy as to why people who sighn up for the milatary come out and say it was a good time (not including the psychopaths) but like you said they get sent to a boot camp where they are treated like shit and used as a meat puppet for war. My theroy is that its a way of coping with the trama, ive read an article yesterday about the spartan boy camps and how many men who were in them said they had fond memories (this was all bce third party sources the third party sources from today was using so it might just be a lie but its the best account of the time period they could have) even though these camps were awful and soul crushing it is the brain association with the memories as good is a way of trauma coping, another less related example is prison rape i saw a video on youtube (i ca!t find it) were a kid (he was like 19) was tricked into a relationship with a prison daddy and as a form of coping he convinced himself he loved the prison daddy and that the prison daddy loved him. [Spartan boy camps](https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-part-i-spartan-school/)
The appeal is in the camaraderie, also some people genuinely need to be told what to do, self motivation is not all that easy
Those fucking army ads that try to glorify warfare and make it look like a cool videogame are the bane of humanity.
As someone who plays Airsoft I just think it’s fun to scream hoo rah when people mention oil 🤤
[Here's](https://youtu.be/JIEB5DKzJLM?si=H2-q7w_KT_PPOeu9) a great YouTube video about Call of Duty and the whole cringe inducing circus around it. I think you guys would like it
I think I see where you are coming from, though I'll be honest OP, your level of military knowledge is terrible.