The Best Engine Builder? One Fueled by Your Support!
Our end-of-year support drive ends in 28 days, 3 hours and 54 minutes. Your incredible support has helped make this site what it is today. Help us continue to grow the hobby. Learn More
I supported because… "I support BGG because they do so much for the hobby and are THE definitive resource for boardgamers the world over." - Ben Cox (Benzebub)
3,663 Supporters
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
Greetings. I admit to being a total newbie here in any forum about Puerto Rico. I am certainly not a newbie to the issues in the game regarding depictions of colonialism and slavery. I have made a video on my YouTube channel breaking down the issues, which basically boil down to a bunch of bad historical mistakes that erase the struggle of colonized people. I focus on the historical record and how it is (mis)represented, not so much about my "feelings" (although, as a Puerto Rican person, I certainly do have my share of feelings).
I see that the new edition makes some welcome changes - purple chips for "colonists" and the removal of the problematic sailing ship being chief among them. However, some core issues seem to remain that I articulate in the video. (TL:DR - plantations = bad).
I want to be really clear - I do not want to agitate or call anyone names. I am not out to "cancel" anything, or take anyone's game away. I have had many good discussions in the community about this topic recently. I have reached out to the publisher to involve them in an ongoing discussion, but I have not heard back to far.[EDIT: I have heard back from them. Thank you for reaching out!]. Part of my reason for posting is to continue to raise awareness and maybe get someone's attention. At this point, my goal is to raise as much awareness and have as much discussion as I can.
Thanks in advance for people's feedback and perspectives. I hope I can engage everyone with respect.
From the way you speak about board games, you seem to be using Critical Theory to analyze and critique them. Specifically you seem to be using the concept of a "culture industry" from Adorno & Horkheimer, along with radical Left Hegelian interpretations of the master-slave dialectic as it was expanded on by Fanon, Buber, and others.
It's fine for you to view board games this way, and it will lead to some interesting philosophical and sociological points, but I simply cannot agree with you that this is the "right" way of viewing things. It's a very specific political interpretation of board games and what they mean to people, which is nowhere near the full picture of objective reality.
The "it's just a game" response may ring hollow to you because of your political ideology which you project onto it, but that's really not the way most people think, especially people who aren't taught to exclusively use the Critical Theory lens for analyzing the world. I AGREE with you that it's NOT just a game, because I also project things into it which make it much more than that. For me, Puerto Rico was the game that brought me into the hobby, and I get warm fuzzies every time I play it. It's also the game that brought my parents and many of my friends into the hobby. It's always a great night when it hits the table.
I was tempted to say "it's just a game" when I first listened to your thoughts, but then I realized that it's definitely not. It's really just that you're projecting different things into is than what I'm projecting into it. You're projecting political ideology. I'm projecting nostalgia. These are not inherently mutually exclusive, but you're completely wrong when you assume that I'll also have a political experience. I myself have studied Puerto Rican history in college and I'm very aware of its complicated social hierarchy. I've never once considered the Puerto Rico board game to be an accurate representation of the real Puerto Rico, economically or socially. And I don't think my friends or family have either. I'm fairly confident that the "danger" you speak of doesn't exist, either in my lived experience, or in whatever empirical evidence might possibly be gathered. I don't think people are dumb. People who play Puerto Rico won't automatically assume it's an accurate lesson in Puerto Rican history for the same reason that people who use 2-D maps won't automatically assume the world is flat. Puerto Rico wasn't meant to be a historically accurate historical simulation, it was meant to be a simulation of very simplistic investment and business decisions. And I think the vast majority of people intuitively understand that.
Back to your criticism about these games for being dangerously ahistorical... Ironically, I think that’s the problem with Critical Theory. The simple problem with Critical Theory is that it only focuses on negatives, and never positives. History is never ALL negative, it's ALWAYS a mixed bag. The more subtle problem of Critical theory is that it interprets everything in a predetermined ideological frame irrespective of facts. And if you live under a capitalist system, it's definitely going to be all negative.
