What You Know Isn't The Truth And What The Truth Is You Don't Want To Know

• 11Oct 08

  Society: North American Cultural (Ethnic Origin) Problems Part: I-I

  Reality vs. Corruption

  

  During the ice age the Aboriginals cross-ed an iced bridge from Asia to Canada where they started to head south downwards to America. Wrong, Aboriginals were here for a long time even before some strange magical iced bridge. Aboriginals are a cross of Indian and Asian because the Europeans thought they were in India. Wrong, Aboriginals have nothing to do with the Asian (race) community nor the Indian (race) community the Europeans just named them that because of poor navigation. Europeans didn't need help of the Aboriginals and are as powerful today because of their dedication. Wrong, the Aboriginals helped the Europeans (explores, traders, trappers) settle in the new land and as Europeans adapted to agriculture livelihood more European immigrants settled. The Aboriginal's way of life wasn't different from the European's and got along nicely. Wrong, the Aboriginal's attitudes way of life differed from the European's, but with the European's superior technology (example: Railroads, guns), larger numbers they used/implied brute force to coincide with the treaty process. The treaty process was the remove the Aboriginals out of the way of the European settlement and so began the Euro-Canadian domination of Aboriginals in Canada. I'll be talking about the issues in the past to present, how things should really be, and tragedy of the corruption's outcome.

  

  Let's start by, the French being challenged by the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 and Conquest on the Plains of Abraham in 1759. Eventually by the time of Confederation there were two social groups (English/French) and was overall being controlled by the British. John Porter's definition of the "Charter group" ignored the existence of Aboriginals in the already resident in the territory, the point of the charter group was in control (immigrant) ethnic groups to make resident in unoccupied territory. The British had higher status and the French had lower status that resulted in enforcing subordinate status/power to the Natives/other ethnic groups. Several features are a result of Canadian's society cause of this. One, the framework of the new society was based on British institutions and traditions even if other ethnic groups didn't appreciate (Native). Two, British allowed francophones (French-Canadians) to keep some control over "Quebec" and with the conflicts of the French/English having different interpretations of ethnic power relationships. This resulted in two official languages due to the fact the French had lower status French became the official second language of Canada. Three, due to the ethnic identities, conflict of loyalties between charter groups it triggered a pattern for other ethnic groups to keep their identity too. The French/British were in conflict it had a greater built-in tolerance for perpetuation of ethnic identities.

  

  The francophones over the years have sustained their ethnic identity through the province of Quebec and is gaining more political power to do so. The Anglophones (English-Canadians) feel that they're part of the Canadian minority linguistic making them feel threatened by the French community. The Quebec government able to make ethnic claims it inspired and Ukrainians in Manitoba, northern Saskatchewan, and Alberta eventually obtaining language support in the school systems. This lead to francophones trying the same thing leading to rejection. Inuit in Nunavut have some school instruction, as well as broadcasting in their native tongue. The one important effect was the segregation seen in the urban areas.

  It's important because 94% of all immigrants who arrived in the '90s located in census metropolitan areas, and 73% chose Toronto, Vancouver, or Montreal. The least segregated was the Western/Northern Europeans, Central/Eastern Europeans with Italians somewhat segregated, and the Asians/Blacks to be the most segregated. As you can see there is segregation between different Caucasian groups, to the different races like Asian/Black that is still present today. With many movements to make immigrants to feel like home away from home is deriving from the importance of the Aboriginal's culture.

  

  Immigration can be looked at in waves and I will assure you this was not random, but intended by the government still to this day. First wave, the British Isles, European (White/Caucasian); second wave, Asian, Middle Easterns, and South/Central America; third wave, by races other than white followed by Native People, French, British, and Europeans. This all happened because the government wanted to express the policy concerning suitability of the migration group. This lead to favouritism (Elitism) from towards British people and North European countries to come over settle in Canada. In 1967 a point system introduced to evaluate the merits of potential immigrants. Eventually lead to discrimination so a new Immigration Act introduced in 1978.

  Immigration Streams 1956-60:

  Europe: 57.2%

  United Kingdom: 28.3%

  United States: 6.9%

  Asia: 2.6%

  Oceania: 1.7%

  South & Central America: 1.3%

  Africa: 1.0%

  Caribbean: 0.9%

  Immigration Streams 1998-2002:

  Asia: 51.47%

  Europe and the United Kingdom: 19.1%

  African and the Middle East: 18.7%

  South & Central America: 8.0%

  United States: 2.6%

  Source: Statistics Canada Catalogue 91-527 and Citizenship & Immigration Canada, Facts and Figures 1998 and 2002: Immigration Overview.

  

  I will stop here for the past, but this will eventually lead to Canada having no cultural identity since it's catering to immigrants ethnicities. Don't get me wrong keeping your ethnic identity is fine, but changing the Nationalities' ethnic origin to me is wrong. This should get you to think about what North America is and what kind of identity is being represented? Why Canadians and Americans are allies, yet the people in power for each country is just settlement disputes. Almost to the point where War is caused by immigration differences between Caucasian vs. Caucasian (Canada) and Caucasian vs. World (America).

