How does this relate to the article, or the situation with the streamer? Sure, dunk on Ubisoft, but maybe not about a black historical figure being black.
The 38 hangings were far from the worst of the Dakota genocide. Lincoln's role was one of reducing cruelty while still punishing those guilty of massacres of civilians. Originally, hundreds of men were going to be hanged, but Lincoln commuted the sentences of all but the worst offenders. Unfortunately, two of the hanged men were innocent, and it's unclear how the mistake was made. Far worse was the banning of Dakota people from Minnesota and the internment in camps, leading to widespread death by disease, though these were the actions of the Minnesota government.
There are very legitimate criticism to be had of Lincoln, like being the sitting president as one of the states committed genocide, or the appeasement tactics to slaveowners before civil war became inevitable. I do not think this one makes sense to be top of the list, as by all accounts Lincoln was attempting to reduce cruelty where possible and yet still punish mass murderers.
For a bit of additional background, the Dakota war, during the Dakota genocide, was an uprising of some Dakota, attacking anyone of white or "mixed-blood" descent. The state of Minnesota had broken numerous treaties and continued to seize land from the Dakota people, leading some to fight back. However, the massacring of civilians and anyone of non-pure blood is evil, and many Dakota who did not join the rebellion rescued hostages and helped resist wholesale slaughter. The Minnesota government is absolutely at fault for the conditions leading to and the execution of the Dakota genocide, but the rebels chose to commit racially motivated massacres of non-military targets. This does not make the later retaliation justified, but it does explain the hangings.
As for number two, I cannot speak to the other commenter's beliefs or intentions, though I do not believe women were combatants in the Dakota war.
Note: Some historians object to the term Dakota war, as only a small faction joined the conflict, while a much greater number did not. I'm using the term as the consensus name for the conflict, not out of belief that it is accurate.
I don't understand your comment. Are you saying that the phrase "we the people" is nationalist? If so, I'd disagree. It's the first few words of the preamble to the constitution. It would be strange if the constitution didn't specifically refer to the United States citizens. "We the people" isn't saying "USA first," it's a callback to the ideal that every American citizen should be equal, without kings, as other similar documents defining the government of monarchies would be under some monarch's authority, not "the people." Whether that ideal has been upheld or not is a different conversation entirely, but the phrase itself as a rejection of monarchy and oligarchy is a good message to repeat against Trump and Elon.
Other than weirdo, can you specify? I don't think saying feminists and trans people are on the same team is a very controversial statement, at least for non-TERFs.
If one is to engage in pedantry, it can't hurt to at least be correct. Calling me a "bougouise feminist" was hysterical though.
The choice cannot be so single issue. Donald Trump is doing everything he can to subvert the election process, and will try to upend it entirely if he can. Harris is a disappointing choice at best, downright revolting at worst, but she respects the election process. Under Harris, I have a chance to continue voting third party in local elections and trying to change the system. Under Trump, not only is my life and the life of many other Americans in danger, but this may very well be the last time I ever get to vote.
The choice cannot be so black and white. The Democrats have always been neo-libs that are okay with bombing third world countries for imperialist reasons. However, in this election, they're the ones we have the best chance of voting again under and continuing to try to change the system. I will not be so short sighted as to believe the average American is going to do anything but vote Biden or Harris, so making an ideological stand is doing nothing but wasting my opportunity to stop total fascism from removing the ability to make this country better in the future.
Even if I believed Trump and Harris would be identical on the issue of Gaza, when I strongly believe Trump will accelerate the genocide, I still have to vote Harris in order to retain the ability to vote in the future and secure the current (distasteful) state of our democracy so it can be improved in the future.
I feel like characterizing Halle Bailey as "just some chick" is disingenuous at best.
Weird personal attack there. Care to explain?
All the waste a plant ever produces in its lifetime can be contained with ease on site. Waste certainly isn't the main issue, though it's portrayed to be. Cost of deployment and staffing are more prohibitive issues, and both are surmountable. I don't think it's a bandaid for all power issues, but it's a powerful tool that should be used more often, not phased out.
I can do that too. You're misunderstanding the concept. I'm perfectly capable of drawing, eyes closed or not (though it's much harder eyes closed, obviously). I do digital art. I just conceptualize things differently. I don't have a mental image, it's more like a knowledge of what shapes go together to make certain forms. I build things piece by piece from fundamental shapes that I analytically know make certain objects or creatures, but I don't have an image of what it is until I have actually put it down in paper.
I don't know if I worded that in a way that makes sense, as I've always struggled with explaining how I conceptualize to people that have an ability I don't. I know what shapes make up a dog, but I can't see the dog, if that makes any sense.
Then hopefully you don't expect women to take birth control or have an IUD.
erin
joined 2 years ago
This complaint feels manufactured. No one complained about the romance-able historical figures in previous Japanese games, and a quick look at social media and Japanese news shows no outrage. Also, every other game features historically unknown natives? What? We have multiple characters that are children of royalty, at least two that are military warlords, and a Viking raider for fuck's sake. The only game I can think of that has a native of the region not connected to the powers that be is 3, where you play a Native American. You're often just playing essentially a secret police for the state of the country you're in. Why not have a black samurai, a notable historical figure, be the main character. That's super interesting. It's not like Japanese culture is being erased. Your outrage feels misplaced and racially motivated, and I doubt we'd be seeing so much manufactured discontent if it was a white samurai (and there were several).