I've always been really interested in
history
so interested in fact, I got a useless degree in it
I also like video
games
I really liked video games
So you could understand why I've ended up
playing a lot of historical grand strategy games
I've also played popular
games like civilization and total war
and while those games are very fun and
relatively accessible
Neither have a level of detail that can compare to the
several series of games produced by Paradox Interactive
paradoxes games have
a reputation for depth that's pretty well deserved,
especially in comparison
to Civ or total war
but there's one big point that I want to discuss where I've found that they fail
when it comes to representing ideologies left-of-center there's a notable lack of depth
and an over-reliance on stereotypes that
ultimately originates in anti-left propaganda
Crusader Kings 2 and Europa
Universalis 4 are two of paradoxes
biggest and most recent hits in this
genre
set vaguely and the Medieval and Renaissance eras respectively
While the historical periods of ck2 and eu4 are
primarily dominated by what we now term
right or far-right politics with mostly
kingdoms some oligarch republics and a
little bit of democracy.
there are two games from paradox that cover later historical time periods when left politics were ascendant
these are the
Victoria and Hearts of iron series
For the sake of time I'll mainly focus on
the most recent installments: Victoria 2 and hearts of iron 4
real quick before I move past Crusader Kings,
you might have heard of the recent uproar from the
far right about the possible removal of
the phrase Dave's volt from the upcoming
Crusader Kings 3
I'm not gonna be talking about that since it's a bit outside the scope of this video but if
you do want to know more about that I
recommend AndarNation propaganda's video
Deus Vult and the paradox of
history, which I'll link in the description
but now let's get started
with Victoria 2
Victoria 2 covers the years 1836 to 1936.
Perfectly encapsulating an era of violent, frequently leftist revolutions.
To compliment this revolutionary period the game has mechanics covering the
political alignments of the populace,
their political consciousness and their
militancy
throughout the game the politics of the population shift from conservative and reactionary to liberal
and further left and then eventually to
socialism and communism
during this time period anarchism was one of the major revolutionary political forces
throughout Europe alongside socialism
and communism, which makes the two ways
that anarchism appears in these games
confusing and flawed
the most obvious appearance of anarchists are as a political faction called anarcho-liberals
you'll notice that these
anarcho-liberals appear to be flying
the black and red flag usually used to represent
anarcho-syndicalists and anarcho-communists
in these games however the
red and black flag is instead used to
represent literally any and all rebels,
regardless of what kind of rebel they may be
fascist, nationalists, religious,
whatever.. they're all going be flying this flag
while the flag of anarcho-communists and anarcho-syndicalists
appears in Victoria 2, these political
ideologies themselves... don't
the true identity of these anarcho liberals can be discerned by focusing on a key term in their description
free market
to further this point
when the anarcho-liberals take control of a country the government becomes a bourgeois dictatorship
ruled by free markets
without any government intervention like
minimum wages or limited hour workdays
based on these facts I have a hard time categorizing these guys as anarchists
without getting into the issues of
anarcho-capitalism overall, the fact that
these guys preferred form of government
is a dictatorship of the bourgeois is
enough for me to conclude that these
people don't represent the kind of
anarchists you'd find in the game's historical time period
and if paradox thinks they do... then paradox doesn't really know what anarchism is
the weirdest thing about the inclusion of these guys in the game
is the notable absence of non capitalist anarchism
weirdly left-wing anarchism isn't
represented as a party or ideology
despite having immense historical
significance during this time period
unlike the anarcho-liberals who weren't
really a thing
Victoria includes Pierre Joseph
Prudhon, considered by many to be the father of anarchism
but only as an invention that increases your country's prestige
with a little blurb very briefly mentioning libertarian socialism
in other words, just a little footnote like your country
getting credit for making impressionist
art or rubber vulcanization
the only other representation of anarchists is anarchic bomb throwers
a crime event that can occur in a territory of administration and crime-fighting
statistics are very low, which increases
the revolutionary desire of the territory
I'm not just complaining that
my favored political ideology isn't in a game i like
if there were no anarchists
and that would be one thing
but to include an anachronistic anarcho-capitalist faction when this was
such a heyday for actual anarchism... seems
weird to me
this time period covers the events of the Paris Commune of 1871, the Ukrainian free territory of 1918, and the
Korean anarchist Federation in Manchuria
of 1929
while each of these had a fairly brief existence at least they were... you know, real?
