Poll: Cultural Revolution Tarot - Yes? No? Don't Care?

MaryHeather said:

Yes. If you find it offensive, say so by posting a critical review. Educate others by talking about the reality of the situation, and shine a light on this attempt at revisionist history. Do exactly what the Cultural Revolution tried to stop- truth telling, self-expression, and both moral and intellectual objections to political structures.

Click to expand...

This. Yes to a listing at AT. Yes to all critical comments and discussion.

Alta said:

This. I am against censorship.

And not just those, then the Ghetto Tarot cannot be listed....and on and on.

Click to expand...

That's a faulty analogy. At the risk of daring Godwin's Law, I'd think a Hitler Youth Tarot would be a much better one.

Well, I voted no but on second thought, I'm kind of on the fence. I think we're judged by the company we keep and including this deck kind of makes a statement about AT as a whole. If we'll include this, it may kind of endorse something horrible. But there are decks here about Native Americans and that was a genocide which is also horrible. The decks don't come from the place of glorifying the genocide but they do depict some of the battles in some cases.

And then there's the Klimt or however it's spelled. Those images are of horribly emaciated people that could have come from the POW camps of WWII and Vietnam. In the Haidl we've got Kali having killed her man.

I don't think AT should seem to endorse something horrible but on the other hand, I don't think AT has rejected any other Tarot.

So I think it's in very bad taste to say the least and I'd never buy it. But I guess it will depend on what Solandia decides she wants to do and I respect whichever choice she makes.

Alta said:

This. I am against censorship.

And not just those, then the Ghetto Tarot cannot be listed....and on and on.

Click to expand...

This. I am not happy with some of the creator's posts ABOUT this deck, but I would not advocate its being BANNED from here - we have the right to make up our own minds. Being listed as a deck that is in existence here is not an endorsement; it's information. There are books on amazon I wouldn't touch with a barge pole - but I defend to the death their right to sell them - and listing them is part of that.

I wouldn't want this deck in my house -- but I am also afraid of the mentality that is in favor of banning. I think it's up to each of us to make our own decisions about this deck. Banning is wrong.

I don't believe in censorship or banned books (or decks, in this case).

I do believe in freedom of expression, which, in addition to the freedom to create and promote a deck, includes the freedom to write negative reviews about why this deck is in poor taste.

If we, the Aeclectic community, think the deck is terrible, then it's our responsibility to make clear that the deck does not represent us -- through level-headed discussion, critical reviews, etc.

ETA: In the end, Solandia makes the call --it's her forum.

gregory said:

This. I am not happy with some of the creator's posts ABOUT this deck, but I would not advocate its being BANNED from here - we have the right to make up our own minds. Being listed as a deck that is in existence here is not an endorsement; it's information. There are books on amazon I wouldn't touch with a barge pole - but I defend to the death their right to sell them - and listing them is part of that.

Click to expand...

im with gregory here!)) surprised to see this deck get so much negativity?x,x
what I've seen so far artwork is good? interesting and original style?
and idea is not so bad?/ i get idea it's something like communist ideology? and like any ideology/religion/politic/ it had its flaws and victims, but there was something that help progress?/ we are what we are thanks to mistakes we did in past? if we don't know learn about that or pretend past did not happen we will repeat same mistakes in future?x,x

so imo it's important to be open minded and look things/ideas how they are with good and bad sides? after all we forget *Christianity and idea of good almighty good and how many people suffered cuz that?x,x but no one is offended by D.V and other *angel/saints themed decks? should we ban that?x,x ok, maybe bad example! x,x )

p.s if there is any deck i would like to know about it with all info and review!^^ )
and like gregory say it's all about info!

You know what? Take it down and within a few years there will be similar one. Leave it and let the critiques deal with it and then this probability won't be that high. People should be taught not only what the definition of "good" is, but what the definition of "bad" is. They should see so they can know in the future what is appropriate and what's not. Why do you want that chance taken away from people - For exaple future buyers who think the art is cute and they don't know what the is the deck really about? What about future deck creators who would have gotten similar idea? Do they have to make the art, publish it here and see this whole story repeating itself again with slight variations? Of course if they knew from the beginning that someone made similar choice to theirs in the past and how it end up they would consider and perhaps would put the time and effort in something which could be beautiful. I don't think that if we take it down we honour in some way people who have suffered these horrible events. We just makre more space for another horrible deck dedicated to some horrible event or not-so peaceful ideology.

So I am saying "yes" to informed choices.

I don't like the art work in this deck, let alone the message being conveyed. The creator's response to valid concerns was the icing on the cake. The Born in the USSR deck does what this one might think it's trying to do with artistic skill and nuance that the CR is painfully lacking.

Ban it? No, but writing reviews critical of it I do support. Freedom of speech is important but at least in this country (US) it does get abused far too often, ie Westborro Baptist fake-church comes to mind.

The problem with writing critical reviews is that someone will have to spend money on this deck and give money to the "anti-capitalist" capitalists who created it.

I think it is worth discussing what kinds of things can and cannot be displayed. Firstly I think that freedom of speech has nothing to do with the issue, and I feel it is important not to throw around big concepts like freedom too lightly. This cheapens them, especially in cases that one does, actually have to fight for them. AT is a private site that decides on its own which content to display. It is, however, not obligated to display all content. The deck's publishing is not being stopped and its dissemination isn't being impeded. Freedom of speech is about those things, not the choice of an individual to engage or not in certain material. I am not censoring Kim Kardashian by refusing to share on Facebook any story about her (nor do I feel the need to). It is simply my choice not to engage with that.

That being said, not all censorship is bad, and it is often the progressive choice.

Some things are offensive like hate speech, racism and the like. Let's say there actually was a Nazi deck, and not one that tried to show their "good" sides. An actual deck filled with Nazi slogans, Jews as the Devil, all the familiar caricatures, the works. Such a deck would almost certainly not be displayed as that constitutes something who's mere display is an offence, is damaging and is also illegal in many places. A deck filled with racist propaganda would probably not even register on the radar of most of the Tarot community, as it would be "self-censored;" that is, sites like AT would refuse to list it.

However, the Cultural Revolution Tarot does not fit this criteria. It is offensive in my eyes, but that does not make it objectively so. It does not include deliberately racist images, it does not have an agenda that would disqualify it as a "real" deck. It does not seem to have inappropriate nudity or bestiality or pedophilia.

In truth, it does not have any qualities about it that would deem it worthy of a ban. It is in highly bad taste, true, but that's all. There is nothing to ban.