Turn out, partial ownership by chinese company is not a good thing...

[Kwak]

So is this another one of those instances where having something be politics-free (like it says in the terms of that HS tournament) is just another way of saying you support the Chinese government or some other oppressor?

There's no conflict.
Supporting demonstrating for democratic representation is political; supporting the wishes of an oppressive force that is a significant contributor to your market value is capitalism.

Yup. Capitalism is about making money. If the money's in a repressive, non-democratic regime, that regime's values are the ones that capitalism will support.

Did I propose a conflict? I assume your replies are a "yes" to my question. I guess even hoping for a politic-free environment in esports (or the Eurovision for example) supports oppressive actors of a given issue. I ask about this because I really don't want politics into my silly pastimes, and if the trend is to root for them who break these no-politics rules then I will leave the audience. I humbly think that I'm perfectly able to divide my time between politicizing and not.

Your comment suggested a hypocrisy in a stated 'politics free' value vs a seemingly political action. There are no politics (in this context 'moral values') where money is concerned.

 

[mavkiel]

Really wish there was a way of slapping the wrist of companies that bow to the CCP. I suppose we are left with only boycotts. And mocking these companies, such that the CEO's and the like might realize they will become a social pariahs.

So... the solution is to act exactly like China

Way to jump to extremes. Heaven forbid if you thought of a moderate position of, if you want to operate in the US, you have to maintain us standards of free speech. Instead it's I must want to jail them and harvest their organs

 

[McElroy]

Your comment suggested a hypocrisy in a stated 'politics free' value vs a seemingly political action. There are no politics (in this context 'moral values') where money is concerned.

Blizzard enforced the no-politics rule which we can only assume would apply equally should somebody promote the CCP in a similar fashion. If money is on the side of the oppressive Chinese government, shouldn't there just be a "no politics... against our benefactors the Chinese"? OR was that the purpose of the rule from the beginning? Like, do no-politics rules automatically serve those who want no attention to their misdeeds, and thus if political criticism isn't a concern (because your money situation isn't affected by it), we wouldn't be coming up with those rules and much less enforcing them?

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

I don't think partial ownership by a Chinese company is needed for this effect. Companies are trying to break into the huge, Chinese market and the Chinese Communist Party blocks even for portraying anything they don't like. Don't, for example, show Taiwan in a country selection list on a website. Don't need Chinese shareholders to be fired by the board for losing access to a huge market.

This.

This is one of many downsides of global capitalism. If a big market is willing to ban you unless you toe the line, you have to toe the line because otherwise your sharedholders will go "How dare you leave money on the table, you're fired and replaced with someone who will go get that money".

Typing "Winnie the Pooh" in Overwatch's text chat can get you banned from the game.

jesus...Their leader might even be more thin-skinned than trump.

 

[Silent Protagonist]

At the very least it has been amusing to watch communists try to use these stories as how horrible capitalism is because they are willing to do business with a communist nation

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

At the very least it has been amusing to watch communists try to use these stories of how horrible capitalism is because they are willing to do business with a communist nation

China is about as communist as North Korea is a democractic people's republic.

Yeah, China's government has communist in the name, but it you look at the way they do business, it's anything but. They leverage markets and business in ways that would make even a libertarian blush.

note: None of this is excusing communism, mind you. It's still a failed ideology that inevitably opens the door wide to totalitarian rule.

 

[Silent Protagonist]

At the very least it has been amusing to watch communists try to use these stories of how horrible capitalism is because they are willing to do business with a communist nation

China is about as communist as North Korea is a democractic people's republic.

Yeah, China's government has communist in the name, but it you look at the way they do business, it's anything but. They leverage markets and business in ways that would make even a libertarian blush.

note: None of this is excusing communism, mind you. It's still a failed ideology that inevitably opens the door wide to totalitarian rule.

That's what is always struggling to explain to people. Modern China does not live up to the ideals of theoretical communism, but is very much the natural product of attempting to put the ideals of communism into practice in the real world. The only way China is the exception to typical communist regimes in the real world is that its oppressive totalitarian rule has managed to stay stable rather than collapsing in on itself. Communism is like when a competitive game has a game breaking exploit unintentionally built into the mechanics. Sure the devs didn't intend for the mechanics to be used that way, but it will absolutely be used that way by assholes looking to be on top no matter what others think and those assholes will always exist

 

[Scarytown_v1legacy]

I get why Blizzard did this (China somehow keeping the Warcraft movie afloat is testament to how much they like Blizzard products), but it is concerning how hard they tried to erase the existence of anything that had to do with the incident. It's pretty much exactly how the Government would have reacted (minus the political executions, organ harvesting, etc).

