WotC bans cards for racism

[Michael Keller]

Some cards have racism depicted in their artwork. They should go. But you (Wizards) have to be careful delineating what's acceptable versus unacceptable. Anyone who directly (not indirectly) projects racism into cards that affect black and white creatures should rethink that or needs to avoid the game entirely, because black and white as colors exist in a completely different context than what said person feels they might be. They're entitled to feel that way, but that doesn't make it accurate or correct.

The point is you can't strip things from society or this game on a much smaller scale to cater to the minds of radical individuals pushing a social agenda as opposed to people that are legitimately offended. You have to delineate.

EDIT: Of course, there are exceptions if something slipped past whomever it is that reviews these before they're printed. Wouldn't it make more sense under those circumstances to ban the artist rather than the cards from here on out?

[Croatoan]

Point out exactly where I said that hatred is excusable, at all. I'll wait.

You fail to grasp the point. The actual anti-racist movement is not "aimed" at "white people" with any sort of hatred at all. If you are anti-racist and hate white people, then you are actually just racist. The point though is that systemic racism and institutionalized racism are actual things. They are historical facts and they still exert effects to this day. To pretend as if these things did not happen or are not still happening is really just ignorance. The aim then is progressive reform that helps to undo the effects these sorts of policies had/still have.

The idea that Wizards saying they'd like you not to use a card literally called "Invoke Prejudice" and literally picturing stylized Klansmen, is not in any possible why I could conceive of it, "racism" or "prejudice" against white people. Nor is it, at all, in any way I could imagine, some way to "turn a racial hierarchy 180 degrees" and grant discriminated groups any real privilege.

Unless you consider that not having casual racism thrown around, not casually referencing divisive, historical images and notions in a children's card game, is a privilege. If you do, well, I can't help you honestly.

You did not but Bosque has already justfied the different treatment of "Cleanse" and "Virture's Ruin" with the statement that "The reason destroying all white creatures is not racist is because the dominant cultural force is designed and enforced to benefit white people.Hating white people could be considered bigotry, but a system of oppression that benefits whites is racism against all people that don't fit that box." without anyone calling him out on that.

And I not denying that there was systemic racism in the past, I just think that any measure taken to combat racism have to be sure that all races are treated equal and that an individual's right not to be treated differently because of his race is always respected. The easy test for this is just switching out the races and see if this changes a statement or a law. If it does, we are in trouble, because then we are obviously not moving closer to the idea of equality.

And coming back to Magic: I think the changes are just silly for the most part. "Invoke Prejudice" might be justfied because the author is - apparently - a Neo Nazi but the art is so stylised that I think the casual reader probably would not interpret it as pro KKK propaganda. But "Cleanse" really put then on the spot and opened the door wide for people to claim that any other card that targets black creatures or uses similar terms might be racist. And then they either have to ban that as well or look like hypocrits. Really stupid move on Wizards part.

[jmlima]

And just wait until someone brings up the sexism of magic's art and the gratuitous exploitation of sexuality... then you're in for a fun ride.

[BKclassic]

Neither do I. I don't work there and I never will. It would not surprise me, because implicit bias does exist to some degree or other. It is not shocking at all, to me, that people tend to hire people that look like them, because people implicitly link notional "race" to culture.

Again though, that does nothing to answer if banning cards with (what are seen by Wizards) as racist over-tones should or should not be banned.

I don't see how these decades old cards were hurting anyone but I'm a random white dude. I think snuffing out Chandra as a bisexual character to appease an authoritarian Chinese regime, which I believe happened in the last six months, probably caused some kind of harm.

[Mr Miagi]

It wasn't 'a lot more chill' for everyone. What you're describing, finding different ways of communicating so people aren't offended, is called progress.

Perhaps, and I'm not gonna argue against that. What I wanted to point out with my post is despite all the "progress" the situation in world is more psychotic... which is is contradictory.. we have so called "progress" and a shittier overall situation. Beep boop, does not compute.

[Michael Keller]

And coming back to Magic: I think the changes are just silly for the most part. "Invoke Prejudice" might be justfied because the author is - apparently - a Neo Nazi but the art is so stylised that I think the casual reader probably would not interpret it as pro KKK propaganda. But "Cleanse" really put then on in a spot and opend the door wide for people to claim that any other card that targets black creatures or uses similar terms might be racist. And then they either have to ban that as well or look like hypocrits. Really stupid move on Wizards part.

