Branimir's Open Letter to Games Workshop

So I am really confused by all this. Is this Branimir person just hiding behind that wall of text that he is just another racist who is upset that his kind is no longer accepted in more and more parts of life? I agree with GW on that. I don't want racists and bigots and misogynists around me either. If I owned a business, their money would be worthless to me. too.

Yeah, this is an awful lot of words for what ultimately amounts to "I don't like that GW re-used a familiar quote that I, a lifelong GW fan, definitely recognized said something that sounds hostile to racists, so I'm out."

Which is a hell of a take for any amount of words, let alone several thousand.

It's Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance. The argument "if you don't tolerate intolerant people, you are not tolerant!" is hardly a new one.

Gradine said:

Yeah, this is an awful lot of words for what ultimately amounts to "I don't like that GW re-used a familiar quote that I, a lifelong GW fan, definitely recognized said something that sounds hostile to racists, so I'm out."

Which is a hell of a take for any amount of words, let alone several thousand.

Click to expand...

Or he could be part of the moderate majority. Social networks don't give a fair representation of demographics, it's mostly the vocal extremes on both sides of the debate. Real life isn't binary, most discussions have more answers than just a 'yes' and a 'no'.
'You will not be missed' implies that there is no room for disagreement whatsoever.

Immeril said:

'You will not be missed' implies that there is no room for disagreement whatsoever.

Click to expand...

But there isn't, is there? They say they will not condone prejudice or abuse. Disagreement means somebody condones prejudice and abuse. If the silent majority condones abuse, then... well, let's just say that I do not believe that the silent majority condones abuse.

Morrus said:

But there isn't, is there? They say they will not condone prejudice or abuse. Disagreement means somebody condones prejudice and abuse. If the silent majority condones abuse, then... well, let's just say that I do not believe that the silent majority condones abuse.

Click to expand...

But people can disagree with part of a statement, or with a certain method, while still condoning prejudice. I'm not going to derail this thread by bringing the BLM and Oriental Adventures debates into this. Suffice to say that I see these debates a bit differently because I don't live in the US.
I'm going to give a ridiculous example to demonstrate that the argument in itself can become ridiculous.


For those who don't speak Dutch: K3 is a music group whose fans primarily consist of pre-adolescents. They've got a lot of merchandise, including feature films. Apparently, some people think that dressing in the style of Elizabeth Taylor's Cleopatra (again, in a movie) is cultural appropriation. When I say that this accusation is asinine, I am not automatically denying the very existence of cultural appropriation.

Immeril said:

Suffice to say that I see these debates a bit differently because I don't live in the US.

Click to expand...

Neither do I.

from a narrative point of view, this just sounds like a story about some guy who discovered Warhammer as a kid and thought it was magical, but then he became an adult and refused to take serious issues with any real maturity.

also iirc both the 40k and WHF canon have changed radically multiple times since I first got into it 20 years ago, the sudden inclusion black Ultramarines apropos of nothing is peanuts compared to some of the other stuff I heard of over the years. like having little to no narrative justification seems in line with how things usually go.

Immeril said:

Or he could be part of the moderate majority. Social networks don't give a fair representation of demographics, it's mostly the vocal extremes on both sides of the debate. Real life isn't binary, most discussions have more answers than just a 'yes' and a 'no'.
'You will not be missed' implies that there is no room for disagreement whatsoever.

Click to expand...

okay, not sure why the moderate majority would feel the need to be offended by the statement GW put out. if "WARHAMMER IS FOR EVERYONE!", if Warhammer is just a game then it shouldn't matter to them if their space marines are suddenly not just a bunch of white dudes.

also, let's think about this. I am a Latino and Asian man who actually got into 40k as a child. what if I met someone at a game store who thought Asians or Latinos shouldn't be part of the community? what if I learned there were regulars at the store who didn't necessarily have the same views but were still friends with him, and the owner thought he was a totally cool dude? can Warhammer really be for everyone if this guy is accepted as part of the community? keep in mind in this scenario I'm just someone wanting to play 40k, and didn't say certain groups shouldn't be allowed to play.

Immeril said:

But people can disagree with part of a statement, or with a certain method, while still condoning prejudice.

Click to expand...

So, OK, let's go there. Which part would you say you disagree with. I'll list the three things in the statement:

• Values of mutual kindness and respect.
• Non-acceptance of prejudice, hatred, or abuse.
• Diversification of the 'cast of characters'.

I'm curious which one is the one you disagree with?

I don't disagree with anything of that GW's statement. But as I have said: some people actively try to find social injustice in everything, and call those who oppose them bigoted.