For the longest time, I thought for sure this guy was voiced by Powers Booth. I was shocked after watching the credits to see that he wasn't. Sure sounds like an impression to me.
Maybe his name is capitalized in the manual, but in the in-game subtitles it is written correctly as Dutch van der Linde. In the newspapers, it is written as Dutch van Der Linde. I think we need a discussion on which one is best. Personally, I go for Dutch van der Linde, as this would be more correct as we don't write "van" and "der" with capital letters. -- Master Sima Yi 05:25, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with your version. I believe the newspaper and manual are errors if they are indeed capitalized... "van" and "der" are almost never capitalized in reality. XenocideTalk|Contributions 01:06, May 31, 2010 (UTC)
- It's a very good argument, but there are a couple thing to consider. First off, the administrators are aware of this issue, as a number of the new achievements are not officially capitalized, BUT it is a convention to capitalized all titles. That being said, we have several native dutch-speaking administrators (which I am not one of), so it will be interesting to what their opinion is on the subject. For now it will remain, until we have come to a decision on which convention we wish to pursue. Thanks for the input, guys! Cheers -- Tiktaalik 01:11, May 31, 2010 (UTC)
"John and a posse of U.S. Marshals stake out the bank and wait for a chance to kill Dutch."
I played that mission today and i was pretty sure that all the time it was U.S. Soldiers, not Marshals. What's to say? Hevehoc 19:50, July 4, 2010 (UTC)
It was definitely Marshalls
188.8.131.52 04:48, June 25, 2011 (UTC)
This was a part of his non-psychotic side here - he meant those who bear office, who are given what is called today "licit monopoly over violence" as written about by sociologists like Max Weber, etc. - he was despairing here and saying, regardless of what happens to any of the characters, or actions taken, the seed of what Catholics call "original sin" or modern sociobiologists call today, the "black ghost of [amoral] Darwinian evolution" - the evil is hopelessly incapable of resisting and futilitarian nihilism of bleak Lovecraftian cosmicism variety, is the reality, the ultra-sad, heart-impaling reality - Dutch turned out to lack masculinity, true virilinity, in the end -
It's not hopeless like he was saying, though.
Magistrates shall always exist, all we can do is try to make sure those of upright heart, knightly character, occupy the offices so the likes of "Ross" and modern C.I.A. assassins, don't make people think all authority shall be eternally corrupt... A few decent people, if imperfect, exist, who can hold office.
It's like Bonnie's father said, "FEW men (i.e. democracy as we know it, is a JOKE) can handle power..." So the solution is not self-immolation but seeking out those gentile hearts...
On a personal note - what is more likely, the numerical majority all possessing virtuous dispositions, or a less sizeable set...? The Leibnitzian law of non-identical substances is relevant here. Monarchy is not quite what Americans think, honestly... More likely one human being, to be good, than the mass herd... We moderns might have to do some serious re-thinking "politically", Americans most of all...
"The poor will always be with you" Jesus was not a fool, he spoke in elliptical koan-like parables, esoterically...
Mr. van der Linde could not deal with (common problem with Utopian Communistic sorts, sadly) the above-cited quotation no human being can alter...he failed the war within...chose to destroy the world because the universe is not perfect... Utopia exists NO-WHERE - except in the "otherworld" or whatever one decides to style the notion, and "Heaven", the "over-world", CANNOT be brought down to this entropic earth - all we can do is fight evil within human limits, do our best, we cannot "perfectionize" - Dutch couldn't deal with this metaphysical issue, and gave up, sort of coward-like, frankly...
Psycho-spiritually, with this fact, he self-imploded, basically.
Whereas the healthy response to human fallen errancy and "sin" is to acknowledge it, fight it correctly; and acknowledge, we can indeed, heck, it is even worse today than in medievaldom - YET to fight it inside oneself and out in the right way...