This is one of the best posts in this thread. And it's 100% accurate. They opened the Box when they did what they did because now they have to bob and weave the line of acceptability without looking absolutely ridiculous. You could argue a few of those could go, or stay. But they're going to need to release a statement at some point explaining that card color and cards of other color that affect those other cards is just a part of the game.

[Humphrey]

At this point they more or less have to change the colors to purple/orange to escape the rabbit hole.

I guess theyre glad theyre not decipher

[Mr. Safety]

But that's politicizing the game, and they can't do that. It's a disaster. That's like someone saying the person who owns the only white car in a parking garage full of parked black cars is racist, just because the color of the cars happen to be black and theirs happens to be the only white one - when that clearly wasn't intended - regardless of how said person felt about that. It's the same thing here: How far can you stretch the boundary of what's acceptable vs. unacceptable to a select group of people whose feelings are hurt because they're overly sensitive - to a group of people that are actually and legitimately offended? Who are they catering to and how far will they draw the line?

Injecting racism into the context of Magic because the cards happen to be black and white is wrong, because the intention of the game to begin with had nothing to do with singling out human skin tone on small pieces of cardboard. That being said, some of those cards' art were used as conduits of actual racism, which I agree with should be expelled.

There's quite a bit to unpack here, so here goes:

1) By avoiding racial connotations with art and flavor text, they are doing the opposite of politicizing the game. They are making a deliberate attempt at keeping anything resembling political viewpoints from getting convoluted with fantasy material.

2) Context is incredibly important. Someone owning the only white car in a parking garage could be a racial statement, especially if they did it on purpose with the intent of creating division. If someone just likes white cars, it isn't. Context is incredibly important. If it clearly isn't intended, well, then it is clearly unintended and reasonable people won't put any weight to it.

3) The best goal of all this isn't to pander to 'hurt feelings' or 'overly sensitive people'. The best goal is to prevent, as much as possible, offensive material to the public as a whole. Allowing some 'small tokens' of what could be construed racist to slide because you think people are overly sensitive is not only half-ass but also the reason why small pockets of racism still exist in the world. (EDIT: in some places it isn't small, but huge!) It hasn't been wiped out completely, so it lingers. I don't know what the perfect solution is, but ignoring even small bits of avoidable offensive material is a shit approach to rooting it all out.

4) It really doesn't matter if the intent of magic wasn't to sow racism if there is some racism in magic. The result is still some racism in magic. Once it's discovered, it should be dealt with like any other problem. Is wizards employing the best approach to this? No, they probably aren't. Is it a good thing that they have at least begun to fix the problems they have, even if it's seemingly just for political points? Yes, it's still a good thing they are doing something. Quite often this opens up the dialogue to getting real fixes started.

[H]

But that's politicizing the game, and they can't do that. It's a disaster. That's like someone saying the person who owns the only white car in a parking garage full of parked black cars is racist, just because the color of the cars happen to be black and theirs happens to be the only white one. It's the same thing here: How far can you stretch the boundary of what's acceptable vs. unacceptable to a select group of people whose feelings are hurt because they're overly sensitive - to a group of people that are actually and legitimately offended? Who are they catering to and how far will they draw the line?

Injecting racism into the context of Magic because the cards happen to be black and white is wrong, because the intention of the game to begin with had nothing to do with singling out human skin tone on small pieces of cardboard. That being said, some of those cards' art were used as conduits of actual racism, which I agree with should be expelled.

Who would actually say that? What an absurd example. Who would justifiably claim that owning a white car is a racist statement? Or that happening to park it someplace, through no fault of your own, would be racist. Unless, of course, you actually are trying to make a racist statement by owning a white car. In that case, a justifiable case could (and likely should) be made. That is a world of difference.

Again, the issue is not that the concept of White and/or Black exist in Magic context. The issue is the context in which some cards which happen to be a given color, and what that means in real-life implications.

[jmlima]

Perhaps, and I'm not gonna argue against that. What I wanted to point out with my post is despite all the "progress" the situation in world is more psychotic... which is is contradictory.. we have so called "progress" and a shittier overall situation. Beep boop, does not compute.

