prescottarchibaldw
 
SHARE THIS PAGE View Viral Dashboard ›
    • prescottarchibaldw

      You’re describing a specific instance of a more general problem we have with nuance. We only know how to be for something or against it. To what extent this is caused by the way the news reports “both” sides of an issue and to what extent the news reporting stems from our inability to see more than two discrete sides is unclear. The point is, in any discussion about any remotely controversial topic, people expect you to fall distinctly on one side or another and they process your argument on those terms. The gamers commenting on this article are all responding defensively, because your reasoning does not match the template of a pro-game argument. If you were to post this same article on the fox news website or send it over to Jack Thompson, you would be attacked as pro-gaming. In reality you have made a well-reasoned and nuanced argument that anyone who cares about the future of games should take very seriously. When the massively popular flagship game titles that represent the industry to the rest of the world are bullshit, that allows everyone to assume that the whole industry is bullshit.

    • prescottarchibaldw

      system issues caused the following message to appear as its own post rather than a response: I agree with this entirely. Things should be made wherever it makes sense to make them.

      When you start banging the protectionist drum, as both presidential candidates have this cycle, you explicitly reject this argument. In light of the narrative thus far, it’s totally reasonable to talk about the protectionist view, even if you and I find it personally ridiculous.

      As far as a protectionist is concerned, every Jeep built in China is a Jeep that was not built in the US, even if it’s ultimately for Chinese consumption.

    • prescottarchibaldw

      I agree with this entirely. Things should be made wherever it makes sense to make them. When you start banging the protectionist drum, as both presidential candidates have this cycle, you explicitly reject this argument. In light of the narrative thus far, it’s totally reasonable to talk about the protectionist view, even if you and I find it personally ridiculous. As far as a protectionist is concerned, every Jeep built in China is a Jeep that was not built in the US, even if it’s ultimately for Chinese consumption.

    • prescottarchibaldw

      I agree with this entirely. Things should be made wherever it makes sense to make them. People that bang on the protectionist drum have already rejected this reasoning. Both sides are doing that this election, so talking about the protectionist view is reasonable if misguided. From that perspective, the ad makes a perfectly reasonable point. Every Jeep built in China is a Jeep that was not built in the US, even if it’s ultimately for Chinese consumption.