You claim to want to provide a "more accurate" historical interpretation of Puerto Rican history, but I don't think you're actually following through with a better more accurate alternative. You're correct that Puerto Rico was a backwater in its early history. But you're incorrect that it stopped being a backwater when it started importing more slaves to develop a plantation economy. Puerto Rico was always a backwater. That's why Spain was able to hold onto it, and why America felt fine taking it in 1898. America didn't want Puerto Rico for its economy, it just wanted naval bases in the Caribbean. Cuba was much more developed, and America didn't take it except for Guantanamo for the same reason. Yes, Puerto Rico did take in slaves during the Atlantic slave trade to develop a tiny little plantation economy, but it was absolutely nothing like Haiti or Brazil, or even the American South. I don't want to belittle Puerto Rican history or culture in any way. They have provided amazing contributions to American (and Global) society which far outweigh their size and economic importance. Puerto RIco is currently a jewel of the Caribbean, but nearly all of its economic development relative to the rest of the Caribbean occurred 1898 to present, under American rule, with access to American markets, 33 years after America had decisively outlawed slavery. To imply otherwise is nonsense, and it's all outside the scope of the "Puerto Rico" board game.
Next, I think your obvious resentment about the brown colonists in the original game is very interesting. Different cultures view skin color (and race) differently. I know that colonial Latin America had a really complicated social/racial hierarchy. There were "white" peninsulares (Hispano-Portuguese, who weren't actually that white because of the cultural exchange they had with North Africans), but there were also mestizos, indigenas, negros, creollos, zambos, y mulatos. Some of those terms are politically incorrect in English-speaking American culture because of our racial sensitivity, but I'm using the Spanish language in an accurate historical context. You claim to want everyone else to have an accurate picture of Puerto Rican society, but then you reduce all of the historical complexities of your society to dark brown. Only zambos would actually be the color of the in-game Puerto Rico colonists. It doesn't make sense why you would claim to be for historical accuracy and claim to understand the nuanced history of Puerto RIco, while automatically assuming that a dark shade for brown "colonists" is a a racist attack on on that very complicated history.
Finally, I'm going to address your claims that you're just "trying to be really clear," that "[You] do not want to agitate or call anyone names," that you do not want "to cancel anything, or take anyone's game away," and "to have as much discussion as [you] can." The problem with your ideas is that they are a trojan horse for leftist revolution in public thought. I'm absolutely going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you really care about these issues, You claim to only want discussion and no real change, but I know that your beliefs operate in a way which is contrary to your stated goals. Critical Theorists claim to want to dialogue and spread awareness, but that's always just the first step. They're really engaged in propaganda and cultural revolution. In board games, they really DO want to cancel and take people's "problematic" games away. Maybe you agree with their cultural criticism, but if you don't take real action, they will eventually accuse you of being all talk and no walk. To quote Engels' most crucial malappropriation of Marx, "Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it." I think your attempts to bring these issues to light just to have a discussion and spread awareness show that you aren't really aware of the movement you're a part of.
I'll conclude with what I started with. You want to discuss, as much as you can, so lets' discuss. I didn't call you any names, and I hope you'll extend the same courtesy to me.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I would be happy to begin an exchange of ideas. Before I address some of the substance here, I would like to note some meta-issues
Quote:
I'll conclude with what I started with. You want to discuss, as much as you can, so lets' discuss. I didn't call you any names, and I hope you'll extend the same courtesy to me.
In my mind's eye, I can see you flinching and bracing for impact before you hit send. Welcome to the internet in 2021. Rest assured, I am as tired of the flame as you are You will get none of that from me.
Quote:
From the way you speak about board games, you seem to be using Critical Theory to analyze and critique them. Specifically you seem to be using the concept of a "culture industry" from Adorno & Horkheimer, along with radical Left Hegelian interpretations of the master-slave dialectic as it was expanded on by Fanon, Buber, and others.
I have read my fair share of critical theory, sure. However, I was not " taught to exclusively use the Critical Theory lens for analyzing the world." Way to sneak that one in there. I try to read as widely as I can, old school and new school. In the video, I make some points that do not fit neatly within a critical theory framework. I will elaborate some more here.
This happened a few times in your response, where you seem to come off as telling me what I think. Note phrases like "but you're completely wrong when you assume that I'll also have a political experience." or "You claim to only want discussion and no real change." I "assume" or "claim" neither of these views. I will give credit for good intent and chalk this up to unfortunate phrasing. I just wanted to highlight this, because a lot of internet conversations break down when people get reductive and argue against straw men. I will do my best to avoid that trap because you do raise excellent points.
Ok, on to the substance!
Quote:
For me, Puerto Rico was the game that brought me into the hobby, and I get warm fuzzies every time I play it. It's also the game that brought my parents and many of my friends into the hobby. It's always a great night when it hits the table...
I was tempted to say "it's just a game" when I first listened to your thoughts, but then I realized that it's definitely not. It's really just that you're projecting different things into it than what I'm projecting into it. You're projecting political ideology. I'm projecting nostalgia. These are not inherently mutually exclusive, but you're completely wrong when you assume that I'll also have a political experience.
First of all, thank you for veering away from the "it's just a game". That one drives me a bit nuts. I can absolutely engage with your more nuanced perspective.
For the sake of the argument, I will call my perspective "liberationist." I think what critical race theory would say is that a liberationist perspective is explicitly political, while a nostalgic perspective is implicitly political. Euro games like Puerto Rico offer players a nice, warm, comfortable, frictionless mental experience. It's kind of the whole point. A Euro game offers our brains the promise of a mental vacation.
Vacations are "political" acts. Who gets to take one, where we can go, a lot of that depends on a person's place in society. Go to any resort, especially in the Caribbean. You will see lots of happy, smiling families attending those as guests, who then wax nostalgic over the pictures and souvenirs afterwards. But travel down into the kitchens, or not even a mile out into the surrounding countryside, then the poverty and struggle of laborers in that resort comes to the surface.
Quote:
I don't think people are dumb. People who play Puerto Rico won't automatically assume it's an accurate lesson in Puerto Rican history for the same reason that people who use 2-D maps won't automatically assume the world is flat. Puerto Rico wasn't meant to be a historically accurate historical simulation, it was meant to be a simulation of very simplistic investment and business decisions. And I think the vast majority of people intuitively understand that.
I realize that Puerto Rico the board game does not want to teach anyone accurate history. Nor should it - that would be a boring game. However, it's version of Puerto Rico serves a similar function as a resort would, or any other escapist fantasy. It presents an idealized, sanitized, ahistorical, "La Isla Del Encanto" version that makes gamers feel good about entering that space. Who wants to see forced labor in their escapism?
Of course, most people who enjoy Puerto Rico the board game do so for the mechanisms. It really is a wonderfully simple Euro game (I happen to enjoy San Juan the card game a lot!). However, even for gamers who say they only see mechanisms, the art style and presentation still help generate that good, nostalgic feeling. It's an inescapable part of the package.
How do I know that? Since Puerto Rico came out in 2002, those of us who had problems with the presentation - that it sanitizes too much, that it erases and commodifies people's struggle too much - have articulated our critiques. Way before wokeness and "cancel culture", we who looked at the brown worker chits and saw our great-grandfathers with bent backs and gnarled hands cutting sugar cane... we've asked the various publishers to change the theme. Make it space, make it cavemen, make it Middle Earth... anything else. They won't do it. Colonization-era Euro games keep coming and coming and coming. They sell, sell, sell. Why? Partly because of the escapist fantasy. Gamers enjoy the vibe. Gamers also enjoy the fact that it's a familiar setting that they've at least heard of. The best, most resonant escapist fantasy always draws just a bit from real history and culture. I think it's a valid question to ask what history it draws from, and what it's doing.
From my "liberationist" perspective, I want to highlight the issues with escapist fantasy versions of real places. Of course most gamers don't see it this way. If they did, we wouldn't be having this conversation! Personally, my hope is to articulate the issue and persuade as many folks as I can. This leads to...
Quote:
The problem with your ideas is that they are a trojan horse for leftist revolution in public thought. I'm absolutely going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you really care about these issues, You claim to only want discussion and no real change, but I know that your beliefs operate in a way which is contrary to your stated goals. Critical Theorists claim to want to dialogue and spread awareness, but that's always just the first step. They're really engaged in propaganda and cultural revolution. In board games, they really DO want to cancel and take people's "problematic" games away. Maybe you agree with their cultural criticism, but if you don't take real action, they will eventually accuse you of being all talk and no walk. To quote Engels' most crucial malappropriation of Marx, "Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it." I think your attempts to bring these issues to light just to have a discussion and spread awareness show that you aren't really aware of the movement you're a part of.
That last sentence was another shot, another assumption about what I know and what I want. I really, really would invite you to try to avoid that in any response you make.
I am well aware of the "woke" left. In a way, I want to address multiple sides of the issue at once. It sucks so bad that, when I try to engage in genuine online conversations about these issues, someone else usually hops right in with cries of "racism!" "white supremacy!" and what not. The energy changes, shifting from trying to converse to trying to convince. I do feel like an unwitting trojan horse sometimes, which is a great visual. Whatever work I do to help people feel comfortable engaging, someone else steps in with a sucker punch. The internet. Sigh.
While I am aware of the dynamic, I won't change my approach because I DO want to push for push for positive change. My exact quote in the OP: "At this point, my goal is to raise as much awareness and have as much discussion as I can." Since you asked, I will show my hand about what I ultimately want, beyond the point of discussion. I want MORE games, not less. I want MORE history in my games, from multiple perspectives. I have ideas about how Puerto Rico could change and present less problematic, ahistorical escapist fantasy - everything from total rethemes to minor adjustments. I hope to engage the community and the publisher, as we are engaging now. Despite the volume of some folks on my side, I know of more who just want more games from more perspectives. May the best games win.
We can continue to talk about our different views of Puerto Rican history and race relations. But, seeing as how this is a board game forum, it should probably stick a bit closer to the board game . I hope I have further articulated my position in a clear way. Thank you for the opportunity to sharpen my own thoughts, and I look forward to hearing more of yours.
This post has been removed by a moderator - Dismissive/Antagonistic
I don’t recall anything getting “ironed out” in the mid 2000s - my experience was getting shouted down and tut tutted by the “it’s just a game” crowd. Funny how mad people are at the new ascendancy of “critical race” theory. Some of us have been here the whole time.
I like the changes to the new edition presentation. I really do. Yes, there are a few more issues I would like to see addressed, as long as a new print run is up in the air. Can’t speak for anyone else, but I truly want to just have a reasonable discussion and not take anyone’s game away.
Pretending to ignore racism's persistent effects is the most efficient way for people who don't about the suffering it causes others to keep from having to look at it.
Puerto Rico could have been reimagined as a space-colonization game with very little changed in the mechanics. The theme of the island is *not* required.
Pretending to ignore racism's persistent effects is the most efficient way for people who don't about the suffering it causes others to keep from having to look at it.
Puerto Rico could have been reimagined as a space-colonization game with very little changed in the mechanics. The theme of the island is *not* required.
I don’t agree.
I usually pass on space themed games. Personally, I’m not a fan. The game mechanics has to be really good for me to prefer a space theme over a non-space theme.
I’m sure that if the theme was changed some people would like it better while others will like it less.
I know that every POC doesn’t universally get offended by this theme. We are a black family and have replaced our disk with dark brown meeples because it fits the theme better. Granted, we have really blinged out of copy of Puerto Rico with Etsy bits, trading post, and ships as well.
A question for Jason though - what additional changes would you like to see?
I watched your video several weeks ago. Even though I don’t necessarily agree with your position about changes to Puerto Rico, I really enjoyed your video on the subject and have enjoyed many of your other videos. I would love to hear your “perfect” list of Puerto Rico fixes for you. . . . assuming that you aren’t asking for a re-theme.
Keep up the good work Jason! I especially enjoy the videos with both you and Liz.
I usually pass on space themed games. Personally, I’m not a fan. The game mechanics has to be really good for me to prefer a space theme over a non-space theme.
I’m sure that if the theme was changed some people would like it better while others will like it less.
You are certainly not alone. People really resonate with the vibe of Puerto Rico the board game. The theme, setting, color scheme, all of that matters a lot. It also matters that it's a real place - Puerto Rico - rather than some made up tropical island. It tickles something in the back of our brains, particularly our desire for vacation and chill-axing. I can see why people resist a theme change so hard, even as I have my criticisms that the theme erases a lot of real stuff.
Quote:
A question for Jason though - what additional changes would you like to see?
I watched your video several weeks ago. Even though I don’t necessarily agree with your position about changes to Puerto Rico, I really enjoyed your video on the subject and have enjoyed many of your other videos. I would love to hear your “perfect” list of Puerto Rico fixes for you. . . . assuming that you aren’t asking for a re-theme.
Keep up the good work Jason! I especially enjoy the videos with both you and Liz.
Thanks for watching! Liz and I are just getting started .
I'm not going to lie. If I were king of the world, I'd retheme it. But I am not king of the world. I want to work with people, both the publisher and fans of the game. The publisher has actually reached out to me, and we're currently looking to schedule a dialogue. I don't want to say too much before that happens. Hopefully I'll be able to say more soon.
If you (the reader of this thread) want to learn more about the tragic history of slavery, and if you happen to find a translation in your language, I can recommend the following book: History of Slavery, by Dick Harrison. Harrison is a Swedish historian, and the book describes the history of slavery from a global perspective, from 5 000 years ago to present time.
The depressing truth seems to be that slavery has been practiced in almost all civilizations in all times, apart from developed countries in modern times. We humans unfortunately seem to think that conquered peoples do not deserve better treatment. Poverty and war produce slavery. This is history that we shy away from. For instance, how many of us knows about the slave trade in Eastern Africa, where 25 million people lived in slavery in the 19th century at the clove plantations in Zanzibar and the surroundings?
The most depressing news to me was that slavery is still far too common today. We only have statistics from democracies that actively try to fight slavery in their countries. The figures from India say that 9 million people live in slavery in the country. However, the situation is worse in countries with authoritarian regimes, but there we do not have any reliable figures. Historically women have been the main victims, but in the 16th century the technology and logistics had advanced to control larger groups of males, and male slavery became most widespread type for 300 years. Today the main victims are children.
So how should board games relate to slavery? I don't know. One alternative is to avoid any historical theme until modern times, and avoid parts of the world completely where slavery is still practiced. Another alternative is to spread knowledge about slavery by other means, and allow board games to skip depressing parts of our history to some extent. For instance, would Concordia be a better game if it incorporated slavery, as the goods were produced by slaves? Should Teotihuacan incorporate mass-scale human sacrifice in front of the newly built pyramid? Should Century: Spice Road incorporate the Eastern African slave trade?
I usually pass on space themed games. Personally, I’m not a fan. The game mechanics has to be really good for me to prefer a space theme over a non-space theme.
I’m sure that if the theme was changed some people would like it better while others will like it less.
You are certainly not alone. People really resonate with the vibe of Puerto Rico the board game. The theme, setting, color scheme, all of that matters a lot. It also matters that it's a real place - Puerto Rico - rather than some made up tropical island. It tickles something in the back of our brains, particularly our desire for vacation and chill-axing. I can see why people resist a theme change so hard, even as I have my criticisms that the theme erases a lot of real stuff.
Quote:
A question for Jason though - what additional changes would you like to see?
I watched your video several weeks ago. Even though I don’t necessarily agree with your position about changes to Puerto Rico, I really enjoyed your video on the subject and have enjoyed many of your other videos. I would love to hear your “perfect” list of Puerto Rico fixes for you. . . . assuming that you aren’t asking for a re-theme.
Keep up the good work Jason! I especially enjoy the videos with both you and Liz.
Thanks for watching! Liz and I are just getting started .
I'm not going to lie. If I were king of the world, I'd retheme it. But I am not king of the world. I want to work with people, both the publisher and fans of the game. The publisher has actually reached out to me, and we're currently looking to schedule a dialogue. I don't want to say too much before that happens. Hopefully I'll be able to say more soon.
Ooh could you please keep us updated on that front? I might just wait a few years until a retheme comes out since I was just looking to get the second version cos I have issues with the usability of this new version. Only if it's just a retheme and not dumbed down though.
I wonder what themes you and the publisher would be discussing, because Alea does not stray too far from historical settings outside of Broom Service/Witch's Broom does it?
Here's my 2 cents on the issue. The issue regarding boardgames depicting colonialism is not just that people are trying to be politically correct and sanitise things. To say that slavery has existed throughout history so you have to incorporate it into a lot of games in order to be educational or just skip anything that could be related to history, would be a flawed argument I think. I feel that's supporting the idea that games like Puerto Rico do not have a problem, and that people are too pedantic.
I find that the issue lies with that these games exoticise colonialism from the perspective of the colonist. As a player you're playing from the perspective of the colonist. Please just take a a look at the covers. In the second edition of Puerto Rico the character in the foreground is an immaculately dressed European man looking very much in control. There is a woman wearing native garb in the background. This depiction is not alone in Puerto Rico. Take a look at the covers of Mombasa or Macao. Those of you who know more about boardganung can probably name many more such games. It's not a coincidence that both the covers are like that - I would bet that these games also put you in the role of the colonist, and the native population would largely be either unimportant or not even part of the game.
I believe it is problematic if players find how the theme is tackled to be a non issue, or that they find the theme to be exciting and would not play the game if it is themed to sci fi or fantasy. That's just saying to me they are exoticising or even fetishising colonial, which I argue is the intent, even if it's subconscious, of such games.
It is said that Mombasa is undergoing a retheme. Pfister has written that he really doesn't like the theme, which is in contrast to what he has written in the past when objections have been made on the issue.
I've been conscious to these issues and I play these games knowing them, so I am wary, similar to the way advertisements work subconsciously on our minds, the possible fostering of colonialist romanticist attitudes for players who are not as aware.
