Hello,
We now have a baguette, huh i mean french translation of the client available, and this is great for accessibility, so first of all i'd like to thank the people who worked on it for the time and the effort they dedicated to make it happen. For a lot of our french compatriots English is an obstacle, and every initiative that goes in the way of allowing more people to access, enjoy and participate in FAF games should be welcomed and encouraged.
I myself tried to advertise somewhat the game by posting french videos and tutorials on Youtube. I'm way too lazy to do it properly, but i am sensitive to this matter. So, again in the names of the non-english readers, thank you.
That being said...
I would like to address a complaint regarding the so-called "inclusive writing" that was used in the translation on the behalf of the french people that are attached to their mother-tongue, its long history and that aren't yet converted to
the glorious church of the SJW enlightenment. I know that we are horrible people who deserves to burn in hell for our reactionary worldview, but since we have a long tradition of debate and defense of our ideals i will honor it. Sarcasm is also a tradition here, so indulge me for it.
If you are not familiar with the concept of "inclusive writing", are curious and wonder what it looks like, jump to the end of point #5.
For english readers, i try my best to explain the french idioms and how inappropriate this is in the point #6.
However, i don't want to spawn a debate on the matter of this uprooted grammatical fallacy, the last point is just here to satisfy the curiosity of anyone interested in the subject.
So if you are interested in keeping FAF politically neutral, here are the main arguments i have to make :
1. It is an endorsement of a political ideology in the name of the FAF communitySo what's the biggest problem ? I'll go straight to the point : the "inclusive writing" is the grammatical equivalent of a
swastika or of
the hammer & the sickle. It's both a flag, a symbol, something you can't miss and a clear mark of belonging to an extremist ideology that is far from being neutral or spontaneous. It is an obvious reminder that you are no more in a politically neutral environment but rather in conquered territory.
The political affiliation of this grammatical thing is indisputably clear : it comes from the french extreme-left wing that is heavily influenced by american liberal ideas (what you call liberal we call it left). What Americans would call "Social Justice Warriors", or "Cultural Marxists" or "The Frankfurt School". So to anyone not sharing their radical political ideals (meaning almost everyone) and with some notion of it's origin, it is, like i said, the grammatical equivalent of seeing a communist or a nazi flag in the top-right corner of the client. It is, by no means, "neutral" in the context of politics.
To say it with other words : if you allow this to exist as the official translation, it means that the FAF community as a whole is endorsing the political ideals of the radical left and is choosing to display it to the face of the world as a mark of commitment. Since this wing of the radical left has a long tradition of religious-think, tribalism, totalitarianism and intolerance towards any differently-inclined political group this is not really a message of political neutrality you are sending to the world by enacting this kind of policy. If i were a muslim i would say it is the political equivalent of a caricature of the prophet.
I am not using those metaphors to manipulate or to exaggerate, i just want to be clearly understood by people that didn't studied political philosophy and are oblivious to the political context and the history of ideas of the last centuries. Don't take them too literally.
I personally think that community-driven video games should be indeed inclusive, and that to this end, they should by no means affiliates themselves with any kind of political or religious ideology, be it leftist, rightist, centrist, radical, moderate or anything else. I'm also pretty sure it is part of the community guidelines. So regardless of how people subjectively feel and of what can be objectively said regarding this matter, i think it [allowing the french translation to be written in "inclusive writing"] is an obvious direct violation of the community guidelines.
If it is not a violation of the community guidelines, then i suppose it's ok if my next nickname is "StalinDidNothingWrong" or "iLikeGulags".
And maybe after that "HitlerDidNothingWrong" or "iLikeGasChambers". And then nothing wrong either with "DeathToAllLeftists" or "AllahCanSuckMyCock", right ?
It's just good old political freedom.
Or maybe some people are more equals than others ?
Care to explain how it works if it is the case ? Thanks.
The fact that people dedicated their time to help with the translation doesn't allow them to let their personal political agenda interfere with it. If you think otherwise, i am sorry to tell you that you don't understand the concept of ethics and that you shouldn't be allowed to any position of power or decision-making.
If it came to happen in my own company on a marketing campaign or a product translation that an employee let his personal ideology interfere with the image of the company on a similar matter, i would fire the person responsible for it and the person in charge of overseeing the work being done for lack of common sense and inability to let their politics/religious views at home. A judge sentence shouldn't be influenced by his political inclination or the race/sex/religion of the offender. Only the law and the actions should count. It is the same thing. In the real world, a failure to abide to the principle of ethics is usually rewarded with a prohibition to practice your profession. Depending on the profession, the lack of sense of ethics is often seen as worse than the unethical actions by themselves. It means the person cannot be trusted with any kind of power or responsibility.