That's actually crap sorry to say. If you think today's world is worse than the 1930's, or the 1940's, or the 1910's , or the 1860's and so on you are not really looking at the world around you. The US are certainly in a crappier place than they were 20 years ago, so is the UK for that matter, but for those two examples, I can point to you dozens who are much better. As to the world overall, to say today's world is worse than say, the 1930s, heck, I will give you the 1950s, which were great for europe and the us but pretty shit for the biggest part of the world, is just not correct. Most of all, in what concerns the topic of this thread, race equality, to say it's not better now than it ever was is just a load of bollocks. No, it's not perfect these days, and there's still a long road ahead, but it's still a whole lot better than it ever was.

[Mr. Safety]

Perhaps, and I'm not gonna argue against that. What I wanted to point out with my post is despite all the "progress" the situation in world is more psychotic... which is is contradictory.. we have so called "progress" and a shittier overall situation. Beep boop, does not compute.

I could easily argue that the world isn't 'shittier overall' than it used to be. You're using a vague 'remember the good old days' kind of argument, something likely didn't really exist. I would say:

1) The fact that slavery and segregation are gone in America, thereby making the world a lot less shitty. Racial profiling still happens, black Americans are incarcerated at a much higher rate, and black Americans are targeted by police. All of that was happening before, so we have a net loss in 'shitty' stuff because we at least don't have the slavery and segregation anymore.
2) You keep saying 'psychotic'. What do you mean by that? I would really appreciate a clear example of how making progress (less racism) is making the world more psychotic, therefore contradictory.

[Michael Keller]

There's quite a bit to unpack here, so here goes:

1) By avoiding racial connotations with art and flavor text, they are doing the opposite of politicizing the game. They are making a deliberate attempt at keeping anything resembling political viewpoints from getting convoluted with fantasy material.

I don't understand what you mean. When you have a group of people with a hidden agenda outside of strictly banning cards based on their "racist" nature bleeding into the point of absurdity, then it's political. That I'm sold on.

2) Context is incredibly important. Someone owning the only white car in a parking garage could be a racial statement, especially if they did it on purpose with the intent of creating division. If someone just likes white cars, it isn't. Context is incredibly important. If it clearly isn't intended, well, then it is clearly unintended and reasonable people won't put any weight to it.

Obviously. But who is dictating context - that's the key.

3) The best goal of all this isn't to pander to 'hurt feelings' or 'overly sensitive people'. The best goal is to prevent, as much as possible, offensive material to the public as a whole. Allowing some 'small tokens' of what could be construed racist to slide because you think people are overly sensitive is not only half-ass but also the reason why small pockets of racism still exist in the world. (EDIT: in some places it isn't small, but huge!) It hasn't been wiped out completely, so it lingers. I don't know what the perfect solution is, but ignoring even small bits of avoidable offensive material is a shit approach to rooting it all out.

Obviously. But my gut tells me they're going to pander to people who are overly sensitive because they're in prisoner-of-the-moment mode. Or that's how they feel in general.

4) It really doesn't matter if the intent of magic wasn't to sow racism if there is some racism in magic. The result is still some racisim in magic. Once it's discovered, it should be dealt with like any other problem. Is wizards employing the best approach to this? No, they probably aren't. Is it a good thing that they have at least begun to fix the problems they have, even if it's seemingly just for political points? Yes, it's still a good thing they are doing something. Quite often this opens up the dialogue to getting real fixes started.

But how does racism exist in Magic if one sees it that way and someone else doesn't? Context. There are cards that are blatantly racist in visual nature, like I.P., and it needed to go. I get that. But once you've cleared the top of the pyramid and you start treading downhill into the murky waters of what's iffy or not, are you going to ban thousands of cards because of their interaction between each other or a possible unintended racial undertone?

Or is Wizards strictly looking for racial depictions in art and not the effect of a card? Because with Cleanse, they did, and now they have to stick to precedent.

EDIT: Also, I'm not sure if anyone has followed or is interested, but anecdotally Invoke Prejudice on eBay is selling for ridiculous money. I saw Cleanse also over $100.00 dollars.

[Zoid]

Again, this really misses the point. The problem is not references to White or Black, those are just color words. But when you place then within certain contexts, they can plausibly gain racial connotations. The issue is not color. The issue is context.



Statement already issued from EC for US events they run.

The thing is that context is something the viewer constructs. It's up to you.
It's like banning every book just because the author said something racist/xenophobic/sexitst/....
I actually really like the notion from EC that sunlight is the best disinfectant.
To fight racism you have to be able to show it and discuss why it is bad.
I would be willing to argue that just claiming these cards are racist is actually more racist as some artwork not on their list.

