Why is racism and xenophobia almost universally present in all fantasy setting...

You aren't arguing against me, just posing as if you were. Much like in real life racists are saying one thing, but in reality their desires and policies aren't very different from what is currently in place.

Real world racism:
>I hate niggers, so I will live away from niggers. I will write how I want them dead on the internet, but in reality I will just avoid them so we can both live in peace, separated comfortably by mutual dislike, even if we both contribute to and make use of the same state and institutions.

Fantasy racism:
>I hate elves, so I will go and rape and enslave elves. I will say I want them dead, and go murder them, and laugh while doing it, and piss on their graves, and cook their meat on the fire made from their holy trees.

>because blacks and whites living together under the same system of government would lead to disaster in the long run.
Why didn't we listen to them?

I'd like to dispute that user. The concept of the uncivilized and savage "barbarian" has emerged independently in cultures isolated by space and time. From the concept of barbaroi in Greek culture, and later inherited by the Romans, to the Chinese conception of the world as a center of (Chinese) civilization surrounded by impious barbarians, or even the Aztec refering to their hunter-gatherer neighbours as Chimichece (dog-people); xenophobia and fear of the other has been undoubtedly present throughout human history.

Never loose that streak of innocence, OP. Never loose that heart of yours. No matter what happens in the world around you, it will always be your greatest treasure.

Human-only settings are nice, at least when they're the only playable race. They don't avoid the racism problems, but at least they allow DMs to make the other races alien and exotic instead of "Basically humans with pointy ears or some other exaggerated trait" that making a race a playable option always fucking leads to.

because it often happens in the real world and it's a easy way to add some depth to your setting without requiering much skill in world building. A well done commentery on racism in fantasy books is very diferent than a ok one, but it's easy to write a ok one

>including Thomas "I fucked a bunch of my slaves" Jefferson

You are aware there is only a single source for that claim, and it was written by his political opponent, and it includes absolutely ludicrous and proven false claims, right?
It was slander, and I have no idea why its so often repeated even in serious literature.

The fear and disgust was there. I don't argue that.
The genocide was rarely there. Empathy more or less balanced the hate.
In fantasy the solution to that fear of the other is always large scale horrific and organized butchery. In real life it was often just insults and personal individual decisions in the free space of market or movement.
Real world discrimination almost never results in genocide, fantasy discrimination almost always does. Its weird why this is the case.

That's a strangely warped vision to have of people who oppose civilization, friendo.

The thing with fantasy is that most fantasy races dont integrate into society while in our reality most forgineres do withing a generation or two

We've had plenty of xenophobic violence in recent times.

>You aren't arguing against me, just posing as if you were. Much like in real life racists are saying one thing, but in reality their desires and policies aren't very different from what is currently in place.

I think I see what you're saying. Look at it this way: Most racists in the real world aren't out trying to violently murder members of other races because starting and getting support for a race war is hard work, and it's easier to just segregate and hold racist thoughts and views. They keep those views online or in private because they run the risk of being socially ostracized, losing their livelihood, or even being jailed depending on the country, for airing them in public.

Whereas, because fantasy racism is removed from reality, and the lives of a fantasy world's inhabitants are disposable, it's easier for there to be individuals, factions, or even entire nations full of genocidal racists who would rather kill an elf rather than look at them.

tl;dr: IRL racism isn't as overt and active as fantasy racism because genocide is hard work, and it's easier to be civil.

Not sure, but given what I just wrote, I'd be willing to guess that people thought it was easier to try an co-exist with the darkies than try to deport them.

I did not know that, and would like to read up on. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Well, genocides require some conditions to happen, mainly a breakdown of social order and intensification of hatred (such as what happened in Yugoslavia or Rwanda), or a difference in power between opressor and opressed (see Nazi Germany). Provided these conditions meet, and genocide can happen.

Also, genocides are very good for narrative. It's easier and more engaging to present a muderous rampage of the intolerant elves on the poor fae than to represent the complex nuances of institutional and cultural oppression.

You just wanted to post that picture

No, its a legitimate thread.

>why aren't all fantasy settings the glorious liberal utopia my university professor told me existed before Cishit Whites ruined everything

because it's cheap and easy.
Thinking about how races would interact in any way that isn't "immediate violence" is WAY harder than just assuming immediate violence.