The "imago Dei" (or as Kant said, the "practical moral reason" differentiating us from apes theologians figuratively give various names to that part of us making "NOT ALL PERMISSIBLE" - Dostoeyevsky knew the danger of Nihilism, a wise man...) is real, worth fighting for, and Dutch slayed the "templum dei" we figuratively represent or embody in his nihilistic futilitarian depressive psychosis and moral regression with abandoned fury truly demonic -
While evil exists, and the "poor shall always be with us" (Communism fails horrifically here in dealing with this problem humanely, BTW) - auto-cannibalistic death is not the answer...
The answer is not self-demolition but to turn the agon of knowledge we have of the "MYSTERIUM INIQUITATIS" or whatever we choose to call it, orienting that knowledge in the right direction, fighting it rightly; not giving up but doing what he humanly can in not "perfecting" "evil", but just fighting it the best we can, coming to terms with it, not hiding from it, but just fighting it and not suicidally choosing violent nihilistic despair like Dutch did because we cannot bring "Heaven down to Earth"...
His comment reflects the core flaw in his personality - sums up everything... For all his masculinity, he wasn't man enough to fight evil rightly.
To use Nietzschean phraseology: He choose to let staring into the abyss, be the abyss staring back at him and with a vengeance, letting the abyss win, passively being conquered by the abyss, in one way of putting it...
Marston was the manlier man, even if totally agnostically, for deciding, the possibility of goodness is real, moral ascendant choices can be made even if evil choices and evil things have been part of one's life in the past...
Choosing the possibility, the reality of Good (Platonic-Johannine "good")...despite imperfections, despite the world being against you, magistrates not being absolutely angelic...and not deciding to demolish the world because it does not fit into some pre-conceived Utopia only attainable post-mortem...
Year of birth
Some editors are going with 1855 as Dutch’s year of birth, and others are going with 1858. Which one is correct, and where is the evidence for 1855/1858? It changes very frequently, and needs to be put to rest sooner rather than later. Wagwan piffting23 (talk) 17:50, March 22, 2019 (UTC)
- To be honest I don't remember ever hearing of a definitive year of birth for Dutch in the games, these 1855/1858 are likely guesses of what year he was born in. In the games he seems to be in his fifties/ sixties but nothing solid I think. In my opinion if no solid proof of his year of birth can be found, it is better just not to put it. BrunoVieira623 (talk) 19:02, March 22, 2019 (UTC)
Seems a very subjective and mostly false section. It mentions his hate for modern things and wants a hunter-gather society. This is not true. IN RDR2 Dutch does nothing but flash his fancy clothing, Jewelery and later decides to buy land and farm, the opposite of hunter-gathering.
He also uses technology to his advantage all the time. Trains, the automobile, the tram. The only time he every complains in outside Saint Denis, where he calls big cities repellent.
He does nothing but assert himself as the leader, with full control and won't allow any doubts or questioning of said authority. Dutch loves authority, only hating it when he's not the one in control.
Nowhere in the games does it every confirm almost all of the stuff written in the philosophy section. The wikia should be kept to the facts, objective things backed by sources. This isn't the place for analysing philosophy. AC Denton (talk) 00:01, May 22, 2020 (UTC)ac denton
- Alright, there’s a bit to unpack here.
- While it is true that Dutch uses modern technology at some points, it’s definitely not “all the time”, rather when it’s convenient. With that even stated, it’s notably very few as the instances involving the tram and the automobile are specifically as means of escape, not out of preference. He does express interest in purchasing land for a farm at several points but of course not only backtracks on going through with this while the gang was further North but we are shown that he ultimately never gives up the outlaw lifestyle. There’s also a fairly large difference between dressing sharp and how one goes about conducting themselves as a living.
- His view on authority is clearly stated as well as being a product of hypocrisy, as you pointed out yourself. He dislikes the government and industrialists for forcing individuals into what he views as an oppressive society as well as holding sympathies for the Wapiti Indians, seeing them as in the same camp in regards to their ways of life dying out. As such, he sees stealing from those in power to provide for others (and eventually more importantly) the gang itself. “Hunter-gathering” as a term, when applied to how he runs the gang, is both in a literal and metaphorical sense, as they steal to provide for themselves.