Amazon is promoting “racial hate crimes” with a new show featuring Nazi hunters as the heroes, professional mad guy One Angry Gamer declares

Just a group of white men enjoying a stroll

By David Futrelle

The video game reviewer who calls himself One Angry Gamer — real name Billy — gets angry about all sorts of things. Sometimes he directs his ire at what he sees as unforgivable technical flaws in games.

In a post on the upcoming Half-Life game Alyx, he attacks the game makers at Valve for not giving the titular character

fully rigged arms, but instead they’re relying on the egregious disembodied hands, meaning that there’s a clear separation between the player and being immersed in the world. Expect corrupt journalists and non-gamers in media to praise the feature even though better VR games have fully rigged player-view arms, such as After-H or Swords of Gargantuan.

Yes, that’s right: he’s attacking “corrupt” game journalists now for hypothetical opinions he thinks they might express in the future.

Sometimes– well, rather a lot of the time — One Angry Gamer’s triggers are less technical; he was one of those who lost his shit over Lady Thor, describing her gender reveal to be “the kind of news that strips the threads away from the very fabric of your soul,” a veritable “hammer to the gut.”

OAG’s latest target? An upcoming Jordan-Peele-produced series from Amazon that he thinks will foment “racist hate crimes” against white people.

Amazon Prime is promoting racial divide within Western countries with an upcoming show due to air in 2020 called Hunters. It’s about a group of Jews, blacks, and Asians hunting down and killing whites. It’s justified in the trailer when the lead character, portrayed by Al Pacino, says it’s “mitzvah”, meaning מצווה, or upholding a commanded religious order from the Abrahamic God.

I should perhaps note that the show isn’t about some multi-ethnic, multicultural gang wantonly killing every white dude they see. Its about a group of NAZI hunters tracking down LITERAL NAZIS.

OAG is aware, of course, that the villains in the series are Nazis; he just seems to think that anyone opposed to Nazis is probably opposed to white people in general.

The end of the trailer showcases the mixed-race vigilantes going after and beating up, brutalizing, and killing whites. …

Yes, Amazon Prime has a show promoting racial genocide and are attempting to mask it as some sort of revenge against Nazis shtick.

By this, er, “logic,” all of the shows and films that have ever been made featuring Nazis as villains — from Hogan’s Heroes to Schindler’s List — were all little more than calls for white genocide.

One could only imagine the uproar if the show’s premise were reversed, and a bunch of whites were gathered to secretly hunt down and kill a bunch of blacks, Jews, or middle-easterners. Social Justice Twitter would have a conniption.

Yet Amazon is proud to broadcast a show designed to stir racial enmity against whites… and for what?

We all know the answer, but expect the Left to play dumb or justify how a show like this – during the current climate where the media is constantly trying to stoke a race war – is somehow “needed”.

“We all know the answer?” If I’m hearing OAG’s dogwhistle correctly, he’s blaming the show on Teh Jews What Controls the Media. Which makes it a bit more apparent why he’s mad about a show with Nazi villains. Because he’s more or less one of them.

OAG definitely has “race war” on the brain. A few days ago, he wrote a curious post about the upcoming Netflix vampire series V Wars, which OAG thinks might be secretly trying to “red pill” viewers by depicting a black vampire cucking the human race in general and white people in particular by getting it on with a white woman. (There’s a literal one-second sequence in the trailer for the show that depicts the head vampire — who is black — making out with some hot human babe I’m not even 100% sure is white. )

It doesn’t take much to figure out that with V Wars you could very well replace “Vampire” with “Race” and you would quickly get the gist of the show. They mostly show a lot of white women being turned into vampires, thus making it look like the lead black vampire is taking the women for his own. That’s almost right on the nose to the kind of media propaganda we’ve been seeing from… well, everywhere.

I’m pretty sure most people upon viewing the trailer weren’t thinking that “the lead black vampire is taking the women for his own.” They, or at least a good portion of them, were more likely thinking “hey, hot vampires!”

The main concern with a show like this is whether or not they’ll turn the main hero into a cuckold or make him join the vampires? That would be a really disappointing turn of events. …

I’m still kind of shocked that they allowed a black guy to be the main villain of a show in [current year]. I also wonder if that will cause the typical outrage fodder on that cesspit known as Twitter to “rheee” about it until it trends?

Maybe not, because people who aren’t racist don’t spend all their time obsessing over interracial human-vampire relationships?

I’m not sure if OAG is mad at the show for pushing a “cuck” agenda, or if he really thinks, as he suggests at the start of the post, that the show has been engineered by “some rogue executive at Netflix” who’s decided “to red-pill people with media that goes against the [current year] grain” by depicting a black guy as a white-lady-stealing vampire villain.

Why does it so often come back to the specter of interracial “cucking?” It’s really quite amazing how many of the issues today’s “Red Pilled”misogynists obsess over end up being about aggrieved racial and sexual entitlement and/or straight-up insecurity

H/T — r/GamerGhazi for pointing me to OAG’s vampire post

Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
3 years ago

@Jacob Blaustein
Well, I think it’s telling that on the first one all the Nazis had to show up and reply with canned phrases. They’re so insecure they just can’t let anyone say anything about them without responding.

3 years ago

Malitia – I guess we’re having this converstion again. (Just like in July:

Thor as a title

I also dislike the idea of Natalie Portman as Thor, because 1- it’s not a title, it’s a name (they’re actually trying to claim otherwise)

Yes, Marvel made that clear in 2014:

“The inscription on Thor’s hammer reads ‘Whosoever holds this hammer, if HE be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor.’ Well it’s time to update that inscription,” says Marvel editor Wil Moss. “The new Thor continues Marvel’s proud tradition of strong female characters like Captain Marvel, Storm, Black Widow and more. And this new Thor isn’t a temporary female substitute – she’s now the one and only Thor, and she is worthy!”

Gender-specific title:

if you wanted a title, they should have used Odinson (or the actual feminine form, Odinsdottir)

Jane has to use a title that explicitly references her gender,

I feel that her having to take the name so it’s “legit” kinda cheapens the fact that she’s worthy to wield the power since, as I said, others did before and didn’t need to do that to be “legit” themselves.

Because Jane will not be “legit” as Thor unless her title makes it clear that she is Thoring while female.

Jane must have the bikini treatment.

Of course, Marvel

introduced bona fide, not “it’s the same thing under another name” bullshit-excused, actual MAGIC

with Loki and Odin long before the Dr. Strange movie, and Natalie Portman didn’t do Thor in 2011 to secure funding for Black Swan in 2010, so Paireon is misinformed on quite a few subjects.

epitome of incomprehensibility

@Jacob, Naglfar – also, holy hell, there are a lot of Nazi wannabees on the Disqus thread. Like, someone wrote,

Do you think Jews are plotting another 9/11 ?

…I started laughing at how ridiculous that sounded until I remembered, “Hey, I did hear about this conspiracy.” Uncyclopedia circa 2006 made fun of it with an article called “Jaws [the movie] Did 9/11.”

Where I grew up, it was much more common to hear bigots saying that Muslims in general were in on the attack or at least approved of it – which is another flavour of “totally wrong” but at least it’s a bit more consistent (?)

Gah. I meant to quote something to laugh at but now I’m miserable thinking about 1) how some people think the Nazis are totally cool & 2) how Islamophobic a lot of Quebec is. 🙁

Guess it’s time for the shadowy Christian-turned-agnostics to plot another “going to bed” (code phrase for going to bed).

3 years ago

What a stupid article. OAG made his point stupidly as well, but it isn’t a far cry to say people are calling other people nazis to dismiss anything they have to say politically as racist. On the right at least we just think liberals are stupid and short sighted when it comes to what they want, while the left goes straight to dehumanization.

3 years ago

@Perseus : it’s not that it’s a far cry, it’s that it’s plainly false. The only people I have seen unjustly treating people of being nazi and fascist *are* nazis and fascists.

If you’re actually able of introspection (well, your post here isn’t a good start ..), you should try to see what you say that come out of the projection effect, which is that people tend to think that what they would do is what everyone do. That’s what is nakedly on display when Trump accused at least twice Obama to want to start a war in Iran for political gain, then tried to start one himself. It’s not hypocrisie per see ; he though Obama would do it because himself would.

That’s the seem here : you accuse the left of going straight to dehumanization and to treat everyone of being nazis because thoses are the standard, massively utilized, first response tool of the far right. They alway start by denying humanity and calling name, even when that don’t make any logical sense.

3 years ago


Citation needed.

Here’s mine:

OAG is a fascist.

3 years ago


What a stupid article. OAG made his point stupidly as well, but it isn’t a far cry to say people are calling other people nazis to dismiss anything they have to say politically as racist.

But what he said was racist. We’re not calling him a Nazi so we can act like he’s racist, we’re calling him a Nazi because he is racist.

3 years ago

I don’t see anything dehumanizing about calling someone a Nazi. Last I checked, Nazis are very human. Meanwhile, it’s the right which started referring to its opponents as NPCs: a literally dehumanizing term.

3 years ago

@Moggie : if they only started with NPC. Before that I remember “subhuman scum”. While that’s a very french one, I remember a remark of Jacque Chirac about “le bruit et l’odeur” (the clamor and the odor) supposedly specific to migrants and all. And that’s the moderate right wing ! (for reference, I sure hope most world leaders will act during the current crisis as he did during the Irak war)

@Naglfar : I would also add that while there is a lot of non-nazi racists, OAG luckily also provided us with all the proof we need to conclude he is not only racist, but a nazi.

%d bloggers like this: