Political Strife Erupts in Second Life

covert.c writes "A real-life drama in the political world has spilled over into the virtual, as the Second Life headquarters of France's controversial Front National political party fell to violent protesters. The anti-FN activists, who had armed themselves with slogans, placards and weapons, leveled the digital buildings occupied by Front National. Second Life is often home to established political and social movements. It seems logical that opposing forces would also choose to make SL their stage."

Comments

Re:Some are more equal than others...

[arbarbonif]

Of course life is just a collection of atoms in an untidy heap.

That said, I hate getting ganked.

I'll have to disagree with you.

[haakondahl]

Who in France would not wish to turn back the clock?

Every night, over 100 cars are burned by the immigrants who will be the new France. The birthrate is below replacement rate. 43% of all children in France are born to unwed mothers.

France is quietly fighting an intifada in les banlieux (sp?), and France is losing. You might say that France is a quagmire.

If you like France the way it was, I recommend that you visit soon, and take lots of pictures. The France to come will be a Muslim nation. Some people like it that way. The Paristinians certainly would. Those who prefer the former and vanishing culture of France would like to turn back the clock.

This is hardly anti-Islamic sentiment, although it is anti-Islamist. Mods and replies, please draw the distinction before you accuse me of something terrible. There are plenty of Islamic nations out there, but only Islamists feel that France should also become such a place.

Are MMO games even allowed under Shari'a?

Re:I'll have to disagree with you.

[dangitman]

1) They play their music (heavy polka/bass beat) in their houses so loud at 2 am that you can hear it 3 blocks away.

As opposed to the white folk that play their music loud at 2am?

3) They are mostly catholic and are going to enforce catholic social values once they are in the majority.

Just like white folk enforce their values and religion when in the majority?

4) They mostly speak spanish- not english so I can't understand them.

Why is that a problem? If you want to understand them, you could learn Spanish. but why do you need to understand them, anyway?

5) Many feel they should take the area back to Mexico and carry mexican flags when they demonstrated recently.

And what's your point?

7) Their children tend to form gangs more than we did when we were children.

If they are breaking the law, arrest them, just like we arrest white kids who break laws.

8) They tend to favor more authoritarian governments (because of the catholicism I suspect).

Any evidence of that? America already has a pretty authoritarian government.

I don't - I could go on but why bother. You've already made up your mind.

Well, you definitely seem to have. I'm not sure how you can infer that from my question. All I asked was "what's the problem" - I didn't even put forward a position. But your answer mostly revolved around bigotry and intolerance of others, so I don't find your reasoning to be compelling. White folk have been in a majority for a long time, and have caused all sorts of problems. Might be good to experience being a minority for once, see what it's like. Once upon a time there were no white people in America, but they didn't have any problem with becoming a majority and pushing the native people out. The whites expected the natives to learn English, not the other way around. Pretty easy to talk shit from a position of privilege.

So, what's your solution to this "problem" that you perceive? Ban immigration?

Re:Left vs Right?

[Ford Prefect]

Really, do politics boil down to left and right? A single axis of political belief? Don't you think that's a little bit simplistic?

There's always the much-maligned Political Compass - with not one but two axes to look at. I posted a link to it a long time ago, and was immediately accused of it being slanted towards the left, or even as being a part of this hateful leftist conspiracy various Slashdotters appear so concerned about.

It's an interesting exercise anyway, even if you don't agree with its results.

Curious about this "Second Life" and coverage

[Jugalator]

Anyone else noticed quite a big jump in news stories just about the recent year or so about Second Life, despite still having a quite small highly active user base compared to World of Warcraft and the likes? Either it's somehow popular to report on this "unusual" game (personally I find it quite boring, although the stories are fun for laughs), journalists find the game "futuristic" in the sense of what it's doing ("Oooh, look, we found out news about this cool game where you can protest for/against the UN or whatever!"), or there's the tin foil theory with many Second Life gamers submitting story material to news sites, posting it in blogs, etc to generate coverage.

Personally, I don't really see the big deal. Some huge geeks started using a game as a platform for politics debates? What's new, really. People stand out in towns in WoW, Guild Wars, and other games and sometimes get into hot "religion and politics" debates. It's just more of the same, only that due to how Second Life works, they can take a more "practical" stance on it with crappy designed graphics looking like something out of the early nineties to help their cause.

Re:Pink Floyd

[mr100percent]

Let's hope it's better than Islam's "solution" for infidels

What, allowing them freedom to practice their own religion and protection by the Islamic government? Even Iran lets the Jewish MPs in office, and swear on the torah or bible.

Quit your FUD.

Re:Pink Floyd

[Original Replica]

"One of the greatest debates within the Muslim Ummah, one that causes division within the Islamic nation and that is often used by the enemies of Islam as a means of ascribing brutality to our religion is centered on the methods by which Islam was propagated throughout the globe. Was Islam spread by the sword? The quick answer to this question is a resounding yes and in this article, we hope to set the record straight using the evidence from the Qur'an and the Sunnah, the practice of the Guided Caliphs and the consensus of the righteous scholars of the Ummah, inshaAllah. While the evidences in this article are by no means exhaustive, inshaAllah they will be adequate to lay this matter to rest...The Prophet (pbuh) said to Abu Hurariah: "You (Muslims) are the best of people for mankind. You bring them in chains to accept Islam so that they end up in paradise (if they fully adhere to it and Allah accepts their deeds). " http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_internal.php? article=107152&list=/home.php

This is more the part of Islam that concerns me.

Re:Some are more equal than others...

[hey!]

You raise an interesting question.

If Second Life is a role playing game, then the attackers are just playing a different side.

So: when a real political organization establishes a presence in a game as themselves, do they get the same protections for their virtual activities (including speech) that they do for their real activities? If people silence them and destroy their assets in the game is it the same as taking the same actions outside the game?

I'd say no. There is a difference between actions in a virtual world and the real one, even if the parties are the same and the motivations are the same and the actions are parallel. What matters in the virtual world is the terms of service. If the attackers did not violate the terms of service set by the provider, then they were within their rights, which are completely defined by the provider. If you don't like it, you go to a different provider.

You have no such choice of real worlds.