ARTICLE - EA, Sony, Xbox, Activision, Naughty Dog, Star Wars, Marvel, And More Call For End To Racism

Unless I missed something it appears that GameSPot does not want anyone commenting on this article. Surprise surprise, surprise. This is too important "political Posturing" to allow the plebeians (that us) to add their thoughts about the matter.

These companies don't care about racism regardless of what group is targeted. They are using the current political situation to try and score virtue signalling points. Anyone who actually cared about this would be trying to find a middle ground, not continue to flame the fires of anger and profit from that.

kid whip out the Virtual Reality LoL.

Just typical corporate virtue signaling.

Not a problem by me, but this struck me curious:

"Now is the time for all to do our part and end anti-Black racism and violence".

End "Anti-Black" racism. Huh. The implicit is pretty disgusting in this denotation when read between the lines. Is anti-black worse or to be held to higher merit than other forms of racism? Is it the only type that can exist?

@MirkoS77: It doesn't offend me but probably "institutional racism" should be used instead of black.

I think their usage was very deliberate.

Many so called "progressives" operate and push the narrative that racism against whites is impossible, as you cannot be racist against those who've held the reins of systematic and institutionalized oppression and who've defined particular power hierarchies in society. Which I find to be a load of utter garbage; it's nothing but jumping through intellectual hoola-hoops to justify that of which they profess to stand fiercely in opposition to.

These people want to have their cake and eat it to: they wish to be able to act racist against those who they view as who've oppressed them, yet while attempting to maintain the moral high ground while they do so by obfuscating the definition of racism in exercise of pseudo-intellectualism. Sorry, no. Racism is racism, it's a very simple definition. Historical context, power dynamics, and societal hierarchies do not validate one act of it more over the other.

If these so-called progressives actually gave a single **** about equality and progress instead of finding ways to justify retribution for a grave injustice by making every attempt to jump through hoops to excuse their chosen racism while standing vehemently opposed to another, perhaps we could move forward. These people are nothing but fucking hypocrites and cowards.

PR that's all it is.

Stuff like this makes me feel icky.

I don't doubt there are individuals at these companies that want to do some good, but as an entity this is nothing but shallow public relations.

I think you mistake progressives for liberals.

Progressive:

• I want to end racism. All racism.
• I want smart taxes. I think we need to spend the money we make better.
• I want smart gun control. I know people like to shoot and that's OK but they don't need an AK with 50-rd clip

Liberal:

• I want to end racism against black people, and we owe them so if they're angry and want to break stuff that is OK.
• Tax the rich to death, pay people to not work.
• Ban all guns.

Progressives want to do things the smart way, the way that lasts. It might take longer but it works better. A good chunk of progressives are liberal, it's true, but not all of us.

Liberals want it now, they don't really think about it.

CD Projeck Red is delaying their Night City Wire event to June 25th. I'm expecting other gaming events to get delayed too. This is just bogus. I was looking forward to these shows and now they are getting delayed. Yes, I'm really disappointed I've been waiting for this what feels like eons.

@MirkoS77: Ye, not really. By saying you are against racism towards black people, when a black person was murdered by a police and numbers show there's definitely a difference of treatment from the police toward black people it's not progressives ruining the world. It's not saying that other forms of racism are ok. Weird interpretation really.

And although racism is racism, institutional racism isn't quite the same since it's from there that comes the legal and institutional protection particularly important for minorities. Specially when historically there is indeed a dark past that still manifests nowadays. I mean, Trump it self was sued for racism towards blacks. Not for being generally racist for all non whites.

Would anything in that statement been lost had it excluded "anti-black" as a precursor? No. Furthermore, had you had a statement that said, ""Now is the time for all to do our part and end anti-White racism and violence", you would have people going apeshit, and rightly so.

Racism is racism, period, and for someone to make highlight of the race (even in a case specifically targeted against that race) is to address it only in the context of which the person doing so views it as ideologically repugnant. There's no "anti-black" racism, or "anti-white" racism. There is racism, and to draw distinction is dangerous and disgusting.

I have no problem with this myself. Trying to put an end to racism is a noble goal regardless if it’s motivated by PR and it’s not like doing things for PR reasons are inherently bad anyway.

@MirkoS77: It is dangerous I agree with that, only that for me the danger comes from people like you that in situations like this uses his voice against the victims. Same with TLoU2, in a situation where abuse was been thrown against gays, gamers and developers you choose to express how dangerous was the author own ideas. Same here, in the face of systemic racism against black people you are arguing semantics, that's the big issue for you.

And ye I know you are ready to be side by side with your black brothers, like you are ready to be side by side with gays if they behave exactly like you think they should.

Hell I think you might be showing your progressive agenda a bit too much. Why condemn racism at all. Let's go full PC and condemn police violence. Hell, violence is just violence it's dangerous to condemn just police violence.

I guess we won't agree on this either.

How am I using my voice against the victims? I stand by Floyd (and the peaceful protesters), and I stand against police brutality and for reform.

It is dangerous to believe that selective condemnation of certain racism is acceptable, and I've no idea how making that point means I'm speaking against the victims. That I take issue with this (unnecessary) distinction has nothing to do with them whatsoever. It is done so as to not undermine the term's potency as a collective toxic ideology (as you are doing). You are the danger, not me, and if you truly cared about the harm racism causes, you would make no attempt to defend distinguishment in its definition. Me pointing out and objecting to one isn't "arguing semantics", it's holding racism fully to account in all its repugnance in every sense of the term. Semantics are very relevant, as racism covers a very broad spectrum.

As for TLoU II, I doubt you can even articulate my position to me in detail, but I'd be amused to see the attempt.

@MirkoS77: sad part is some dont even grasp its wrong.

@MirkoS77: Yes you always have a line for the victims and then you proced to write 50 lines, and multiple posts, on your ideological concerns.

Same thing with TLoU2. Exactly.

BLM is a movement that centers around the very real issue of police brutality towards black people. A multi racial, multi cultural movement as you can see on the streets.

This might be a bit hard for you to understand but there are many different types of racism, that have to be addressed differently as it has different motivations and origins and as such demand diferent approaches. Because then I'll say it again, let's not even talk about racism as it deviates from the broader issue of police violence. Let's be really pc so that you and people right of you don't get offended and distracted.

Yes all lives matter, even blue lives matter. Unless you go to the very extreme end of the spectrum every one agrees. Except that when you, during the current events, choose to take offence with the particular of racism against blacks being mentioned when that literally is what happened, when that dominates you speech, then I'm sorry to say that, yes, imo you are a big part of the problem.

You literally enter Trump's "there's bad people on both side" logic. And just like with you right now, of course there's bad people on both sides, we all know that... But maybe address the person that was just murdered and condemn the rising far right violence?

Regarding your TLoU2 jab. There's nothing much to say, you said it there. You fully support gay rights, you are ready to go to the streets and march side by side with gays. Except if you think their ideas don't quite align with yours. Then your words of compassion are spent. It's more important to condemn the author for expressing personal opinions that are not yours, to allow fellow gamers to have the game spoiled for them and developers to be abused. Why? Because you really just want what's best for them.

There's really no point in continuing this. We'll disagree again on another topic.

No, I think we'll disagree in here thanks.

Making notation that one stands against "Anti-Black" racism does nothing to combat the specific instance it highlights, it is, as I said, only drawing dangerous lines between a toxic ideology. Saying "Anti-Black Racism" is akin to saying "Anti-Jewish Nazism". Can you fight against those factors that are exclusively leading to the destruction of the Jewish people during WWII? Sure, all the while the rest are left to burn under an abhorrent ideology who you've, congratulations, selectively chosen to address.

