As anyone who has played a computer game will know, not all NPCs are alike. The game designers create different types of NPCs, programmed in different ways to say different things to the PCs. The NPC meme is very apt, as it's possible to see the different types of NPCs in today's world. For example:
-
There are those NPCs programmed to 'abide by the narrative'. These NPCs will take talking points from the media, and repeatedly regurgitate these verbatim to those around.
-
On the other hand, there are NPCs also programmed to respond in a certain way to various events. These NPCs will take talking points from the media or external world, and repeatedly regurgitate certain predictable responses to these events. For example, a game designer might make a decision to include a samurai who is not Japanese in their game. NPCs which fit this category will all respond in the same way, by repeatedly pointing out how the game designer was wrong to do this.
The curious thing about second category of NPC is they are programmed to believe they are thinking independently because they are opposing the first group of NPCs, yet their responses are still largely determined by the external events and very predictable. In other words, they can be baited to all respond in the same way so are not actually thinking independently. These NPCs seem to lack the critical thinking or discipline to avoid responding predictably to various stimuli, for example, by choosing to ignore the bait they are given in favor of making their own rational and conscious decisions about what to think and talk about. I blame this on the success of propaganda and loss of impulse control and decline of intellectual discipline as a male virtue, but others may have their theories.
If you feel compelled to overanalyse a meme, I'd imagine the more meaningful takeaway would be that the conditioning, triggers and events have a designer.
Meme or not, it's a useful analogy.
God provided us with free will, regardless of any human weaknesses we might have. How we use it is up to us.
Sure. And acknowledging there are concerted, non-random efforts to exploit those towards a specific outcome is a great place to start. However, over-intellectualising issues isn't helpful, especially when your rational decision is to do nothing, indefinitely.
You reference Ubisoft's latest DEI blunder. Please explain how inaction is "rationally" the better course in this instance?
For example, one could ignore the black samurai and talk about actual samurai. Build your own ideas and have your own debates. Not devote your focus on the enemies content and having the debates that your enemies want you to have.
Except a lie unchallenged quickly becomes the truth, and a society's perception of truth influences the nature of all future ideas and debates.
The backlash has discredited the notion of a black samurai, one that has been appearing in media with increasing regularity, for many unfamiliar with the surrounding history. For those, it has also drawn attention to the media's gaslighting, and further reinforced a desire to financially punish companies pushing such propaganda.
I don't believe the intention was ever debate; Rather the normalisation of black individuals/characters in the context of Japanese culture. Your proposal, in this context, is exactly how that succeeds.
I think you overestimate peoples investment. It has become a subject of passing ridicule. I think you oversimplify the issue to "engagement is bad". Ridicule and disdain can and have been used to immunize collectives against "harmful" ideas.
I appreciate where you are coming from, and there are instances where I'd agree. Where to engage in debate is to cede ground. This just isn't one of them.
Is this some kind of meta-bait? I'll nibble a bit.
It's normal to reinforce reality when reality is challenged. When someone says something that is incorrect, it is completely understandable why someone would want to correct them. One may well call any reaction at all to be "NPC" at that point. The word loses its meaning.
How do you determine the "non-NPC" response to someone who is saying something false, and especially when it is verifiably false? This just seems like post-modernist deconstruction of being allowed to respond to certain kinds of statements. Is any response whatsoever "NPC?" That would be ridiculous. Am I supposed to be insulting and mocking? That won't sway anyone in an argument, and demonstrating how stupid and unpopular an idea is is necessary when trying to find the best ones. Simply responding with "faggot" is fun, and funny, but not productive.
I cannot see this post as anything other than the "you're just as bad as them" that we get from Leftists and normies every time we have to try to reassert reality in the face of their insanity. It's not NPC to say that men are men, women are women. It's not NPC to say that third-worlders cannot function in the first world. It's not NPC to say that Real Communism has been tried, and it cost tens of millions of lives, and somehow some people have not learned this lesson from history.