Doing the right/just thing is not the same as doing the "good" thing. The right/just thing depends on the social contract, while the good thing is a matter of personal moral, beliefs and worldview. This is easy to understand, but not for all. And it is way harder to be just than to be good, it's not for everyone. The higher you score on empathy, the more you are influenced by [subjective by definition] morality, the more importance you grant to feelings, the less you are likely to be just and impartial. It will create an internal conflict that is really intense, painful, and hard to overcome.
When "nice"or "feeling-driven" people are allowed to command, terrible things starts to happen.
3. It is not officially french, the official French Academy even called it "a barbarism"Almost every great french intellectual has spoken against it, except for a few that admitted it was part of a political agenda that they endorsed. We love our language so much here in France that we have an official independent institution called "The French Academy" (Académie Française) which was founded in 1635 and whose job is to be the official authority on the usages, vocabulary, and grammar of the French language. It's official letter of mission is
"to labor with all the care and diligence possible, to give exact rules to our language, to render it pure and eloquent and capable of treating the arts and sciences". In this regard, the members of the academy (which are called the immortals) decreed that the "inclusive writing" was a barbarism.
Here is a google-translated extract of the declaration of the Académie regarding the "inclusive writing" :
The multiplication of orthographic and syntactic marks that it induces leads to a disunited language, disparate in its expression, creating a confusion which borders on illegibility. It is difficult to see what the objective is and how it could overcome the practical obstacles of writing, reading - visual or aloud - and pronunciation. It would weigh on the task of the pedagogues. This would further complicate that of readers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A ... %C3%A7aisehttp://academie-francaise.fr/actualites ... -inclusivehttps://translate.google.fr/translate?s ... -inclusiveIt was also banned from all official documents by the french prime minister. Some would argue that this is the proof of a global patriarchal conspiracy but :
a) This is a paranoiac and unreasonable worldview.
b) What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
4. It is offensiveHere i will speak a language that even SJWs, empaths, and feelers with zero critical thought can relate to : "
muh feelings".
(i will emphasize progressive keywords and adopt their victimizing rhetoric so that they can understand)
As a form of entertainment and given the fact that it has a worldwide reach, FAF should be kept as a
safe space. A place where one can come to enjoy himself, spend a good time, make some friends, and to take refuge from the hassle of everyday life. A place where one can come without being constantly reminded of the political, economical, religious and ideological struggles of our epoch.
Even a sympathizer of the "inclusive writing" could agree on this point and be offended by it as a failure to neutrality, ethics and a violation of the community rules. You just need to free yourself from tribalism to be able to feel this way. I could cite Hannah Arendt as an example : being jewish didn't prevented her from being outraged by the way the Eichmann trial was conducted. Dare i say everyone should be inspired by her example and her dedication to the
Greater Good™ ?
Anyone sharing the ideals of
liberty and social justice will see any form of political endorsement as a
micro-aggression and will be
triggered every time he puts his eyes on a grammatical construct that is politically oriented instead of being the product of the natural language history.
In the same way, such an ideologically oriented deconstruction of our written language can be taken as a direct insult to our pluri-secular tradition of literature and excellence. This is a mark of
intolerance and bigotry towards the french culture.
This is clearly a mark of
ignorance and
frenchophobia, which is typical of the progressive
supremacists. They think that they are the center of the universe, that they are the moral aristocracy of this world and that any other culture is inferior to theirs and that anyone who disagrees should be educated or silenced. This is clearly
paternalism.
Also everyone knows that the rewriting of a language is the signature of the
fascist totalitarian regimes.
Haven't you read 1984 ? Go educate yourself, you ignorant.It is also
ableist because it can't be deciphered by screen readers and it confuses blind people. (ableist means discriminatory towards handicapped people for those of you who don't speak the
progressive fluently). I have a lot of blind friends that enjoy browsing the map vault, and this ruined it for them.
Ok enough with the sarcasms, but i meant every point except the last one.
I just wouldn't have used the victim rhetoric that is supposed to take your feelings in hostage and insta-make you a monster if you disagree.
Because it is the way of the weak.