But on the other hand I can't help feel a lot of us (myself included) are hypocrites to the situation as we continually benefit off of cheap Chinese products. So protesting China's government ends up being pretty hollow if we are waiting in line to buy the new Iphone 11. I want to say we need to rip off the bandage pressure companies to cut ties with China, but then you get into the whole situation on how that would affect everything from software workers to farmers here in America. Overall it's just a really complex and shitty situation.

 

[Agema]

Did I propose a conflict? I assume your replies are a "yes" to my question. I guess even hoping for a politic-free environment in esports (or the Eurovision for example) supports oppressive actors of a given issue. I ask about this because I really don't want politics into my silly pastimes, and if the trend is to root for them who break these no-politics rules then I will leave the audience. I humbly think that I'm perfectly able to divide my time between politicizing and not.

I wouldn't make the assumption that someone who doesn't want politics in their game supports oppressive regimes.

However, nor is it necessarily a problem-free issue. We might imagine that political comments were okay in online games up until the point where the game market expanded into a country which frowned upon it. However, due to the nature of global online gaming, that means they have shut down political comment in numerous countries in case it offends one country. I'm rather less comfortable with banning the Vietnamese, Australians or whoever from political comment just because China doesn't like it. This is a chilling effect on political discourse spreading unnecessarily from one country to others.

Although more specifically, my comment is more directed at the general amorality of corporations. What's a little totalitarian oppression and facilitating its cultual spread elsewhere when there's $$$ to be made? And shouldn't we perhaps think about resisting it?

 

[CaitSeith]

It happened in the Hong Kong tournament. So, we can assume there was pressure from the Chinese government to do this (instead of just Tencent being bossy).

In the Taiwan tournament, not the HK tournament.

OK, but Taipei is still under control of the Republic of China, so it applies the same.

 

[Worgen]

At the very least it has been amusing to watch communists try to use these stories of how horrible capitalism is because they are willing to do business with a communist nation

China is about as communist as North Korea is a democractic people's republic.

Yeah, China's government has communist in the name, but it you look at the way they do business, it's anything but. They leverage markets and business in ways that would make even a libertarian blush.

note: None of this is excusing communism, mind you. It's still a failed ideology that inevitably opens the door wide to totalitarian rule.

Is it a failed ideology that inevitably leads to totalitarian rule? I mean couldn't pretty much any economic system do the same, in capitalism if you have unchecked capitalism then its not hard for the big to become huge and kinda take over everything.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

So apparently the new thing is to get one of the Overwatch characters to be a symbol of the protest and get Overwatch banned in China. That's pretty great in my opinion.

 

[Trunkage]

I get why Blizzard did this (China somehow keeping the Warcraft movie afloat is testament to how much they like Blizzard products), but it is concerning how hard they tried to erase the existence of anything that had to do with the incident. It's pretty much exactly how the Government would have reacted (minus the political executions, organ harvesting, etc).

But on the other hand I can't help feel a lot of us (myself included) are hypocrites to the situation as we continually benefit off of cheap Chinese products. So protesting China's government ends up being pretty hollow if we are waiting in line to buy the new Iphone 11. I want to say we need to rip off the bandage pressure companies to cut ties with China, but then you get into the whole situation on how that would affect everything from software workers to farmers here in America. Overall it's just a really complex and shitty situation.

I would add that I think China has been far more aggressive since Trump's trade war started. I think they at least pretend to tow the line. With them being attacked no matter what they do, they just do what they want.

 

[IceForce]

https://www.polygon.com/2019/10/9/20906320/overwatch-mei-blizzard-hong-kong-protest-banned-memes

Pretty funny, turning Overwatch's only Chinese character into a HK protest symbol. Blizzard can't be too happy about that.

 

[CaitSeith]

https://www.polygon.com/2019/10/9/20906320/overwatch-mei-blizzard-hong-kong-protest-banned-memes

Pretty funny, turning Overwatch's only Chinese character into a HK protest symbol. Blizzard can't be too happy about that.

Well, oops! That's what happens when you pull out a "support the authoritarian regime" move; not that they had much of a choice. It's kinda pitiful seeing Blizzard's situation. It's like making a deal with the devil, and when the devil comes to collect the payment, it involves being put between a rock and a hard place.

 

[Silent Protagonist]

Is it a failed ideology that inevitably leads to totalitarian rule? I mean couldn't pretty much any economic system do the same, in capitalism if you have unchecked capitalism then its not hard for the big to become huge and kinda take over everything.