Also, where is the line on racism and xenophobia?
In that sense Ixalan is a lot worse because they have invasive and oppressive conquistadors clearly modeled after historic examples.
Instead of being just a random card with no lore, they are a major faction with which a fraction of the player base is supposed to align themselves with.
They are not depicted in any better or worse way than other factions in this set or vampires in past sets.
But that's ok because it's vampires and they sell?

How should they do then about other sensitive topics like sexism?
Wasn't there a huge thing a few years ago because some card could be interpreted as Garruk raping Liliana, even though the card depicting the next moment in the lore shows her defeating him?

Again, I'm not defending racism/xenophobia/sexism/.. , but I think the way to go about it is just wrong.
If you don't have a discussion about it, it will not get any better.
In that sense, I really like a comment I picked up on the outcome of the election of the state parliament in Hamburg, Germany.
A lot of people were sad that the AfD, the pretty obvious new nazi party, passed the 5% threshold and got into the parliament of a very liberal/left city.
However some people said, that is actually a good thing since it will remind people for at least 5 years that racism is still a problem which you have to so something about.
Racism and hate in general thrives in darkness, it can only be changed once brought to light and confronted.
And WOTC is doing the opposite.

[H]

I could easily argue that the world isn't 'shittier overall' than it used to be. You're using a vague 'remember the good old days' kind of argument, something likely didn't really exist. I would say:

1) The fact that slavery and segregation are gone in America, thereby making the world a lot less shitty. Racial profiling still happens, black Americans are incarcerated at a much higher rate, and black Americans are targeted by police. All of that was happening before, so we have a net loss in 'shitty' stuff because we at least don't have the slavery and segregation anymore.
2) You keep saying 'psychotic'. What do you mean by that? I would really appreciate a clear example of how making progress (less racism) is making the world more psychotic, therefore contradictory.

Indeed, not only is it nostalgia for a past that never existed, it is nostalgia for the present, as if everything was/is A-OK just as long as we pretended that casual, institutional and systemic racism just didn't exist. The world isn't getting more psychotic, it is getting more aware. People aren't just putting up with crap, they are actually exercising new-found power.

Like any power, that might not always be used in a just manner. But we have to examine that on a case by case manner, rather than a blanket statement that includes everything and really says nothing.

I don't understand what you mean. When you have a group of people with a hidden agenda outside of strictly banning cards based on their "racist" nature bleeding into the point of absurdity, then it's political. That I'm sold on.

There is no "hidden agenda." The agenda is pretty open and clear: get racist overtones out of the game. Now, you might disagree with what "racist" or "overtone" are in practice, but the agenda is pretty crystal.

Obviously. But my gut tells me they're going to pander to people who are overly sensitive because they're in prisoner-of-the-moment mode. Or that's how they feel in general.

What you derisively call "pandering" is actually just marketing. They'd be positively idiotic to not have their children's card game be as inclusive as possible. That is just "good business."

But how does racism exist in Magic if one sees it that way and someone else doesn't? Context. There are cards that are blatantly racist in visual nature, like I.P., and it needed to go. I get that. But once you've cleared the top of the pyramid and you start treading downhill into the murky waters of what's iffy or not, are you going to ban thousands of cards because of their interaction between each other or a possible unintended racial undertone?

Or is Wizards strictly looking for racial depictions in art and not the effect of a card? Because with Cleanse, they did, and now they have to stick to precedent.

You have discussions. You talk to people with different perspectives. You consider the evidence. You come up with solutions. That is how anything gets done, ever, in any context.

Also, there is no formal precedence they are beholden to. They can do whatever they want. If other cards are noted as justifiable problems, they can deal with them if and when they are an issue.

[Mr Miagi]

That's actually crap sorry to say. If you think today's world is worse than the 1930's, or the 1940's, or the 1910's , or the 1860's and so on you are not really looking at the world around you. The US are certainly in a crappier place than they were 20 years ago, so is the UK for that matter, but for those two examples, I can point to you dozens who are much better. As to the world overall, to say today's world is worse than say, the 1930s, heck, I will give you the 1950s, which were great for europe and the us but pretty shit for the biggest part of the world, is just not correct. Most of all, in what concerns the topic of this thread, race equality, to say it's not better now than it ever was is just a load of bollocks. No, it's not perfect these days, and there's still a long road ahead, but it's still a whole lot better than it ever was.

I was referring specifically to 90s, as noted in my original post. And yes, I do believe that, I lived through the 90s and in retrospect I can say it was a way more chill environment compared to now, but perhaps you had it different.

And no, you were not sorry to say my post was actually crap, you fully meant it and just tried to be half-gentleman about it.

[Mr. Safety]

I don't understand what you mean. When you have a group of people with a hidden agenda outside of strictly banning cards based on their "racist" nature bleeding into the point of absurdity, then it's political. That I'm sold on.

This is a little esoteric, and almost conspiracy-theory minded when you talk of a 'hidden agenda'. Who has a hidden agenda? WOTC just wants to offend as few people as possible so they can sell as many cards as possible. Are you suggesting there is a group of contentious people that have a hidden agenda to take down magic, or make it 'absurd' as you put it? Who are these people? You say it's political to ban cards based on racist nature 'to absurdity'. What is this absurdity you speak of? All WOTC needs to do is define what white/black fantasy context is (good vs evil, etc.) and it's clear.

Obviously. But who is dictating context - that's the key.

Wizards, at least legally, will always be responsible for dictating context. Anybody can misconstrue anything, but as long as WOTC is doing their utmost (which they are a long ways from) to avoid racist an offensive connotations then they aren't legally liable. Then it's just interpretation.

Obviously. But my gut tells me they're going to pander to people who are overly sensitive because they're in prisoner-of-the-moment mode. Or that's how they feel in general.

Follow it to completion: what are the results? A few more juvenile subjects rather than more adult-ish material? What harm does 'pandering to overly sensitive people' do? If you aren't as sensitive as others, it shouldn't bother you that they are accommodating. Is your whole argument that you don't want Magic to turn into Pokémon, as far as age recommendation goes for games?

But how does racism exist in Magic if one sees it that way and someone else doesn't? Context.

Wrong, it isn't context, it's interpretation. If someone says red is really green because 'that's just how they see it', that doesn't make the context different. The red thing is still red. However, some people are color-blind and red/green look the same in many situations. Would it be wrong to accommodate them somehow?

There are cards that are blatantly racist in visual nature, like I.P., and it needed to go. I get that. But once you've cleared the top of the pyramid and you start treading downhill into the murky waters of what's iffy or not, are you going to ban thousands of cards because of their interaction between each other or a possible unintended racial undertone?

That is yet to be seen. It's a slippery-slope argument, which often doesn't have a lot of merit. Just an example: back in the 80's law enforcement and government called marijuana a 'gateway drug', so their argument to make it illegal was to prevent cocaine and heroine use. The exact opposite is actually happening now that marijuana is legal in some states: opiate use is actually decreasing. (source:https://www.usnews.com/news/articles...ical-marijuana)

So if this is a slippery slope, what's the end result? What is this fearsome dystopia that you are imagining?

[Cire]

I was referring specifically to 90s, as noted in my original post. And yes, I do believe that, I lived through the 90s and in retrospect I can say it was a way more chill environment compared to now, but perhaps you had it different.

The Los Angeles and Crown Heights Riots were way chill dude

[H]

The thing is that context is something the viewer constructs. It's up to you.
It's like banning every book just because the author said something racist/xenophobic/sexitst/....
I actually really like the notion from EC that sunlight is the best disinfectant.
To fight racism you have to be able to show it and discuss why it is bad.
I would be willing to argue that just claiming these cards are racist is actually more racist as some artwork not on their list.

Also, where is the line on racism and xenophobia?
In that sense Ixalan is a lot worse because they have invasive and oppressive conquistadors clearly modeled after historic examples.
Instead of being just a random card with no lore, they are a major faction with which a fraction of the player base is supposed to align themselves with.
They are not depicted in any better or worse way than other factions in this set or vampires in past sets.
But that's ok because it's vampires and they sell?

How should they do then about other sensitive topics like sexism?
Wasn't there a huge thing a few years ago because some card could be interpreted as Garruk raping Liliana, even though the card depicting the next moment in the lore shows her defeating him?