The patronizing tone was just a reference to their debating style, i don't mean it.
5. It is ugly to the french eyeIn french the neutral is expressed with the masculine. While the feminine is discriminatory (it can only designate females and is exclusive to them).
Actually the official name is not even masculine or neutral but "non-marked genre", or "extensive genre" which is pretty much a synonym for "inclusive".
But the word "inclusive" is way more hyped and has been validated by the far-left to be used throughout the world as a sign of rally, so they ignored the traditional way of saying things. It is the last word
à la mode.
So if you want to say something like "all the customers left", you have 3 possible cases :
a) 100% of male customers
b) 100% of female customers
c) a mix of the twos
In the first and the last case, you will use the non-marked genre, but everyone calls it the masculine. It means a masculine pronoun doesn't tell you much about the gender of the customers despite being called that way, but it is logical since it is not the correct way of naming it.
But if 100% of the customers are female, you will use the feminine agreement which will then describe the situation accurately.
a) & c)
Tous les clients sont partis.b)
Toutes les clientes sont parties.(all the customers have left)
In the first case there is no way to tell if you are designating only male customers, or both male & female customers.
But in the second case you are 100% certain that you are talking of only female customers.
So one could argue the french language is granting a privilege to females because there isn't any grammatical construct that allows you to be certain in any situation that you are speaking of a group composed entirely of males. The "inclusive writing" does not fix this either. The masculine agreement is progressive and kind enough to allow females to be included. But it's ok, french males don't feel oppressed by the grammar. It could have made sense to add a pure masculine and a pure neutral grammar, like in German with the singular if my memory is correct, but that's not what is proposed.
Instead the "inclusive writing" version of this sentence would be :
Tous.tes les client.e.s sont parti.e.s.I wrote a quick text just for fun to illustrate how unsettling it can become in extreme cases :
Ce matin moi, et mes soeurs avons été déposé.e.s au travail. Tous.tes les employé.e.s sont arrivé.e.s à l'heure. Les premier.e.s client.e.s se sont pointé.e.s avant que les portes et les volets ne soient ouvert.e.s. C'étaient tout.e.s de vieux.vieilles grincheux.ses. Car ils.elles étaient tous.tes veuf.ve.s.
Here is the normal way of writing the same text :
Ce matin moi, et mes soeurs avons été déposés au travail. Tous les employés sont arrivés à l'heure. Les premiers clients se sont pointés avant que les portes et les volets ne soient ouverts. C'étaient tous de vieux grincheux. Car ils étaient tous veufs.
When i try to read the first version, i feel like i am mentally retarded. And i'm quite a good/fast reader...
Some will say :
« Taste is relative ».
To them i answer :
« "Taste is relative" is the excuse adopted by those eras that have bad taste. »See what i did ? I answered to a magical spell with another more powerful magical incantation !
I have another one :
« When a people no longer dares to defend their language, they are ready for slavery. »Wooosh ! Double power ! I am now immune to the 3 next spells casted by the enemy !
But seriously, it is ugly and unreadable, and it is a subversion.
6. Optional : some context regarding the french languageBut if you say something like
"a lot of persons are working on this project", you would write it as :
"Beaucoup de personnes travaillent sur ce projet".
And in such a case there is no way to add any information or transform this to be "inclusive" since
"personne" is already gender-neutral.
Maybe you are talking of only males, maybe only females, maybe a mix of males & females. Who knows ? Who cares ?
Also it ends with an
e which is considered by french progressists as a mark of a feminine word, even if it is not the case.
Only feminine agreements will (almost) always try to use the
e to mark the genre. For example for the word pretty it is
"joli / jolie".
But it only works for agreements. An "e" doesn't mean you are dealing with a female, far from it.
A lot of masculine words ends with an
e. Like : "un pygmée, un égoïste, un squelette, un capitaine..."
The masculines articles for
"a / the" are
"un / le" and the feminines are
"une / la".
Gender-neutral nouns like
"personne" are called "épicènes".
Member is one of them but it is a masculine word.
For example if you have some girl-only club, if you want to say
"all the feminine members of the club have left", you will write :
"Tous les membres féminins du club sont partis".
Despite the fact that you are talking about women, it would make absolutely no sense to add an "e" of agreement to the word
"partis" since
"membre" is a masculine word.
But if you say
"the women left" you will write :
"les femmes sont parties".
This is because :
"Le membre" (m), but
"La femme" (f). Also
"La personne" is feminine too, even if you use it to designate only males.