I am interested to find out if the percentage of people who come from backgrounds that are affected by colonialism take more issue with how these games are tackled than white Europeans.
With these German style games moving from a European base to a broader global market I theorise that these issues will be less in games moving forward as publishers will find that their games will sell better if they can be better related to by a more global target audience of varying demographics.
To say that slavery has existed throughout history so you have to incorporate it into a lot of games in order to be educational or just skip anything that could be related to history, would be a flawed argument I think. I feel that's supporting the idea that games like Puerto Rico do not have a problem, and that people are too pedantic.
I totally understand that people find the theme of Puerto Rico offensive. I hope for a retheme as well. I agree that publishers will understand that there is nothing to gain in making parts of the player base upset. Games with colonial themes will probably fade away with time.
Many games with historical themes are problematic, when you look at them in more detail. I have problems with war themed games, especially games set in world war 2, like Memoir '44: Eastern Front, where indescribable horrors are turned into a family adventure.
I do not understand any meaningful differences between "liberationism" and critical theory, particularly when it comes to the other points I'm about to make. You seem to be trying to highlight ways in which your perspective is trivially different from critical theory as a way of dodging criticism.
Everything is not politics. Vacations and escapism are not political acts for most people. They are apolitical. And being able to say that is not a function of power or privilege.
Vacationers should not feel any guilt for rural poverty in the countries they visit. If it weren't for them, there would be even more poverty. The wealth created in global capitalism wasn't stolen from anyone. Division of labor + trade created that wealth from thin air. Most importantly, moralizing with bogus economic theories is largely irrelevant to the Puerto Rico board game.
Many people want forced labor in their escapism. It's fun to pretend to be the slavemaster. The idea that this is wrong, and the idea that people who want this are in some way morally compromised, contains flawed assumptions. Chiefly, fantasy does not impact reality in the way you seem to think it does. Social constructionists believe that our fantasies deeply inform our thoughts and actions, but there is no legitimate evidence to back this up. For many people, dark fantasies are actually an escape valve which have a positive impact on real world biases.
There are no meaningful issues with escapist fantasy versions of real places. You acknowledge that most gamers would agree with me, but you want to discuss these issues because you follow a "liberationist" ideology which insists that there are issues with escapist fantasies. But what exactly are these issues? Does playing Puerto Rico make people subtly racist against Latinos? Does playing Puerto Rico make people think colonial exploitation is ok? Those would be ridiculous claims. And if these actual "issues" with Puerto Rico are about even vaguer things like "cultural sensitivity," why is this really an issue? Like I already said, escapism is not always political. It may be for you, but that doesn't mean you can insist that it is for everyone else too.
Lastly you say you want MORE games, from multiple perspectives. We already have that. We have Spirit Island, Conquest of Paradise, Freedom Underground Railroad, an Infamous Traffic, Archipelago, and more. And more historical, less problematic games will be continue to be created in the future. Petitioning for a retheme or adjustments to Puerto Rico is one thing. Presumably you would also want the old theme with the old rules to never be reprinted again? Or would you really be ok with brand new copies of the old problematic version sitting on shelves next to new copies of your sanitized version? Having more games from multiple perspectives can't be a zero sum battle where all problematic games are replaced with inclusive rethemes. That doesn't result in more games, it results in the same amount of games we currently have.
This post has been removed by a moderator - Dismissive/Antagonistic
Everything is not politics. Vacations and escapism are not political acts for most people. They are apolitical. And being able to say that is not a function of power or privilege.
This only means it is not political for you. Your ability to use many of these locations is the result of political actions and decisions.
All I can say is that we seem to have an experience mismatch that probably can't be bridged in the span of an online forum. I come from a place where only the bosses took real vacations. I'm blessed to be able to take paid time off now and to go where I want. But that's not everyone. At some point, I hope to continue these conversations and share experiences in a better forum.
I am dedicated to the idea of "more games". My contention is that, with better representation on boxes, more diversity of themes, and different kinds of people making and publishing games, we will get more games from more sources. Someone will say, "well, what's stopping them?" There's a lot of barriers, soft and hard, cultural and economic, that's stopping some folks. Or at least slowing it down. The games cited like Spirit Island, Freedom, etc. are wonderful examples. More, please.
I have a different vision for Puerto Rico that isn't just some garbage sanitized version. I don't want to just satisfy the libs with a game no one wants to play. I hope to articulate it soon.
I was born and raised in the island. Our history like everyone else's is deep and complex. I saw in one of your replies that you can't stand the "it's just a game" bit.
But frankly to me, it's just a game. I don't have any negative feelings towards it at all, just neutral. Also, I found the "apology" by the editors in the newest edition pretty insightful.
Thanks for this response. The more I dive into this project and speak about it, the more I’m finding Puerto Ricans on both sides of the issue. That’s great! I love that there are so many of us playing games, speaking, and sharing opinions.
There’s a big problem with the “it’s just a game” argument - it cuts both ways. The majority of the time, “it’s just a game” gets used in response to the criticisms about all of the colonialism. “It’s just a game, not a big deal, stop complaining.” However, it can also go the other way. If “it’s just a game”, it should be really easy to change, and it should be no problem at all. If they released the game and people realized the printed island was accidentally in the shape of a middle finger, they stop the print run, change it for the next printing, and everything would be fine.
People who see the colonialism in this game are asking for a change. We have been asking for the whole time; it’s just louder now. There have been enough people complaining for enough time, just change it. No big deal, it’s just a game, right? But then there’s the backlash. “IT’S JUST A GAME, STOP GETTING OFFENDED!!” Literal quote I’ve gotten. If it’s just a game, why is this person using all caps?
That’s why I want to get out of the “it’s just a game” framing entirely. It’s a cultural product. People care on both sides. To me, that’s totally fine. Let’s work with it.
There are two things that are absolutely, undeniably, “facts don’t care about your feelings” true about Puerto Rico - 1) it’s a great game that people love, 2) it’s depicts colonialism while lying about it and saying it doesn’t (ie, little brown “colonist” pieces). I am plenty mad about that second fact. But the first fact is also true, so I don’t want to take it away from people (which is the real thing those people care scared of). I want to make something new. Please check out my video elsewhere in the forum if you are curious.
Thank you Jason. Keep it up. I know it is a slow process to help one set of eyes at a time see. Eventually we will be able to look back at how much as changed.
Big thanks for this thread, especially for mentions of Critical Theory. I haven't read the whole discussion yet, but it finally made me understand the roots of the current trend to "correct" every cultural item and where do the "everything is political" people come from. To the OP: I understand that you find "It's just a game" annoying - but I think the other side feels the same annoyance with "oh, here comes another who wants a revolution in a freaking board game. God, not again". It's a matter of a gap in worldviews. Some context would certainly help - when I was first met with these kinds of discussions, I was completely confounded about where those ideas are coming from. I saw people wanting to sanitize a small detail because they found it offensive - same way Victorians probably fainted at a mention of a penis. Now that I know the things you care about and that you believe that especially small casual depictions cause harm (even though I don't understand the proposed mechanism for that harm yet) - I may not care, I may not agree, but I can see where you're coming from. I feel this is very helpful to the discussion.
Big thanks for this thread, especially for mentions of Critical Theory. I haven't read the whole discussion yet, but it finally made me understand the roots of the current trend to "correct" every cultural item and where do the "everything is political" people come from. To the OP: I understand that you find "It's just a game" annoying - but I think the other side feels the same annoyance with "oh, here comes another who wants a revolution in a freaking board game. God, not again". It's a matter of a gap in worldviews. Some context would certainly help - when I was first met with these kinds of discussions, I was completely confounded about where those ideas are coming from. I saw people wanting to sanitize a small detail because they found it offensive - same way Victorians probably fainted at a mention of a penis. Now that I know the things you care about and that you believe that especially small casual depictions cause harm (even though I don't understand the proposed mechanism for that harm yet) - I may not care, I may not agree, but I can see where you're coming from. I feel this is very helpful to the discussion.
Thank you for your response. I’ll say that in order to truly understand the discussion, you need to understand this - ultimately, both sides want the same thing. More games. Better games. Preserve the ones we have and make the new ones better.
The left thinks the right are a bunch of white male jerks that want to preserve social hierarchy. The right thinks the left is a bunch of whiny babies that want to cancel things that hurt their feelings. These are stereotypes we need to reject and overcome. Sure, elements of that exist on both sides. But to really understand the people who put thought into this stuff, you need to look past the left/ right stereotypes.
I say that because of your last statement - thinking that lefties like me want to change board games because they “cause harm”. That makes it seem like we only want to stop a thing. Therefore, we’d be happy with cancelling because it stops a thing (ie, harm). Incorrect. Things like reinforcing stereotypes, telling historical stories that lie, casually depicting horrible stuff, etc., pisses off people who are already here, but also keeps others from wanting to play. Fewer players playing means fewer players designing.
The hobby is growing. Some people think it is despite the lefty activism. It’s actually because of it. Not the Reddit trolls and Twitter flamers, but the smart activists who do a lot of work behind the scenes because it’s long and hard and quiet. We don’t cancel games - we make more games. If my conservative friends don’t buy that, well then, the conversation will continue.
Thank you for your response. I’ll say that in order to truly understand the discussion, you need to understand this - ultimately, both sides want the same thing. More games. Better games. Preserve the ones we have and make the new ones better.
I feel that's a bit of a blanket statement. We sure can agree on some things, like enjoying for games as a hobby. But we might fundamentally disagree on some others. For example, I feel you want to make the world better. I don't. Sometimes I feel I would like to make the world worse. On your gripes, I think we could partially agree - if, for example, plantation labor was mostly enslaved, then calling them "colonists" makes me uneasy, as it goes against my values of truth and not avoiding difficult things. But that's not always possible - sometimes there's a pure conflict of values, as for example with some people calling for censorship or enforced this or that in books/computer games. Their values of X (I'm guessing universal good?) go straight against my values of creative freedom. It's not possible to find harmony. Sometimes, it might be impossible to compromise.
Quote:
I say that because of your last statement - thinking that lefties like me want to change board games because they “cause harm”. That makes it seem like we only want to stop a thing. Therefore, we’d be happy with cancelling because it stops a thing (ie, harm). Incorrect. Things like reinforcing stereotypes, telling historical stories that lie, casually depicting horrible stuff, etc., pisses off people who are already here, but also keeps others from wanting to play. Fewer players playing means fewer players designing.
But that is a secondary sentiment, isn't it? I don't know about you, but I don't think many people would be as emotional about these topics if they didn't think it impacts the world outside of the game. And you might find it surprising I don't really care if my hobby is small or big (or maybe you don't, given the first paragraph).
About the right and left thing - you're correct in identifying my views would fall more on the right end in the US, with some caveats like e.g. religion. However, I mostly wanted to give you perspective of a person from a different part of the world with no knowledge of US cultural discourse or Critical Theory or anything - which I was when I first heard discussions like these. I feel you might get a "it's just a game" response even from liberal people out there, if they lack the wider context to your views.
It doesn't help that many Critical theory adherents - not you here - are so missionary (I'm lacking the proper English word here) in their manners. "you must"; "we need to"; "they have the responsibility to" and the implicit/explicit suggestion you're a bad person if you don't. I don't know if it's the views or the people, but when even a completely neutral person is confronted in this manner, the normal response will be antagonistic.
Quote:
(...) We don’t cancel games - we make more games. If my conservative friends don’t buy that, well then, the conversation will continue.
I applaud what you're saying. However, I can't help but mention the topic title itself is about changing the game of Puerto Rico
I enjoy engaging with my friends in Europe . It's not my worldview, so I learn with every interaction.
Criticism is not cancellation. Change is not cancellation. When I criticize the current vision of Puerto Rico, whether its the old 2002 version of this 2020 reimagined one, I do so with the intention of making it what I would call "better" - keep the mechanisms exactly the same, update the theme. Here's my video which describes what I would do, if I were the publisher - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iArLXVNbgzc. You can judge for yourself whether its "better" or not.
This post has been removed by a moderator - Dismissive
This post has been removed by a moderator - Derailing/Dismissive
No results available
Your Privacy
We rely on cookies to remember your preferences, login info, analyze website traffic, and serve you personalized content. My Options
Your Cookie Privacy Options
Cookie Usage
Below are the categories of cookies we use to ensure the basic functionality of the site and to enhance your experience.
We rely on these cookies to remember your preferences, login info, and prevent abuse and fraud.
These cookies measure how often visitors use our site and what features are popular. This information helps us build better experiences and optimize our site's performance.
Without these cookies, there will be reduced functionality of embedded social media content, such as YouTube and Twitch videos. This functionality often involves embedded iframes, which may set other cookies.
Examples of cookies you might see are shown above. For connections to 3rd party sites such as Google, cookies may be sent that were set elsewhere on the internet; we do not use these cookies, and have no access to them. The lists of example cookies above should include all domains for which cookies are set, but may omit some 3rd party cookies, especially in cases where we embed 3rd party content, such as youtube videos.
. I hope I have further articulated my position in a clear way. Thank you for the opportunity to sharpen my own thoughts, and I look forward to hearing more of yours.