I thought it was pretty obvious that I was calling many people here NPCs because of the completely predictable way they were responding to the black samurai being in Assasin's Creed (5+ posts at the top level in the last 24 hours or so). I suspect most people knew what I was doing and didn't like it (unsurprisingly). But, regardless, the real reason I posted it was to encourage people to think about what they are doing instead of responding instinctively based on simplistic emotional reasoning.
No. An "NPC" reaction would be one that is based on simplistic or instinctive reasoning, instead of one based on actual thinking about the best way to respond to something. Responding to bait is a clear example of this. Sure there might be good reasons to respond to something, but my point is that propaganda is far more insidious than most people realize. Propaganda is often set up so that the propagandist wins either way - accept the propaganda as true, and they win. Try to prove the propaganda wrong, and they also win. The reason is both responses allow the propagandist to set the terms for what is being debated. I am trying to encourage people to think more about what they are doing, and how they are being lead and herded, instead of just reacting all the time.
One of the biggest powers of the media of all forms that is underappreciated is that they choose the topics that are being talked about. In doing so they still get to define the terms of the debate. Case in point - everyone here is talking about a black samurai. The game designers have succeeded in making plenty of people here start to talk about black samurais even though black samurais never existed. If a fictional black samurai is not something that people here are interested in, isn't it a bit strange that so many people here talking about it?
It's possible to outsmart propaganda, but it requires rational thinking and discipline. Such as training oneself not to be baited into responding instinctively to obvious propaganda.
If someone can predict how a defined group of people are going to respond with a high degree of certainty then those people are acting like NPCs because they are responding instinctively, not intellectually. Of course, it's simply an analogy to make a point though, there is no definite NPC response vs non-NPC response.
In any case, you are still thinking inside the box in that the best thing to do is to respond in some way. Maybe the best thing to do is to ignore it?
We are talking about the black samurai because it is yet another facet of the rewriting of history that so defines the Left today. It is a necessary discussion piece because it's the most recent apparition of this behavior. It doesn't matter how small it is, it matters that they're doing it at all. Given how extremely negative the response has been, evidenced by large numbers of downvotes on the varying trailers across multiple languages (especially Japanese), this shows that the propaganda is being rejected. The game is being contaminated with "more SBI woke garbage" in the discussion, and this will tank the sales of the product. This damages the reputation of "consultancy firms" which will invariably include the usual DIE policies which have infected virtually all of our recent media. Tarnishing the idea and acceptance of DIE values is a worthy endeavor in our fight against it.
I think you've dove too deeply into analyzing whether or not merely responding to an action is an advantage to them. There's "the only wining move is not to play," and then there's "do nothing as your world is ransacked around you by barbarian hordes." I shouldn't require psychological training before I respond to Leftist propaganda, and labeling any insult or criticism I level against it as an emotional response seems dismissive. It's exactly what the Progressives would accuse me of doing to imply that my reaction is not well founded or reasonable.
No, because this sounds too much like "just let them win, leave them alone, why do you care so much?" I'll fight every bit of the way because inaction and apathy is death; death of my country, death of my culture, death of my future.
No. I stand by my view. Allowing your enemies to set the terms of your actions means that they are likely still in control of the situation. You talk about "rejection of propaganda" but I see no such thing. Sure, perhaps fewer people will buy the new Assassin's Creed, but people are still talking about what Ubisoft wanted people to talk about - a black samurai. And in doing so, you have given them far more power over you than they deserve.
My point was for people to own their own debates, own their own culture, talk about what they want to talk about. Is it samurai? Great, talk about samurai then, but there is no need to talk about a black samurai who never existed when there are a vast number of actual samurai to talk about.
Still, you are "fighting" on their terms. The best way to fight death is to create life, like I said. Built your own content. Develop your own ideas. Care about your culture and future? Build communities you want embodying this culture you love, build your own future using your own values. Stop focusing on fighting "enemies" when they have designed the situation so that they also win by you fighting them.
There are three kind of people. Those who could always see, those who can see when they are told and those who can't see