The inclusive writing doesn't help at all here. And everyone seems happy with the neutral, be it feminine or masculine.
The idea that adding a lot of
e's everywhere will somehow improve the condition of the female cashier that works in my local supermarket is a pure grammatical fallacy, a logical non-sense and wishful thinking at its best. Those people don't understand the basic rules of the french language, they just over-generalized a single rule and decided to destroy the non-marked gender,
for some reason. I suspect nihilism, but who knows what happens in a leftist mind, right ?
In this regard the "inclusive writing" does not add any precision or any information to the french language, it is just a way of uglifying the neutral / masculine construction and making it very painful to read.
If you really need to be gender-neutral, there is something that is already existing which is the use of the parenthesis.
In our previous example it would give :
Tout(e)s les client(e)s sont parti(e)s.It's not really pretty either, but it is far easier to read, it is officially accepted, everyone knows it and this is what is used on some documents, but rarely.
Only two examples come to my mind :
- On an official paper where you have to put your date of birth.
In french the document will say "Born : dd / mm / yyyy". And it will be written : "Né(e) le : dd/mm/yyyy".
In that case it makes some sense since it is a singular, and it should then be accorded correctly to the genre, but they can't know it beforehand.
This is actually for this particular case that the use of the parenthesis is really adapted : undetermined singular agreement.
But it is used only on a few official documents, almost no one uses it in real life.
- On a job offer description you could read something like "Vous êtes chargé(e) de l'accueil des clients" (You are responsible for the reception of customers).
One will use it to emphasize the fact that both males & females can apply, but only in this kind of special cases where there are strong state laws against discrimination, because France always has been a pioneer regarding those matters, especially in the context of job applications.
You will notice that no parenthesis are used on the word "clients" (customers), because in that case it is pretty obvious what the neutral means (customers come in all sort of genders, colors and shapes).
Thanks to the feminist / egalitarian ideology this has already changed however. For example instead of hearing
"Bienvenue à tous les clients" (Welcome to all customers), you will almost always hear now :
"Bienvenue à toutes les clientes et à tous les clients". People go to the length of adding words, and will almost always put the feminine first, as a mark of
Galanterie, unless it really has a bad tone to it (harmony is important as well).
It's the same thing as replacing the word "mankind" with "man-and-female-kind". By the way, some of you will maybe have heard the proposal/"joke" of the Canadian prime minister to replace the word
mankind by the word :
peoplekind. Well, they share the same school of thought, so no surprise here.
Some linguists would argue that the natural evolution of a language tends towards simplification and that such a construct is un-natural and must be the fruit of an external stimuli of some sort but that's not the point.
In the same line of thought a lot of job names whose nouns that are
invariables were forcefully feminized despite the fact that it is grammatically incorrect. For example the french word for "Author" is "Auteur". You cannot add an
e after a
r to mark the feminine agreement, it is against all french grammar rules to do this after an
r. The correct way to feminize a word ending by "eur" is to replace the end with "euse" or by "trice". For example for "
a theft" you would say : "
un voleur / une voleuse". But for a (male/female) professor it will be : "instituteur / institutrice". But a lot of words ending with an "r" are épicènes / gender-neutrals and can't be finished with
"euse" or
"trice", it is just to unaesthetic and vocally unpleasant. You have to be highly familiar with the french language to understand the aesthetic aspects i suppose.
Unfortunately for our feminists friends, a lot of job names in french ends with an
"r" ! And as everyone knows
"Arbeit macht Frei" so it is really important to feminize those job titles.
So after decades of struggle and unbearable patriarchal oppression, it has become somewhat tolerated to add an
e after some words like "Auteur">"Auteure", "Professeur">"Professeure" to avoid conflicts with some feminists. L'académie française allowed this in february 2019, despite the fact that all the french teacher i know (males or females, all left-wing
—there is no such thing as a right wing teacher in France—) are against the addition of the
e after an
r, the fact that the "e" doesn't change the oral pronunciation, the fact that the article is already genred (a male writer = un auteur / a female writer = une auteur), and the fact that it is against all grammatical rules.
Also, some words like "Architecte" or "Journaliste" just can't be gender-specific, because they already have an
e to the end and that some people thinks it has something to do with the feminine gender. No one proposed a masculine-only term for those épicènes words despite the fact that
"feminism is about equality", but i shouldn't say it out to loud, they could get some crazy ideas. Removing the "e" at the end of those words would be very "unfrench", even worse than adding an "e" after an "r". Also like i said an "e" at the end of a word is "silent", or "muted". When you say the word orally, it doesn't change anything, so it is kinda pointless.
