As I said, I don't have any experience with games. What I do see is generations of the similar style of advocacy for liberty (with the exception of Rand who created new moral and epistemological foundations). Collectivism isn't being adequately opposed. What I see with Progressivism is new approaches, new enthusiasm, new ideas (although bad ones), and effectiveness (it's winning). What the article lays out for the Chinese, where they are linking gaming, collectivist propoganda, and market-like rewards and punishments is scary. People, in general, not just the Chinese culture, are far too susceptible to emotional, political movements that take on a religious nature. Look at the horror wrought by Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Po Pot and Imperial Japan. This propoganda game concept shows a level of sophistication and subtlety that didn't exist in the past and that accords with the increase in technological capabilities compared to the past. It also aligns well with the trend we see in progressivism where a nudge and misdirection and hidden agendas are given priority over brute force as mechanisms for getting the yoke in place. Collectivism wants to have a form that is taken like a religion, to be worshiped and accepted on faith. But it is harder to get from here to there in this age of science and ubiquitous communications - therefore, a more sophisticated and subtle approach might be just what the next generation needs to find themselves subject to the next Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Po Pot, or Imperial Japan.
|