Op is saying nothing of the sort you retard.

The three rules of storytelling:
conflict
conflict
and conflict

The humans don't live with the mutated ones. the humans are barbarians who live in the woods or on the steppe
??
Actual barbaric peoples (not stupid anarcho primitivst urbanites) were highly racists and had a social darwinist ideology.

>were highly racists
Absolutely not. They had a highly tribalist system. People of the same race, but different tribe, were treated the same way as people of different race.

>and had a social darwinist ideology.
Very much so. Old people who can't walk are abandoned where they fall, children who look like they wouldn't turn out well killed on the spot, or maybe if you have too many woman and a girl is born, you can kill her for being the wrong gender so to speak too.
This isn't racism though.

When one of the groups starts to feel that their existence is endangered by the other groups, violence in inevitable.

The social darwinism thing isn't true

We've have found remains of ancient tribespeople with debilitating injuries that have shown sides of advanced natural healing, a skeleton of a man with his leg severed halfway down the thigh, but with the thigh bone healed to a rounded stump. The remains of a woman with a twisted skeletal structure that is known as the result of a congenital defect that lived to be over 50. The weak weren't abandoned where they fell, they were assisted, carried, cared for.

You know, when the tribe could afford to do so without risking imminent destruction

Yes, they were racist. Many tribes regarded other ethnicites as inferior. They did see race.

Keep in mind Tribal does not just refer to hunter gatherer tribes.

read this; theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ted-kaczynski-the-truth-about-primitive-life-a-critique-of-anarchoprimitivism

We have documents from different peoples meeting, one side being tribal.
The native americans didn't consider the europeans subhuman or animals. The native australians didn't consider the europeans subhuman or animals. The native south and central americans didn't consider the europeans subhuman or animal.
In fact in all of these cases, its easier to make the argument they were seen as superior, not inferior.

did you read my link? CTRL-F and search "racism"

I've read that mentally ill terrorist's esseys in the past. They are long and I won't re-read them over a Veeky Forums post.
Consider having a discussion here, instead of repeating your views over and over. Unlike Kaczynski's wall of text, you can read my Twitter length posts here and respond to them, rather than ignore them.

for most of history human societies haven't been more than a few hundred people

and for the entirety of that period these groups were more or less in constant hostilities. 10-25% male mortality rates from intertribal violence were the norm in a lot of pre-modern societies even into the 19th and 20th centuries

>for most of history human societies haven't been more than a few hundred people

Objectively false, by the definition of history.

you don't have to read the whole thing, just search up "racism". You can read it all in a minute.

So its a single example? Using the same logic I can insist that all tribal societies ate human meat and cut off relatives heads to shrink as decoration. I'd even have a stronger argument, since I could cite multiple examples.

How have you disproved my argument? 99% of people would call tribal societies "racist" if they weren't shown as wonderful happpy liberal utopias like our media shows them to be.

Yeah, don't tell me it doesn't happen, it's happened around here in my life. The racists might not lynch anymore, but they'll drag to death behind a truck.

You are strawmanning hard. Go up the reply chain to remind yourself who and where you are.

not an argument.

>misrepresent the discussion
>get called out
>"not an argument"

Neither are your posts that are arguing a non-existent position, while ignoring the existing one.

They considered them gods,servent of the gods, demons and very much different, with all kind of exotic powers. Racism is the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races, and you can see in LatAm that live. The chinese description of the Brits in the 19th century was funny as fuck for example.

you haven't made an argument

i explained factions in my homebrew fantasy world, you responded that "muh real life barbaric peoples don't do that", i showed evidence that they did and you are just making shitty points

History disagrees with you...
youtube.com/watch?v=-evIyrrjTTY

>i showed evidence that they did

Translation: I linked to an essay of a convicted murderer that cites 1 (one) example, and insisted that 1 (one) example is enough to convict all tribal peoples.

I love this kinda old timey bullshit.
Got any more?

Not as hardcore.
I imagine a country bumpkin trying to explain to a very opiciated artist what a weird men where the british sailors.
>"What a nose he had Lee! Curved an long, like a bird beak"
>"Wha, birb beak?"
>"And he was covered in red Hair like a parrot!"
>"Wha, Red parrot"?
>"And he never stoped to smoke and exhale smoke"
>"Wait, Smoke? Wait a moment I have to draw that"

Oh, I do know of some bleiefs they had. Like that the english couldnt bend their knees and that they needed tea to live.

