Infestation 88 developer, Nightmare Forge Games, have responded to claims that the ‘88’ in the game’s title refers to the Neo-Nazi salute.
Infestation 88 developer, Nightmare Forge Games, have responded to claims that the ‘88’ in the game’s title refers to the Neo-Nazi salute.
This is a word game that cryptofascists play; they’re quite open about using it to recruit people.
They love the plausible deniability, because it makes people who don’t know about the word game think the people who do are being ridiculous.
Was this a false positive? Perhaps. Is the game worse off for changing the name away from a fascist dog-whistle? I don’t know, it looks pretty terrible in any case.
Regardless, there are ways for a company to make it clear that they are not fascists even if they want to stick to their name. Maybe you’re right and we should just ignore the cryptofascist messaging game, but that just presents more problems in my opinion.
I mean, they already changed the name and said they had no idea about other meanings of the number 88.
My issue isn’t with the concept of dog whistles, it’s that when that’s all you have, it’s not a falsifiable accusation.
A subtle or weak connection doesn’t weaken the accusation, it almost makes it stronger.
Denying it makes it stronger, and responding to it to get rid of the connection entirely doesn’t even get rid of it.
I mean, look at your own language. A game briefly had the number 88 in it’s name, which was also 14 letters long if you count the space. They changed the name when someone told them there was a connotation, and said they didn’t know.
Based on that, you say there’s a possibility that they’re not secret fascists.
I’m not saying to ignore fascist messaging, but that literally every instance of the numbers 88, 14 or the word “ok” shouldn’t be assumed to be secret fascist messaging without some other reason to be suspicious.
If your entire reason to suspect then consists if secret messages with plausible deniability, the reality is that the rational thing to do is to not believe they’re fascists.
Those are some good points, I think we agree more than not. I was a bit sloppy with my language, too so thanks for the check.
:)
From what I’ve seen, no one here has been fundamentally disagreeing, but there’s been a lot of “unscientific” reasoning on display, which is a thing that I care about,