I was thinking about why so many in the radical left participate in “speedrunning”:

The reason is the left’s lack of work ethic (‘go fast’ rather than ‘do it right’) and, in a Petersonian sense, to elevate alternative sexual archetypes in the marketplace (‘fastest mario’). Obviously, there are exceptions to this and some people more in the center or right also “speedrun”. However, they more than sufficient to prove the rule, rather than contrast it. Consider how woke GDQ has been, almost since the very beginning. Your eyes will start to open.

Returning to the topic of the work ethic…

A “speedrunner” may well spend hours a day at their craft, but this is ultimately a meaningless exercise, since they will ultimately accomplish exactly that which is done in less collective time by a casual player. This is thus a waste of effort on the behalf of the “speedrunner”. Put more simply, they are spending their work effort on something that someone else has already done (and done in a way deemed ‘correct’ by the creator of the artwork).

Why do they do this?

The answer is quite obvious if you think about it. The goal is the illusion of speed and the desire (SUBCONSCIOUS) to promote radical leftist, borderline Communist ideals of how easy work is. Everyone always says that “speedruns” look easy. That is part of the aesthetic. Think about the phrase “fully automated luxury Communism” in the context of “speedrunning” and I strongly suspect that things will start to ‘click’ in your mind.

What happens to the individual in this? Individual accomplishment in “speedrunning” is simply waiting for another person to steal your techniques in order to defeat you. Where is something like “intellectual property” or “patent” in this necessarily communitarian process?

Now, as to the sexual archetype model and ‘speedrunning’ generally…

If you have any passing familiarity with Jordan Peterson’s broader oeuvre and of Jungian psychology, you likely already know where I am going with this. However, I will say more for the uninitiated.

Keep this passage from Maps of Meaning (91) in mind:

“The Archetypal Son… continually reconstructs defined territory, as a consequence of the ‘assimilation’ of the unknown [as a consequence of ‘incestuous’ (that is, ‘sexual’ – read creative) union with the Great Mother].” In other words, there is a connection between ‘sexuality’ and creativity that we see throughout time (as Peterson points out with Tiamat and other examples).

In the sexual marketplace, which archetypes are simultaneously deemed the most creative and valued the highest?

The answer is obviously entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and others. Given that we evolved and each thing we do must have an evolutionary purpose (OR CAUSE), what archetype is the ‘speedrunner’ engaged in, who is accomplishing nothing new? They are aiming to make a new sexual archetype, based upon ‘speed’ rather than ‘doing things right’ and refuse ownership of what few innovations they can provide to their own scene, denying creativity within their very own sexual archetype.

This is necessarily leftist.

The obvious protest to this would be the ‘glitchless 100% run’, which in many ways does aim to play the game ‘as intended’ but seems to simply add the element of ‘speed’ to the equation. This objection is ultimately meaningless when one considers how long a game is intended to be played, in net, by the creators, even when under ‘100%’ conditions. There is still time and effort wasted for no reason other than the ones I proposed above.

By now, I am sure that I have bothered a number of you and rustled quite a few of your feathers.

I am not saying that ‘speedrunning’ is bad, but rather that, thinking about the topic philosophically, there are dangerous elements within it.

That is all.

---

An addendum for the fools.

Oh my. I wake up from a nap to a huge amount of triggered leftists in my notifications.

I will address some of the criticisms here.

Yes, I said “rustled” instead of “ruffled” that is a typo. Sorry. Peterson is a thinker and it is fine to cite him. I am not sorry for that Yes, the critique also applies to physical sports. They are also nonsensical, but also not adding a new sexual archetype into the world, since it has already been introduced and is already negative (the ‘sports star’). Evolution exists and influences our behavior. I have been linked a video by “hbomberguy” which made many of the same points as me, but did so while being a radical leftist and he was celebrated.

I, meanwhile, brought in a contemporary philosopher who is more of a centrist and was ridiculed.

This confirms my argument.