The difference is between theory and practice. In theory capitalism could be as bad as communism is in practice, but it is rare for that to happen in practice because capitalism is almost never completely unchecked. This isn't because capitalism is inherently good or immune to corruption or anything, but because certain checks and regulations are often times in the best interest of the assholes. It is sort of like the real phenomenon of a crab bucket where in a crab could escape the bucket it is placed in if it weren't for all the other crabs that pull them down when they try in an attempt to get better footing by stepping on each other to escape themselves. If we take escaping the bucket to mean "become a totalitarian regime" capitalism has a bunch of different crabs getting in each other's way with their own self interests and preventing any one entity from "escaping the bucket", where as communism only has one crab so when it wants to "escape the bucket" there is very little stopping it. Now in theory the one crab might just decide to stay in the bucket but we know in practice that will not happen because power hungry assholes will always exist.

This metaphor got weird. Why do I ever try to convey ideas through metaphors? It always gets weird and almost never gets the actual point across. Well at the very least I can leave people with the mental image of crab people dressed up as dictators or in business suits.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

This metaphor got weird. Why do I ever try to convey ideas through metaphors? It always gets weird and almost never gets the actual point across. Well at the very least I can leave people with the mental image of crab people dressed up as dictators or in business suits.

Sounds like a good post for the shower thoughts thread.

 

[Silent Protagonist]

This metaphor got weird. Why do I ever try to convey ideas through metaphors? It always gets weird and almost never gets the actual point across. Well at the very least I can leave people with the mental image of crab people dressed up as dictators or in business suits.

Sounds like a good post for the shower thoughts thread.

Now I'm picturing the crab people taking showers. Thanks brain, you somehow took the journey from "Corporation faces backlash for attempting to appease an oppressive Communist Regime" to "Crab people taking showers"

 

[Worgen]

Is it a failed ideology that inevitably leads to totalitarian rule? I mean couldn't pretty much any economic system do the same, in capitalism if you have unchecked capitalism then its not hard for the big to become huge and kinda take over everything.

The difference is between theory and practice. In theory capitalism could be as bad as communism is in practice, but it is rare for that to happen in practice because capitalism is almost never completely unchecked. This isn't because capitalism is inherently good or immune to corruption or anything, but because certain checks and regulations are often times in the best interest of the assholes. It is sort of like the real phenomenon of a crab bucket where in a crab could escape the bucket it is placed in if it weren't for all the other crabs that pull them down when they try in an attempt to get better footing by stepping on each other to escape themselves. If we take escaping the bucket to mean "become a totalitarian regime" capitalism has a bunch of different crabs getting in each other's way with their own self interests and preventing any one entity from "escaping the bucket", where as communism only has one crab so when it wants to "escape the bucket" there is very little stopping it. Now in theory the one crab might just decide to stay in the bucket but we know in practice that will not happen because power hungry assholes will always exist.

This metaphor got weird. Why do I ever try to convey ideas through metaphors? It always gets weird and almost never gets the actual point across. Well at the very least I can leave people with the mental image of crab people dressed up as dictators or in business suits.

Ehh, its not a great metaphor for the situation either. I mean, what if some crabs just eat the other ones and get too big for the bucket? Which we do see, I mean it does seem like it would take a capitalist system longer to become totalitarian but it also seems like its just as inevitable. We are already seeing the consolidation of businesses, look at the disney/fox merger, not to mention something like amazon, which is just kinda devouring the concept of stores. I'm still not convinced that a totalitarian regime is really that much more likely under communism then capitalism. I think the problem with a lot of communist governments is they are authoritarian, which we also see under capitalism and its pretty bad with either economic system. I mean, it might be easier under communism but I don't think its any more inevitable.

 

[Agema]

The difference is between theory and practice. In theory capitalism could be as bad as communism is in practice, but it is rare for that to happen in practice because capitalism is almost never completely unchecked.

What do you mean "in theory"? It has been as bad as Communism in practice, and not that rarely.[footnote]Mind you, technically, capitalism and Communism (at least as practiced in the Eastern bloc) is not entirely an equal comparison. Capitalism is an economic system, where Communism involves both a political and economic system.[/footnote]

Do you think Nazi Germany, for instance, ended capitalism? It surely didn't. It simply co-opted it into the service of the state. Capitalists in Nazi Germany still owned their companies and raked in massive profits, and many of these companies (e.g. Bayer, Porsche/Volkswagen) survived the downfall of the regime healthy enough to become leading global companies. Likewise have many tyrannical states made happy use of capitalism, and your average multinational is sure to operate in plenty of vile regimes, often feeling happy to bribe and co-operate with said regimes to ensure smooth business.