It's the same thing for the inclusive writing that can't be read as-is orally because it is just way too ridiculous and painful to hear, it sounds like you are mentally retarded. Some of you must be familiar with the idea that intellectually limited kids/people are reading "in their minds" almost the same way as they are reading out loud. I didn't studied the subject, but i suspect that for them it will be a pain in the butt to read at a decent speed the kind of text that i wrote and mentally replacing on-the-fly all the weird stuff and dots with something else that makes sense.
A lot of people in this country already have a really hard time learning how to speak, read or write the language without wrecking the spelling, for them this is clearly not a progress. I can't tell you how much my eyes are crying when i read social/forum posts or comments online, no one knows how to spell anything correctly or use grammar. Sometimes i even see the same word spelled in two different ways, both equally incorrect, in the same paragraph (just pick one, you crazy bastard). The whole country is regressing really fast regarding spelling, and this will not help kids to learn, neither will it help the french women to get better salaries or anything substantial on the politico-social aspect.
This kind of societal push is typical of the bored bourgeoisie with a political agenda, this is merely a distraction from the tough issues which are the social ones (proletariat), not the societal ones. The women that participated to the Gilets Jaunes protests don't really care about "inclusive writing", they care about feeding their family and direct democracy. Anyway this is debatable and i don't want to spawn this kind of debate here.
So when you launch the client and next to a map you can read :
"Auteur.e inconnu.e" (unknown author) you are facing a
hardcore combo of barbarisms.
The correct and gender neutral way of writing it, is :
"Auteur inconnu(e)" but it would be WAY more common to just see
"Auteur inconnu" by using the non-marked gender. Using the (e) would already be unusual. You never ever see "L'auteur du livre est inconnu(e)" written anywhere, be it in Wikipedia, in the press or else.
"Auteur inconnu" on Google gives
705,000 results.
"Auteur inconnu(e)" gives
924 results.
"Auteur(e) inconnu(e)" gives
7,000 results.
So the first way is about
88 times more common than the parenthesis way.
TL;DR- The choice of the dots instead of the parenthesis is the irrefutable proof that the people behind this choice care more about pushing their ideology than being readable, accessible, inclusive and gender-neutral. Those are just fancy-words they are using to have the moral high-ground.
- This non-sense should be removed from the client and disallowed in any future translation, be it in french or in any other language.
- The people behind it can't be trusted to put their personal feelings aside in deontological matters.
- This is dumb, ugly, unreadable, politically oriented, and it gives a bad / poor image of the FAF community to the french people.
- This is insulting towards french readers that are not SJW. So probably 95% of them considering the sociology of this game and the typical jungian psychological profile of players. (introverted thinkers)
Also on a side note i'm not sure a single female ever made a map for the game xD, but i could be wrong on this and this is another debate. And this writing is applicable to all kinds of texts, not only the one about the map authors.
(no need to explain that as long as you don't intend to use them you shouldn't feel offended by my answers to them, since those answers are addressed to a straw-man)
1) "When it is for the Greater Good™ and the camp of the Good™, politics is allowed to meddle in everyone's life"
> Failure to understand that morality is subjective
> Failure to understand the concept of totalitarianism
2) "I did nothing wrong"
> Meaning you don't understand ethics
> You are fleeing your responsibilities when you make a mistake
> But you are over zealous as long as you are on the right side of the hammer
3) "The academy is a bunch of reactionary old white males that says stupid things, and the state is evil so you shouldn't listen to them"
> So racism and discrimination on the basis of the age is allowed now ?
> 12,5% of the members are women i suppose they have been brainwashed ?
> You have been touched with the divine grace or have extensively studied the semantics and origins of the french language for 50 years i suppose to allow yourself to think you are more educated, more intelligent and that your opinion is more representative of the french people as a whole than the one of the 40 immortals. Care to explain how it works ? By the same logic i suppose i could say the scientific consensus about global warming is stupid.
> The fact that the Academy might have been wrong on the past regarding an unrelated topic [which still needs to be proven and argued] doesn't necessarily make them wrong on this. Or i could just find a single point on which your philosophical school of thought has been wrong in the past to entirely dismiss it until the end of times. And believe me it would be VERY EASY.
