Well, I've finally done it. After months or possibly even years of not using it, I finally unsubbed from r\gamingcirclejerk. Not because of how obnoxious they are, but because of how absurdly shallow their understanding of politics is, even by the standards of social media discourse. Their understanding of politics is basically "Trans rights good, blatant Bigotry bad" with barely anything else and is literally adults with a sheltered middle schooler level understanding of American politics (or arguably even lower than that in some ways). Even progressive subreddits like r\whitepeopletwitter, various powermod run subreddits, and r\political_revolution have notably more political education in comparison since they're at least on a regular teenager level and not a sheltered middle schooler level. Basically, r\gamingcirclejerk's understanding of American politics lives and dies by a "Trans rights good, blatant bigotry bad" mantra while failing to realize any systemic political issue in nuanced ways. Heck r\gamingcirclejerk's understanding of politics feels like its stuck in the early 2020s "performative corporate racial awakening" even if it's fucking 2026. And due to this severe lack of political education and nuance, r\gamingcirclejerk falls for corporations using "wokeness" as a means of marketing. Whereas most tend to see right through corporations using wokeness (I.E POC and Queer marketing "representation"), r\gamingcirclejerk acts as if those are actually representative of ideology instead of just marketing. r\gamingcirclejerk will sometimes either implicitly or even explicitly side with exploitative billion dollar corporations on behalf of "owning gamers" because their ideology can be boiled down to "Epic Gamer bad. Opposite of Epic Gamer good". r\gamingcirclejerk's understanding of American politics is so awful and shallow it makes 2010s and early 2020s trendy performative social justice activism look like a democratic socialist book on class relations and economic or social grievance driven radicalization written by a professional sociologist. If anything, r\gamingcirclejerk is one of the most politically illiterate subreddits on the entirety of Reddit, only rivaled by developmentally delayed teenager meme subreddits.
This brings me to the reason I unsubbed, their bootlicking of Nintendo due to their "we treat our workers well" narrative. It's not that surprising that a subreddit that often falls for corporations using liberalism in ways most internet users wouldn't would fall much harder for corporations using progressivism as marketing. After all, many people can tell how Disney queerbaits using fake LGBT representation, but those same people would cite an ABC News article on "Democratic Socialism" as a reasonable source for leftist ideologies. So, if most people who can obviously tell when a corporation is using liberalism often fall for the same corporations using progressivism, then what chance does a subreddit with the shallowest understanding of politics have of realizing corporate progressivism? No matter how many times you try to explain to r\gamingcirclejerk how "We treat our workers well" is a marketing ploy to make Nintendo seem nice or actually discuss the reasons why Nintendo has that perception, they will dismiss it with "Well, someone online told me Nintendo is nice, so therefore Nintendo is nice". Because to them, concepts like NDA's and corporate selective transparency as well as Nintendo being super controlling of PR and super secretive don't register in their brains because they lack the political literacy to understand how corporations work. Nor do they realize that Nintendo's "Better treatment" is common in the rest of the Japanese games industry, yet other Japanese game developers don't have the same "wholesome wonderland corporation that cares about standards in ways other companies wouldn't dare" narrative that has dominated the way Nintendo's been mythologized in North America for the last 40 years.
If there's one thing I've learned from politics over the last 10 years that applies to politics as a whole for over half a century, it's that democrat aligned white people (both liberal and progressive) prefer narratives that don't implicate them and instead reaffirm their status or comfort them. For example, "Tax The Rich" is a popular slogan because it reaffirms privileged suburban white people status as "oppressed" compared to cartoonishly evil billionaire republicans and doesn't require an understanding of economic class in the USA. "End free trade" isn't a slogan due to implicating suburban white people who support progressive politics as actually privileged compared to lower income people who suffer from free trade immensely and actually discussing the issue of class, something progressive politics is specifically not supposed to do. The entire reason why modern day "anticapitalism" and "Democratic socialism" focuses on primarily on the idea of billionaires is because discussing billionaires allows for anticapitalist rhetoric and populism without the concept of actual capitalist systems and class, thus making it palatable for privileged people who think they're "oppressed", yet treat anticapitalism as a trendy consumerist lifestyle, which means expensive Nintendo products fit right into the "expensive products about regulating capitalism" merchandise area. The reason why topics like "Medicare/Housing/College for All" "Minimum wage worker debates" and "Taxing the rich" are so popular is because they're extensions of the culture war debates about welfare and economic regulation. So, to a progressive, the concept of Nintendo products vs the rest of the industry is an extension of the consumerist culture war of Obama reformism vs the Tea Party, Bernie Sanders vs Donald Trump, or Antifa vs Militias.
Nowadays, due to corporations controlling the public sphere, the entire lifeblood of "left wing" movements depends on white liberal approval. Supporting anti factory farming politics, but only because "hurting cute animals is mean and not hurting them by consuming vegan products can solve literally any problem in the world" instead of actually engaging with intersectional left wing anti factory farming ethics, politics, or philosophy and completely misunderstanding the issue. Supporting Black Lives Matter and acting smart by talking about "systemic racism", yet backing down when actual calls to defund the police instead of performative ones become uncomfortable for your privileged suburban policing supported upbringing, then pulling a 180 on police reform when a mass shooting targeting light skinned rural kids happens and then supporting a law and order bill disguised as "progressive". Supporting anti Asian American hate, yet using deeply culturally essentialist and orientalist narratives about issues in Asian Countries under the guise of "liberalism" and "cultural critique" while often using White Savior narratives about "saving" Asian women from their own "corrupted" culture. Supporting "Democratic Socialism", but believing it just means culture war debates about welfare, minimum wage workers, and economic regulation instead of anything radical in the slightest because some billion dollar corporation told you so and sold you "tax the rich" merchandise while you start celebrating McCarthyism once actual socialists start having a presence in American politics and call out the foreign policy of the party you support.
This means the "Nintendo treats it's workers well" narrative is highly effective because it's a company representing white suburban culture saying "We Agree with you politically". It isn't just any company supporting "Democratic Socialism", it's the company representing childhood innocence, Modern Suburban Americana, and a commitment to "wholesome" standards saying they agree with you politically. If any other video game company said that, most people would see right through it. Heck, Big Tech uses this same "We treat our workers well" narrative, but many people see right through it due to their controversial image and big tech companies (comparatively) being more transparent about workplaces. However, Nintendo isn't just any company. They've created an entire brand around "Wholesome wonderland corporation who cares about standards in ways no other company would" since the Days of reviving the games market with the NES's quality control, often using this to manipulate people in predatory ways, including political ways back in the NES and SNES days as well as marketing their console to white suburban families, meaning that most of their fanbase is disproportionately white nowadays. Heck, the "We treat our workers well" mantra used by Nintendo is effectively a status quo reset, which prevents proper analysis of the companies monopolistic and anti-consumer practices such as fixed prices, high priced proprietary accessories, or vertical integration and reducing them to a mere "Wholesome corporation who just happens to be harsh on fan projects with DMCA's"
Overall, r\gamingcirclejerk is basically a subreddit for immature adults too sheltered to actually think about politics in nuanced ways and think all politics is about arguing in very minor (in the grand scheme of things) arguments about representation culture wars in video games and not ask bigger questions about actual American politics, especially when it comes to the games industry. You never see r\gamingcirclejerk bring up more insidious non culture war aspects of the intersection between gaming and politics, such as Microsoft allowing their technology to be used by the Israeli Military, Game companies letting their game engines be used as defense training technology, the role Saudi investments play in major game companies, games industry lobbying, or Tencent's ties to the CCP. I'd argue if more people were aware of how the games industry intersected with politics beyond culture war battles about representation in games, people would be able to see through Nintendo's "Democratic Socialist" adjacent marketing. That's the thing, Nintendo's "We treat our workers well" narrative works so well because progressives are too politically illiterate to understand how corporations work and how they weaponize progressivism (NOT liberalism) to seem hip with millennials.
There's a quote from MLK and Malcolm X that's worth remembering about white liberals and white progressives, especially in recent years. MLK's quote is "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice". Nowadays, we have a similar problem with our corporatocracy. The Biggest problem isn't the ultra neoliberal corporations like Koch industries and other "obvious villain" type corporations or the reactionary right wing movements they fund. It's the liberal corporations who co-opt "Democratic Socialism" by turning it into a massive and center right (on the grand scheme of the political spectrum) "progressive politicians" who are always dedicated to bringing order to the Democrat Party instead of real economic justice as well as their white liberal/progressive base who always favors movements that reaffirm their status rather than challenging society in meaningful ways. Malcolm X's quote is "The white liberals are foxes... The white liberals are more dangerous than the conservatives; they lure the Negro, and the Negro runs from the growling wolf, he flees into the open jaws of the 'smiling' fox.". Nowadays, in our corporatocracy, the wolf is overtly reactionary corporations like military corporations and big oil, but the fox is corporations that present themselves as progressive by co-opting anticapitalist sentiment and neutering it by turning it into marketable trends.
At the end of the day, there's one thing about white liberals and progressives that defines them. They will always prioritize their own comfort and prefer that things reaffirm their own status rather than movements that implicate them. This is a major reason why so many political movements nowadays end up being weak in the grand scheme of things. It's because they don't want to alienate their white liberal and progressive base by implicating them and instead decide to reaffirm their status, even when the movement should actually challenge biases. Whether it be various performative "anti racism" movements to modern day "democratic socialism", movements nowadays are designed to be feel good marketable trends as opposed to anything actually radical, due to how corporations now control the public sphere via social media, which allows them to turn any sort of movement into a marketable trend via co option or shut down movements before they get off the ground if they're too radical and can't be co opted via algorithms and moderation. And this is how the "Nintendo treats its workers well" narrative came to be, because Nintendo's primary demographic in the USA is white and a corporation tied to modern suburban Americana saying they support you politically reaffirms a privileged white persons status very well. The thing about "Nintendo treats their workers well" narrative is it isn't just a condemnation of Nintendo and their manipulative tactics used to trick people to doing their bidding, but also a condemnation of the Democrat party and their dedication to bring order to the status quo under the guise of justice as well as their voter bases political illiteracy which makes them easily manipulatable.
