RpgPundit Presents DungeonChef: it sucks

Good point, I'll be a good commie now. Heil Stalin, Mao et al.

Unless you're suggesting i become a disgusting centrist?

So who is the Hunter S. Thompson of RPGs then? Patrick Stuart maybe?

The right-wing is usually aligned with repressive traditionalism and authoritarianism, usually along religious/ethnocentric lines, and so is often the foil to Fantasy and Speculative fiction.

ITT: Pundit astroturfs his shitty products.

Speculative fiction and fantasy are full of Reactionary fantasias. Turtledove, Niven and Pournelle; Heinlein depending on who he was trying to fuck at the time, etc.

But now, the right-wing is the defender of classic science fiction. You know, classic sword-and-sorcery, alien-hunting, Space Marine stuff. It's the left-wing that wants to make it more 'progressive', destroying everything interesting about it in the process.

>it's another thread about opinions on modern world politics on Veeky Forums

The right-wing trying to claim ownership of Sci-Fi's history is laughable. And there's been plenty of historical and modern sci-fi that isn't just "aliens and feelings," that also doesn't go full-on Vox Day 14-words crazy.

>Turtledove
I don't remember him righting anything that would put him anywhere but middle of the road,

>The right-wing trying to claim ownership of Sci-Fi's history is laughable
Party of Lincoln!

Historically, early stuff was. Conan and John Carter of Mars.

Things did shift pretty far left, but there a handful of exceptions.

For every Conan or John Carter, you've got H. G. Wells or later life Lovecraft, a socialist and a new deal Democrat respectively. Any political faction trying to claim ownership over such a broad category as science fiction is retarded. Fiction of all kinds of political stripes has filled the genre since its very foundation.

No, Thompson was a great writer. Stuart is a hack.

So let's cut to the actual point. RpgPundit being right-wing isn't why he's bad. Plenty of OK people skew right. RpgPundit is bad because he's a pretentious, self-important dickwad who dismisses anyone who doesn't agree with him as Swine simply having fun wrong.

Make it yourself if it's that important to you.

>later life Lovecraft
Was he more liberal later in life?
I know he gets a lot of flak for rascism.

Conan is weird because it's pulp adventure guy shorts but also it's not really committed to black people as goblins.

Uh... In my country the left wingers literally give returning ISIS-fighters rewards when they come home, like free apartments, paying their drivers license fee's etc etc. The leftists here absolutely adore muslims.

>Sweden

No it isn't. Only if you equate 'right-wing' to 'literal nazi'. Regular right wingers don't want to have sex slaves, kill gays and institute a theocracy (in my country at least). We just want a nation that we can call our own and that takes care of it's own, and is a meritocracy.

You don't have to be racist to be right leaning.

He got better once he got out of his sheltered youth.
Mind, he was still a bit scarred for life, but he was a bit more reasonable.

He was a manchild for most of his life with a bunch of extremely irrational fears, including of foreigners. However, he had an interest in various cultures, especially Ancient Egyptian, from a young age and he became a lot more tolerant later on partially becaus of this. He was never a fan of the melting-pot though, because he didn't like the thought of what he later saw as proud, noble cultures americanising and becoming bland and mediocre.

Maybe this version will appeal to you instead?
coinsandscrolls.blogspot.ca/2017/07/monster-menu-all-part-1-eating-ad.html

But it helps

Honestly there's nothing wrong with niggers and arabs. The wrong thing is having them in higher cultures that expect people to not act like violent rape-murder-monkeys.

Depends where you are in the world. America tens to equate right-wing to libertarianism, but here in Britain the right is more likely to create a plutocracy than a meritocracy, though they'd never admit to it. Still far better than what Corbyn's done to Labour, but otherwise our Conservatives are an awful lot like Hillary - pro status-quo, pro-big business no matter the costs and completely out of touch. The only difference is that Hillary pretended to be progressive but May pretends to be pro-Brexit.

Muslims are not the same as ISIS. Only Muslims are ISIS, but not all Muslims are ISIS. That said, returning ISIS fighters should be shoveled into an unmarked grave, bullet in the head beforehand that is optional. The coddling they receive from the establishment is disgusting.

In Sweden right wing means

>C-could you please not make our country a caliphate? A-and r-rape is b-bad...

True. I'd go as far to say that many Muslim countries aren't all bad compared to Africa or Venezuela.

Off you go, lads.

That still sounds pretty right wing to me.Or at least anti-immigration/globalization.

Most muslims have absolutely abhorrent views on gays, womens rights and on how much you should force Islam on people though. Also, they are literally inbred as fuck.

It is just plain ridiculous. I guess that bribes are cheaper than bombs nowadays, but that's still a shitty explanation.

The problem with muslims is that they seem to have an agenda to infiltrate and change western nations (also inbreeding). The problem with africa is, well... africans.

>>C-could you please not make our country a caliphate? A-and r-rape is b-bad...
Racist shitlords.

...

I don't see how I said anything /pol/ there, except for insulting Hillary. I was just pointing out that 'right-wing' means different things in different places.

By the standards of today, definitely, although many liberals would say multiculturalism shouldn't mean everyone giving up their culture to become a homogenous ultra-Americanised blob of people. By the standards of his time, not so much.

>Reee /pol/ get out!
I miss the days when people could just ignore stuff that bothered them, instead of calling extra attention to it.

That's a little paranoid. Most of them just want to move somewhere where the prospects are better, but don't want to adapt even though they should. ISIS isn't strong enough to destroy most Western nations even if we did let them.

Come on, user. You're seriously going to say that this is Veeky Forums related?

There's an entire board where you can debate this shit to your heart's content AND IT'S NOT HERE. Now fuck off.

>Muslims
>Inbred
Not compared to the Welsh.

Visited Sweden recently? Don't be surprised when you are greeted by police wearing niquabs, when you have to search to find a Swede in the city centres, when you (in some places) hear morning prayers blasting from the mosques, when the police will ask the local clan leader to enforce law rather than go into the arab areas themselves etc etc ad infinitum.

I see your point, but I'm not /pol/. Veeky Forums dicusses politics all the time, and it seemedlike a good time to point out that th American right-wing is very different to the British right-wing. If I mentioned that on /pol/ the first reply would be something along the lines of 'neither of them are killing enough Jews, so why dhould the differences matter?'

The right-wing in America is mostly everything that makes White jet-ski surbanites scared or angry, with a handful of Pepes shrieking about the 14 words propped up by weirdo rich troglodytes like the Mercers thrown in.

It's not that the Muslims enter Sweden expecting to take over, it's that Sweden lets them do so. If the government would actually act like reasonable humans, most of the muzzies would be content to live in their own areas and practice Swedish ways outside them. Also, why would a muslim country allow women to be police?

>Don't be surprised when you are greeted by police wearing niquabs

I agree, fuck the police.

American politics in general is full of scaremongering right now. Much of Europe is going the same way, the only difference being that there's less guns.

Yes, but I still wouldn't like rats if my house was infested because the landlord refused to remove them. It isn't the fault of the rats, it's in their nature, but they are still pests.

>The right-wing in America is mostly everything that makes White jet-ski surbanites scared or angry, with a handful of Pepes shrieking about the 14 words propped up by weirdo rich troglodytes
Well it's good to know we can get to the heart of matters instead of resorting to name calling.

I'm referring to the fact that we have police niquabs now. So much for 'not changing the country'.

Gee, I sure hope I didn't hurt the billionaire's feelings.

Being right wing as a vocal point of your "artistic" career tend to create the same problems as their left-wing counterparts.
Basically imagine a obnoxious /pol/ack instead of an obnoxious SJW.

First World politics started to lose any sort of Utopian vision for society in 70s, and it's only started to come back now that we're dealing with the headaches of Neoliberal economics and the dumb Imperialism that's left a good portion of the Third World a smoldering hellhole that people want to get the hell away from.

I guess Norway's pretty nice, on account of having *all of the money*, an egalitarian society, and looking at all the giant migrations and saying, "hey, we didn't have anything to do with that."

Africa is WAY better of now after imperialism than they were before it, though. They were even better of DURING imperialism.

Th...thanks.

Do you want me to post a picture of an african being burned alive in a tire or something? What would that prove.

Look up actual crime rates, poverty rates, mortality rates, level of wealth and development etc. All was better during white rule.

Latter-period Colonialists tried to clean up their act, because they saw the writing on the wall. But by that time, the people were so pissed off by decades, if not centuries of exploitation and fucking with their politics that they overthrew them anyway, even if it turned out they didn't have any sort of lasting structure to fill the void.

Correction: some of them wanted to fill the void with socialism and stuff, but the CIA tended to assassinate those guys so they could put their warlord of choice in.

Robin D. Laws

>I'm not /pol/.
If you're talking about politics on Veeky Forums in a context unrelated to RPGs, you're /pol/.

>Veeky Forums dicusses politics all the time
In a context relating to RPGs.

>and it seemedlike a good time to point out that th American right-wing is very different to the British right-wing.
It's never a good time to point out /pol/ topics outside of /pol/.

>this is what lefties believe
And i bet that would have been proper socialism as well, right?

Do you have even a single idea of what led to this picture?

When Belgians took over the Congo, they instituted military rule, and used natives as soldiers to enforce order.
However, native soldiers notoriously had abysmal fire discipline and would fire off any ammunition given to them within a short period of time for no reason or for hunting for themselves.
Therefore when Belgian quartermasters started to notice the huge amounts of ammunition that soldiers were using, despite no actual reported conflicts or firefights, they instituted a rule which they hoped would prevent their native congolese soldiers from wasting ammunition: "for every bullet spent, the soldier must provide the right hand of the killed enemy, or else the cost would be deducted from the soldier's pay."
However, this just led to native congolese soldiers shooting their guns for fun anyway and chopping the hands off of innocents so that they wouldn't have to pay for their bullets.

Now you know.
Black soldiers cut off the hands of other black people, and somehow white people get blamed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrocities_in_the_Congo_Free_State#Mutilation_and_brutality

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_Publique

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Patrice Lamumba was a better dude than Mobutu.

>when people complain about /pol/ and want them to stay off of their board and in their containment board
kek.
so you're saying that different cultures should be kept separate and that mixing vastly different ideologies/peoples/cultures just leads to conflict?

hmmmmmmmm.... where have I heard that before?

Boy, you sure flipped me on the benevolence of the Belgian Congo.

It was white people that discovered these atrocities and ended them though.
Without whites, the Congo would forever remain the Heart of Darkness.

Well socialist or not they probably would have failed but it's an historical fact that the USA put in power far far worse dudes than the socialist wannabes just to avoid them becoming allies of the URSS.
Just look at the history of post-WW II middle-east and south america.
The "true socialism" meme has nothing to do with that.

Never knew the Skylark series was a left wing fantasy.

>So the House of Saud is a little backwards. But c'mon, Truman, think of all that oil. What's the worst that could happen?

The interesting thing is that they did so AFTER forcing colonial powers to leave, then realising that they fucked up and left a power vacuum. So instead of stable areas full of supportive-ish allies against communism, they had to put in military strongmen, or let the USSR take over.

But that makes a lot of sense when you realise that the US's premier geopolitical objective from Roosevelt to Johnson was not actually the containment of Communism (though this was important and a major priority) but rather the assertion of the US on a global stage, the break down of traditional US isolationism and the removal of the European Empires as competitors to the US economically, politically, militarily and culturally.

>again nonwhites commit atrocities
>again the blame is backtracked as far as needed to blame whites, as if not a single being in the interim were capable of moral fault, all nonwhites being morally blameless victims or inert physical products without consciousness

>inert physical products without consciousness
Sounds about right to me.

That the Saudi's suck, that Wahhabism is a poisonous ideology, and that the Quincy Agreement was short-sighted don't contradict each other, my man.

But it allowed the US to dominate the currency markets and forced any nation that relies on Arab oil to any large degree to support American economic hegemony.

Very clever.

>so you're saying that different cultures should be kept separate and that mixing vastly different ideologies/peoples/cultures just leads to conflict?

No, we're telling you that Veeky Forums is an English-language website comprised of numerous boards devoted to specific topics, and posting outside of the correct board (i.e. "shitposting") is discouraged.

You're confused and upset because you don't understand that simple concept.

So what should the US have done?
We wanted oil, but the guys who owned it were backwards sand people.
Should we have instituted a coup, and destroyed their government, culture, and people, just to impose a puppet? I thought liberals considered that evil. I certainly do.

How could anyone be "far-sighted" enough to see that Western Morality and identity would collapse in the decades to come and that these backwards zealots would fund radical zealotry so effectively around the world that it would lead to a worldwide movement of jihad against our now amoral nihilistic centerless civilization?

>It's not true segregation when we do it
kek

When you think about it, posters are the most oppressed people of all.

get gassed kikes