> The state is oppressive when you disagree with it but you seem to love it when it is enacting your policies. Actually most of your societal requests depends on the very existence of a state with the monopoly of violence to enact them. This what is called "variable geometry moral".
> The state is what is preventing me from buying a gun, killing all of your family and raping everyone to death (including your dog, i'am pan-sexual) before i loot your corpses and use them as fertilizer to grow delicious fruits, so you should be thankful. Remember that lefties are pacifists and non-armed.
> Actually the idea that the state is inherently evil is so childish and stupid that i won't debate it seriously. Also i don't think in terms of "good" or "bad" i'm not a small kid.
4) "Muh, male/conservationist tears"
> You are dehumanizing people with a different line of thought and that are not sharing your ideology. This is the very definition of ultra-archaic tribalism and primitive religiosity. This is not a societal progress this is a civilizational regression of several thousands of years.
> Dehumanizing people is the last step before enabling a "moral genocide".
> It's your school of thought that puts feelings and "morality" above all else, not mine, i'm just speaking a language you can understand.
> If the feelings of some people are important (banning people because they use the gay word) and the feelings of others can be mocked on the base of their sexual orientation or political beliefs, then you are the exact thing you are pretending to be fighting, and again "some are more equal than others".
> Conservatism starts from the sentiment that good things are easily destroyed, but not easily created. Good things like, the french language or the peculiar sense of camaraderie in the FAF community that moderators are slowly destroying in the name of the God of political correctness. (yes i am well aware that you call camaraderie "oppressive humor" and that every time someone uses the word "gay" a flower instantly dies somewhere on the planet)
5) "I think it is beautiful and readable"
> Its your opinion, not mine, and not the one of the dozens of politically neutral people whom opinion i have asked about the matter.
> Most of the french press is heavily leftist (not a secret or anything) and is not representative of the country's opinion so you can't use it as an argument
> The language we all learnt to read and write in school is easier to read, faster to write and universally understood by the french. You love universal stuff right ? Ain't it more inclusive to rely on it ?
6) "French language is oppressive of women, blah, blah, blah"
> Just sh*t the f*ck up
> Never in my whole life have i ever encountered a normal woman that had so few problems in her life that she had the luxury to feel oppressed by the fact that extensive gender is the same as the masculine and that the gender of the discrimination is the feminine (meaning that the feminine plural pronoun is precise about what it designates). You should be thankful for your happy life instead of trying to ruin the one of others. If you don't have any problems, don't invent some fake ones. I know it helps you to feel alive to fight an imaginary enemy, but you could also try outdoor activities, gardening or reading some philosophy.
> In Germany it is the other way around : the plural is the feminine (Sie) instead of the masculine. It doesn't prevent the radical left people from Germany to try to push a similar agenda, despite the fact that the situation is a perfect mirror from the french one.
> Care to explain precisely by which mechanisms injecting this "inclusive writing" in FAF will help the homeless and poor women of my country ? I'd love to hear it, i'm sure of it. I am a simple human, I always like to laugh and i genuinely enjoy hearing about SJW sophisms, syllogisms and magical thinking.
> Just admit you are incapable of rational and critical thinking, that you don't have your own thoughts, and that your ideology comes in a "pre-made-kit-for-the-children" which is to political philosophy what McDonald's is to gastronomy. Leftism is a package and either you endorse it all, either you are a fascist that deserves to burn in hell. That's why people call you NPCs, you don't have original thoughts, you behave like a hive. As long as you behave yourself like a pest, you will be treated like a pest.
Bonus) "You have a reactionary political agenda"
> Accusatory reversal. I think you call it DARVO in english.
> If you consider that not having an ultra-leftist political agenda is a political agenda, then you live in a simplistic world comprising of : "one paranoid good tribe VS the rest of the evil world". A lot of people adopted this archaic over-simplistic line of thinking in the course of history, and it doesn't usually end well for them.
> Keeping things the way they were is not an agenda, its just called continuity, normality, transmission...
I'm truly sorry, i don't respect SJW NPCs enough to pretend to be respectful and polite, so i'm arrogant and patronizing, but at least i guess that makes us something in common. I just despise totalitarianism and people that can't think by themselves, you can hate me for it if you want or if it helps you to strengthen your convictions, it's ok : i don't care about what people like you think i just do my own things.
I wish everyone a wonderful day full of exciting drama
