New Governments/Mod Advice Criticism Encouraged

[Wycoff]

Off Topic:

Oz,

I notice that you like to casually label things as "Fascist", yet you are complaining that people don't have enough say in the government. Remember that Weimar Germany had one of the most (if not the most) democratic constituions in history. The people went out and they voted for Hitler. That is what makes Fascism Fascism. It is "Totalitarian Democracy", voted into office. The Majority rules completely, as happens in pure democracy. The Nazis were had huge amounts of popular support. When the people spoke, they spoke unabashedly for dictatorship.

Disenfranchisement is not utter and total evil. In fact, thats how things operate in real life. The majority of American People don't vote. That is good. They don't have a strong enough interest in voting/ the political process to comple them to act. Why force them to vote if they are completely uninformed or disintereted? The result would most likely be some sort of MTV type demogogue, the pure child of mindless consumerism. I personally think that the uniformed should not be forced to vote. As to the Nader situation, he did not have enough support to win. He also recognized the inherent danger in his run for office. He himself recognized that he would probably swing the election into Bush's favor, yet he ran anyway. Third parties can, and have, successfully emerged in U.S. history (for instance The Republicans) However, the greens are too much of a fringe group to have a successful party of their own, and too unimportant for the Dems. to co-opt them a la William Jennings Bryan. Its not the system's fault that Bush won the election, its the voters fault.

Don't throw around totalitarian references too lighty. All they do is take away from their seriousness. America is in no way close to the Totaliarianism of Stalin or Hitler.

On Topic: I like your governments Tweek.

[Azeem]

According to a dictionary definition of fascism, fascism is a government which exalts the nation and stands for autocratic and often militaristic government. The US currently is somewhat of a mix of militarism, oligarchy, and aristocracy with a small quart of representative democracy. No more than half of the voting age population vote and politicians, and especially more upper-class lobbyists, don't seem to care that the majority of the voting age citizens do not vote. They especially do not care much for minority ethnic groups either. Since wealthy lobbyists, who contribute much to election campaigns, can easily sway the decisions of the government more than a group of lower middle class or poor citizens and that the upper class (who seem to think that they're more important than we common folk from working-class families), America has a bit of an aristocracy in it. Also, ever notice that those who run for high offices tend to come from well-to-do families? The US government also promotes militarism and indirectly promotes hatred (and a touch of disguised racism) towards any alleged "enemy".

In my opinion, it's more of an aristocratic republic than a democracy.

OK, enough of my political talk. I've already had to write this sort of thing for a college essay so I don't want to bore all of you to death. Back to the topic of the mod-

Hmm... Forced Labor for Monarchy? That's about right in many cases (such as Emperor Qin sending hundreds of thousands to their deaths to build that Great Wall).

As for "Communism", you can remove that (if you haven't already) and replace it with "Bolshevik Socialism" or "Maoism" (since a real "communism" never existed). That would be more historically accurate. They should retain the same stats as "communism" but have a slightly higher military police.

BTW, what modern equivalent does "Statism" have?

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by Wycoff
Off Topic:

Oz,

I notice that you like to casually label things as "Fascist", yet you are complaining that people don't have enough say in the government. Remember that Weimar Germany had one of the most (if not the most) democratic constituions in history. The people went out and they voted for Hitler. That is what makes Fascism Fascism. It is "Totalitarian Democracy", voted into office.

Ah, but I never label lightly

It is a long-noted quirk that liberal democracy allows for its own destruction, a la Hitler's "democratic" victory. I must note that I am a great admirer of Turkish democracy which, IIRC, specifically empowers the military to intervene whenever demagogery threatens to undermine democracy. Not that this is without its own inherent dangers, of course ...

In Turkey's case, the "threat" is Islamic fundamentalism; in America's case, it is consumerism -- or, rather, the replacement of the internalized, national idenity of the citizen with the right to consume (and successfully accrue further wealth to further consume) over such concerns as privacy and freedom of expression.

Of course, compared to Europe, we are a people who have uniquely replaced history with mythology -- whoops! ... or did Weimar Germany do so as well?

As for 3rd parties -- the fundamental economic structure of the nation has changed since Lincoln became the first Republican president. With the change in economic structure has of course come, hand-in-hand, significant social structure. Part of this socio-economic polarization has resulted in an embedded two-party system which has -- at least since Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party -- defied reconstruction.

Insofar as "fascism" is concerned / defined, it is two things -- the extreme of right-wing authoritarianism, and an economic structure of state-directed capitalism, concentrating wealth as the ruling "elite" sees fit.

To imagine that America is without a ruling elite is naivete at its highest; to imagine that the current ruling elite is without its own economic interests is absurd -- or are you unaware that Bechtel et. al. are already bidding on projects for post-war reconstruction of Iraq? Or that Karzai has sat on the board of oil companies (sorry, off hand I cannot recall which)? Or that Afghanistan is the shortest route for Caspian oil to reach
the sea via pipeline?

Disenfranchisement is not utter and total evil. In fact, thats how things operate in real life.

Here we can only agree to disagree -- maybe. "VOLUNTARY disenfranchisement" begs the question why people don't care how they are ruled.

That people don't vote because they can't point to Canada let alone Iraq on a map -- and have their retirement plans intimately tied up in hopes of winning some sort of lottery -- is cause for alarm. Or a new flavor of coke. Or another "reform" to dismantle something which costs money, no matter the benefits to the polity as a whole.

The majority of American People don't vote [...] They don't have a strong enough interest in voting/ the political process to comple them to act. Why force them to vote if they are completely uninformed or disintereted? The result would most likely be some sort of MTV type demogogue, the pure child of mindless consumerism.

... You mean, just like we have now??

Its not the system's fault that Bush won the election, its the voters fault.

Here I must disagree -- the mess of the 2000 election was a situation which the Founding Fathers did not forsee, and has nothing to do with the electoral college per se, but with a Supreme Court reversing years of consistent decisions in favor of State's Rights to suddenly hamstring ... Oh, never mind ...

There IS actually a Civ gamepoint for all this: America is the greatest power the world has ever known, with about the most apathetic and/or uninformed elecorate Democracy has ever known.

Hence I suggest a new Civ government type: Corporate Republic. Very high efficiency; moderately happy people; very low war tolerance -- unlike those participants in Democracy and war who have now commonly come to be known as "the greatest generation".

Don't throw around totalitarian references too lighty. All they do is take away from their seriousness. America is in no way close to the Totaliarianism of Stalin or Hitler.

I must painfully remind you that current interpretation of law in this country allows a citizen to be declared an "enemy" combatant who can tried and executed, in secret, without due process including attorney/client privilege, under the authority of a military tribunal.

That we don't know whether this has happened or not is, IMHO, sufficient cause for alarm.


Yours Happily Remembering When "Civilized" Meant Something, Or So I Thought ...

Oz

[SirTweek]

I would have to disagree that the US is run by the "racist elitist upper class". What about affermative action programs, sexual harrasment officers, ect... The US does not persecute minorties if anything the government gives them special status and protections. I think most people don't vote out of apathy because they figure they will get screwed either way.

The nazis may have had a democratic constitution but even before the war they didn't have the huge amount of support that people think they did. The nazis purged political enemies. I have some friends that fled from nazi germany since they didn't support hitler. They are all germans. One of my friends, her father was executed and his land was stolen. She fled to Canada with her mother before the war.

I propose the McDick's republic where the people are fed fast food to make them fat, lazy and subservient. Even if you try to avoid McDick's for your entire life once you have kids they will be screaming to go there since advertisments make out McDick's to be a gourmet food establishment for kids. With the civ advance of 'super/biggie' size meals, all war weariness is gone as your people are to fat and lazy to protest war.

I tested out the governments. They work good except the computer will not pick communism over fascism. The computer still sometimes picks democracy over fascism/communism for war since democracy is still the most powerful government form. I'm going to change the unit support to 5:5:9 for communism hopefully the computer will pick it more then, and I'll get rid of the spy bonus. I think just from my testing the computer holds the amount of units it can support as the highest factor in choosing governments and of course with democracy you can support the most units out of all the governments even with my changes.

The early governments worked great the computer usually went with republic yet some stayed in monarchy for a while even after getting the republic advance, I think because of the 4 unit support for towns. Then when theocracy came along the computer player's were split between theocracy and monarchy for war.

For statism I couldn't think of a modern equivalent to it, even though one may exist. Statism is supposed to be a offshoot of fascism that didn't come to being since fascism was defeated. Think of it as a modern fascism with even more tight controls because of technological advances and with a modern economy. Statism is militaristic with extreme nationalism like fascism. This could possibly fit some modern 'communist' countries or dictatorships.

[Ozymandias]

Originally posted by SirTweek
For statism I couldn't think of a modern equivalent to it, even though one may exist. Statism is supposed to be a offshoot of fascism that didn't come to being since fascism was defeated. Think of it as a modern fascism with even more tight controls because of technological advances and with a modern economy. Statism is militaristic with extreme nationalism like fascism. This could possibly fit some modern 'communist' countries or dictatorships.

Perhaps "Authoritarianism"? -- Hitler's brand of fascism was the extreme; Mussolini's, Franco's et. al. were arguably different. This would also encompass many nominally democratic 3rd world, present-day countries. Definition might be "state-directed capitalism" with the military ever-ready to ensure that voting etc. doesn't stray too far from the party line. Stats could mix Republic and Fascism (e.g., Fascism but paid labor).

As for all the other sundry diatribes, phillippics, militant screeds, etc. -- my spleen is well vented; thank you all

-Oz

[Azeem]

"state-directed capitalism"

That would be similar to China's situation. China's government in the Mao era exalted the state above the people. The prestige of the nation came before the needs of the people. Very similar to the definition of "fascism". How about renaming "Statism" with "Maoism"?