This may be a little bit hard for you to understand, but there are not different types of racism in the world, there are different types of victims of it. You may again lay accusations of semantics at my feet in saying that but the distinction is crucial. It's a world of difference to claim there's "anti-black" racism as opposed to claiming racism against blacks, as the former suggests the ideology somehow distinguishes itself in the tenets of its doctrine in specific application to the groups or individuals it persecutes. That is incredibly dangerous ground to tread, and it is what you, astonishingly, appear to be defending. Racism is an immutable ideology; one whose beliefs are absolute, wholly destructive, and that needs to be fought against equally in all of its manifestations. And further, that this is possible to do while still addressing the specific factors that differentiate one persecuted group over another while not simultaneously muddling the pool that racism draws from by claiming it "anti-black", "anti-white", "anti-yellow", or whathaveyou.

So yes, heaven forbid I sit here and take issue with ND's statement placing the individual group affected by racism above that which enables it. I operate on value hierarchies. My ardent opposition to racist ideology is valued in the collective over the specific one bringing it to bear. That does not mean I don't fight for the specific, much less that I'm "voicing myself against them", but it is to say I believe we need to target the broader problem in addition.

As for TLoU II, wrong as expected. You come off as extremely simplistic and binary in your thinking given what you wrote.

@firedrakes: sad part is some dont even grasp its wrong.

Not only sad, but frightening.

Indeed. All that needs to be said and I can't believe anyone is arguing this.

@MirkoS77: Was fully expecting you to continue the conversation while adding absolutely nothing. Just saying that I won't continue this conversation since it would be just me and you repeating the same arguments.

@phbz: as you've indicated, but you are the one who has contributed absolutely nothing aside strawmans and assumptions. Don't accuse me of enabling racism unless you are willing to back it up.

@MirkoS77: These are the same people who believe blacks cannot be racist.

@MirkoS77: ‘Many so called "progressives" operate and push the narrative that racism against whites is impossible‘

This is so incredibly dumb. Due to increased immigration in metropolitan areas where I live, I’m regularly the minority white person in shopping centres or work. People often speak another language in my presence. I don’t know if they’re talking about me or whatnot - I find it rude and uncomfortable to deliberately omit my existence. It feels like racism. I’m told racism doesn’t exist for white people that I’m supposed to suck it up, like I deserve it somehow due to oppression I have nothing to do with? Naw man. Racism exists across the board and singling out one type of racism while omitting the problem as a whole seems...racist?

Besides, why is this all the sudden an issue today anyway? Because a cop murdered a black guy? That sucks of course, but where’s the proof that was racially motivated? Confrontations, no matter what they are, between different races isn’t always racism. It’s racist to automatically assume so with no proof.

Or they are having a private conversation that has nothing to do with you.

There's a general underlying sentiment that's been building since 2016 and Trump's ascension. Whether it's true or not, people have construed his rhetoric, policies, and outlandish behavior as xenophobic and racist. This has placed a magnifying glass on every instance of police brutality and killing of minorities and has immediately framed them in the light of racist intent that many view as being tacitly approved and excused by an administration and president that has been, up to this point, inflammatory and far less than responsible in handling such volatile issues in his manner of leadership.

As for Floyd's death, it's impossible to determine whether something was racially motivated unless the one accused comes out and states their beliefs explicitly or wears them on their sleeves, as any multitude of factors could be attributed to his fate. I believe you can evidence racism, but not prove it unless explicitly demonstrated (in words or actions) by the one who subscribes to it. The accusations of racism that have caused such current widespread civil unrest are much larger than the specific instance that ignited it. This is largely an upheaval against a system people believe those in power are enabling and doing nothing so well as to make race relations in this country markedly worse, and is a perspective that I personally share.

Probably closed because half the comments would probably be deleted if it were open to be commented on.

I prefer articles to be open for comments from readers, but definitely see why a company chose to remove that option from some articles.

People you know? People you consider friends? Or are they strangers? Have you considered that if you travel abroad and speak English, you're potentially doing exactly the same as these folks?