in the context of leftist history the Paris Commune is a famous event for both anarchists and communists
and yet it doesn't even get a blurb in an
event pop-up or anything like that
if we discount the game to anarcho-capitalists since they didn't actually exist
then the only portrayals of historical
anarchists in the game are as dynamite
obsessed criminals who don't have a
coherent ideology worth talking about
while this representation is far from
historically accurate it does line up
perfectly with stereotypes of anarchists
that were prevalent during this period
from "Anarchism in British public
opinion 1880 to 1914" by Haia Shpayer Makov:
in other words, Victoria twos depiction
of anarchists resembles historical reality
much less than it resembles old
propaganda that presented anarchism as
more of a symptom, even a criminal
pathology, rather than as an ideology and legitimate political movement
while anarchism is oddly snubbed by Victoria 2 despite its historical significance,
communism does appear, although its appearance is equally soured by stereotypes
while communism during this
period was an untested idea with many
different interpretations
Victoria 2 chooses to only represent communism as it existed in the early USSR
while certainly the most common examples of communism in modern minds are of totalitarian single-party States
this isn't so much due to the actual ideological underpinnings of communism
it has much more to do with what flavours
of communism have happened to be most
successful in a world overrun by
capitalist States all too willing to use
any means to restrict the possibility of structural economic change
simplifying communism down just to Marxist-Leninism
Due to its historical success only
makes sense if you ignore the fact that
the Marxist Leninist interpretation of
communism was largely shaped by the
political and economic situation of
Russia at the time of the revolution
rather than being a fully industrialised
democratic capitalist state like much of Western Europe
Russia before the Revolution was a feudal absolute monarchy
the method of centralized and
generally authoritarian rule by the revolutionaries
was undoubtedly influenced by the situation that they were trying to escape from
while this form of communism seemed to make sense to many Russians at the time
it generally didn't make as much sense in
many countries in Western Europe where
communist revolutions did take place but with less success
in countries with
well-developed democratic traditions
powerful trade unions and industrial
capitalism
a revolution of a more libertarian Marxist
character, with expanded Democratic possibilities, could have occurred
by ignoring dissenting opinions on the role of democracy in communism.
communist states in Victoria 2 are only ever able
to have a reactionary approach towards
political freedoms
in attempting to represent this via game mechanics, communism in Victoria 2
is inherently opposed to political reforms like expanding voting rights,
allowing labor unions, or having a free press
You can't do this to me, I'll strike!
the state forbid strikes
Wait till the union hears about this!
ah yes the Union, welcome to
our ranks number 1313
this results in strange situations where
you can have a communist government
supporting the legalization of slavery
Eh, the farm vote'll put a stop to this!
farmers don't vote anymore!
what'll I do for seed next year?
you won't have to worry about next year the state will do your planning from now on!
even if the Communists take power in a country via democratic elections rather than a revolution
they continue to support the rollback of voting rights regardless of the existing political situation
this is because, in Victoria 2s model,
an authoritarian dictatorship is the
preferred form of government for all communists,
which they will continue to agitate for until it is achieved
while this isn't accurate it does allow paradox to use a
simplistic and monolithic understanding
of communism
which, as I'll discuss later, has its inspiration in the anti-communist anxieties of the past
shifting our focus to the economic side
of communism in Victoria 2 doesn't make things much better
even though from an
economic perspective communism and
capitalism are usually considered polar
opposites,
Victoria 2 oversimplifies that continuum
so that the most communism you
can have is essentially just state capitalism
Laissez-Faire capitalism is
well represented, with capitalists making
sweeping economic decisions based on
whims, and dooming factories and workers to disuse and unemployment
on the other side, with a planned economy, the player decides which factories are built
and can subsidize the employment of workers
but beyond this there is no change in
the fundamental way that the economy is organized
by showing communism as just capitalism but the state has more control
the game glosses over the fundamental differences
in property relations between capitalism and communism
which is kind of the most important difference!
