WotC bans racist cards

[Kinopeng]

I don't really care about WtC decision since that those cards are their products and they can do whatever they want with their image. I just hope deckstats and other sites decide to not censor or remove those cards from their databases. That would be fucked up, just leave the company in charge feel good about pushing their current political agenda.
I think  the major part of the playerbase won't be affected by those bans since most of us play casually following the group rules, be it EDH, modern, cube or casual.

[Aetherium Slinky]

Like others have said, WotC calling attention to these cards have jacked their price up and will make them highly desirable for any white nationalists, etc. in the MTG community.

And collectors. The cards are now not only rare but also difficult to get and have a special story attached to them. I can definitely see the appeal. From what I've understood there is an entire market revolving around banned and restricted cards even though you can't really play with them anywhere. Actually I think most people buying those cards right now are not supremacists but rather people from the MTG finance community and other collectors.

That would be fucked up, just leave the company in charge feel good about pushing their current political agenda.

Be careful there. Racism is an ongoing social issue, it's not a political agenda - by definition. I think you mean to say they're overreacting and taking this too far? I know I said Magic shouldn't be political but I didn't mean that racism is a political issue. Thus far I think WotC has managed to steer clear of the political discourse which is a good thing. I think there are a lot of opportunities for political satire in our current situation but WotC has chosen to ignore those opportunities.

[WWolfe]

To keep this conversation in one place, I'll just add this in this thread...

The Commander RC has also banned the cards in Commander (which was expected).

Commander Rules Committee
@mtgcommander
The RC supports the message Wizards of the Coast are sending through this action, and stand with them in attempts to foster a more inclusive and positive culture.  We will be following suit in Commander.

https://twitter.com/mtgcommander/status/1270824139331301376

[crimsonking]

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/depictions-racism-magic-2020-06-10

How do we feel about the topic?

I'm a little torn on this. Thus far WotC has managed to make the matter worse:

• The price on the cards has spiked and will likely remain high due to them being effectively on the restricted list.
• A lot of people didn't know about the cards...but now they do. This could have been a silent edit. Virtue signalling much?
• It's a bit of a slippery slope in terms of values. In some ways they're now saying racism is worse than (mass) murder. I mean if a layman took a look at Invoke Prejudice and said it's racist then surely that same person would see Murder as pro-murder? Or something like Kindred Dominance being very genocide-friendly. Anyway they're now pitting society's values against each other and saying one is better than another.

I have no idea how they're going to dig themselves out of this. I feel angry at them for doing it this way. I'm sure they're trying to be more inclusive but this just feels like someone started panicking at the office and they started banning cards and even promised they'll ban some more...instead of actually thinking about the ramifications of doing so.

I totally agree. To stand against the racism is a good thing, but that's not an excuse for acting silly.

Besides your point that racism is banned but sexism and violence in general are fair game, I think (as a non-English person) some references are very far fetched.

• Invoke Prejudice: is there something I don't get in the name or it's just because the hooded men in the artwork resemble the ku klux clan? So pointy hoods are banned altogether? Really?
• Cleanse: ok, maybe the flavor here is slightly more explicit but, as pointed out in a twit in the thread you've posted, what about Virtue's Ruin? Is reverse racism ok?
  If black color implies black people, shall we assume white color implies caucasian? And does red imply native americans?... And green extra-terrestrials from Mars? Oh! Come on...
• Stone-Throwing Devils: this one I don't get it. I just see some devils throwing some stones. Devils are not humans, where's the racist reference?
• Pradesh Gypsies: what's wrong with gypsies? Is that inherently negative to belong to Rom/Sinti ethnicity or what? Are we just banning names?
  I strognly suggest you to watch this video of the great Frank Zappa arguing about censorship in music during the 80's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ISil7IHzxc
• Jihad: so, this tells me people inside Wizards of the Coast are ignorant. Jihad doesn't hint to racism but to religious fanatism, which is another thing.
  Muslims are not a race, period. Or are we going back to II World War, when the nazis thought jews were a race? Lame.
• Imprison: is this racist just because the guy is dark-skinned? So, were he white-skinned, everything was ok? Really?
  Are they telling us this card is an apology to slavery (and again, slavery and racism are different things)? Are they kidding?
  Talking about a concept doesn't necessarily imply making apology to it. I'd say this policy dangerously blurs into deliberate censorship...
• Crusade: is this card implying white men are superior or what? So Bad Moon would hint that black people are better (same for Gauntlet of Power and native americans)? Are we banning color-based anthems altogether?
  Or is this another example of mistaking religions with races? Ok, let's assume crusades were a bad thing (and they were indeed), then why don't we ban Celestial Crusader and all card with "Crusade" in their name?

All this stupidity (let's call things with their name, shall we?) makes me remember those times were Wizards of the Coast were accused to be satanist and all kind of silly things happened (like the guy in Unholy Strength switching from feeling full of evil power... to just feeling a bit sleepy).

[Morganator 2.0]

Invoke Prejudice: is there something I don't get in the name or it's just because the hooded men in the artwork resemble the ku klux clan? So pointy hoods are banned altogether? Really?

[crimsonking]

Invoke Prejudice: is there something I don't get in the name or it's just because the hooded men in the artwork resemble the ku klux clan? So pointy hoods are banned altogether? Really?

I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).

[Morganator 2.0]

I figured as much, but it's not like you don't have an internet connection. One of the advantages to a forum site versus talking in person is that you have to think about what you write before voicing your opinion. You don't risk shooting your mouth off, as I often do. You could have easily chosen to look into why this card is racist, before drawing assumptions. Especially considering that this is the most egregious offender. Here's the gist of it.

• The artist for this card is a known racist.
• The people in the picture are absolutely klanmen; an organization dedicated exclusively to white supremacy, and responsible for many deaths of colored people.
• The name "Invoke Prejudice" means to discriminate against someone based on factors outside their control (color, sexual orientation, disabilities). Prejudice is derived from "pre-judge". In short, you're choosing to dislike someone before you get to know them.
• The multiverse ID is 1488, although this is likely a coincidence, as cards are assigned a multiverse ID based on their release. Both 14 and 88 are associated with neo-nazis.

Whether WotC made the right call in choosing to get rid of these cards is up for debate. It does nothing to stop police brutality, and this could very well just be an attempt to show that they care. But is Invoke Prejudice racist? Undeniably.

I leave the rest of the cards for you to look into.

[Spinsane]

I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).

Seriously, one doesn’t have to be born in the US to know what the KKK looked like and what their modus operandi was. The intentions of the artist might not (apparently) have been to reference the racist organisation, but the combination of the name of the card and the art makes the link more than obvious.

As for the other cards, you’re entitled to disagree, but in some of those cases you seem to be purposefully ignoring why there are issues with the card or going out of your way to find excuses.

I don’t like making such extreme comparisons, but I’ll just make one warning: be careful, even when your intentions aren’t inherently racist, your actions or your words can be. The revisionist stance is racist* and antisemitic even though its adherents might not explicitly state anything else outrightly racist. Defending acts of bigotry is arguably just as bad as practicing them because it validates and encourages them.

* there is one human race. Racism refers to acts of bigotry targeting one or kore specific culture(s) and has no basis on so-called race...

[CleanBelwas]

I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).

Yea dude, it's a fair question if it's not something you're overly familiar with.

Here is why Invoke Prejudice is a problem.

- The imagery is indeed very resemblant of the KKK. I'm sure none of us need to explain what the KKK are or why that's a bad thing.
- This, in conjunction with the name, sends a very clear message. It's similar to Imprison in that regard. There are many, many ways of portraying that within the art of a fantasy game without using real world references that are, at the very least, incredibly controversial and for many people, deeply upsetting. But there's more still.
- The artist for this piece has strong ties with white supremacist groups and is known for using racist and Nazi imagery in his works. So much so that WotC stopped working with him years ago, before all of the current events.
- And the icing on the cake is that this cards Multiverse ID is 1488, which is a figure hugely associated with Neo-Nazis and white supremacist groups. The reasons for this can be found here: https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/1488.

Of course, that last point could well be pure coincidence, but all of those things combined, no matter how innocent the intentions, have some significant implications.

Personally, for me, Invoke Prejudice and Imprison were the worst offenders on that list for the reason I touched upon in the second point. There were a million different ways those ideals could have been portrayed in their art that would be in-keeping with the fantasy setting of the game and would have kept them as merely game pieces. The decision to use those arts specifically sets them apart for me.

