There is currently a very funny, kind of sad dust-up over Helldivers 2, in which self-proclaimed “anti-woke” gamers have previously heralded it as a rare game where they believe “politics” does not play a factor. Their faith was been shaken by an Arrowhead community manager they believed they found to be (gasp) progressive who was then subsequently harassed, but their head-scratching reading of Helldivers 2 as a “non-political” game is worth examining.
The only thing that makes sense is that these players have the shallowest of surface-level readings of the game. You are a patriotic soldier serving Super Earth. You must kill bugs and evil robots trying to hurt your brothers-in-arms and innocent citizens. There are no storylines to insert progressive causes into, everyone wears helmets so no “forced diversity.” Therefore, no politics.
Of course, this is…wildly off the mark, as Helldivers 2 is about the most blatantly obvious satire of militaristic fascism since the film that inspired it, Starship Troopers.
I don’t disagree with this synopsis, but I’m sadly unsurprised that your familiarity with the source material stops at the movie — which, in fact, was preceded (nearly 40 years) & inspired by a (far better) book of the same name from Heinlein. 😅😶 What’s more, Helldivers 2 seems to take more cues from the book than the movie, and it does the original more honor than the cult classic did in '97, too.
Lastly, who in their right mind ever expects alt-right fucknuts to parse irony? Isn’t that integral to their M.O., the consistent whoosh so frequent that it must be like white noise in their skulls 24/7? (Yes, there’s a supremacy joke in there, but I’m too tired to dig it up)
We’re dealing with people who read at a fifth grade level at best. They barely understand the text, let a lone the subtext.
They’d have to know what the concept of subtext meant first, and then be able to perceive such, before even beginning to understand the blatant (to most anytime else in the human species) undertones of eviscerating sarcasm.
I think you are criticizing the movie for not being more overt in its political messaging. As a counterpoint, I think that if it had been more overt, it would have been less accessible overall and particularly to those who most need to be exposed to that message. It’s intentionally subversive, which means that it can exist in homes, in conversations, and in minds where a more direct stating of the same idea would be rejected out of hand.
I apologize if I gave you that impression, as that is incorrect and I completely agree with your assessment: the movie was a cult classic for many reasons that include it being just subtle enough to almost feel sincere but overt enough to deliver the cheeky dark humor that Heinlein himself was too fervent a fanboi to grasp.
Ah, OK… then what did you mean about the book being far better?
Those that don’t need their subversive undertones delivered with the subtlety of an axe handle behind the wood shed might recognize that the book is a far more effective source of multilayered and sardonic humor.