‘The politics of envy’

JB: Let the one who has two tunics share with the one who has none.

RWT: That's what I'm talking about! That's the politics of envy.

JB: I don't see what envy has –

RWT: I've got two tunics and you've just got one and now you envy me!

JB: I used to have two tunics –

RWT: And you lost one and now you're envious!

JB: No, actually I gave one to a man who had none.

RWT: Aha! Because he was envious!

JB: He wasn't envious, he was shivering.

RWT: Shivering … with envy!

JB: He was shivering with cold.

RWT: But you weren't cold.

JB: No, I was quite warm.

RWT: And this man shivering with the cold, don't you think he wanted to be warm too?

JB: Yes, that's why –

RWT: He wanted what you had. He was envious of your warmth!

JB: You keep using this word, but I'm not sure you know what it means.

RWT: You just can't handle that I can prove you're promoting the politics of envy.

JB: You think you can prove this?

RWT: Easily.

JB: Please, go ahead.

RWT: It's the politics of envy. It's the politics of envy. It's the politics of envy.

JB: Um, that's not proof. That's just an assertion.

RWT: No, it's not just an assertion — it's a repetition. And that proves it.

JB: You think repeating a slogan over and over means you've proved it?

RWT: It's not just me silly. There are thousands of us repeating this. And some of us are even repeating it on television. What more proof do you need?

JB: …

RWT: You're speechless because you know I'm right.

JB: I'm just trying to understand why anyone would think that clothing the naked has anything to do with envy.

RWT: You said yourself that you can't stand to see anyone with two tunics.

JB: Actually, what I said was I can't stand to see anyone with no tunic.

RWT: Same difference. It all sounds like the politics of envy to me.

JB: I suppose to you it does, but that's not how I think of it. I prefer my cousin's term. He calls it "the kingdom of God."

RWT: Who's this cousin of yours?

JB: You don't know him. You wouldn't like him.

RWT: Why? Is he envious?

JB: Well, he can't stand to see anyone left naked either. He takes it personally. He says that when you refuse to share with the person who has no tunic, it's just like you're refusing to share with him.

RWT: Envious bastard! He sounds dangerous.

JB: You have no idea. …

  • Drake Pope

    Anyway, my point is that the game exists, but shouldn’t.

    That’s not funny. Are you SURE?

  • Spearmint

    That’s not funny. Are you SURE?
    I’ve never seen a physical copy, but I’ve skimmed the PDF, and its existence is pretty widely reported and has been for several years. If it’s a hoax it’s a very old and elaborate one that scores of apparently unconnected people are in on.
    Also if it’s a hoax, someone had to make up the incredibly long, stupidly detailed, and repulsively tasteless PDF for a prank. I find that idea more terrifying than the idea that it’s some creeper’s sick fantasy, to be honest. It’s so misogynist, racist, homophobic and poorly designed as a game that I would hope no decent person would be able to think of all the icky shit it contains, even as a joke.
    If it’s any comfort, I don’t think it was exactly a best seller.

  • Mad Monkey

    I wasn’t doubting your word. It’s just… I read that entire review and I kept waiting for a “Westboro Baptist Church” type tell to reveal that it was just a satire on how many games can be sexist but… there wasn’t anything there.
    Misogyny and racism aside, how do you even play such a game? How are you supposed to make a dice with 10 sides? How could anyone remember all of those numbers?

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Pius Thicknesse

    That’s nothing. There’s 20-sided dies.
    Check out the polyhedral dice.

  • Drake Pope

    Okay, you got me there. But the other things in that game are ridiculous and impossible.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/spectralphoenix Count Zero Interrupt

    RE: 4e
    I’m not a fan. But what really pissed me off was how WotC went out of their way to bully all the retailers into not selling older editions anymore, even the online retailers that sold PDFs. Not only would I have liked to have kept my 3.5 on, but I had gotten a few of the 2e campaign supplements off RPGnow and wanted more. These days I don’t think it’s possible to acquire the old PLANESCAPE books and the like legally at all (besides finding them used on Ebay for an arm and a leg, I suppose.
    RE: FATAL
    Some poor unfortunates at TVTropes actually liveblogged an attempt to create characters and possibly play a game of F.A.T.A.L. I don’t know if any of them actually finished character creation and started actual gameplay (though they go over most of the rules, such as the quadratic equations to resolve sexual encounters.) I know several people started and later gave up, at which point they presumably ripped out their own eyes rather than chance reading a rulebook so terrible again.
    Look upon it and DESPAIR! (NSFW)

  • ako

    I found the review rebuttal the FATAL people wrote, and ick! They actually tried to defend giving low-intelligence characters “retard strength” bonuses (their exact terminology) with talking about how some “females” they knew in college took care of “retards” and they were all super-powerful. And how looking at people with Down Syndrome, they decided “their metabolism seems not quite right”, which somehow supports the super-strength conclusion.
    And they completely don’t get why people think they’re grotty little creeps.
    (The review rebuttal is here:http://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/FATALReviewRebuttal. Distinctly not safe for work, and written by the sort of anti-humor robots who would read what I just said and respond with something like “We are not robots, but humans! Thus your entire point is refuted!”)

  • JE

    It’s not a date rape rpg! There’s no dating in their game! *hysterical laughter and scratching at own eyeballs*

  • http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ John Hardin

    A fundamental flaw with your premise in this dialogue is that JB was suggesting moral behavior that RWT should strive to follow, not trying to compel that behavior through the use of force via the government. Nor was he saying to RWT “give me one of your tunics!”
    Saying “Let the one who has two tunics share with the one who has none” as a positive moral precept that one should willingly follow is perfectly acceptable. Seeking political support from those who don’t have two tunics by advocating for laws that compel such behavior by force is “politics of envy”, and saying in essence “we should despise and penalize the rich merely because they are rich” is class warfare.

  • Hawker Hurricane

    Class Warfare is what happens when the lower classes shoot back.
    “From whom much has been given, much will be asked.”


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X