  Mental Note: If wrong feel free to correct me.

  Related Blog: Ethnicity

  • Posted Oct 11, 2008 4:07 pm PT
  • Category: Editorial
  • 0 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 7Oct 08

  Explanation: Gamers Defined

  Reasons for my Choices

  

  Casual Gamer: A permissive person who plays at irregular / infrequent intervals.

  • Neutral Gamer: A type of person who really enjoys the time playing.

  • Impulsive Gamer: A type of person who just plays seeing it as second nature.

  With the "Casual Gamer" I wanted it to be a definition of how they somehow happen to play games by chance instead of choice or is unconcerned with video games altogether. I also used my experience with another medium and how tolerant I am towards it. I don't go looking for the medium, but it comes by me I'll watch if everyone is doing it.

  

  Hardcore Gamer: A Person who knows the basics of the industry, is an informed gamer, generally challenges themselves/sets goals, knows what they want, and strives to get it, is what centrally drives them to games.

  • Cyber Athlete/Professional (Pro) Gamer: Is a type of person who plays games for money almost to the point where it's like a career or looking for money by playing video games.

  • Retro Gamer: Is a type of person who enjoys playing/collecting vintage games and can't live without the backward-compatibility/emulators on platforms.

  • Import Gamer: Is a type of person who loves playing games that aren't from their region even if it's in a different language.

  • Elite Gamer: Is a type of person who knows a lot about their particular platform, thinks it's the best no matter what, and would rather be caught dead instead of playing games on the rival platform(s).

  • Fanatic (Fan-Base) Gamer: Is a type of person who can be a follower in numbers/sales (National Purchase Diary), games (franchises, series), genres (Real-Time Strategy, First Person Shooter), developer(s)/person(s), products (toys, special controllers, special canned beverages), and overall have an intense liking, occasionally has an overwhelming obsession.

  Mental Note: There might be other types of hardcore/casual gamers.

  

  What I'm going to talk about here are "Elite Gamers" and "Fanatic Gamers" to show you why I made them significantly different. I did mention why in the original, but I'm hoping this can make people understand better. Fan, is a devotee of a pop star, sport, or hobby. Fanatic, a person who is excessively enthusiastic about something. Elite, most powerful, rich, or gifted members of a group; a belief that society should be governed by a small group of superior people. I gave this definition because I wanted to show that being a fanatic doesn't necessarily mean you have negative qualities. Being a fanatic just means you are an ardent supporter of something. In the gaming community for some reason sees being a "fanatic" means you possess negative qualities.

  

  A good example would be in a rugby game you'll have some players you genuinely get hyped up for a game, while others love the sport they just don't show it as openly. A movie in 2005 was about a diehard Red Sox fan with a girlfriend in "Fever Pitch" starring Drew Barrymore and Jimmy Fallon. A lot of people will say a fanatic will go beyond the social norms. Then you have to ask yourself, what is the social norm and who defines it? Is talking in slang deriving from the "social norm" is being gothic deriving from the "social norm?" To me this varies on person to person even down to profession, age, or intelligence can determine that "social norm."Someone with a PHD (Doctor of Philosophy) can talk very different from a teenager or someone who's married with kid(s) compared to someone who single with no kid(s).

  

  Without being too sidetracked there will be something we all get obsessed over with and I think being a hardcore gamer would require some form of fanaticism. Considering the tile "hardcore gamer" should imply that you have some kind of intense liking, would it make sense if you moderately like video games still being called hardcore? In the movie "Fever Pitch" a fanatic doesn't necessarily mean you're ready to fight someone who is a fanatic of something opposite in the medium you're interested in. You can easily say anyone who dresses up as a video game character derives from the social norm, one, they're grown adults two, it isn't Halloween. At the same time wouldn't that be the social norm in that particular place or industry? At the same time some people can cross the line even for gamers (COD4 Psycho) on YouTube than there are the gamers who boost/smack talk/taunt that isn't crossing the line, hey what are achievements / trophies for?

  

  It's obvious of why I would connect what is a fanatic in the gaming industry to "elitism" and just twisted it a little. Instead of being upper ****they just think they're upper ****based on the platform they choose, think it should dominate, and will never touch the rival's platform.

  In the end it will depend on what you consider the "social norm" and creating new definitions to fit those particular criteria. As each generation grows up we're as a society is becoming more acceptable to different types of people. Women are being seen as human beings and taking care of a child can be the equivalent to two full-time jobs, while society understands war can make men develop psychological side effects. Eventually I think the "social norm" will be defined by a psychologist and not by society itself.

