Why is hatred for elves so common?

Or Tolkien.

It's all false flagging by this guy.

They are a plague that needs to be purged.

This, can we please stop having these stupid meta elf threads? I'm probably one of the biggest, most flamboyant elf-faggots around here and I'm tired of daily elf shitposting bait threads that are probably just false-flagging.

2nd.

I wouldn't call hubris "being too perfect"

>just false-flagging.
Naw elves are seriously the shiftiest race.

HFY retards can't handle classic Tolkien elves being better than humans at pretty much everything.

It's not really hubris, if you're a godlike and immortal.

It is when you become a huge asshole and kill everything over a couple of rocks.

Because they abduct us from our villages in the middle of the night and disappear in a flash of light before anyone can stop them! Even if we get someone back from the black eyed bastards they are never the same again! Always rambling on about the descending spirals and the insidious twisting of the world this and that...

Don't forget Maeglin, Salgant, and most of Feanor's sons.

Because nerds either:
>Love elves because they want to fantasize that they're attractive
>Hate elves because they remind them of the good looking popular kids in school.

>They're snobby hippies that think everyone else is an unrefined mongoloid.In short, they're the worst sort of Democrat.

wow, all of a sudden the fact that I relate to them makes perfect sense... thanks user.

also piss-off you unrefined mongoloid

The question was about elves in general, not elves in Silmarillion.

Warhammer elve/eldar are awesome though.

They are spoiled pompous bastards that thing they are above everything, and they prevent us from choping wood. Chase them all back to underdark I say.

Holy shit, THAT'S why I hate them so much.

You're also a mincing fairy, so it's understandable you see elves as your kind of people.

You know those are Orcs retard.

Also on the list.

I'm curious how you know.
Please enlighten me.

They're often arrogant, self-righteous bastards that think every other race is so far below them that they have no purpose and can't do anything that matters.

Yeah, this.

A lot of people see them as the intelligensia and hate them because they don't like being reminded of how wrong they are. It doesn't help that elves are associated with nature and stupid people have made it their life's work to destroy nature out of spite for the people smart enough to know that it has to be preserved.

Fucking google the image. It's made by some guy on deviantart and it's about killing orcs. You can even tell by the image itself from the more nearly looking nails and darker skin tone which in a black and white picture, is suppose to be green.

Not much of a difference really. Like said, they need to be purged.

Okay. Just keep being retarded.

Because they are horrible creatures in every possible way, with no redeeming qualities. Why else? It's like asking why more people don't eat literal shit more often. The answer is pretty obvious.

This is why people hate you

Because in the vast majority of settings, Elves cause all of the problems.

In Warcraft, they cause literally every problem- from the invasion of the Legion to the rise of the Silithids to the Undead Scourge. In Forgotten Realms, their infighting causes the very earth beneath your feet to become completely inhospitable. In 40k, they murderfucked Slaanesh into existence and damned everyone to deal with him.

And they STILL act like they're better than everyone else. In almost every goddamn setting, they are the root cause of a huge chunk of all the world's problems and not only do they refuse to take responsibility for it, they ACTIVELY BLAME OTHER RACES FOR FUCKING UP WHEN THEY DON'T KILL IT RIGHT.

In short, fuck Elves.

I'd rather be hated for being correct than hated for being willfully ignorant.

...

wood elves are cool

high elves a shit

Rather be hated than be ethnically replaced.

>destroy nature out of spite
Did you know studies show that working class red state voters understand the Liberal platform fairly well, but that white collar blue state voters do not understand the Conservative position at all?

The idea of a democratic republic was formed in the Enlightenment following centuries of war in Europe. The idea was a very fragile peace could be established based on mutual respect and discourse between people who disagree. The fundamental requirement of which is that you remember the people you're arguing with are not only human, but actually also pretty smart.

When you start telling yourself that people who disagree with you are just inherently evil who destroy their own interests out of spite, you are dehumanizing an enemy. Not only engaging in the fundamental attribution bias, but also profound hubris for assuming there's no intelligent argument to be made against your position or even assuming the issues are simple and uncomplicated.

But most troublingly, the dehumanization process is the first step in all discourse breaking down. Increasingly, that seems to be the case in today's world, wouldn't you agree?

...

It's a dichotomy and representative of the people who play tabletop rpgs.

On one excessively large hand, you have common people who are physically unattractive and their mental and spiritual states are rather poor, being full of rage at their lackluster lives. This is also why they're into fantasy because they just see it how they want to and use it as an outlet to express and at the same time reaffirm their prejudices.These people make up elf haters and dwarf fans.

On the other hand though, you have a minority of good people who play tabletop rpgs and delve into fantasy because they use it to help grow spiritually. These people also tend to be tall and good looking, henceforth they represent pro-elf people.

It's like a redpill vs a greenpill.

See >my team is perfect and attractive and has all the GOOD.
>enemy team is stupid and ugly and unpopular and has all the BAD.
>YAY MY TEAM

So very enlightened you are.

>nb4 pretends to be team dwarf all along

>Did you know studies show that working class red state voters understand the Liberal platform fairly well, but that white collar blue state voters do not understand the Conservative position at all?

That sounds like a whole load of unsourced bullshit right there.

>When you start telling yourself that people who disagree with you are just inherently evil who destroy their own interests out of spite, you are dehumanizing an enemy.

I don't believe anyone is inherently evil. Just that most of the people like the guy above have been hoodwinked into believing a whole bunch of stupid crap, and desperately want to stick to their guns in the face of overwhelming evidence proving them wrong.

If you really want to see an example of dehumanization, just look at the opinions these guys have on other races or anyone who doesn't share in their delusions.

Discourse is breaking down because, ultimately, the right and left have become too different in ideology. They're reaching the point where coexistence is pretty much impossible. At least in America.

>politics
Only less intelligent people bring up politics in fantasy stuff. It's one mark of a untermensch.

And whose fault is that? It's the lefts you became more liberal and changed while we did not.

Dangerously /pol/ in here...

>That sounds like a whole load of unsourced bullshit right there.
aei.org/publication/liberals-or-conservatives-whos-really-close-minded/
"...University of Virginia Professor Jonathan Haidt’s new book The Righteous Mind doesn’t simply suggest that conservatives may not be as close-minded as they are portrayed. It proves that the opposite is the case, that conservatives understand their ideological opposite numbers far better than do liberals."

>I don't believe anyone is inherently evil.
>They're reaching the point where coexistence is pretty much impossible
>anyone who doesn't share in their delusions.

Ah yes, the party of peace, understanding, and tolerance of course. Absolutely nothing dehumanizing in that statement at all, no sir. Clearly this person is well informed and has a deeply well read understanding of people who disagree with him. You can tell because he looks things up when challenged, rather than expecting others to do a 30 second google search for him.

But look, I really should do a better job myself of resisting the urge to antagonize you. I'm serious- you need to check your hubris.

To weigh in, now that things have taken a /pol/ turn, evidence is no longer relevant to either side, regardless of who is right or wrong. Indeed, its little more than a buzzword these days.

Fact is, all that matters, all that ever really mattered, is the total victory of one side over the other. There can be no middle ground, when you get right down to it.

>Dangerously /pol/ in here...
Horseshoe theory is the most autistic thing on the planet. Two completely separate political idea's that share nothing in common are somehow to be "related" because...?

Oh that's easy, they must be related because I like neither of them.

desu it's only a thing because Hitler and Stalin were both authoritarian.

To have a government is to have authority.

The horseshoe doesn't take enough into account. A political axis explains it a bit better

To that, I'm going to quote someone more well spoken than myself:
slatestarcodex.com/page/2/

"...Liberalism is a technology for preventing civil war. It was forged in the fires of Hell – the horrors of the endless seventeenth century religious wars. For a hundred years, Europe tore itself apart in some of the most brutal ways imaginable – until finally, from the burning wreckage, we drew forth this amazing piece of alien machinery. A machine that, when tuned just right, let people live together peacefully without doing the “kill people for being Protestant” thing. Popular historical strategies for dealing with differences have included: brutally enforced conformity, brutally efficient genocide, and making sure to keep the alien machine tuned really really carefully.

...

The argument goes: liberalism assumes good faith and shared values. It assumes that, at the end of the day, whether you’re Catholic or Protestant, you can still be a basically good person. You can compartmentalize a few special beliefs relating to the Pope, and your remaining differences can be dissolved by the universal solvent of Reason. After everyone does this, you can invoke the wisdom of crowds via a popular election, and even if you don’t like the results you can at least understand where the other side is coming from. Some people prefer liberty to safety, other people prefer safety to liberty, but if the voters choose the wrong one then at least they’ve erred in an understandable way by preferring one real value to another.

But if there’s some group out there who aren’t connected to normal human values at all, some group that’s deliberately rejected reason; if they’re willing to throw liberty and safety under the bus in pursuit of some kind of dark irrational hatred which is their only terminal goal – then the whole project falls apart."

That's not what authoritarian means in this context. Islam Karimov, Kim Jong-Un, Stalin and Hitler are considered authoritarian leaders, Thatcher or Reagan not.

They act almost exactly the same while having different ideas on how things should work. That is: if one far side were to come into power, the results would, in theory, be almost the same as if the other side had won instead.

It's because far-X, Y and Z have been tied up with totalitarian regimes, most people in the field have debunked this line of thinking though.

>Discourse is breaking down because, ultimately, the right and left have become too different in ideology. They're reaching the point where coexistence is pretty much impossible. At least in America.

Speaking of unsourced bullshit...