Re Imprison: This could have easily been an image of a Goblin in a cage surrounded by soldiers that had captured him. While most of us could look at that and think "who cares that the guy has dark skin?", that comes from a place of being a decent human being and not caring about that kind of thing. For a lot of black people, the stigma and connotations of "The black guy goes to prison" is so deeply ingrained in their culture and their upbringing and their real world experiences that this depiction of this card could, and does, offend them. It's grossly unnecessary, and while those of us who don't experience that prejudice every day (myself included) could easily shrug it off, I think it's important to listen to those who do experience that prejudice with a sincere ear, attempt empathy and consider why it could cause such offence.

Also, I strongly urge you to take a look at an earlier post of mine in this thread that points towards a twitter thread that goes into more analysis as to why each card is problematic. If some of these aren't immediately obvious to you because your own experiences, this thread will help clarify why they are to others.

With this sort of thing, it's important to remember that everyone has different experiences in their lives. Something not being obvious or relevant to you doesn't mean it's not deeply upsetting to someone else, and there is absolutely no reason anyone should be made to feel like shit because the company that makes the pieces of cardboard they like to play with didn't do their homework or listen to their player base.

[Albeer]

I really dont get the point: "The artist for this piece has strong ties with white supremacist groups"
So what?
The piece of art on "Invoke Prejudice" has nothing to do with the political views of its creator.
Should we label every piece of art with the political views of its creator?
So we can avoid looking at art from "bad people"
For me the bannings are a strange and scary thing. "Entartete Kunst" (Degenerate art) comes to mind.

On the other hand WotC can do whatever they want with their game.
just my 2 cents

[crimsonking]

I figured as much, but it's not like you don't have an internet connection. One of the advantages to a forum site versus talking in person is that you have to think about what you write before voicing your opinion. You don't risk shooting your mouth off, as I often do. You could have easily chosen to look into why this card is racist, before drawing assumptions. Especially considering that this is the most egregious offender. Here's the gist of it.

• The artist for this card is a known racist.
• The people in the picture are absolutely klanmen; an organization dedicated exclusively to white supremacy, and responsible for many deaths of colored people.
• The name "Invoke Prejudice" means to discriminate against someone based on factors outside their control (color, sexual orientation, disabilities). Prejudice is derived from "pre-judge". In short, you're choosing to dislike someone before you get to know them.
• The multiverse ID is 1488, although this is likely a coincidence, as cards are assigned a multiverse ID based on their release. Both 14 and 88 are associated with neo-nazis.

Whether WotC made the right call in choosing to get rid of these cards is up for debate. It does nothing to stop police brutality, and this could very well just be an attempt to show that they care. But is Invoke Prejudice racist? Undeniably.

I leave the rest of the cards for you to look into.

I’ve been playing Magic since ‘96, so it’s been a while since I was aware of the card’s existence.
You can believe me or not, but I did make the connection with the ku klux clan only now that Wizards has banned the card.
Of the other things you’ve pointed out, I was totally unaware of and I’m safe to say many people from outside USA are in the same situation.
As I said, please understand the world doesn’t end beyond USA borders and people from abroad don’t have to be aware of your stuff.
We already have to go after our countries’ stuff and, after all, we’re here just to play cards.

[CleanBelwas]

The piece of art on "Invoke Prejudice" has nothing to do with the political views of its creator.

How can someone look at a piece of art by a known white supremacist on a card called invoke prejudice depicting KKK members and think "yea, this has nothing to do with their political views"?

Should we label every piece of art with the political views of its creator?

Yes, absolutely. Creating art is a very personal thing and to look at art without considering the context in which it was created and the motivations behind it is missing the point entirely. You may well be able to remove yourself from the implications of the art, but that's not something everyone is able to do.

That's not to say that "bad people" aren't capable of creating beautiful art, and erasure of peoples art because of who they are isn't something I'd ever encourage, but art should absolutely be considered within the context of its artist. And in this, I'm talking about art in general.