Seriously, the chinese were so busy smelling their farts that they couldnt even comprehend that they were threat

the english do need tea to live, yes.

you haven't linked any examples.

Also "muh murderer" isn't an argument against his point.

>but in the real world it would be something autists actually try to do and get shunned
you have a real fucking high and naive opinion of humanity if you think this mindset is reflective of human nature.

human nature is to be xenophobic (in general, there are always exceptions), and even today, its present in every single culture to varying degrees, the only difference is its been reduced dramatically

as soon as the chips are down, people will start looking for someone to blame, and i guarantee you, they're going to start with people they recognize as "the other". we're a tribal species, and individuals can defy their nature, but this is only a temporary state of affairs.

Did you read history ?
Like when we traded shells for sla- wait no- animals ? or everything that user is saying.
I'm not saying it's great but human is not keen to anything different from himself.

>as soon as the chips are down, people will start looking for someone to blame, and i guarantee you, they're going to start with people they recognize as "the other".

Must be why during the siege of Sarajevo, with all the chips down and people having a random chance to die at any given moment from artillery or sniper shots, and having no food and medicine, everyone who survive says it was when they were the most friendly with people, everyone was helping each other, regardless of faith and ethnicity, and so on?

There's a difference between everyone acting like a cunt and NPCs having their own conflicting viewpoints.

Xenophobia and Racism are great spices for conflicts between factions with a long history of wars and cultural conflicts.

>why does the setting that often takes heavy influence from medieval history use common things from medieval history like tribalistic and religiously zealous tendencies?
Truly activates the almonds.

Xenophobia and Racism are pretty much a must to some degree in almost every single decent campaign that deals with wars since whenever there is violent conflict, there will be prejudice as a result.
It's a survival mechanism.

>Opponents of the Khmer Rouge, the Tutsis, the Armenians, the fucking Jews weren't systematically killed because of their race
>White farmers weren't kicked out of Zimbabwe because of racism by blacks
>White farmers aren't constantly attacked by South African niggers because of their race
>Population transfer doesn't happen to manipulate ethnic groups in certain areas Like in the USSR or China

Terrible post. Not all violence of one people against another is based on race.
Communists killing nationalists isn't based on race, even if they are difference races.
The Turks moved and killed Armenians because they were on the border with Russia, and friendly to Russia, and shared religion with Russia, and the Turks were at war with Russia at the time.
White farmers are hated by Africans because of the colonial past, not because of race alone.
And when a white policeman today shoots a black criminal, this isn't because of race, its because of laws.

Not all violence between races is racist violence.

Racism and Xenophobia aren't the reason to wage a war, but rather the result of the conflicts.
Racism and Xenophobia are nothing but one of the ways to help rationalize existing conflicts. It does not create them.

Even in WH40k, the Imperium doesn't tend to kill aliens just because they are there. They kill them either because they are a threat or because they took something from them or because they want something from them.

The only exception to this rule are shrine worlds, in which case reasons are more religious than practical.

Imperium could have wiped out the Tau ages ago, but they aren't seen as a threat yet, so they have been largely left alone in the space boonies save for when crusades go and reclaim some planets.

>imperium could have wiped out the tau
Hah!

Pattern recognition is a primary function of humans, racism and xenophobia are hardwired into us.

>genocide was rarely there...
Try telling that to the few remaining Native American cultures and see how many other tribes they can list as wiped out by the greed of the whiteman....

That was less a concerted effort and more a by-product, user.
>which is the same excuse Holocaust deniers use, amusingly enough

Wut, I'm sure if you have gone to /int/ than you have shitposted with lots of them. Heck, probably you even work with them, the Mexicans than go to USA are mostly mestizos with strong amerindian ancestry.

You mean the poor natives who quickly jumped up the opportunity to kill other natives?

Or do you blame whiteman for bringing a disease that wasn't natural to America?

>Imperium could have wiped out the Tau ages ago
user, lemme school you right quick.
The Imperium DID try to wipe out the Tau on first contact, but the fleet sent to do it was lost in the Warp.
Yes, the Imperium could indeed wipe out the Tau, but the Imperium can not divert the resources to do so without losing ground on the hundred other fronts they are currently holding.

How multinational and religious do you think Bosnia even is? I somehow doubt there was that much multicultural interaction in that nation.
Was there even large enough factions to put the blame on in the first place?

But yes, under long sieges peoples attitudes do change as was seen during WW1. After being at a standstill for too long, people just want it to end so they can move on.

Still, assuming that such situations will be the norm is equally foolish. When one side is clearly more powerful rather than both being equal, there will be people either supporting or resisting change.
With stagnant deadlock it's a bit harder.

Because they are basic outcomes of having a brain capable of doing pattern discrimination

Why does one group not like another group of people.

Gee idk, almost like its a natural thing for people to distrust or give predetermined patterns to people.

Do you think that whites that hate Muslims and Blacks is because of their skin color or because of their disproportionate crime statistics?

Congrats. You just disproved the existence of racist violence.

>i will kill this person, because he killed my brother
Not racist violence.

>i will kill this person, because other persons who look like him killed my brother
Racist violence.

Super simple stuff, tard.

Damocles crusade was a pretty insignificant Crusade as far as Crusades go.

>most forgineres do withing a generation or two
Most "europeans" who joined ISIS were 2nd or third generation inmigrants. The first generation is always the best and it goes down south from there.

Racism due to tribalism is still racism. Nobody is racist just because.

>I will kill this person because he looks like a descendant of those who were fighting against the communist revolt in Rhodesia before it turned to Zimbabwe
Extremely racist violence.

That was less than 40 years ago, dumbass, those people are still alive. You are saying "the descendants", but a lot of these owners are literally the same people who were fighting.

>Seriously, the chinese were so busy smelling their farts that they couldnt even comprehend that they were threat
To be honest this can be said about all Europe after the times of the Sun King.

>I will kill this person because I thought he was part of the mass rape of cologne
Not racist violence

>I will kill this person because he looks like he'd be part of the mass rape of cologne.
Racist violence

Difference is so slim that it's at that point meaningless.

Its not slim at all, brainlet. One is killing an individual who you think deserves it, the other is killing an individual who belongs to a group that includes other individuals who you think deserve it.

Yea, and they had to be adults for the most part.
Majority of the guys who fought in that conflict are pretty much at retirement age or way past it.

Everyone who was 18 at the time of Rhodesian Bush War is now past 60, so yes. Descendant is the right word.

You need to be over 18 to post here.

In practical terms, the difference only exist in your mind when the end result is the same.

Didn't they use genetic to proof that Washington was the male character of a japanese porn comic IRL? He raped and impregnated his daughter's teenage maid as an old man after all.

Veeky Forums tries so hard to make new and exiting races from scratch when we should be taking notes from weird historical bullshit.

Elves need to check their privilege and let orcs move into their forests and cities.

In practical terms punishing a man for the sins of his brother is retarded and you are retarded.

Agreed. All cultures are the same, except when they are better than elven. There are no differences between groups, cultures or ideologues.

Real world racism:
Wir müssen die juden ausrotten.

>oh shit i lost the argument
>better strawman like a mofo

To be fair in Lord of the Rings, humans are largely incompatible with Elven society because Elves can die of heartbreak. This means that if Humans and Elves get into a relationship, the limited lifespan of the human could kill the elf and often dies unless the said human just existed as a living sex toy.

Also, humans are generally speaking just shittier versions of elves at everything they do anyhow so they'd never find any meaningful employment among the elves, which means they'd probably end up committing a lot of crimes in order to make ends meet and whoring themselves to the elves that are found most unattractive by their own kin.

not if his "bothers" have a history of committing the same crime. Its very simple if mountain lions have a habit of killing humans on sight you stay away kill or imprison them, even if they are "innocent". If blacks have a habit of stealing... you blame cops fro racialing profiling them and give reparations.

Does drinking elf blood make me immortal?

>I am sorry sir, but a few of your cousins robbed a bank, so I have to arrest you now
>"What, why?"
>You know, lions and so on.

That's why you marry nice a dwarven lass. Better fit for humans than elves in every way.

Try that attitude outside of the West and see how far it gets you.