No corruption in communism don't let me laugh

[Kuciwalker]

To_Serve_Man is right. There has never in all of history been a communist state. The USSR and other "communist" countries were really totalitarian states with a socialist economic system. SMAC had this: its known as Police State/Planned.

[Juggernaut]

There has never in all of history been a communist state. The USSR and other "communist" countries were really totalitarian states with a socialist economic system

is there a difference?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Raped the land? How so? Back up your statement

Others have done so adequatly, I think. Look at what's been done to Siberia, one of the richest areas in the world in terms of natural resources. It looked like the Mongols stormed it after Stalin had his way!

It seems to me that it is the US that backs off on the Kyoto Protocol and wants to drill for oil in the Alaskan Wildlife Preserves. Of course Japan is another big environmental offender: hunting whales for food in the name of "scientific research" and clearcutting SE Asian forests for chopsticks and toothpicks, just to name a couple.

Compare both nations to Russia. There is no contest, Russia is much more environmentally destroyed (especially the East).

aww man, i really didnt mean it to sound as though I was preaching.. sorry if I got carried away, I was just babaling and saying things that came to my head. Hope we can still be friends

Heheh... I was just kidding around. Sure, we can be friends, just don't sneak in KrazyHorse when I ain't looking .

[SerapisIV]

The Caspian Sea is a disaster area environmentally. We can complain about the environmental problems in the US and western world all we want, but the environmental damage of the former USSR makes those problems pale in comparison. Any environmental group, news magazine, national geographic-like scientific journal will easily prove the environmental disaster that communism wrought onto Russia. China's about to do the same thing with its Three-Gorges dam. It's rivers will silt over in barely decades making the dam worthless. I can't believe anyone would actually question the comunism's damage to the environment.

[Juggernaut]

i don't get why the communism´s economic model would hurt the envoronment?

[SerapisIV]

The theory doesn't, in the real world, all major communist powers have however, one party means no dissenting environmental voice from the people

[Dr Strangelove]

My suggestion for communism is an enhanced production rate and/or reduced production costs, reduced trade and income and "suppressed" unhappiness. By suppressed unhappiness I mean that unhappiness would still occur, but to take into account the suppression of dissent it would take more than 50% unhappiness to trigger the possibility of toppling the state. Once the threshold was reached a "die roll" would occur each turn to determine if the state was to fall. The probability would increase each turn that the threshold conditions continued to be met. Once the state falls the new government can't return to communism for 10 years.

[kolpo]

There is an extremely big difference between commumunism and socialism in practice, I will from now on use human capitalism instead of socialism to show clearer the difference(I think that's a beter translation it looks like socialism in Enligh has another meaning then in Dutch). So I think they should be aviable both in civ3.
You can only judge ideologies in practice all ideologies promised an utopia but none of them created it, no idealogy was ever able to be applied in it's purest form because there is still something as reality.

So let's compare real world communistic nations(like USSR and China under Mao) with human capitalistic nations(most european nations like Sweden, Belgium, France... but also Clinton was in fact a moderate human capitalist)

USSR: very weak economy
european human capitalistic: very strong economy some of them have one of the highest average incomens on earth.

USSR: they want to overtrown the governement and start a new non-capiltalistic order.
european human capitalistic: They accept that capitalism is the best economic system and try to get power on a democratic way, they want to chance the current order but not overtrown it.

USSR: failed the people hate it now
european human capitalistic: are in power in many countries get in most countries many votes.

USSR: there evorimental politics where an disaster(they where even worser then Bush)
european human capitalistic: theyb are one of the greennest nations in the world(that's why they don't like Bush btw)

Dr Strangelove, I think that the idea of unhappyness should only work in cities where you have many military units or/and a police station. A soon as the USSR showed that they wouldn't send tanks any more to rebelion in eastern europe revolted they all.

[Ralf]

OK, some people have problems with low corruption in Civ-game communism. Big deal.

But what about nationalism and the announced feature of reducing military-support by half at the expense of doubling the cost city-improvements (or vice versa). Are you guys quite sure that nationalistic Civ-government feature is 100% irrefutable and realistic, both in terms of historic- and present days reality?

Dont you see how pointless and fruitless these eternal historical pick-and-choose examples becomes over time? Its a GAME, for crying out load. Its nothing wrong backing up ones ideas with some historical background - but why not connect it to something thats relevant: Civ-3 gameplay & game-balance.

Also, if you guys really are so annoyed about it, why not just change the government rules-txt files, once your game is installed? Or, why not just create a dedicated scenario there you can tweak around with these factors in what ever ways you like?

[JMarks]

Uh oh! A communist AND an evolutionist afoot! Whod've thunk?

Concerning Communism as a philosophy, it is fataly flawed in one respect, MAN IS SINFUL!!!! It is not power and money that corrupts man, but man that corrupts power and money! Take away the power and money, man is still sinful, but of course to do that you need some power or money...

Otherwise it is a perfectly good idea. But if man weren't sinful, so would capitalism, fuedalism, despotism, or any idealism or government.

As far as Communism (as defined by the Russians, aka socialism) as a civ government, I think it works fine. It works better than a monarchy (and some instances a republic) but is infererior to Democracy where trade is concerned. Plus I remember that new spies are always veteran, that way China can pay Clinton a few bucks for some missle stuff....

Socialism, communism, whatever, either way, keep America free.
You Europeans can do whatever you please, I don't know what kind of constitutions you have. (yeah, I know, stupid American)

Ioanes

[ancient]

Originally posted by uncle_funk


EeeH?

i don't get why socialism is getting bullied here all the time. it's like communism, only more mawkish and to the right. it´s a compromise.

by the way, LaRusso, is your first name Daniel?

i dont think socialism is a bad thing, i actually believe we need a good strong socialist country (that is head in the direction of communism) to in fluence the world

[JMarks]

Originally posted by ancient
i dont think socialism is a bad thing, i actually believe we need a good strong socialist country (that is head in the direction of communism) to in fluence the world

What? To counter US freedoms? Just give us enough time and the stupid general public will let the government take over. I don't want to turn out like the Europeans, who are further down the path than us, no offense to anyone. What we need is a bastion of freedom to influence the world. A government that protects its citizanry, not oppress them. The US isn't perfect, but its the best we got. Now we only have to ban public schools... a hotbed of ignorance and despair. The only thing I have against Bush now is his compromise on education.

Ioanes

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Others have done so adequatly, I think. Look at what's been done to Siberia, one of the richest areas in the world in terms of natural resources. It looked like the Mongols stormed it after Stalin had his way!

Really...any more so than a Texan oilfield or a strip-mining operation? Remember that the Thames has actually caught on fire on two separate occasions...

The biggest cost was human. There were famine years during the twenties and thirties, but Stalin kept selling grain to foreign countries in order to raise das Kapital to finance the rapid industrial development. I think something like 11 million people died.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Heheh... I was just kidding around. Sure, we can be friends, just don't sneak in KrazyHorse when I ain't looking .

What do you have against me? Uh-oh...you're going to be the first one up against the wall when the revolution comes. JMarks, you don't happen to be good friends with CivNation, do you?

[JMarks]

What do you have against me? Uh-oh...you're going to be the first one up against the wall when the revolution comes. JMarks, you don't happen to be good friends with CivNation, do you?

Never heard of him. At least I don't go f****** evolutionists and commies. Lets just face it, man is corrupt, Marx was about as out there as Aristotle in Republic, which I recall was fairly communist in nature itself.