Again, I'm not defending racism/xenophobia/sexism/.. , but I think the way to go about it is just wrong.
If you don't have a discussion about it, it will not get any better.
In that sense, I really like a comment I picked up on the outcome of the election of the state parliament in Hamburg, Germany.
A lot of people were sad that the AfD, the pretty obvious new nazi party, passed the 5% threshold and got into the parliament of a very liberal/left city.
However some people said, that is actually a good thing since it will remind people for at least 5 years that racism is still a problem which you have to so something about.
Racism and hate in general thrives in darkness, it can only be changed once brought to light and confronted.
And WOTC is doing the opposite.

While I like Jaco and I think his statement comes from a good place, that is something of a misguided place, to me.

There is a huge difference between things in isolated context, versus something like a book. Because if you read a book, that is mostly just a private affair, in a private sphere. But, lets say you decided to go to the Holocaust Memorial and read Mein Kampf out loud. That is a whole new context. You see the difference?

Frankly, Wizards is in a no-win position with this. But the action taken is fine by me. The game is not made in a way that allows, in Sanctioned play, contextual analysis. So no, you cannot place these cards, realistically, in any context to make meaningful historical contextual analysis during play. So, was/is Wizards actions so far perfect? No. Were they justified and rational? Yes.

The game is not the place for racial overtones. Or sexist ones either. Sure, was the Liliana/Garruk example overblown? Yeah, to some degree. However, while you point to the "succession" of the card to the "next" that is only in the context of you seeing one card then the other. What happens when you only saw the one? Frankly, the art was a bad idea from the get go, because it fails to be able to place itself in it's "proper context" and nothing within the game itself prepares or facilitates that context.

But, it is funny that you talk about bringing things to light. As if this whole thread is not doing just that. As if banning the cards does not also "bring to light" the fact of problematic overtones they can/do have.

[Mr. Safety]

I was referring specifically to 90s, as noted in my original post. And yes, I do believe that, I lived through the 90s and in retrospect I can say it was a way more chill environment compared to now, but perhaps you had it different.

Sure, way more chill. You could toss around epithets for gay people, black people, or anyone different, and get away with it without consequence. Those slighted individuals weren't 'chill' about it, they just didn't have a strong enough advocate to really get change happening. They were bothered in silence, which you took to mean acceptance. As H has said, the world isn't more psychotic, it's more aware.

Are you bothered you can't throw around derogatory language and have your buddies in the locker room snicker?

[Michael Keller]

There is no "hidden agenda." The agenda is pretty open and clear: get racist overtones out of the game. Now, you might disagree with what "racist" or "overtone" are in practice, but the agenda is pretty crystal.

I don't buy that for a second. You can't tell me with a straight face that the weight of someone's opinion in the decision-making process of this doesn't have final say or influence over the decision to move forward with eliminating a card from virtual existence because they're overly sensitive and their own personal belief system will impact that decision. "Wizards" here is being used as a general term, because the people that are "weeding" through this is likely small. Good-intentioned or not, some decisions are ludicrous. And I don't want the game and its players to be punished because someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

I think we can all agree their decision-making has been deeply flawed in all areas - especially the disaster of last year into this year.

What you derisively call "pandering" is actually just marketing. They'd be positively idiotic to not have their children's card game be as inclusive as possible. That is just "good business."

I'm not saying they wouldn't. But if you look at the cards they've initially banned, a majority of those children have likely never seen or even heard of those cards, so it really has no impact on them because they haven't been playing with them for 30 years like we have.

You have discussions. You talk to people with different perspectives. You consider the evidence. You come up with solutions. That is how anything gets done, ever, in any context.

Also, there is no formal precedence they are beholden to. They can do whatever they want. If other cards are noted as justifiable problems, they can deal with them if and when they are an issue.

And that's what this boils down to: opinion. That's been my point. They aren't asking you or me for your opinion on this - they're telling you once they make a decision and try to rationalize it why they made the decision. This is where it gets political. Since this is unprecedented, who's to say they won't ridiculously ban cards that aren't racist in context but could be perceived as racist because six or seven people think so - and now they've impaired your ability at choice to use those cards if you really liked or played with them?

Is that a sacrifice you're willing to adhere to and accept since Wizards and a handful of people perusing Gatherer is saying that's how it's going to be - even if you disagree?

EDIT: Remember, no one is in disagreement on the banning of a select few here at the start because they're racist. That's one thing. I'm talking further down the line in the card pool where things are murkier and they have to make hard choices.