because the workers can't own the factories,
one of the main ideas of communism
and one of its biggest theoretical benefits: communal ownership of the means of production is impossible
while this may be, again, an attempt to simulate soviet-style communism
with de facto state ownership
acting as a proxy for worker ownership
the end result is that communism is "when the government does all the things"
which is the same level of understanding of communism you'd get from a PragerU video
if we jump forwards in history a little bit, we can see another recent entry in one of
paradoxes popular franchises, hearts of
iron 4, making a lot of these same mistakes
this supports the idea that Victoria 2's representation of leftist politics
isn't an exception... it's the rule
with hearts of iron 4 starting in 1936
there's a great opportunity to
present the events of the Spanish Civil War
a conflict in which both communism
and leftist anarchism played a big part
to summarize the conflict extremely briefly
it included both anarcho-syndicalists and communists
initially cooperating on the Republican side against Franco's fascists
ultimately this alliance broke down and the anarcho-syndicalist were driven out of power
and suppressed, by communist forces operating in concert with supporters from the Soviet Union
hearts of iron 4 has things go... a bit
different
immediately upon the outbreak of the war Republican Spain becomes just fully communist
anarchists are mentioned as part of the International Brigades
and as part of the forces on the Communist side
but this is only flavor text
the events within the Spanish Civil War on the anti Franco side,
like the conflicts between the soviet supported communists
versus anarchists and the anti
Soviet communists
aren't represented and ultimately the anarchists are only included as a footnote
unity within the Republican Spanish ranks is unquestioned
this view is in line with the anti-communist propaganda of the time
which represented the Spanish Civil War
as a simple struggle against godless
Bolsheviks by Franco's rebels
from "Red Scare 1936: anti-bolshevism and the origins of British non intervention in the Spanish Civil War":
fearing the nationalization of British companies holdings within Spain
and the possibility of communism
spreading into France and Portugal
should the Spanish Republicans be
victorious
British politicians pushed a strategy of non-interference
for themselves and for France
from the same source:
the British non-intervention strategy left
the Republican forces to rely heavily upon the Soviets
while Franco's forces received support from Italy
hearts of iron 4's configuration of Republican Spain as exclusively communists aligned with the USSR
erases the legitimate question of why the UK and to a lesser extent France
refused to provide material support to the Republicans in their fight against Franco
the excuse provided by British anti communist propaganda
is given undue precedence
compared to the actual reason:
fear of British wealth being expropriated by the proletariat
which led conservatives in Britain to quietly back Franco's fascism so that they wouldn't lose any of their money
ultimately, what does this revisionism accomplish
well, for one; it saves paradox time and effort
they don't have to explain or model a complicated multi-side conflict with internal struggles
it can just be fascism versus communism
it also saves them from having to get into what anarcho-syndicalism actually is
since in their representation it's mechanically identical to statist, Stalinist, communism
while both syndicalism and even anarcho-communism
are featured as sub ideologies in the game
sub ideologies are just labels, and
they don't have any mechanical effect
what this means is that even if you have
a nation which is labeled as syndicalist
or anarcho-communist, they remain statist
and authoritarian
again, this simplification ignores the real differences between leftist ideologies
and compresses them all into a Soviet shaped mold
a glaring example of this is revealed when we talk about elections
as a communist nation you can intentionally create support for democratic reforms,
open a national conversation about democracy,
and then ultimately, hold a referendum on
if democracy is right for your country
and if it is.. you stop being communist
communism and democracy in this game are mutually exclusive
what this means is that in the context of a continuum
between fascism, democracy, and communism
we see that hearts of iron 4 models its politics off of the horse-shoe theory
in hearts of iron 4 the differences between fascism and communism
are effectively just that fascism can make war declarations more easily
and communism can force other countries to become communist
neither can have elections and both are totalitarian
these mechanical similarities also extend into the economic systems in the game
since the economic options don't include anything
resembling a planned economy or
communism
they're just a continuum between an economy only producing civilian goods
and one only producing military items
which causes the economies of fascist and communist nations to be mechanically identical
this makes the differentiation between fascists and communists
just a question of what decorations you want on your authoritarian empire
I had to pick a side George, it was an aesthetic choice as much as a moral one
the problem with this goes back to the very narrow view of what communism can look like
which we also saw in Victoria 2 these
these games say.. communism can happen anywhere, but it can only be Stalinism
the belief that all communists are aligned
politically and ideologically
with the USSR, or more recently Communist China
has been the inspiration for anti-communist propaganda
from before the Spanish Civil War, through to the American Red Scare and beyond
on a mechanical level, this simplification of communists being indistinguishable from fascists
is likely inspired by, and in turn supports
that same long-running propaganda campaign to muddy the waters of what communism actually means
by turning communism into just another variant of fascism
you make communist ideology immediately dismissable by association
number one: the Nazis were of the left, the nazis were of the left
the split between the National Socialists and the communists
was a split over power, not over fundamental principle
and the fact is that the communists were Fascists
I don't draw a massive distinction really, ideologically
between Nazism and communism because they both have the same source
while the simplicity and shallowness of the portrayal of communism in these games
could be the result of some intentional anti-communist bias within paradox
it could just as easily be the result of lazy research and lazy implementation
this wouldn't be the only example of that either
for instance, in hearts of iron 4, Pol
Pot is listed as an anarcho-communist
which has no basis in reality that I
could find
and as numerous people on the forums pointed out:
Pol Pot would have been 11 years old at the start of this game in 1936
making it very odd that he'd be running Cambodia
another oddity is the description of the party that starts out in power in Austria:
the Austrian fatherland front
they're listed by Wikipedia as a far-right Austro-fascist party
but paradox has their government type marked as "centrist"
but...what does centrism as a government type devoid of any other context mean?
the description provided by paradox:
"centrism is a form of government which wants to achieve common-sense solutions
that appropriately address current and future needs
that support the public trust and serve the common good
with consideration of risk and capacity in
context of these needs
this is a super weird way to describe a Nationalist Party modeled after Italian fascism
if you look into things a bit, the Fatherland
front actually did *claim* to be nonpartisan
which I could see someone interpreting as non-political or centrist
but even a glance at their Wikipedia page shows this centrism to be less Angela Merkel...
and more Tim Pool
to clarify: I don't think that either of these things
are examples of paradox making a choice to whitewash a fascist party
or intentionally associating anarcho-communism with Pol Pot as some way to discredit the ideology
what's far more believable to me
is that these are examples of paradox making decisions quicker than they can really think about them
and skimming the surface of topics
where a deeper look would be warranted
I honestly think that this is a case of
quick low effort decisions being made
and it's in these situations where
propaganda can be the most effective
propaganda typically relies on quick and
simple explanations of complex issues
which makes it the perfect accomplice
for those trying to move quickly through complex topics
like a filled out answer sheet casually passed to you by someone who looks suspiciously like Mussolini
in this way grand strategy game development and propaganda
are sort of a match made in heaven
they have a symbiotic relationship
with propaganda facilitating easier production of games
which then spread that very propaganda
one last point I want to touch on regarding communism in these games
is the tone of the writing about it
going back to Victoria 2, the description of the communist workers goal of a stateless utopia
has to be qualified with the inescapable bloodiness of communism
and this trend continues on to hearts iron 4
with the description of Stalin
mentioning the great cost in human lives of Russian industrialization
interestingly, the description for
Hitler's Germany and Mussolini's Italy
don't mention their political or racist violence
and there's even a fawning description of Hitler's economic successes
that last point in particular is notable
because it's a commonly repeated talking point on the right
especially when they feel like they need
to say something nice about Hitler
if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well okay fine the
the problem is that he wanted, he had
dreams outside of Germany
hearts of iron 4 for takes a similarly negative tone towards communism
in the generic communist tech tree
with descriptions like:
"internationalism focus": ideology knows no borders
another nation may call itself sovereign but our convictions are above such claims
and "political correctness":
people holding mildly controversial or otherwise embarrassing opinions
appear to be concerned that there is a wide reaching conspiracy against them
this seems like an excellent idea
certainly political oppression existed within the USSR
and one could argue that communism is a
threat to a certain kind of sovereignty
but, this cartoonishly villainous
description of communism isn't matched
by a similar tone for the fascists
for example, some matching tech descriptions from the same level of the fascist tech tree:
"nationalism focus": our nation is unique and our political achievements could only have happened here
we must fight for it at any cost
and, "militarism": those who view the military as a necessary evil
are doomed to hesitate in the face of war
we will ingrain militarism into our culture to become a people of soldiers
so now communism and fascism aren't just being portrayed as equally bad anymore
now we've got descriptions which have a
specifically negative tone directed towards the Communists
while these games generally pretend that they're non-political
in most of their descriptions and representations
the idea of a non political game about
history is an obvious oxymoron
even with non political as their goal
the biases of the developers will inevitably slip into their work
particularly the unconscious biases
and unconscious biases are often formed from messages and imagery found in propaganda
so, ultimately, what are these games
saying about leftist ideologies?
one consequence of the 'Stalinism only' communism of these games
is that they reinforce existing cultural
stereotypes about communism
in the same way that conservatives who constantly ask "but what about Venezuela?"
are repeating an unhelpful and inaccurate
thought terminating cliche
these games are repeating an older set of cliches that prevent serious engagement with the idea of communism
basically... it's lazy
it means the developer doesn't need to really think about how communism works
outside of 'fascism without some of the nationalism'
and it means that the people playing these games
won't be challenged on their existing beliefs about what communism is and how it works
while this is expedient, it has the major
downside of repeating propaganda uncritically
and carrying water for rabid anti-communists, who tend to have fascist leanings
while the messages these games
have about communism
are pretty obviously the result of oversimplification stemming from a reliance on propaganda
the messages about anarchism are much less clear
anarchists are, according to these games:
simultaneously not important enough to meaningfully include
but also one of the most prevalently annoying types of rebels in Victoria 2
as the Anarcho-liberals
the games say that anarchism is a distinct leftist ideology
but also that it isn't different from communism in any way
and can be folded into communism without discussion
Anarchists are represented as bomb-throwing assassins
except where they need to appear as rebels who desire a dictatorship of the rich
the anarcho-communist flag is used to represent all non-government armed forces
and yet, the flag itself also somehow represents nothing at all
the overall message from the developers seems to be:
"we don't really understand anarchism, and you don't need to either"
these messages have the end result of making left-wing ideas either undesirable
or at least impossible to intellectually engage with
due to the frequent repetition of anti-communist and anti anarchist stereotypes
these propaganda-driven stereotypes rely on being able to explain ideas quickly and simply
making them easier to consume by a general audience than accurate information
this then creates a snowball effect of propaganda
the stereotype appears in films books and newspapers
at a higher rate and volume than the truth
can keep up with
and then ultimately this regurgitation becomes accepted fact for a large portion of society
if you've seen my video about capitalism and the Sims
then you know that paradox aren't alone in conveying
pro-capitalist, pro-status quo, anti left propaganda in their games without necessarily even realizing it
what makes the repetition of propaganda worse in this case
is that while the Sims is pretty explicitly an aspirational fantasy game
that only kind of looks like reality
paradoxes games are intended to be based on the real world, and its real history
if it seems like I'm giving paradox a lot of benefit of the doubt
as far as ignorance versus maliciousness in spreading these messages
that's because paradox are, by their own admission, armchair historians
"Does Paradox Interactive have historians on staff when making a new game/expansion?"
"we don't really, we are armchair historians just like everyone else
edit: actually now that we are much
bigger we probably do have someone
that studied history in university or something
but for the games you mentioned, definitely not"
in light of comments like this it's easy to see why
in the rush to complete these projects
they found themselves at the mercy of relying on the simplest explanations available
which in this case, happen to have their roots in propaganda
by presenting communism as only Stalinism
and the leftist anarchism as either
non-existent
or not meaningfully different from Stalinist communism
these games create a situation where the biggest ideological gap
is only between capitalist democracy and the mostly identical extremes of fascism and communism
this is not only a silly oversimplification
but also ignores that capitalism and fascism frequently have a symbiotic relationship
and that communism is not inherently antithetical to democracy
these decisions to avoid a nuanced understanding of anything left of center
ultimately results in a kind of "safe space"
for people who are into centrist and right-wing ideologies
centrists won't be challenged on the idea
that maybe a neoliberal democratic capitalism isn't the final "correct" ideology
far-right people won't be challenged in their belief that communism is a murderous death cult
one which *their* murderous death cult of super racists have to violently oppose at any cost
and neither group will be challenged by the
idea
that anarchism is a well-established political ideology
and not just an excuse to spray-paint the cool 'A' on things and listen to loud music
in real life, a lot of people aren't satisfied with the status quo
which makes sense, because the status quo sucks
and I think it's worth pointing out that the messaging of these games
funnels people to the right if they're
dissatisfied with the status quo
since the left isn't presented as having
anything worthwhile to say
the far right becomes an appealing option to folks who are looking for radical change
at the end of the day, these mechanics find
themselves serving the same
conservative, anti-communist, and anti-anarchist purposes that they were originally designed for
over the last couple years paradox have made moves to distance themselves
from the more terrible far-right sections of their audience
and while these changes are a step in the
right direction
they don't change the fundamental
mechanics of their games
that create an atmosphere that is conducive to far-right rhetoric
fortunately it appears that paradox are planning
to make positive changes in a mechanical direction as well
the recently announced la resistance expansion for hearts of iron 4
promises an expanded Spanish Civil War
with mechanics for both non-Stalinist aligned communists and anarchist forces
assuming these promises are fulfilled
the result will be a more fleshed-out and fair portrayal
of both anarchists and communists than have ever been seen in these games
by actually changing the mechanics surrounding these ideologies
paradox can finally escape from the propaganda cycle that these games have thus far been trapped in
by extension, this also means that their
audience will be exposed to these ideologies
in a way that isn't so mired in the baggage of propaganda
for the people who like these games
it's not just real history that inspires the imagination
it's the possibility of what history 'could have been'
as a result of these positive changes
from this more impartial starting point
what 'could have been' for both anarchism
and communism
can, in the imagination of the audience, turn into 'what could be'
hey folks, hope you enjoyed my video
if you did like my video then you'll definitely like my friend Becca's videos
and she just came out with a new one about Elizabeth Warren
and how she's not as progressive as you might think
that'll be linked in the description
(off camera) do a little 'thumbs up' and just say like 'check it out'
check it out!
