United Apolytonian Despots (this is NOT a joke!!! Read.)

[UnOrthOdOx]

I am not saying we cannot change, I am saying that we should look at what we are, and allow the govt in game to reflect that. Why is attempting a 'model despotism' any different than your 'model Democracy'? Have you ever played a game and found it fun to be the bad guy? Why not? Why must we play the perfect peace loving democracy? The perfect 'good guys'?

Yes, bottom line, we can change. And, IMO, it is a little sad that: A) we could do no better than following history's example in commiting these atrocities from the beginning, or
B) that now we are this 'evil' nation we do not continue in the role we have made for ourselves. Personally, I find it fun to play as the 'bad guy' now and then. No need to get all irritated over it.

[Meshelic]

Unortho you drive a good point I believe.

Ghengis I couldn't agree more. PTW DOES come out very soon and we should end this game soon so we aren't using up twice the amount of time it takes from our lives to play this game.

I want conquest, not because I'm a Hawk or because I enjoy warmongering, or because of any agenda besides ending this game soon. Spaceship victory doesn't prove anything in my opinion. Maybe that path is something to consider in the future PTW Demo game, but I don't believe it belongs here at all.

Oh yeah I was the only guy who voted domination.

[Meshelic]

well i was the only guy as of yesterday when the poll opened....i see more have joined the ranks.

[Hot Mustard]

Ah, interesting view. I can't help but think that eewolf's thread had a hand in stirring this (what a remarkable discussion that was).

I DO agree that we are truly a despotism. I DO agree that, sadly, the game has been played in the typical "win-at-all-costs" fashion, sanctioning all sorts of crimes against humanity that none of us (I hope) would even attempt to rationalize in real life.

However, I DO NOT agree that changing to the game-defined despotism will serve any purpose. Rather, I would challenge the citizens of Apolytonia (and this forum) to truly start to behave as the Republic that we have chosen, and eventually, the Democracy we wish to be. Society DOES change. Social conscienceness (ethics/morality/human rights) HAS evolved over the millenia. I think it would be lots of fun if the we attempted to reflect that. UnOrthOdOx is perfectly right to point out that we have utterly failed to do so thus far, but as eewolf originally observed, we haven't been trying to.

[Thud]

Shiber, I agree completely. I'm going to start a Apolytonian Enlightenment movement.

[Duddha]

As one of the strongest reactionarys on the board, I support the UAD. May we enslave the entire planet.

[Meshelic]

The UAD has my full support in this matter, as well as full support from the Shadow Service (SS).

[Arnelos]

Pursuant to Unortho's statement that we are all unenlightened win-at-all-costs competitors... I hereby support a switch to the incredibly unenlightened form of government known as "democracy" where the masses rule themselves...

Why?

Simple, being the win-at-all-costs type of person that we all are, I'm willing to go to ANY LENGTH (as Unortho correctly claimed) to win Though many would obviously consider giving the masses real power distasteful, I am being a true Apolytonian (by Unortho's argument) by supporting the switch out of purely Apolyton-aggrandizing motives

So...

To Democracy! Give the hudled, filthy, and illiterate masses power if it will advance our nation and let the enlightened rule of the educated and literate classes be damned.

[Kloreep]

[RP]Why must we change out of glorious Republic? I say keep power confined to our senate, who we know we can trust with the tough decisions. If the masses complain, just switch back to Monarchy so our King can oppress 'em a little![/RP]

But seriously, Unortho does bring up a good point. We are a very cruel, bloodthirsty nation.

But how exactly are we a Despotism; a rule of one? Aside from the occassional temper flare or spillover of RL problems, we are quite civil to each other, the ruling senate. I'd say we're more somewhere between an Oligarchy and a Republic.

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by Kloreep
[RP]Why must we change out of glorious Republic? I say keep power confined to our senate, who we know we can trust with the tough decisions. If the masses complain, just switch back to Monarchy so our King can oppress 'em a little![/RP]

But seriously, Unortho does bring up a good point. We are a very cruel, bloodthirsty nation.

But how exactly are we a Despotism; a rule of one? Aside from the occassional temper flare or spillover of RL problems, we are quite civil to each other, the ruling senate. I'd say we're more somewhere between an Oligarchy and a Republic.

Indeed...

Perhaps, in a synthesis of the arguments of Unortho and Kloreep here...

"If you live in a country run by committee, be on the committee." -Graham Summer

Glory to the Senate!

[Harovan]

Yes! Let's be an enlightened and human people.

Give all slaves one day off!

Then hurry them, so they do the work they missed that day.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by Kloreep
But how exactly are we a Despotism; a rule of one? Aside from the occassional temper flare or spillover of RL problems, we are quite civil to each other, the ruling senate. I'd say we're more somewhere between an Oligarchy and a Republic.

How are we NOT a despotism? Not only have we played as such in game, but out here when you boil right down to it, we ARE a rule of one.

The President, and the President alone makes the final decision. He/She plays the game, and makes the final decision to move that particular unit/make that particular trade.

"but we elect the president" So? A Despot elected to power is still a despot.

"but we have ministers of (insert department here)" So? Every decent Despot has advisors, that doesn't mean he follows them. What is to stop the President from committing his own ideas?

"We have chats to stop that from happening" Yeah, at the discression of the President, our glorious despot. There is no obligation for him to actually hold a chat, just to play the game. He could just as easily play it in private.

"But he has to report and post the save" Yeah, so what? He could report nearly anything that is plausible. Pick a fight on Germany and say they started it. How are we to know? There are many things not available in a save.

Not only have we played with nothing but our own best interests in mind, we are a despotism in every sense of the word. One man in charge carrying out his will. We just have a 'revolution' every month and change that leader. It is merely by fortune that, to the best of my knowledge, each president has accepted the will of the people.

[Kloreep]

Many governments could be viewed as a despotism in this light. But, myself, I don't find a guy following detailed orders, the results of which he posts each turn, threatening.

It certainly is quite possible to have a bad president who twists us into a despotism. But we do not intend to give the president much actual power, and, under our laws, he must follow the ministers, who in turn are required to "conduct polls in order to interrupt the people’s will". (I had forgotten that was in there; man, that would allow so many ministers to be dragged through court.)

As you pointed out, the Prez doesn't have to follow orders, and could make up anything to justify wars or other actions. My point is that if we were, are, or become a despotism, it is through the fault of a minority of people in the government, not because our small senate society wishes it so. We certainly could be a despotism, but I don't think most of our group of senatiors would want it. We are definitely ruthless, cruel, and violent; but we do want to keep power spread within our special circle.

[zeit]

- This game is sure more like RL country ruling than a regular Civ3 game, but let's not forget it's still a game- and the point of it is the 'Democracy' part in 'Democrcy Game'. We don't have one man rule, and if it will be so it won't be this DG, it won't be Apolytonia anymore, it would just be someone with the save file (happens to be the guy in charge of physicaly playing the actual Civ3 game) who would do as he pleases. I might as well play it on my PC, turn our government to Despotism, and say to myself this is the game, others won't accept it, no-one will play with me, and it won't be this DG anymore, it would be Zeit playing Civ3 with some save he got from some forum- it would lose all it's meaning.

Reffering to UnO's cases: if we are bloodthirsty and care for conquest- we might as well be a desguised Republic/Democracy- as Hitler's germany was for a time, hyporcacy and scheming is an integral part of global conquest quest, IMO. And if our goal is to create a wonderous and enlighted civilaztaion, Democracy is the way to go. What we are actually is more like a normal country who is run by it's people/senate, that does what is best for it's citizen's interests- and this is giving them power and making our rule more efficent, this includes warmongering, being brutal and also craving for enlightment, we shouldn't be ashamed of it, as UnO's is suggesting.

[UnOrthOdOx]

As I stated Like it or not, we ARE a despotism. Just because the President, the Despot, CHOOSES to allow people to influence his actions does not mean it is not still his choice.

And, no, many governments would not follow suit. Most have checks and balances that are impossible in this little situation since no matter what we do, there can only be one playing the game and having the final say.

And as far as in game goes, those decisions have been very despotic, looking out for us first.