A Civilization

[JellyDonut]

Originally posted by Draco aka Se7eN
Ever heard of America's war for independance. INDEPENDANCE !!

If you're going to make such a big deal about independence, at least spell it correctly.

As in hey we are our own country now aka civilization.

Okay, so the Marshall Islands, a recent breakaway republic from the US now has its own culture, simply because it is a separate country, but Guam doesn't because it's still part of the US. But Palau is because it broke off. So is Micronesia. But not American Samoa. And the day after North and South Korea became separate nations, they had separate civilizations. Same for West/East Germany, etc. Or perhaps its any entity that CONSIDERS itself an independent nation, like TIbet or North Cyprus. But then is Texas its own civilization?

Dont give me that bull either. Stop making up this random jiberish. Blah blah blah blah. Ohhh they were a colony ohhh blah blah blah they speak english they are part of the english civilization ohhh nooo blah blah blah Shut up.

Convincing. Firstly, the word is "gibberish." Well they inherited English culture from being, well, English to begin with. I don't think you can spell "honour" without a "u" and fly a different flag (albeit with the same colours) and consider yourself a new civilization. I assure you this is not a forum for flaming/spam so I would advise you not to make such childish comments.

Opps sorry, i dont like lame reasoning. Simple solution, stop posting lame reasons.

Look who's posting.

[BackdoorMan]

That's really a pretty bad definition of a civilization. What about some of other great republics in history like Greece and Rome, could we say that they were any less civilized because of their lack of united goals?

I do agree that they seem out of place in ancient times and that is the reason I never play them. In fact they are the only civ that I have never played.

[joseph1944]

America very minor contribution to the world.

First to installed a Steam Engine in a Ship/Boat

First country to build a Machine Gun

First country with a Telegraph

First to lay a cable between two Continents

First country with a Telephone

First country with Electrical Lights

First country to build an Airplane that flew on it's own power source.

First country to fly faster than the speed of sound.

First country to build a Airplane that flew in space.

First country to build an Airplane that routinely flys above 80,000 ft at mach 3 + (2,010 mph). Actually it is much faster, but they won't tell us how fast.

First country to produce a Nuclear Chain Reaction

First country to build a Nuclear Power Ship.

First country to install a Nuclear Power Reator in an Airplane for testing.

First country to build an airplane that will fly 10,000 miles on one tank of gas.

First country to send a Man to the Moon. Hmmm the only country to sent a Man to the Moon.

I of course realize these are very minor in world scope of thing.

[KrazyHorse]

Nobody's arguing that the US has had only a minor contribution to the world. In the OT I recently answered the question "What was the most dominant empire throughout world history?" by placing the current state of American hegemony in 3rd place, out of all the nations which have ever existed. I don't doubt that the American nation will continue to rank in history books for millennia to come. That has no bearing on the case at hand. Are the Americans different enough from the British to be termed a separate civilisation? IMHO, no. Neither is Canada, nor Australia, nor New Zealand, etc. These are individual nations which are united under the heading of a common civilisation. Maybe in another thousand years or so the Americans and the British will have diverged enough to be considered members of different civilisations. Until then, they:

1)Speak the same language (though very slightly different dialects)

2)Exist under remarkably similar economic systems

3)Exist under political systems which are virtually equivalent (minus a few pro forma items)

4)Have common goals

5)Are, in the main, composed of peoples with similar backgrounds and religious beliefs

6)Have an inextricably intertwined history together, even after the rift of the Revolution

[KrazyHorse]

Draco whatever-your-name-is

If you're going to flame me, either:

a)post something which contains some shred of well-founded criticism, and which will thus embarass me, or if this is beyond the current scope of your mental facilities, at least

b)post something which follows accepted rules of grammar and spelling, either American or British. Most in need of rectification (that's fixin', to you) is the constant stream of run-on sentences you foist upon us. Actually, your entire punctuation scheme is very...creative. A sub-problem which is very prevalent amongst the semi-literate is the lack of differentiation between homophones, namely the possessive article "your" and the verb phrase contraction "you're". Next in importance is the atrocious spelling you've displayed so far. Finally, once these are fixed, there remains the question of style. For an example:

Did America not have a war for Independance?

The answer, of course, is no.

[tniem]

KrazyHorse you so crazy.