  Related blog: Gamers Defined

  • Posted Oct 7, 2008 1:24 pm PT
  • Category: Opinion
  • 4 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 3Oct 08

  Society: Gamers Defined

  Defining a Gamer

  

  Game - amusement or pastime; contest for amusement; single period of play in a contest; an activity distinct from work with rules, challenges, and interactivity; scheme or trick; animals or birds hunted for sport or food; their flesh. -v gamble. -adj brave; willing. Gamely adv gaming gambling. Gamekeeper, person employed to breed game and prevent poaching. Gamesmanship, art of winning by cunning practices without actually cheating. Gamer - ? There is no formative definition of a gamer let alone what is a casual to hardcore gamer until now. Well I'll be trying to define it, while at the same time categorizing/defining gamers. Whether they're athletes or not will be for another time, but for now I'll tell you the categories and what/why I go into a specific category.

  

  Since many words come from other words it'll be natural that I use pre-existing words to define words in the gaming community. What I find with people who try to define what is casual and hardcore they don't break it down into sub-categories. Let's start with the title "Casual Gamer" is just a permissive person who plays at irregular / infrequent intervals. I would say there are two types of casual gamers the one (Neutral Gamer) that really enjoys the time playing and the other (Impulsive Gamer) who just goes with the flow seeing it as second nature. Now going to the hardcore gamers where I think many people should really use sub-categories since there are so many different levels.

  

  As for the main category the "Hardcore Gamer" is someone who knows the basics of the industry, is an informed gamer, generally challenges themselves/sets goals, knows what they want, and strives to get it; is what centrally drives them to games. I've been searching the internet for what people thought and will put other types of gamers under the hardcore category. First up will be the cyber-athlete/professional (pro) gamer, is the type of person who plays games for money almost to the point it's like a career, or is looking for money by playing video games. Retro gamer, is a person who enjoys playing/collecting vintage games and can't live without the backwards compatibilities on consoles/emulators. Import gamer, is a person who loves playing games that aren't from their region even if it's a different language than theirs.

  Elite gamer, is a person who knows a lot about their particular platform, thinks it's the best no matter what, and would rather be caught dead instead of playing games on the rival platform(s). Fanatic gamer (Fan-base), is a person who can be a follower of the numbers/sales, games (franchises, series), genres (Real Time Strategy, First Person Shooter), developer(s)/person(s), products (toys, special controllers, special canned beverages) and overall has an intense liking, occasionally has an overwhelming obsession. This term is altered in the gaming community for some odd reason, but I personally think it (Fan-boy/girl) should be called "Elitism" not "Fanatics'." I believe being a fanatic draws gamers together like Trekkers /Trekkies at Star Trek conventions.

  

  As you can see being a hardcore gamer isn't defined by how much you play, but your incentive to play. With all hardcore gamers they're well informed about the gaming industry otherwise they wouldn't be able to import games knowing the names of the games they want, or even knowing how to play/purchase games from previous generations. Remember now this isn't a surgical operation where you have to meet certain criteria to be called hardcore; example playing a single game for at least 6-12 hours straight. You can also be more than one if you think you just don't fall into one type of hardcore gamer, but at least gives you an idea of where I'm heading with this.

  

  What type of gamer am I? Well I'm the hardcore fanatic gamer and people will most likely strongly dissagree with my definition or think I'm really arrogant. Well I'm proud to be a fanatic, but I wouldn't say I'm authoritative. At the same time I do try to set new standards to open people's minds. Technically speaking you can create a Neutral "Hardcore" Gamer category if you really want to be categorized, where you don't really do anything special. For the most part most gamers are "Fanatic Gamers" if you really think about it. I'm more of a hardcore - fanatic I play games to beat them, have fun, and go online. You can call me a fanatic gamer because I'm a fan of Metal Gear Solid and Gran Turismo Series with many more on the list. You can also go by genre and say I play a lot of third peson shooters, racing games, and first person shooters.

  I'm also well informed about games in the sense that I know what's coming out, what the game's features are, and have account(s) on gaming sites for updates. What I think makes me a hardcore gamer is that I strive for the challenge, yet that challenge varies from person to person. I usually play games no lower than Normal, but usually play on the hardest difficulty settings. Another hardcore gamer might want to beat a game under a certain time or collecting achievements/trophies in their games. A casual gamer wouldn't be interested in getting too involved in the game. Hence, the lack of depth in with games that is labelled as casual, pickup and plays mechanics.

  I find that when a journalist or user tries to define what is a casual gamer to a hardcore gamer they list criteria, not characteristics. A combination of qualities distinguishing an individual should be the definition. Just like in real life I'm not so much a sports fanatic so I'm a casual sports person. Yes, believe it or not I don't enjoy watching too many sports besides fighting or unless I'm watching myself play sports, lol. Then you'll have you sports fanatics where they check the stats of their teams to heart, collect the cards, or even jerseys of their favourite team/player. For the fact I'm even doing this shows how serious I am on the topic that will automatically ****fy me as a hardcore gamer because of how much depth I have on the topic.

  As you can see a casual gamer plays games in irregular / infrequent intervals, hardcore gamers have priorities, and why I should be called a hardcore gamer.

  Mental Note: There might be other types of hardcore gamers, but wanted to make this short as possible, if you can call it that?

  Related Blog(s): Gamer Critics, Gamer Fanatics

  • Posted Oct 3, 2008 8:53 pm PT
  • Category: Opinion
  • 1 Comment
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts