As a few of your anons have correctly pointed out, I do have a Tumblr! Hello! :)
Wanna start off by saying that being worried that you might have interpreted things wrong is, if anything, a sign that you are actually open to changing your opinion, which isnât something everyone in this fandom can pride themselves in. I salute you for admitting to feeling unsure about your position and seeking othersâ opinions to either reaffirm it or debunk it.
Discovering people talking about me in such a negative light on Tumblr has surely been a surprise, but I am not that mad at it, especially not at OP. Only issue I have is that some of my takes have been misinterpreted terribly, but I address that at the end of the post.
Here are my thoughts on it all.
Letâs start out with criticism of how Technoblade represents anarchy.
The criticism that was linked is quite good and I agree with a significant portion of it! It doesnât criticize Technobladeâs portrayal of anarchy as much as the lack thereof, though. Itâs something cc!Technoblade himself has pointed out: itâs bad anarchy rep if all the guy with the âanarchistâ brand does is goes around and blows up nations, and I think the Syndicate was created exactly because heâs been trying to move onto exploring the anarchist part of his character in a more diplomatic way.
Most criticism of c!Technoblade hinges on the idea that he has done things just for the sake of anarchy which⌠he hasnât really, aside from joining the Pogtopia rebellion. Everything else was mostly done for his own personal goals, but affected by his anarchist ideals, which is what OP talks about for the majority of the post.
The criticism of c!Technobladeâs anarchy that I was talking about in my original post is not the kind that was linked at all. Youâd probably know what I was getting at if youâve been a follower of mine for a while, but out of the context of my account it can definitely seem as if I donât accept any criticism of c!Technobladeâs representation of anarchy at all. Itâs just that 90% of the criticism Iâve seen is âheâs a tyrantâ, âheâs a hypocriteâ, âthe Syndicate is a governmentâ, itâs based on the assumption that Doomsday was done purely for the sake of anarchy, or itâs criticism of anarchy as a concept that hides under the roof of simple c!Technoblade criticism. And thatâs the kind of faulty criticism I was referring to in my post.
Main point is, there isnât much of c!Technobladeâs anarchy to criticize in the first place. The criticism that he isnât doing ENOUGH anarchy for someone who made anarchy such a big part of his character is a valid one, though. I think thatâs something Techno is planning on addresing in Season 3 with the Syndicate but⌠*looks at a hibernating Techno* eh, one day weâll see it.
I am going to start out with what I have in mind when I say âLâManburg loyalistâ so weâre on the same page, because terminology in this fandom has been watered down to the point where there are no definitions that are widely agreed upon and that alone causes a whole lot of trouble. (e.g. c!Dream apologists getting called abuse apologists out of the assumption that an apologist must defend every single action of a character).
A loyalist (Cambridge dictionary) â a person or group that strongly supports the government or ruler in power.
A loyalist (Google) â one who is or remains loyal especially to a political cause, party, government, or sovereign.
So to me, a LâManburg loyalist is someone who believes Wilburâs intentions in creating LâManburg to have been good. To me, a LâManburg loyalist is, harshly speaking, someone who bought into Wilburâs propaganda.
If your allegiance lies with the people of LâManburg and their relationships, then you arenât a LâManburg loyalist to me, and I have no quarrel with you. Itâs not the political cause of LâManburg that you support, but its people. My issue with LâManburg lies in its very foundation and Wilburâs administration specifically.
It is in no way bad to like and enjoy LâManburg. It has definitely grown beyond Wilburâs original purpose for it (which is displayed in how it managed to live and develop even after his death) and shaped its citizensâ lives in many positive ways. It had its great moments that are deserving of attention and appreciation.
Now letâs move onto your points!
if thereâs a large portion of people who are not picking up on this, then that might be a failure of cc!wilburâs writing as much as itâs the audienceâs failure.Â
This fandom is full of young politically unaware people who are also used to viewing stories through traditional narrative conventions where the main POV is the POV of the hero. So as odd as it is, itâs also not all that surprising that the people who watched the Dream SMP story through LâManburgâs POV failed to see between the lines into the true nature of the nation. Because the viewers, most of whom were likely new to this story-telling style (myself included) were under the assumption that âWell, if weâre looking at the story through their eyes and theyâre speaking about experiencing oppression, then they MUST be the good guys and the ones in the right!â
If the subtext of the story isnât obvious, it doesnât mean it doesnât exist. Itâs not bad writing if the viewer/reader was unable to see deeper into the story and unlock a second layer of it, because it is not the writerâs responsibility to hold the reader by the hand and make all sides of a story clear to them. If the subtext of a story is made extremely obvious, it not only violates one of the main principles of storytelling, âshow donât tellâ, but also ruins the whole point of having a subtext.
So Iâd say the audienceâs failure to see the true nature of c!Wilburâs character and LâManburg is, if anything, a signifier of the brilliance of Wilburâs writing, since the man managed to write propaganda so good that even the viewers believed it. Wilburâs propaganda mimics irl propaganda in its shape, invisibility and effectiveness.
the og lâmanburg revolutionary war was written with tommy, by the seat of their pants, with relatively little planning
The lack of a script doesnât mean that Wilbur Soot (a very politically aware man, may I note) couldnât have implemented heavy political themes into his roleplay story organically. Even though very early lore wasnât scripted, itâs not like it wasnât planned at all.
Wilbur talks about reshaping his and Tommyâs drug empire into a revolution a day before he actually does it, on Tommyâs stream. And itâs likely something heâs been pondering for a while beforehand. So it was still, to some extent, planned, and Wilbur had plenty of time to think just how he should go about directing his roleplay in a more political direction from his earlier lighthearted Breaking Bad roleplay.
I fully believe the story of L'Manburg to have been, in part, political commentary because throughout the foundation of the nation, Wilbur references real-life events of the time (judging Americans for not wearing masks, and making sly references towards Trump, for example) and employing real-world strategies used by governments to foster patriotism and convince people to commit to his cause.
cc!Wilbur has often spoken about his interest in politics. So itâs not that big a stretch that he would naturally implement political ideas when roleplaying a leader figure â and in the case of LâManburg, Wilbur plays the role of an authoritarian.
Not to mention that cc!Wilbur seems to naturally lean into the âcharismatic manipulative authoritarianâ character archetype when roleplaying, considering that the moment he joined the sbi Rust server he started playing c!Wilbur: Cult Edition.
Long story short: the lack of a script =/= the lack of planning. It is not at all impossible to integrate heavy themes into a story that unfolds in real-time.
saying that wilbur had all these grand intentions for them being secretly villains is⌠probably unrealistic.
Well, they were never âsecretly villainsâ exactly. They havenât been the best from the very start, it simply went unnoticed by some of the viewers. They may not have been intended to be âvillainsâ, but they werenât intended to be âheroesâ either.
1. Wilbur started dividing people the moment he built a wall and allowed only a certain nationality to cross it.
2. Even if the characters werenât purely convinced to join by propaganda, it certainly influenced their decision, especially considering some of them werenât there to witness LâManburgâs true history, they had it relayed to them by Wilbur, who is far from a reliable narrator.
I canât speak on Niki and Fundy since my memory of most early VODs is rather stale, but the argument that âtommy and tubbo were already fighting dream when he joinedâ isnât a good one because Wilbur declaring independence wasnât prompted by Dreamâs actions. The first time Dream and Wilbur talk is when the walls are already being built. Dream had nothing to do with the preceding conflict that prompted Wilbur to secede from the server. Dream was made guilty by association for being American and being the head of the server, not for being a tyrant. He hasnât done anything to Wilbur directly to give him an excuse to hate him.
if wilbur has complaints of dream and wants to state them, as long as he isnât straight up lyingâŚ
Well the issue with c!Wilbur is that he is indeed straight up lying a lot of the time, as exemplified above by the fact that he framed LâManburg declaring independence as them seeking to escape c!Dreamâs tyranny, even though their decision to secede wasnât prompted by any particular action from Dream. Wilbur just wanted to have a plausible excuse to demand independence.
Even Tubbo points out how their freedoms werenât exactly limited.
also, just, in canon, wilbur was very invested in the ideals he preached.
He stuck to those ideals, yes⌠when it benefited him. But he also saw little problem in dropping them when convenient. He seems pretty selective about when to follow his nationâs ideals.
he isnât driven to mental health decline and eventual suicide for a country he doesnât care for
True. He is driven into a mental health decline by a combination of losing power, which was a source of comfort for him, and the stress of exile and war. His spiral was prompted by the realization that he can never have the LâManburg he built because the values of freedom and democracy he implanted into LâManburgâs image are directly against what he was doing as the leader of Pogtopia â trying to take down a legally elected, albeit terrible leader.
His âconcern over âbeing the bad guysâ isnât only a concern, but also an admission of guilt.
I donât think cc!wilbur, blm and acab supporter, would tie his country his to that movement if it was actually supposed to be corrupt and evil
I can see how youâd view this as a problem. One wouldnât want to tarnish the image of such an important movement after all.
But the thing is, Tubbo and Sapnap werenât actual cops, even if they called themselves that. They werenât part of any system, they hadnât been assigned that position by Dream, the de-facto ruler of the Dream SMP. Itâs the systemic power of the police thatâs the problem, not the name, when it comes to the ACAB movement, so it doesnât ever really apply to that situation.
Sapnap, Tubbo and Purpled werenât policemen, they were members of a community retaliating in response to being stolen from. Members of a community retaliating in response to being stolen from is not police brutality. I donât think youâd call a lady beating up the guy who stole her purse a case of police brutality, even if the thief calls her a cop throughout the beating.
The reason c!Wilbur was cussing out âthe copsâ is that both he and Tommy consistently play the victim throughout both the drug monopoly stream and the foundation of LâManburg in the hopes of gaining sympathy for their cause from neutral parties. One way to do that is to say that the guys going against you are clearly just violent heartless cops and not direct victims of your crimes.
You saying that Wilbur tied his country to the ACAB movement is very interesting, because you are willing to draw these kinds of connections to real world issues and others see no problem with it, yet the one time I said that c!Wilburâs actions and words parallel Trump, it was met with great outrage. Which makes me wonder what the issue was then.
And I think the issue isnât that people are uncomfortable with parallels between Minecraft roleplay and serious real world issues being drawn, since bringing up ACAB and BLM doesnât seem to prompt the same unhappy reaction. It would seem that the issue is that people are afraid of admitting that a character they like has connections to such a horrible real-life figure because they think it may reflect badly on their person. Which it wonât, because itâs all fiction. You can like bad people in fiction and c!Wilbur having parallels to Trump doesnât say anything about you liking him at all.
If you think it is possible that Wilbur making references to real world movements is a clear indication of his intent for LâManburg to be good, then you should also have no issue reading my document listing all the times Wilburâs words and actions paralleled Trump, which suggests the opposite intent.
[LâManburg] morphed overtime into a symbol of freedom and home for so many, and to discount that because you believe the leader had bad goals that never even came to frution? itâs silly.
I never disregarded the role LâManburg had in other charactersâ lives, and it was a very significant role. As I said earlier, my criticism of LâManburg lies mostly with c!Wilburâs administration and its foundation specifically.
However, whatever positive effect LâManburg has had on its citizensâ lives is downplayed by the fact that LâManburg was also the cause of their biggest issues.
Had LâManburg never been founded to âstick it to the manâ, then there wouldâve never been a war with said man that has taken multiple lives. Had Wilbur never decided to rig an election to strengthen his position in power, then Schlatt never wouldâve won and Wilbur and Tommy never wouldâve been exiled. Had LâManburg never been founded, the events of Season 2: exile, Technoâs execution and the subsequent Doomsday, never wouldâve occured.
L'manburg dragged its people into war as much as it gave them peace.
plus they believe wilbur was faking his mental health crisis apparently and I donât even know where to start with that lmao
Iâve seen like 3 people say this so I found my tweets that convinced people that this is something that this was an opinion of mine at any point in time, and made a post clarifying what I actually meant.
In conclusion, I hope this has convinced people that it is indeed very possible that LâManburg was intended to be corrupt and âbadâ by Wilbur. And if it hasnât, then maybe this clip of cc!Wilbur talking about his characterâs intentions behind creating LâManburg will.
Iâve deleted the OG post about doing the CCs a disservice because people are clearly misinterpreting it a bit and I donât like the wording of the part where I talked about Wilbur. In hindsight, saying that Wilbur wrote âa story of how propaganda can be used to shape minds and lives and now nations and wars are used to divide peopleâ is probably giving him too much credit. The heavy presence of those themes is likely an unintended consequence.
But I still stand by the fact that Wilbur didnât implement propaganda into his story for you to buy into it, and that he intended for his character and his nation to be viewed critically and as unreliable narrators. There are a lot of things pointing to the fact that LâManburg was never intended to be âgoodâ aside from my aforementioned points, which I have explored in detail in my analysis of how LâManburg was founded.
I will forever be of the opinion that LâManburg, even though itâs grown into a community that was more than just what Wilbur put into it, was mainly created to sate c!Wilburâs hunger for power, has caused more problems than good and should never have existed in the first place.