Star Trek vs. Star Wars (and a collection of memes)

Then consider yourself fortunate that I am here to break it down and simplify it.

You're correct that the four terms are not equivalent (only two of them are, with third being very very closely tied to the other two), but they don't have to be. They all accurately describe the current Disney Star Wars train.

For example, I could be described as...

• the guy who has a woodworking blog
  
• the guy who loves creating polls
• the meme guy
• the most prevalent poster

Note that all four of those accurately apply even though they are not equivalent statements. So I could be described as the woodworking/poll/meme/posting guy. Sure, it would be more appropriate to use commas instead of the forward slash, but I figured we would all be able to follow along.


Now back to our leftist/SJW/NPC/snowflake example.

• a Leftist is simply a person with left-wing political views. This is the most benign of the four. In fact, I'd argue that a country needs voices from both the left and the right to thrive. Although the left (in the USA) is becoming increasingly radical (ultra-progressive), there are still a large majority of moderate left thinking people who could not be accurately lumped in with the SJW/NPC crowd. So while all (or most) SJW's are leftists, not all leftists are SJWs. My personal political views are comprised of an amalgamation of moderate left and moderate right ideas.
• The term Social Justice Warriors has increasingly become a derogatory insult used to describe people that are constantly offended by everything and continually see the world in an extremely negative light. According to this group everything and everyone is racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, xenophobic, transphobic, etc. Identity politics reigns supreme in this group and victim-hood is used as a sort of pseudo social currency. Facts, logic and science carry no weight here.
• The term Nonplayer Character or Nonplayable Character (NPC) was ported over from video games as a synonym to SJW. THEY ARE EXACTLY EQUIVALENT TERMS! The rationale was that SJWs like videogame NPCs, have a limited selection of talking points and repeat those even when they are no longer contextually sound.
• Snowflake is simply a term that describes individuals that are triggered by things that would be benign to "normal" people. Safe spaces and trigger warnings were created to accommodate these people. Although a person from any walk of life could be a snowflake, the vast majority (≈99%) of snowflakes are SJW/NPCs.

None of those terms are positive. I'd say that leftist could be viewed as neutral (as it encompasses a wide range of values that range from positive to negative). So your statement could be somewhat applied to leftist, however that was the term used in the post I was replying too so I kept it in. Plus, the over saturation of leftist ideology in Hollywood is slowly suffocating many beloved franchises (Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, Dr. Who and likely soon to be the MCU)

However, SJW/NPC and snowflake are definitely NOT positive terms. Here are some of the champions of that group...

They are not that small of a subset. Many of their ideas have become increasingly mainstream on the left. Heck, they're even beginning to eat their own (as demonstrated by AoC attacking Nancy Pelosi and subtly implying racism on her part). I could go much deeper into this, but this post will get way too long and very much off topic.

Perhaps that is a contributing factor, but there are many many other more important ones. I prefer to sit back with some popcorn and enjoy the show (... a true Sith at heart ).




Class dismissed

 

Spoiler: Endgame

 

The problem is that they are typically fighting for things that aren't real problems and they are causing far more harm then they cause good. For instance, this is some of the nonsense that we have to deal with because of the "virtuous" SJWs


https://globalnews.ca/news/4202437/consent-changing-diapers/

https://goboiano.com/japanese-tumblr-user-shuts-down-cultural-appropriation-argument/

https://abcnews.go.com/US/transgend...d-competitors-critics-close/story?id=55856294

There are thousands upon thousands of further examples, but the above should suffice as a brief taster. The bottom line is that people have largely turned against the SJWs for good cause. They aren't making our society a better place, but instead are creating division and anger for the sake of virtue signalling and victim points.

Really?

So for instance, if someone argued on behalf allowing pedophiles molest young children it would be okay as long as they fought for it in the "right way"? What you fight for is absolutely and fundamentally important!

It isn't meant to be nice... it is a purposefully crafted insult. It was created to describe people that can't engage in logical or fact based discussion and simply revert to heaping unfair labels on their opponents (like sexist, racist, etc.). I'm not claiming that there aren't instances where those accusations are not accurate or applicable, but they are flung around so casually and carelessly that they have pretty much lost all meaning. The NPC term is perfect because it beautifully encapsulates the SJW mentality (and pisses them off in the process... which is the point!).

I believe you are thinking about it the wrong way. They are called snowflakes because:

1. they are fragile
2. they think that their point of view is automatically unique, special and worthwhile (and thus above logical scrutiny)

Maybe things are different in Germany; I can't comment on that. In my experience the snowflakes are almost exclusively comprised of the leftist SJW crowd. Not liking a movie character and arguing against it is not the same thing as being triggered. I can show you countless YouTube videos showing SJW snowflakes being triggered (there are compilation videos of such things! God I love the internet!).

For instance, here is an example of SJWs being triggered for no logical reason...


Or here is another example, where the individual is triggered not because they oppose Trump but because their behavior is overblown and reminiscent of how a child would throw a tantrum). If Hilary had won, you wouldn't see the same reaction from the right...


I just don't see this on the right, but like I said, things could be different in Germany.

Triggered does not refer to someone having an opposite opinion (otherwise it would apply to everyone). It is an over-the-top emotional reaction that is simply not justified. You can see this in the videos I posted in this message as well as the previous message where I discussed the subject.

For instance if you bring up Rose Tico, I won't be triggered. I won't cry or require a safe space. In fact, quite the opposite, I'll likely tear my opponent's arguments to shreds with logic and evidence (and if not on this forum, I'll probably trigger them!! ).

 

Palpatine/Sidious in the background: "I made him legal"

 

And concerning the renewed sh*tstorm that's going on, you're on your own with this one - my views are probably outdated enough for me to be given an earful by somebody.

 

That's my point, none of those things are what I would consider to be "triggered". People on either side (left or right) are allowed to have a normal reaction to something but not to the point where they are breaking down and are unable to function as a normal adult. In the videos I provided you, the people are of such soft constitution that they are not able to control themselves in response to benign stimuli. Who walks out of a lecture because the speaker says that on average men are taller than women? That is a triggered response as the person is no longer unable to function properly in a normal society.

That is pretty gross! I don't think triggered is the right word in that context, a more accurate term would be sociopath.

The age of consent could very well be a political topic.

Of course we would argue against someone like that. However, the fact remains, I'm sure most of us would have a very low opinion of a person who is arguing on behalf of child molestation. My point is that what you argue for is equally as important as how you argue for it.

That depends entirely on the nature of the discussion. I would agree with your point in the contextual setting of two sides honestly debating a topic using well thought out and reasoned argumentation that is backed up by facts/evidence. However, in the case of the NPCs, we have the exact opposite situation. They don't present a logical argument but automatically label the person with one of their go to labels (sexist, bigot, etc.). You can't have a normal discussion with such a person. They aren't forming counterarguments to your points and simply follow their checklist of labels. This is no different than trying to have a real discussion with a video game NPC, hence these people rightfully labelled NPCs.


That said, I'm not asking you to start using the term NPC; my intention is purely to classify its origin and how/why it is used.

Personally I prefer a more accurate and specific insult than something general like "asshole". Asshole has no contextual significance so it is essentially powerless as far as insults go.

Here is class 101 of insults (not that I'm saying that one should readily and fling them around unprovoked, think of it as more of a technical manual). What is the point of an insult? It can be any number of things ranging from angering someone, hurting someone, making someone look foolish, etc. All these can be effectively summarized as inflicting an emotional wound of some sort. With that as the goal, the person has to theoretically craft the insult to strike at the weak point of the opponent.

For example (and in the most simplistic terms):

If your adversary was a fat physicist, you wouldn't call them stupid. Such an insult is worthless because they are obviously very intelligent. Calling them fat is infinitely more effective because there is truth to it and on some deep down level (whether they admit to it or not) they know it. Oppositely you wouldn't call a fit meathead fat, but rather calling them intellectual deficient would be more effective.

It works the same way as a physical fight. Using a generic term like asshole is like the equivalent of trying to punch them in the forehead, it is ineffective (and you'll just break your hands). In the war of words, a well crafted and accurate insult is the equivalent of going for the eyes, groin, throat, etc. If you're going to hurl an insult, you might as well have it stick!

DISCLAIMER: I'M NOT ADVOCATING THAT WE GO ATTACKING PEOPLE UNPROVOKED. THIS WAS MEANT PURELY AS A THEORETICAL/INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE. I DON'T WANT THESE WORDS TO BE MISCONSTRUED. (I'm not saying that you would misconstrue them, I just wanted to make sure my intentions are clearly understood)

That's the point, you can't actually have a reasoned discussion with an NPC. They are unable or unwilling to meet you on that level. Sometimes ridicule is the proper response and it is okay to make fun of really stupid ideas! Sometimes the correct course of action is to fight fire with fire.

 

I believe that @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl was referring to the NPC/SJW/snowflake discussion. (though I could be mistaken)


@Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl : For the record, if you believe in your convictions, then they are worth defending with the same enthusiasm as you would defend Jar Jar or attack Wesley Crusher!

 

Uurgh, that would be just horrifically dull and stupid, and would really lower my opinion of Episode IX. JJ Abrams, if you have any semblance of intelligence in that purist skull of yours, don’t you dare put that in the film, or I will eternally loathe you.

Yes indeed I was - I’ve just said my piece about the Rey dilemma above.

Well, I certainly have a lot to say on the matter, so I might have to draft it out and return with another post detailing it in full.

 

Not distressing at all. I'm glad you feel the same. Just friendly chatter. There is no ill intent on my part and the same is obviously true on your part.

Like I said, you can't really have a conversation with a person who walks out of a lecture in response to "on average men are taller than women". In that specific video case, those people are clearly triggered snowflakes.

Like any insult though, you have to use judgement in its use and application.

As I said above, each of us has to apply sound judgment when placing people in such categories. To be fair, I've never met an actual NPC/SJW in my life (outside of the internet). I've met people with minor SJW tenancies/sympathies, heck, I'm even friends with some of them. However, they don't meet the criteria of NPC status so they are not categorized as such.

NPCs are a real minority in society, but their voices are disproportionately loud. The internet is the real problem in this equation, it serves as an echo chamber that amplifies their voices (this applies to other less than ideal groups as well). On their own, most of these people would be kept in line by the normal people that surround them in the real world. In real life they are not so bold as they are on twitter. However, on Twitter and other such platforms, their collective screechy voices do considerable social damage.

They're still real humans, just not humans with fully functional brains! As far as I'm concerned, if people don't want to be referred to as NPCs they shouldn't exhibit the behaviors and response patterns that perfectly mimic their video game counterparts.

When people do stupid shit, they need to be called out for it. Otherwise the propagation of stupid shit will spiral out of control. I have no desire to see these people coddled and protected.

Those people that attacked her are literally the NPCs. They don't have the ability to challenge her ideas (because ultra liberal ideas on immigration are absurd) so they apply their stock video game NPC response... in this case Nazi (that is actually one the favourite NPC responses within the SJW world). This actually proves my point!

Well the whole immigration issue in Europe is a huge colossal mess. Many countries really screwed up that one. It is probably best to avoid that little topic, but we all know that I can't help myself...

#teamHungary #OrbanWasRight