I suspect America is more politically homogenous than ever, because the ruling elite carefully curates the acceptable range of opinion that can be displayed on broadcast media and each party relies exclusively on cultural signifiers to get out the vote - they don't want to get the electorate excited about actual policy because it might force them into legislating against the interest of their backers.

I mean how many American elected officials or even public figures are you going to find who'd be prepared to go on record as saying they're anti-capitalist, anti-surveillance, anti-free trade, irreligious, oppose military spending, regret supporting Israel, in favour of pardoning whistleblowers...? Your "left" party can't even support basic democratic socialist measures like single-payer healthcare.

Because i keep picking up elves i think are women but they always end up being dudes.

>the universal solvent of Reason

How quaint. A solvent so universal it dissolves itself.

Their smug aura mocks me.

I would not even say it was a good thing this came about. What that writer describes is nothing but a truce, a temporary cease fire that will inevitably flare up again. Except now, modern liberalism has replaced Protestantism as its successor

Not him but are you saying that a "suggestion" some guy's book is a credible source?

>that share nothing in common

Well, this group of mostly black clad people fond of throwing rocks and setting things of fire in their quest to create a brutal dictatorship where only their ideology is tolerated is certainly fundamentally different form this other group of mostly black clad people fond of throwing rocks and setting things of fire in their quest to create a brutal dictatorship where only their ideology is tolerated. One's likely to use red and black scarves for masks, and the other likes wearing brown shirts under their black jackets. Completely different.

Man, you ever think, like, why do wars even happen? You have guys on both sides shooting guns... can't they see they're just the same?

>because the ruling elite
So as an Ivy League elite with a name in Forbes magazine and insider to the world of the elite... no, sorry. Nothing about this is carefully managed. Sadly, your view is far too optimistic.

Most rich people live in a completely batshit alien world where 100% of the people you meet are sycophants and sociopaths. You have little to no concept whatsoever of what real people are like or how anything works. You know how liberals talk about how having socio-economic privilege gives you second chances for when you fuck up? Being rich means your mistakes are never even flagged as mistakes. They never slow you down. Somebody else cleans them up for you and you don't even know they did.

The "elites" are elite in some sense. They can get shit done and have subtle skills and insights that you simply do not have or see at any other eschelon in society. A mind for efficiency not at the engineering level but at the social level. But at the end of the day the "elites" are not actually that much better than you. Which you'd probably admit yourself in one breath, but then you talk about some impossibly well managed conspiracy to control society in the next. In actuality, Washington, Wallstreet, and Hollywood are a frantic clusterfuck of people just sorta trying to keep things somewhat organized, a frenzy of people who want to change things up so they can be on top and a handful who've made it who have no idea why- though they have their own justifications.

One small example of proof: if there was an organized media conspiracy, it would be far more effective than what you actually see. In reality the media just chases whatever gives them views. Bad reporting stirs controversy which starts internet arguments which gets people taking which gets them watching which gets views.

If there was an organized effort to push some agenda in the media, they have clear cut cases they could put on the news cycle and repeat 24/7 just to shove down you throat.

shut up cuck

Firstly, a single survey is not really good indication of anything.

Secondly, your crucial error is immediately thinking I'm talking about all conservatives. I'm not at all. I know very well that all political parties contain a pretty varying spectrum of morals and beliefs.

I'm talking about a specific brand of populist conservative that has abandoned all reason and is intent on crash this plane with no survivors, all out of a collective case of small man syndrome and a chronic need for an other to hate at all costs.

People not grasping that Tolkien Elves specifically AREN'T perfect, despite their superficial superiority, then creating annoying "Flawless" elves that are condescending as fuck to everyone else, while simultaneously being far worse due to the shitty writing of the work/player in question.

Shit like Eragon is a good example; it certainly didn't start it, but it did codify everything infuriating about Elf wankers.

They hate us cos' they ain't us.

Eh, even when they recognize that elves aren't perfect, they cite that as more reasons to hate them as a concept. See Often they'll call elves 'too perfect' and bring this point about them being fuckups up in the same argument, unaware of how retarded that makes them sound.

How are/were elves over saturated? I can only really think of Skyrim, the witcher and possibly dragon age where they show elves and even then they're not that great, just being sideshow Nazis or other something else unimportant.

>"suggestion"
1) the quote says "prove", not suggestion
2) "some guy" is a professor
3) having read the study, he handed out questionnaires and evaluated the results. The study was peer reviewed and published.

So you're actively advocating the alternatives.
>brutally enforced conformity, brutally efficient genocide

Well at least you're honest about it. You won't like the reality as much as the fantasy though. More people die in war from economic disruption than on the battlefield. I doubt you like being poor.

Unfortunately it can't dissolve witty quips with no substance.

Around levels,watch yourself
Also fuck elves, smug pointy ears plague

There's a difference between writer intent and the end product.
Warcraft is a great example there, because of pic related.
WC3 tells us that he's a dinosaur that can't move with the times, and dies for it.
World of Warcraft shows us that literally every word he said about orcs is true.

Elves are a similar case. We're often told that they can do no wrong, or as close to, but then shown the precise opposite.
Eragon is pretty much the defining work for this in action

You may want to reread the bottom bit of the post you cited. The "in almost every goddamn setting" part is certainly hyperbolic, but it's why you can both hate them for being presented as perfect and hate them for being complete and utter fuck ups. In short, writer incompetence.

HOWEVER, all that said, if the setting doesn't attempt to do either, there should be no issue outside the usual memes.

>because of pic related
well shit.
But you probably all knew who I was talking about anyway

So why not link the study, since that's the actual source?

>Secondly, your crucial error is immediately thinking I'm talking about all conservatives.

Yet it took quite a bit to pull that admission from you. I wonder if I made the same sort of sweeping generalizations about the fact that most black men are criminals (more accurately, will be arrested and convicted at some point) whether you'd still think I was making a valid point in an appropriate way without dehumanizing anyone?

I wonder if I kept emphasizing how those negroid desperados cannot be resolved with reason or rational discussion, whether you'd think I was one of those people trying to crash the plane, as you say.

Do you not see the irony, in committing the same sort of error?

And a single survey is more evidence than you've provided to the contrary. It should be enough to challenge your view, rather than dismiss mine, and you should reconsider your position unless you have at least two studies to counter. Yes, a body of evidence is needed for a formal consensus. But only a single study is needed to merit you doubt your claims in the absence of any studies supporting them.

>the same sort of sweeping generalizations about the fact that most black men are criminals
This isn't a generalization this is crime statistics.

I'm having trouble finding it without being linked to a University periodical subscription. It may be out there for free but it's almost time for me to get on with my day so you'll have to seek it out on your own.

Here, have a TED talk instead.
ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind

>I wonder if I made the same sort of sweeping generalizations

Re-read the posts you're talking about.

Literally not one mention of conservatives as a group. No generalizations whatsoever.

>Go read the fucking Silmarillion

Simmer down grandpa, we can't afford your blood pressure meds

Ah yes, the "turrible turrible middle ages" meme. Wasn't all that bad as the likes of you think. Nor was it a bed of roses either, since you seem to automatically assume that's what I think. No it was no utopia, for utopia is impossible, human nature being what it is. What it was, was a civilization of people largely and for the most part devoted to the same ideas and the same goal. Would I do whatever - and I do mean whatever - is required to bring back that mindset? You are goddamned right I would.

Which happens far more often than not.

>Which you'd probably admit yourself in one breath, but then you talk about some impossibly well managed conspiracy to control society in the next

Ok, fair enough. "Carefully curated" is the wrong phrase there, I don't actually believe there's a conspiracy across all media outlets to repeat the illuminati line. I DO believe there's a very narrow range of of political belief that it's acceptable to espouse in public in America, and the media naturally self-censor and fit their output to the prevailing consensus.

By that logic, everything is writer incompetence.

Strong character loses? writer incompetence
youth stops being childish? Writer incompetence

Elves are hypocritical at best and fucking ruiner of everything at worst.

Dwarves don't get any flak because while being competent, they also don't stir shit up.

>while being competent

Man, what dwarves are you thinking of?

>they also don't stir shit up

Again, this doesn't sound like any dwarves ever.

Dwarves are greedy, ill-tempered little shits who start wars over the most inane reasons, nurse grudges forever, and let their material desires lead them and others into destruction.

Even the biggest Elven critics needed to show some respect after this scene (pic related). Unflinching discipline and precise coordination. Its surprising they ever lost a battle.

Elves are what every race hopes to be and a model of post consumption utopian societies.

>What it was, was a civilization of people largely and for the most part devoted to the same ideas and the same goal. Would I do whatever - and I do mean whatever - is required to bring back that mindset? You are goddamned right I would.

Slit your own throat pls you retarded goddamn animal

>Dwarves don't get any flak because while being competent, they also don't stir shit up.

They stir up all sorts of shit. I mean, the defining phrase for them is 'They dug too greedily and too deep'

Oh man... that is why they are so chaotic. At some point in 400 years you will fuck up. You will acidentaly do something dumb like burn down a house or hit on your great grand niece. If your society is very rigid most elves would have to commit honerable suicide.

Ok new version of elves. Super tightly strung honerable society, with the only real cause of death being suicide. Society seeks war so elders can die in the field without first having to get drunk and run about town pantsless. This would be great.

Homo homini lupus est, motherfucker.

I would do so, because I love something far above and beyond myself. I am like a dog who wishes to serve his master, because he loves it. So yes, on a metaphorical level, I am an animal. But an animal who serves his purpose. We are all animals, in one way or another.

Gay