Is chess racist?

[Havet]

Why do the white pieces start first?

Isn't it representative of white supremacy in traditional board games?

On the other hand, we have Checkers, where black pieces start first. Do you consider that a political correct board game, as opposed to chess?

And why do most card games have a white background instead of a black one? (more food for thought)

I know this is a TRIVIAL issue, but a pertinent one nonetheless.

Share your thoughts.

[NewSocialist]

:laugh:

[Tifosi]

You must be drunk

[Os Cangaceiros]

Yes.

Also racist: Spy vs. Spy

[Invincible Summer]

Why do the white pieces start first?

Isn't it representative of white supremacy in traditional board games?

On the other hand, we have Checkers, where black pieces start first. Do you consider that a political correct board game, as opposed to chess?

No, checkers is clearly an afro-chauvinist game meant to glorify the subjugation of native populations.


I know this is a TRIVIAL issue, but a pertinent one nonetheless.
I think this is a contradiction in terms.



I will now print out all my papers on brown paper (as we all know that brown is the color of all colors mixed together) with text in a different shade of brown to show my solidarity with all races. Down with reactionary paper/typeface!

[Tifosi]

What about tumbling monkeys? That has to be racist :lol:

[Revolution starts with U]

yes

[F9]

Trivial issue?!?!

I have seen some conspiracy minds, but hell, you are taking it to a whole new level!:lol:;)

[Aloysius]

I'm not sure about why white goes first, but I always do rock-paper-scissors to decide who goes first.
On the card-background question, I think it's just for clarity and contrast, but one of my friends had a kick-ass deck that was black with white images.

[Tifosi]

And where you watching Genus on BBC 2 last night Havet?:laugh:

[Dean]

I know this is a TRIVIAL issue, but a pertinent one nonetheless.

Share your thoughts.
No, its both trivial and non-pertinent.

Jesus Christ. Does anyone give a shit if the historical facts of chess piece colors reflected the material racism than has pervaded society? If you want to talk about this, you should take a more comprehensive look at the issue of color, the connotations of color, and how it relates to race.

[danyboy27]

meh, where i came from, the black always start first.. go figure.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

meh, where i came from, the black always start first.. go figure.

Exactly. Which side starts first is merely convention and offers only a very slight advantage (if I remember correctly), otherwise both sides are exactly the same.

Really racist chess would have the white player as all Queens, and the black player as all Pawns.

[Conquer or Die]

meh, where i came from, the black always start first.. go figure.

Then you weren't playing chess.

In chess, the white player goes first, and the black player goes second. As far as I know the colors of the chess pieces are not supposed to reflect the race of the players. I've played black while playing a black person and that was actual chess.

I guess one could read into the positioning of the chess pieces, but that would be a waste of time.

[Conquer or Die]

Exactly. Which side starts first is merely convention and offers only a very slight advantage (if I remember correctly), otherwise both sides are exactly the same.

Really racist chess would have the white player as all Queens, and the black player as all Pawns.

The suggestion being that feminity is exclusively white and masculinity exclusively black?

Stop with this phobic belittling!

[Vanguard1917]

Chess was invented by Indians (who mostly wouldn't be classified as racially white), but i'm not sure if they used black and white pieces.

[Devrim]

Chess was invented by Indians (who mostly wouldn't be classified as racially white), but i'm not sure if they used black and white pieces.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/Shatranj.jpg/220px-Shatranj.jpg

Iranian 12th Century.

Devrim

[Vanguard1917]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/Shatranj.jpg/220px-Shatranj.jpg

Iranian 12th Century.

Devrim

Yes, that seems more PC to me.

[Devrim]

Really racist chess would have the white player as all Queens, and the black player as all Pawns.

Of course the Queen is really a Eurocentric invention, and in the original game of Chess there was no such piece. In Turkey, Arabic countries, and I am pretty sure Iran, it is still called by its original name 'Vezir' (Vizier), the King is the 'Şah' (Shah), which is where the name of the game comes from, and the Bishop, another obviously Western addition is the 'Fil' (Elephant).

Devrim

[scarletghoul]

does anyone remember wiggly worms

you just cant catch em

i loved that

[IcarusAngel]

In the game of Go black pieces move first.
http://yeefan.sg/weiqi/howtoplaygo/

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The suggestion being that feminity is exclusively white and masculinity exclusively black?

Stop with this phobic belittling!

Hopefully you realise that I suggested that because, being able to move all the way in every direction, the Queen piece completely outclasses the Pawn which can only move fowards and can only take pieces that are in a forward diagonal position. You could rename the Queens into Viziers and this would still be the case.


Of course the Queen is really a Eurocentric invention, and in the original game of Chess there was no such piece.

What, racists can't be Eurocentric as well? :D

[revolution inaction]

in Alice through the looking glass the chess is played with white and red pieces

[revolution inaction]

Of course the Queen is really a Eurocentric invention, and in the original game of Chess there was no such piece. In Turkey, Arabic countries, and I am pretty sure Iran, it is still called by its original name 'Vezir' (Vizier), the King is the 'Şah' (Shah), which is where the name of the game comes from, and the Bishop, another obviously Western addition is the 'Fil' (Elephant).

Devrim

i think i Chinese/ Japanese chess the queen is a general and there may be two of them, also there are guns.

[RED DAVE]

I have a beautiful red and black set; red goes first.

Obvious discrimination against anarchists by socialists.

RED DAVE

[M-26-7]

I have a beautiful red and black set; red goes first.

Obvious discrimination against anarchists by socialists.

RED DAVE

For Vanguard1917's birthday we should get him a custom red vs. green set. :lol:

[Devrim]

i think i Chinese/ Japanese chess the queen is a general and there may be two of them, also there are guns.

I played a few times. It was a long time ago though. It is a different game whereas the Middle Eastern names I was referring to are the local names for normal chess pieces.

It has one general, which is the King. The reason for the name change is that Chinese emperors didn't like the idea of themselves being depicted as a game piece. It has two advisors (viziers or queens).

Devrim

[Havet]

Its amazing how many replies this has got, given that its a trivial issue, eh Dean?

[Dean]

Its amazing how many replies this has got, given that its a trivial issue, eh Dean?
And how many of those replies were seriously considering the 'racism' issue? :rolleyes:


Your contribution to democratic theory is histrionics about Iran. Your contribution to the critique of racism is asking whether or not chess is racist. I increasingly get the feeling that you are locked in a basement with access only to a bible and the works of Mises.

[Havet]

Your contribution to democratic theory is histrionics about Iran. Your contribution to the critique of racism is asking whether or not chess is racist. I increasingly get the feeling that you are locked in a basement with access only to a bible and the works of Mises.

right, because feelings are a legitimate form of analysis...Once again you prove how well you are at ignoring what I actually believe just so you can argue with me more easily.

[Dean]

right, because feelings are a legitimate form of analysis...Once again you prove how well you are at ignoring what I actually believe just so you can argue with me more easily.
You never express what you believe - unless you think that moralizing about Iran and CHESS IS RACIST are central to your belief structure. Which seems plausible.

[Revolutionair]

This is call to arms to ALL pawns to revolt. Rise up against the kings and their queens, rise up against the bishops, rise up against the knights!
Black and white pawns should work together. They are both being oppressed. Botvinnik shall sacrifice us no more!

[Havet]

You never express what you believe - unless you think that moralizing about Iran and CHESS IS RACIST are central to your belief structure. Which seems plausible.

If you think I never express what I believe then thats 1 more reason for you not to try and blind-guess about it. I don't know where you got the impression that I had a bible and a Mises book, considering the fact that i've never read the bible or a Mises book, nor do I plan to.

[Kamerat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moqcUmDxNY0
At 2:45.
Havet must have seen this before posting.

[Dr Mindbender]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HPI_HT6yjo

[Havet]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moqcUmDxNY0
At 2:45.
Havet must have seen this before posting.

Indeed!

But I was the only one with "balls of steel" to post about it...

[IndependentCitizen]

I just facepalmed.:bored:

[Queercommie Girl]

Chinese Chess is the most revolutionary variant of chess since Red pieces always move first. Also it is a more proletarian game since there are no kings and queens only generals, advisers and different types of soldiers. :thumbup1:

It's also a more modern game with pieces like "cannons/artillery". You can't simulate Trotsky leading the Red Army against the Whites on a Western Chess board with standard pieces, but you can do so with Chinese Chess. Many Chinese communists were Chinese Chess fans. :thumbup1:

[Dr Mindbender]

8HPI_HT6yjo
Mother fucker.

[Queercommie Girl]

Of course the Queen is really a Eurocentric invention, and in the original game of Chess there was no such piece. In Turkey, Arabic countries, and I am pretty sure Iran, it is still called by its original name 'Vezir' (Vizier), the King is the 'Şah' (Shah), which is where the name of the game comes from, and the Bishop, another obviously Western addition is the 'Fil' (Elephant).

Devrim

Eurocentric perhaps, but having a "female" piece on the chess board, not to mention making it the most powerful piece, is at least anti-sexist.

In Chinese Chess the "vizier" name remains, but the "shah" is changed into "general", the "elephants" on one side remains, but on the other side is changed into "ministers". "Chariots" also remain, and "cannons" are added, China being the inventor of gunpowder.

[Devrim]

Eurocentric perhaps, but having a "female" piece on the chess board, not to mention making it the most powerful piece, is at least anti-sexist.


Actually I was joking :blushing:.

Devrim

[Sir Comradical]

Ten Pin Bowling is a pan-africanist communist conspiracy because it involves a black bowling-ball knocking over white pins with red-necks.

[4 Leaf Clover]

oh crap

[Havet]

So many examples of racist games! We really need to change entertainment in the world!

[Fabrizio]

Exactly. Which side starts first is merely convention and offers only a very slight advantage (if I remember correctly), otherwise both sides are exactly the same.

Really racist chess would have the white player as all Queens, and the black player as all Pawns.

Nah, black vs black with two white Queens. :D

[Dimentio]

Why do the white pieces start first?

Isn't it representative of white supremacy in traditional board games?

On the other hand, we have Checkers, where black pieces start first. Do you consider that a political correct board game, as opposed to chess?

And why do most card games have a white background instead of a black one? (more food for thought)

I know this is a TRIVIAL issue, but a pertinent one nonetheless.

Share your thoughts.

In the traditional game, the person who was oldest began. That was due to its beginning in the Sassanid era, which is the root of medieval European chivalry and the knight culture (brought from Persia to Europe via Byzantium).

[Panda Tse Tung]

This is call to arms to ALL pawns to revolt. Rise up against the kings and their queens, rise up against the bishops, rise up against the knights!
Black and white pawns should work together. They are both being oppressed. Botvinnik shall sacrifice us no more!
Kinda like this?:

http://mikenesbitt.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/peoples-chess.jpg

[Dermezel]

Chess might be but earlier versions from other countries probably not so much. Japanese red vs blue Shogi for example. Xiangqi is likewise.

[Trigonometry]

its not racist, its historic, it tends to be the white pieces that invaded first

[Sam_b]

Kerplunk shows the problems faced by a top-down approach to liberation imo

[Magón]

I always thought that Checkers for example, was Anarchists (Black) v. Left Authoritarians (Red). :D While Chess was a game I never cared about.

[soyonstout]

no.

[DaComm]

Why do the white pieces start first?

Isn't it representative of white supremacy in traditional board games?

On the other hand, we have Checkers, where black pieces start first. Do you consider that a political correct board game, as opposed to chess?

And why do most card games have a white background instead of a black one? (more food for thought)

I know this is a TRIVIAL issue, but a pertinent one nonetheless.

Share your thoughts.

Chess originated in Persia. So I wouldn't say so.

[DaComm]

Kinda like this?:
see picture


In addition to the pawns switching places, the board is set up wrong. The kings are facing each other directly, as are the queens.

[Luís Henrique]

Kinda like this?:

http://mikenesbitt.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/peoples-chess.jpg

More like this:

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/1706/lutadhttp://img709.imageshack.us/img709/1706/lutadeclasses.png

Whites move first, and have to capture all pawns. Pawns must chekmate the king.

Luís Henrique

[Panda Tse Tung]

In addition to the pawns switching places, the board is set up wrong. The kings are facing each other directly, as are the queens.
Thats how it's supposed to be.


More like this:

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/1706/lutadhttp://img709.imageshack.us/img709/1706/lutadeclasses.png

Whites move first, and have to capture all pawns. Pawns must chekmate the king.

Luís Henrique
Thats actually pretty brilliant a game concept. But what happens if the pawns get to the end?



Is it class collaboration if your pawn becomes a knight, bishop, or queen? lol
lol

[Luís Henrique]

Thats actually pretty brilliant a game concept. But what happens if the pawns get to the end?

Nothing, I suppose. We don't want the pawns to betray their class, do we?

Luís Henrique

[Ocean Seal]

Why do the white pieces start first?

Isn't it representative of white supremacy in traditional board games?

On the other hand, we have Checkers, where black pieces start first. Do you consider that a political correct board game, as opposed to chess?

And why do most card games have a white background instead of a black one? (more food for thought)

I know this is a TRIVIAL issue, but a pertinent one nonetheless.

Share your thoughts.
You have contradicted yourself my friend.

[Queercommie Girl]

Chess originated in Persia. So I wouldn't say so.

But it wasn't "white vs. black" in the original Persian version though. That's a feature in European Chess only. You don't find it in Persian Chess, Indian Chess, Chinese Chess, Japanese Chess or Thai Chess.

Also, Chess actually originated in India, not Persia.

[Quail]

Every time I look at this thread it makes me laugh. Not just the replies, but really, "is chess racist?" is probably the most ridiculous thread title I've seen in ages.

[Havet]

You have contradicted yourself my friend.

Wrong. Something can be both pertinent and trivial. Lets analyze the definitions:

"having precise or logical relevance to the matter at hand; "a list of articles pertinent to the discussion"; "remarks that were to the point""

"triviality - pettiness: the quality of being unimportant and petty or frivolous"

q.e.d.

[Robert]

Not just the replies, but really, "is chess racist?" is probably the most ridiculous thread title I've seen in ages.

Ridiculous or not, I would not stay up late at knight worrying about it.

[Dean]

Wrong. Something can be both pertinent and trivial. Lets analyze the definitions:

"having precise or logical relevance to the matter at hand; "a list of articles pertinent to the discussion"; "remarks that were to the point""

"triviality - pettiness: the quality of being unimportant and petty or frivolous"

q.e.d.
Well, if you claim that its pertinent, what subject was it pertinent to?* As I understand it, the only subject you introduced was the concept of chess being racist. Are you claiming that it is "pertinent" to itself? :rolleyes:

The object of this statement is, of course, the "matter at hand," "discussion" or "point" in your definition.

[Havet]

Well, if you claim that its pertinent, what subject was it pertinent to?* As I understand it, the only subject you introduced was the concept of chess being racist. Are you claiming that it is "pertinent" to itself? :rolleyes:

My remarks/arguments where "to the point", that is the sense in which I am claiming it is a pertinent issue, regardless of whether or not its an important one.

Anyway, why are you still wandering in this "both trivial and non-pertinent" "nobody gives a shit if the historical facts of chess piece colors reflected the material racism than has pervaded society" thread?

[Dean]

My remarks/arguments where "to the point", that is the sense in which I am claiming it is a pertinent issue, regardless of whether or not its an important one.
For something to be pertinent, it has to be pertinent to something, in particular, to an immediate concern of discussion. Self-reference to the idea is a lazy way of refusing to accept that you misused the term / were wrong.


Anyway, why are you still wandering in this "both trivial and non-pertinent" "nobody gives a shit if the historical facts of chess piece colors reflected the material racism than has pervaded society" thread?
Because I think its absolutely hilarious that our resident "market anarchist" presents absurdities of this caliber as if they were serious points of discussion. And I'm also hoping to show you how absolutely trivial these issues are, that maybe you could spend your intellectual energy on more valuable pursuits.

[Red Commissar]

Chess is obviously representative of exploitation of the masses by the elite as pawns are moved into the firing line. However when class consciousness reaches to such a point that class struggle explodes into war, the pawns should spontaneously rise up and seize control and put the other pieces to the firing wall and form a new and fair society.

And thus we have the game of checkers.

[Reznov]

:laugh:

Haha, agreed. Sometimes you just have to laugh at some of this extreme anti "racist" stuff.

[Havet]

For something to be pertinent, it has to be pertinent to something, in particular, to an immediate concern of discussion. Self-reference to the idea is a lazy way of refusing to accept that you misused the term / were wrong.

It is pertinent in regards to discussin racism, since it is a very simple way to show how some of the arguments by anti-racist people can become absurd when taken to an extreme. This is not to say that those arguments are wrong, simply that their way to approach the issue is not the optimal one.


Because I think its absolutely hilarious that our resident "market anarchist" presents absurdities of this caliber as if they were serious points of discussion.

You should try harder to identify irony whenever I present it.


And I'm also hoping to show you how absolutely trivial these issues are

I think eveyone that has posted here knows that already.


that maybe you could spend your intellectual energy on more valuable pursuits.

By what means have you measured the amount of intellectual energy I've spent? Do you perhaps think i've wasted a terrible amount of time thinking of this? I have not. Do you think I have wasted a terrible amount of time replying to this thread? I have not. In fact, all the posts in this thread except for one have been to joke about other people's posts. You, on the other hand, have made me spend more intellectual energy than anyone else in this thread. Think about it.

[RedKnight]

If chess is racist, then Lenin must have been racist, as he played chess. http://www.queensac.com/chessstamps/ckmt054.jpg In fact, the Soviet Union historicly had the most chess champions. And I don't think that being white, and therefore starting first gives one much of an advantage, if any. For if you start off by making dumb moves, you can doom yourself, before you even get a chance to enter the end game. Plus the color refers to the uniform, not the skin color. And as I recall, the queens used to be called princes. Which makes more sense I think, as otherwise male pawns(foot soldiers) would be undergoing a sex change when they get to the other end, and become queens. And I likewise used to play with red pieces. I think that originally they were red because it came as part of a checkers set. It may interest you that as a matter of fact my username was inspired by the knights I played with using this chess set.

[Targaryen]

A pertinent issue indeed, I think I will analyze this problem some more...
hmmmmmmmm:closedeyes:

[Reznov]

If chess is racist, then Lenin must have been racist, as he played chess. http://www.queensac.com/chessstamps/ckmt054.jpg In fact, the Soviet Union historicly had the most chess champions. And I don't think that being white, and therefore starting first gives one much of an advantage, if any. For if you start off by making dumb moves, you can doom yourself, before you even get a chance to enter the end game. Plus the color refers to the uniform, not the skin color. And as I recall, the queens used to be called princes. Which makes more sense I think, as otherwise male pawns(foot soldiers) would be undergoing a sex change when they get to the other end, and become queens. And I likewise used to play with red pieces. I think that originally they were red because it came as part of a checkers set. It may interest you that as a matter of fact my username was inspired by the knights I played with using this chess set.

Oh my, I believe you may have discovered the greatest bourgeoisie conspiracy ever discovered!

*Dramatic music* :laugh:

[ComradeMan]

Commandante Che Guevara was also a keen chess player- some of his games can be found online.

Chess is not racist as no concept of race is involved. The pieces come in all colours and originally represented Indian and then Persian armies.

Chess may be deemed imperialistic and perhaps capitalistic in that the object is to conquer the enemy and force him or her into a position of check mate but then again you could argue that it depends whose side you are on.

Trivial and pertinent are opposites, therefore a statement cannot be both trivial and pertinent.
:cool:

[ComradeMan]

Chess is obviously representative of exploitation of the masses by the elite as pawns are moved into the firing line. However when class consciousness reaches to such a point that class struggle explodes into war, the pawns should spontaneously rise up and seize control and put the other pieces to the firing wall and form a new and fair society.

And thus we have the game of checkers.

Which is also a shit game....:D

[Queercommie Girl]

Chess is obviously representative of exploitation of the masses by the elite as pawns are moved into the firing line. However when class consciousness reaches to such a point that class struggle explodes into war, the pawns should spontaneously rise up and seize control and put the other pieces to the firing wall and form a new and fair society.

And thus we have the game of checkers.

Correction:

Western Chess is obviously representative of the exploitation of the masses by the aristocracy and the clergy within a class society, (represented by the pieces king, queen and the two bishops) during the medieval era when technology was still relatively primitive. Then with the invention of gunpower (the introduction of the cannon piece) and the coming of the industrial age the objective conditions became sufficient for the onset of revolution. The aristocracy and the clergy were abolished, and the chess pieces became the various military and civil officials in a worker's state, (general, adviser, minister etc) and to clearly represent the glorious success of the revolution it was decided that the Red side would always move first, thus we have the game of Chinese Chess.

It is hoped that as time goes on the differentiation within the worker's state would fade away leading to a truly classless communist society. But the risk of bureaucratic degeneration at the hands of the generals and ministers of the worker's state back into a class society.

[ComradeMan]

Correction:

Western Chess is obviously representative of the exploitation of the masses by the aristocracy and the clergy within a class society, (represented by the pieces king, queen and the two bishops) during the medieval era when technology was still relatively primitive. Then with the invention of gunpower (the introduction of the cannon piece) and the coming of the industrial age the objective conditions became sufficient for the onset of revolution. The aristocracy and the clergy were abolished, and the chess pieces became the various military and civil officials in a worker's state, (general, adviser, minister etc) and to clearly represent the glorious success of the revolution it was decided that the Red side would always move first, thus we have the game of Chinese Chess.

It is hoped that as time goes on the differentiation within the worker's state would fade away leading to a truly classless communist society. But the risk of bureaucratic degeneration at the hands of the generals and ministers of the worker's state back into a class society.

All work and no play makes Marx a dull boy! :D

I don't think you can say that Western Chess is representative of the exploitation of the masses. Chess is not Western, it is Eastern and although the figures were westernised the archetypes remained more or less the same- an army, with a hierarchy. The basic divisions of elephants, cavalry, infantry and chariots would all have conformed to Northern Indian caste/class specifications. These were then adapted to the various places chess arrived.

The pieces are named here in Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic and Latin.
Raja (King) Shah Malik Rex King
Mantri (Minister) Vazir (Vizir) Wazir/Firz Regina Queen
Gajah (war elephant) Pil Al-Phil/Fil Episcopus/Comes/Calvus Bishop/
Ashva (horse) Asp Fars/Hisan Miles/Eques Knight Ratha (chariot)
Rokh Qalaah/Rukh Rochus/Marchio Rook/Margrave
Padati (footman/footsoldier) Piadeh Baidaq/Jondi Pedes/Pedinus Pawn

The interesting differences are that in the West the Queen, i.e. a female, figure emerged- the most powerful piece on the board and also that the Bishop, originally an elephant, seems quite unstable- being also a Count or Warlord of some type in early Europe.

I suggest the following Revolutionary Chess.
Raja (King) - Comandante
Mantri (Minister)- Subcomandante
Gajah (war elephant)- Comissar
Ashva (horse)- Subcommissar
Rokh Qalaah- Captain
Padati (footman/footsoldier)- Guerilla
:D
Like Chinese Chess- but note, you can change the names but the moves don't change! ;) There's a lesson in that.

[Queercommie Girl]

All work and no play makes Marx a dull boy! :D

I don't think you can say that Western Chess is representative of the exploitation of the masses. Chess is not Western, it is Eastern and although the figures were westernised the archetypes remained more or less the same- an army, with a hierarchy. The basic divisions of elephants, cavalry, infantry and chariots would all have conformed to Northern Indian caste/class specifications. These were then adapted to the various places chess arrived.

The pieces are named here in Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic and Latin.
Raja (King) Shah Malik Rex King
Mantri (Minister) Vazir (Vizir) Wazir/Firz Regina Queen
Gajah (war elephant) Pil Al-Phil/Fil Episcopus/Comes/Calvus Bishop/
Ashva (horse) Asp Fars/Hisan Miles/Eques Knight Ratha (chariot)
Rokh Qalaah/Rukh Rochus/Marchio Rook/Margrave
Padati (footman/footsoldier) Piadeh Baidaq/Jondi Pedes/Pedinus Pawn

The interesting differences are that in the West the Queen, i.e. a female, figure emerged- the most powerful piece on the board and also that the Bishop, originally an elephant, seems quite unstable- being also a Count or Warlord of some type in early Europe.

I suggest the following Revolutionary Chess.
Raja (King) - Comandante
Mantri (Minister)- Subcomandante
Gajah (war elephant)- Comissar
Ashva (horse)- Subcommissar
Rokh Qalaah- Captain
Padati (footman/footsoldier)- Guerilla
:D
Like Chinese Chess- but note, you can change the names but the moves don't change! ;) There's a lesson in that.

It's still "western" for the Chinese. The ancient Chinese called all lands to the west of central Asia "Xiyu" or the "western regions" in ancient times. Just like the Europeans called all lands east of Greece the "orient".

As Indian Chess spread westwards to Persia, Arabia and Europe, it also spread eastwards to China, Korea, Thailand and Japan. Chinese Chess shares the same origin as European Chess and Japanese Chess.

[ComradeMan]

It's still "western" for the Chinese. The ancient Chinese called all lands to the west of central Asia "Xiyu" or the "western regions" in ancient times. Just like the Europeans called all lands east of Greece the "orient".

As Indian Chess spread westwards to Persia, Arabia and Europe, it also spread eastwards to China, Korea, Thailand and Japan. Chinese Chess shares the same origin as European Chess and Japanese Chess.


Your original quote:-

"Western Chess is obviously representative of the exploitation of the masses by the aristocracy and the clergy within a class society"

It was not clear from your original quote that you meant the Chinese definition of "western" , which you used in English. China only "pops" in at the end. Never mind....:D

Anyway- Like I said before, you can change the names all you want: pretty pitiful in my opinion because you are still playing the same game.
;)

[IndependentCitizen]

The zebra crossing must be racist.

[ComradeMan]

The zebra crossing must be racist.

LOL!!! Reminds me of the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy- "he argued black was white and was killed on a zebra crossing" ;)

[Havet]

The zebra crossing must be racist.

Exactly. A true communist road walk would be red and black.

[revolution inaction]

do zebra crossings exist outside the uk?

[ComradeMan]

do zebra crossings exist outside the uk?

Yes-- lol, but here in Italy if you think anyone is going to stop for you like they do in the UK then you put your life in your hands! :D

[Lyev]

I also think hungry hungry hippos is racist to fat people.
Anyway, nice to see you ComradeMan, haven't seen you post here in ages! You'll be glad to know your pal BobK was banned some time ago.

[ComradeMan]

I also think hungry hungry hippos is racist to fat people.
Anyway, nice to see you ComradeMan, haven't seen you post here in ages! You'll be glad to know your pal BobK was banned some time ago.

I remember that! I see there has been the demise of some others too.

Not something I revel in, just means more divisions and failure to form cohesion.

Re the topic- what about that "Penguins going down the slide game"- is that not racist because they are black and white?:D

[Mythbuster]

Why do the white pieces start first?

Isn't it representative of white supremacy in traditional board games?

On the other hand, we have Checkers, where black pieces start first. Do you consider that a political correct board game, as opposed to chess?

And why do most card games have a white background instead of a black one? (more food for thought)

I know this is a TRIVIAL issue, but a pertinent one nonetheless.

Share your thoughts.

Yes, it is very much racist! It is also stickily catholic! (look at what that bishop is doing to that poor little pawn!)

Forgive me for digging up this thread, but I could not resist my comment.

[EvilRedGuy]

Did you have to post in this old thread.

Anyways DON'T TALK SHIT ABOUT CHESS YOU ASSHOLES.

PS- Chess is Internationalist.

[Mythbuster]

Did you have to post in this old thread.

Anyways DON'T TALK SHIT ABOUT CHESS YOU ASSHOLES.

PS- Chess is Internationalist.

Lol...what? I am a chess player!

I said that I couldn't resist about posting.

[Le Rouge]

/Thread

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

For fuck's sake.

Closed