No... Having a non-white character is fine. There was some game set in Poland or something during the Medieval Era and someone was complaining about the fact that there are no blacks in the game... If someone was complaining about let's say blacks being in Mass Effect, I'd question it as what's wrong. If a game is made by a white majority nation, they usually make it similar to those they're around. If an African Game Company made a game filled with a majority of blacks, I'd not go "OMG THAT'S RACIST!" I'd accept the fact that to the Africans that Africans are the majority. As strange as that is. If the Japanese made a game and it had a majority of Japanese people, I'd understand that in Japan there is a vast majority of Japanese people there. Not exactly rocket science.
Has nyone heard of this yet? Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton's Doomed Campaign https://www.amazon.com/Shattered-In...Inside+Hillary+Clinton’s+Doomed+2016+Campaign It's a thesis on what went wrong with the Clinton campaign for President last year. There's an interesting review of it here: http://www.vox.com/2017/4/24/15369452/clinton-shattered-campaign Here's an excerpt from the review. "This thesis rests on two arguments that are fundamentally in tension. One is that the allegedly best and the brightest of Clinton’s campaign fell short because they failed at marketing an otherwise winning candidate — that unforced strategic blunders, factional infighting, and boneheaded investments torpedoed a Democratic nominee who, in the hands of some better staff, would have swept to the White House. Not incidentally, this has been the part of the book that’s gotten by far the most attention in the coverage surrounding its release last week — with Clinton aides defending themselves to Politico and Allen standing by his story on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show. It’s also the least meaningful part of the book. The second main argument Shattered makes is that Clinton herself was a flawed candidate whom no campaign team could have saved. This argument hinges on the idea not that Clinton was failed by her staffers, but that she failed them by never articulating a political vision they could use to capture the public’s imagination. It is in uncovering proof of this second thesis where the book is both most persuasive and most arresting — and where its lessons for the Democratic Party are the most salient."
I feel like its more because she was detached and tried using PC culture bullcrap as a means to gain popularity, that might of been a reason some resented her anyway. Its obvious she hardly supports any of that stuff though, hell she changed her stance on gay marriage like 5 times in a span of about 11 years. I feel like her overuse of Identity politics really felt shallow
Oh man, remember this song about nuclear war? View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IfM6HM2rRs Decided to listen to it because the Doomsday Clock is currently set at two and a half minutes to midnight.
It's probably because they think it's change for change's sake. Like when there was that campaign to have Steven Roger's Captain America come out as gay. It was only because of people's ignorance of his history and the "Wouldn't it be cool!" factor. Even though it was counter to his established character, you would need something like a Cosmic Cube to happen, and there was no good reason to do it. Thing is, sometimes a character is changed for a good reason, yet you get people speaking out against it because they are also ignorant of the reason and the character's history, plus think there's a "That's so uncool!"/"It's not as cool as it was!" factor. There's also the belief that this diversity drive is actually creating leading characters that are part of a SJW and Feminazi agenda. And there's been a big argument over it, mainly because I don't accept this point of view.