WotC is a company that's looking to sell a product. It makes absolutely no business sense whatsoever to keep cards that X number of people don't give a shit about but Y number of people find deeply offensive. Why would you piss off a subset of your audience for no reason? If people are living this shit and dealing with these stereotypes everyday, then coming home to escape into their card game and experiencing the same shit there too and are fed up of it, why keep that up? Who gives a shit about "well it was a sign of the times" or "nothing bad was meant by it" or "we had good intentions". No one gives a fuck about these shitty cards from a gameplay perspective, so why subject your customers to the implications that they have?

[crimsonking]

I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).

Yea dude, it's a fair question if it's not something you're overly familiar with.

Here is why Invoke Prejudice is a problem.

...

Very thanks for your explaination.
As for Imprison, I have to point out that my objection isn’t: “who cares if he’s dark-skinned.”
You said: “what if he was a goblin?”
What I’m saying is: “what if he was white-skinned?”
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
As I said, to stand against the racism is a good thing, but that doesn’t justify people for acting silly.

[CleanBelwas]

I'm sincerely asking if the reference were to ku klux clan. Please, understand that the world doesn't end beyond USA borders.
In Italy we didn't have the ku klux clan, not everybody knows about it (and banning this card doesn't help explaining anything).

Yea dude, it's a fair question if it's not something you're overly familiar with.

Here is why Invoke Prejudice is a problem.

...

Very thanks for your explaination.
As for Imprison, I have to point out that my objection isn’t: “who cares if he’s dark-skinned.”
You said: “what if he was a goblin?”
What I’m saying is: “what if he was white-skinned?”
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
As I said, to stand against the racism is a good thing, but that doesn’t justify people for acting silly.

Yea dude, I get what you are saying, but it's because he is dark skinned that it is a problem.

Across the world, and particularly in America, people of colour are disproportionately represented as criminals and have been since the abolition of slavery. This stigma follows them in all aspects of their lives and is deeply ingrained in many countries social doctrine. It is this stigma that many people consider the driving force behind the disproportionate levels of police brutality they face. Had the card been portrayed as a white person or a goblin, it would not have had the same impact as those stigmas do not exist to the same degree for white people or goblins.

Furthermore, had the card portrayed someone with white skin and people had have taken offence to it, they would have been well within their rights to do so. If they feel that it implies and unfair stigma against themselves personally, they absolutely should complain about it. Slavery still exists in the world today in many forms and effects people of all colours. Where I'm from in Europe, white people are being kept as nothing more than slaves. Had this card depicted a white man, and those poeple who have lived through that complained about it, their complaints would have been just as valid as the current complaints against the current card.

Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?

This for me is an incredibly bad take. It completely disregards the real world ramifications that contribute to the reason Imprison was removed. Obviously slavery is never OK no matter who it impacts, but slavery against people of colour is what a vast majority of people will immediately think of when slavery is mentioned. Additionally, we'll never know if people would have been upset if he were white, because he wasn't. Someone somewhere decided that the best way to depict imprisonment is to show a black man in chains. That is a problem all of itself.

[Morganator 2.0]

As for Imprison, I have to point out that my objection isn’t: “who cares if he’s dark-skinned.”
You said: “what if he was a goblin?”
What I’m saying is: “what if he was white-skinned?”
Think about it: was he white, nobody would have raised an eyebrow. So what we have to infere from this? That slavery towards black people is banned, but slavery towards white people is totally fine?
As I said, to stand against the racism is a good thing, but that doesn’t justify people for acting silly.

You're doing it again. You're not looking into why this card was singled out. And you can't use the "not from USA excuse" again, I already told you to look this stuff up. As an aside, I'm not from the US either, but that doesn't matter. Anyone can understand why this card is racist if they just looked into it.

The mask that the person in this picture is wearing is called an iron bit. It was used as a form of punishment by slave owners. I won't go into details (it may disturb some readers) but this was used as a form of torture and slave capture.

Knowing this info, it's hard to not see this as a reference to oppression. An iron bit on a black person does have a strong connotation. I truly do believe that if it was a goblin it would be different, because then it's not a direct reference to real world suffering. Which is why these cards are out. Death and torment is common in MTG lore, but these cards depict real-world events. Real-world oppression.

So please, stop jumping to conclusions. You are fully capable of seeing for yourself why these 7 cards were singled out. Whether or not this was a good action or just virtue signalling is still anyone's guess.