Some points over racism and mutual respect of rights in boardgame community

Recent controversies in alleged manifestations of racism in boardgames have stirred countless polemics and heavily polarized our communities. I am referring to the recent use of the Italian word “negro” by Mr. Tascini that led to his ostracism by publishers of its games, the absence of people with darker skin tones in Alma Mater, the stereotyped portrayal of Chinese culture in a video by an Italian youtuber, alleged xenophobia in footnotes by Mr. Eklund, inaccurate representation of Cree symbols in Manitoba and debates on the nature of Puerto Rico “colonists”, the criticized post from Robert Burke in June. If you are interested, I have added more context at the end of this story.

I would have posted this on boardgamegeek (BGG), that should be the main reference for this debate. However, the indiscriminate removal of comments that were trying to discuss the topic raises several concerns about freedom of expression in that platform, so I am fairly sure I would see my post removed in almost no time there. If you want to have more clues about the moderation policy of BGG look at the following screenshots, but if you are not interested jump directly to the text below.

This is an example of indiscriminate removal of contents in BGG when racism is discussed. But let’s take a look to some of the deleted posts.

So, I would like to evidence some points that can be useful for the debate, in the hope of diverting discussions from the usual toxic, violent routine.

1. No country in the world can claim to be immune from racism. We live in a world where migrations have caused peoples to move and to form minorities in countries with a different dominant culture. Signs of the dominant culture being oppressive to the other ones are everywhere, but take different forms depending on the specific culture. Each country and each culture is entitled to find its cure to the violation of rights of the minorities it encompasses. Different manifestations of the same disease in different species must be treated with specific remedies, and no cure is universal. Most of the cited polemics were raised by North American gamers to European (or, more specifically, Italian) game authors and reviewers, and alleged signs of racism happened in communications that were supposed to stay inside the boundaries of authors’ national culture. This act has been seen as an inappropriate meddling of North American people in a matter that does not regard them. I strongly support this point: only an Italian, with a deep understanding of Italian language and Italian culture is entitled to judge the gravity of those acts placing them in the proper context and decide in case which “social punishment” should be applied. Nobody else has the right to interpret these acts according to their own social norms, least of all to pronounce judgments of guilt. Please respect other cultures, as you have no rights to impose your social norms elsewhere and any culture has to find its own working solutions to racism. This of course applies not only to Italy, but to any country in the world.

1a. I must point out that acting as your social norms are superior to the ones of other cultures and demanding the others to follow them is inherently racist.

2. The definitive solution to racism is integration and mutual respect for rights. But the prosecuting party accused the other party, and after arbitrarily deciding that the other ones were intolerant, deemed appropriate to deprive them the right to reply. I directly point my finger towards BGG, which deleted not only comments openly denying racism existed, but anyone that was trying to put each act into context and to make some real exchange of views happen. This is an infringement of the right of expression. In modern justice systems, no one is at the same time prosecutor, judge and jury. So, if you believe some harm has been done, you must allow the other party to defend themselves. We all know that the boundary between freedom of expression and actual intolerance can be very thin, but this does not put you in the position of denying this right with such levity. No one is allowed to have any prejudice of guilt. Notice also that this behaviour is affine to fundamentalist systems.

2a. BGG claims to be an international community, but in fact demands its users adapt to North American social rules. So, it would be more intellectually honest to define themselves as a North American community where foreign users are welcome.

3. Processes based on the argument that someone would be offended by some behaviour are unfair, because they are based on assumptions rather than fact. If something offended you, you can explain why you feel so, but it is impossible to demonstrate that someone else would be not offended by my actions. So, if you believe there has been some offence, it is better to ask the subject of the supposed offence rather then arbitrarily deciding that behaviour is actually offensive.

4. We must bring different cultures together, acknowledge that they are different and that diversity is richness: this is the solution to racism. I raise the point that absolutely none of the responses to alleged cases of racism have led closer to the elimination of racism for different reasons. No communication happened between people, and after them the factions were only more polarized. If we want to eradicate racism (and I believe we all want this) we must convince other people to act against racism. But these violent angry mobs, associated with the so-called “call off culture” are of no use. Nobody would be convinced to “give up racism” after similar manifestations, because from outside the prosecuting party it is evident there is an abnormal disproportion between the alleged felony and the punishment (someone has lost his work and money because of a misused word). This behaviour makes people having a more moderate idea about racism to distance themselves, and gives strength to the ones that deny racism is a problem.

5. Acts are judged on the basis of a “can this be considered as an offence for some culture” criterion, but this is wrong because it already contains a prejudice of guilt. Instead, a more equilibrate “is this an offence for some culture” should be used. The difference is subtle, but fundamental, because the first criterion inevitably leads to the inquisitorial hunt of anything that can be interpreted as racism. “But this way it is not easy anymore to point out who is not respecting other cultures!” Well, welcome to the world. Racism is a mess, and real racism is way more subtle than some seemingly disrespectful words. If you want to fight inequalities, acknowledge world complexity, and admit no simple and rigorous criteria to discern any racism exist. It would be like a surgeon removing a tumour using a hatchet instead of scalpel.

6. The best way to address a seemingly wrong behaviour is not to stir up huge polemics in public spaces, but to speak with the offender at first place. For the ones of you that are Christian, this is also what is said in Matthew 18:15–17. This has also been said by Phil Eklund in response to the accusations towards him. If you have a real interest in defending oppressed cultures, such acting can lead to better responses. In most cases, the author of the supposed infringement would be able to address its behaviour without the pressure of a community already having a prejudice of guilt. They could demonstrate with a clear assessment their real intention with the offended culture, so resolving everything in a manner that really brings closer to mutual understanding of cultures. Who put the accusations in public forum at first, does so with clear intentions of stirring polemics and not for the real sake of human rights.

Finally, an important note. Notice how I insisted on the concept that each country and culture must find its ways to tackle racism without others dictating what they should or should not do. So, points 3 to 6 must be intended as my personal opinion on the ongoing situation, as a European, Italian citizen. If North Americans believe that call off culture is an efficient way to shed light on racist actions that otherwise would remain unpunished, they have any right to persevere in their actions, but please consider also opinions from outside your country, from people that have a different sensibility and whose perception is less biased from ongoing debates.

Please feel free to discuss the points I have raised, in case you both agree and disagree. Communication and exchange of ideas is the only real solution for cultural integration, and acceptance of every culture.

This is Mr. Tascini’s post implicated in allegations of racism. It contains the Italian work “negro” which is the translation for the infamous “n-word”. Italian boardgame communities responded in average that this post is a questionable way to discuss racism and that is inappropriate to post such sentences in public spaces, but has not seen it as a sign of racism. Nonetheless, foreign gamers after reading a translation of the text by Google decided otherwise.

Alma Mater is a game set in Italian universities of 15th century. The game has been harshly criticized because all depicted characters have white skin. It must be pointed out that 500 years ago the share of the Italian population with a dark skin tone was negligible.

This is the alleged stereotyped portrayal of Chinese culture in a video review. Video is in Italian, and was intended to be seen only inside the italian community. Unfortunately, it was shown also on the KS page of the game, which is destined to an international target.

This is the footnote by Phil Eklund where he, according to some, allegedly supports persecution of Jews.

The totem shown in this cover art depicts a totem fashion that was not actually found in the Manitoba region. The game was then accused of “cultural appropriation”, a hot topic in North America. The game was entirely developed in Europe, where cultural appropriation is not matter of discussion and is an almost unknown concept.

An ironic comment by Robert Burke, which has come under fire these days.

Puerto Rico in its first editions had some black tokens representing “colonists” that work in plantations. Historically, it is evident what the so-called colonists really were. To avoid hurting sensibility of descendants of New World slaves, in most recent editions the colour of the tokens turned to purple. Interestingly, this sparked criticism about the alteration of historical facts, hiding the abuses perpetrated by white civilizations toward African populations.