Anyways. If as someone above tried to say that the US should be with Britain because it broke away, what about the French, British, Germans, etc. Weren't they all apart of the Roman Empire?

If you really only want to have historically acurate civs - have the Babylonians, Egyptions, Indus Valley, the Greeks, the Chinese, the Polynesians, the Persians, and maybe a couple of others. None from Europe. But in this game, the game should end around the year 250 BC.

But Civilization goes through 2050 or so AD. That means there should be civs that represent all eras throughout this time. That means the Americans - the dominant players since 1900 in the world should be included. Now if the game was to end around WW2 like it did in Civ I then maybe you could leave the Americans out. But with nukes, spaceships, and stealth fighters how can you not include the U.S.?

And if you think spearman fighting for the US is weird, what about Hamurabi controlling nuclear warheads? New history lesson, "If your house is destroyed by a nuke, you are allowed to nuke the person responsible's house with a bomb. If your first born was killed you can kill his first newborn as well."

[KrazyHorse]

Ah, bu the difference is one of scale and events. The British found their own path, and their civilisation is based on markedly different principles than the Roman Empire's. Personally, I think that 20th century America and 18th century Britain are more closely related to each other than 4th century rome and 18th (or 20th) century Britain. In a very realistic way, the rest of the world sees the British and the Americans as belonging to the same club, and ever since the inception of the US, this has been the case, even while there were open hostilities between the two nations.

IMO, being a separate nation is only the first step toward being a separate civilisation. If it makes anybody feel any better, I'd say that control of the "British" civilisation has crossed the Atlantic and no longer resides on the island whose name it bears.

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by tniem
Anyways. If as someone above tried to say that the US should be with Britain because it broke away, what about the French, British, Germans, etc. Weren't they all apart of the Roman Empire?

The Roman Empire, at its height, occupied many countries, but the native residents already possessed a distinct culture of their own and retained it, with some changes, until after the Romans departed. The problem with this issue from the word go has been the different viewpoints that insist that being a big country either does or does not directly imply a separate civilisation. The Welsh, Irish and Scots all have very unique cultural differences but personally I would not try and suggest they were individual civilisations rather than parts of a larger one.

[TechWins]

The US had applied much of the culture from Britain, well becasue most of the early people were from Britain. Since the early colonists that primarliy came from Britain many other ethnics have came here to live, as well as the original ethnics of this land have been implemented into society, so to speak. With all these cultures here they eventually mixed and became one basic culture. The culture has gained influence from Britain, the Natives, Spanish, German, African, etc.. With these cultures mixing they have became this one basic culture. This basic culture has many of it's ideas used today by other nations but that doesn't mean these nations that are using much of the US culture are not civs. Britain now has a US influenced culture, not that the US doesn't have a somwhat Britain influenced culture. The US once did have a Britain culture but times have changed. Britain is still a civ even though they now have a lot of US culture intertwined with their own culture. US is still a civ even though we have a lot of Britain influenced culture.

A lot of similitarities that have been mentioned between the US and Britain apply to many nations. Please name similarities that only apply to these two nations.

[Tingkai]

Wow, The United States might well be the most powerful nation on earth, but you would never be able to tell that from some of the Americans responding to this thread. The temper tantrums from people like Draco is more appropriate for an insecure backwater than from the only country that can claim super power status.

Techwins, who provides a more mature American view, is moving us closer to explaining why the civilization of America is different from that of other English-speaking countries.

I would add that the Americans have a powerful mythology about who they are and that influences their civilization. It is the myth of the individual, something that I think is more myth than fact (everything requires teamwork these days), but nonetheless it is something that pervades American society. That is very different from the way British people think, or for that matter Canadians.

A belief in the right of the individual is the glue that holds the U.S. together, and it is something that only exists in the U.S.

And that's from someone who would never want to live in the U.S.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by TechWins
A lot of similitarities that have been mentioned between the US and Britain apply to many nations. Please name similarities that only apply to these two nations.

It's true that a lot of these similarities apply to many nations, but if they all did to two separate nations, then I would class these nations as being part of the same civilisation. Example: Austria and Germany. Different nations, same civilisation.

Let's take another example: Sweden and Denmark. Different languages, but the other 5 similarities still hold, with the differences being roughly equivalent to the differences between the US and Britain. I'd still classify them as the same civilisation. You can't apply the term "civilisation" to every nation that crops up; being of a different civilisation implies having a markedly different lifestyle, history and culture. I don't see the fundamental differences between the US and Britain which exist between, say, France and Britain.

[Sun Zi 36]

I guess the argument here is there are not as many differences between English and American than between other civilizations even not in the list. At least they are the only two civilizations which satisfy the 6 points raised by krazyhorse which no other civs statisfy. It is not a perfect test, I agree, but at least a reasonable test. I don't think I would want to go into a discussion of what is the definition of a civilisation in the context of the civ games.

I think many civilizations can exist within one nation and one civilization can exist across nations. It's not that Amercia should be part of, or included in, or a subsidiary of the English civ. I think it's better to say that the Americans and the English, and also the Candians (maybe except Quebec) and Australians and New Zealanders are all part of one civilisation, better termed the Anglo-Saxon civilisation.

There are other civs which should be included in the game (if you don't include commercial reasons for firaxis) more than the Amercians. I would think the Arabs is in the strongest position to be included next on the list, then the Spanish. I also think one of the Iroquois or Aztecs should be exchanged for Incans just that there would be a civilzation in South America. Anyway, I think 16 civs is a bit too little. 21 or 24 is about right.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Osweld
I don't think the issue about whether the USA should be in the game or not is a matter of deffinition - to me - it just seems out of place, all of the other civilisations have been around for ages and have a very old history, where as the USA is a brand new country, and it is a break off of the European countries, it seems very out of place to me to have a bronze age USA, especially while the Europeans are across the sea developing at the same time.

Though I really don't care whether they're in the game or not, like I did in civ2, I'll just play without them or modify them to be something else, and happily pretend they aren't included.

By your reasoning, Germany shouldn't be a civ as it wasnt united until a few hundred years ago.

Do you honestly think that united states has United Goals?? no democracy has united goals! Im an american and i dont have a ethnic enemy nor do i know many people who do (and i dont think you can count canada)

United enemy- Iraq,China,etc.
United Goals- destroy Iraq,China,etc.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Osweld
I don't think the issue about whether the USA should be in the game or not is a matter of deffinition - to me - it just seems out of place, all of the other civilisations have been around for ages and have a very old history, where as the USA is a brand new country, and it is a break off of the European countries, it seems very out of place to me to have a bronze age USA, especially while the Europeans are across the sea developing at the same time.

Though I really don't care whether they're in the game or not, like I did in civ2, I'll just play without them or modify them to be something else, and happily pretend they aren't included.

By your reasoning, Germany shouldn't be a civ as it wasnt united until a few hundred years ago.

Do you honestly think that united states has United Goals?? no democracy has united goals! Im an american and i dont have a ethnic enemy nor do i know many people who do (and i dont think you can count canada)

United enemy- Iraq,China,etc.
United Goals- destroy Iraq,China,etc.

-
Also, the above (1st post) Ideas aren't necessary my own, they are merely one definition among many.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Osweld
I don't think the issue about whether the USA should be in the game or not is a matter of deffinition - to me - it just seems out of place, all of the other civilisations have been around for ages and have a very old history, where as the USA is a brand new country, and it is a break off of the European countries, it seems very out of place to me to have a bronze age USA, especially while the Europeans are across the sea developing at the same time.

Though I really don't care whether they're in the game or not, like I did in civ2, I'll just play without them or modify them to be something else, and happily pretend they aren't included.

By your reasoning, Germany shouldn't be a civ as it wasnt united until a few hundred years ago.

Do you honestly think that united states has United Goals?? no democracy has united goals! Im an american and i dont have a ethnic enemy nor do i know many people who do (and i dont think you can count canada)

United enemy- Iraq,China,etc.
United Goals- destroy Iraq,China,etc.

Anyone could call the British and the Vikings the same civilization, considering that the Vikings are the current Britsh group in power and have been since Canute, the first King of Britan.

Over 1000 different words is enough difference, I think... And besides, In 200 years from now everyone will either speak
English, Chinese, Russian, Spanish, or some dialect of Indian, thus, all languages are consolidated.

Another thing, America is at least as big as England and France combined. (If you define a civ by its size)

-
Also, the above (1st post) Ideas aren't necessary my own, they are merely one definition among many.