Thoughts on the replacement of Fundamentalism with Nationalism

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
Both is true for Democracy as well.

There have never been any TRUE and GENUINE democracy or communism in the highest and most idealistic sense of the word. Like one could imagine it would be, if everybody who inhabited our planet where true angels or true moral geniuses, like Jesus himself.

Just take a look at this statement; "equal rights and treatment of all" - you see how badly this relates to reality? Both on a indevidual and on an international level?
OK then, but it is nevertheless the "least bad" choice we have. Whats the alternatives? What have the result been then brutal political/police-state force have been sanctioned in order to change things?

Perhaps current democracy is like an 9 year old, and current dictatorship is like an 6 years old (figurative speaking). Neither "clothes" can fit an grown up adult (in moral sense), but democratic gov-form is nevertheless a step in the right direction, or the "least bad" considering the alternatives, and the current development-level of mankind.

[Comrade Tribune]

But if Democracy and Communism are not quite real, either, they could have well have kept Fundamentalism. I do not favour a Theocracy, but it is a realizable concept. For the same reason, Fascism should be in. Or they should make Despotism a viable alternative, like in CivI, where modern Despotism represented Fascism.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
Or they should make Despotism a viable alternative, like in CivI, where modern Despotism represented Fascism.

Hmm - I see your point. Both despotism (especially despotism) and monarchy easily becomes stop-gap govs. Govs that you really cant use as worthwhile enough platforms, to do worthwhile things with. Especially not in the second half-part of the game. Perhaps an (to some degree) upgradeable despotism and monarchy gov-choice could push the life-cycle forward somewhat? If Firaxis have tweaked the govs like that, I dont know.

[Ribannah]

* repeats her original post and throws dictionaries and 'pedia into the room *

[Mister Pleasant]

I guess it will come down to Democracy and Communism in the endgame since nothing else will be viable >sniff<

BTW, what were the so-called "unrealistic" governments in CTP!? I mean, theocracy may have been a bit strong in the first CTP, but other than that . . .

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by Soren Johnson Firaxis
I'm not sure where all this started

I know. It started May 26 with a preview that stated:
[COLOR={qcolor}]Rather than paying a production upkeep for your units, you will pay gold instead. This frees up shields for production but puts a slightly higher strain on your economy. The solution to this lies in the game's new government, Nationalism. Available later in the game, Nationalism is analogous to the ideology of early nineteenth century Europe. Think Napoleon here. To switch to Nationalism your culture rating must be quite high. The benefit of Nationalism is that you can mobilize your economy for war or peace.[/COLOR]

And I brought it to the forum government discussion. And as no one from Firaxis said anything about it until now the idea has grown with the time.

[TechWins]

Well, after stating it millions of times that nationalsim isn't a government choice in Civ3 I was finally proved right by a Firixian.

I'm not sure where all this started, but Nationalism is NOT a form of government in Civ III. Nationalism is a Tech which allows you to draft citizens and switch to a war-time economy.

I'll say no more.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Ribannah
* repeats her original post and throws dictionaries and 'pedia into the room *

No nead to ready Your catapult. I realize that 'Theocracy' is a more precise term than Fundamentalism, but 'Fascism' is the term Mussolini used for his political system, so there´s nothing wrong with that. The question is: Should Theocracy and Fascism be in or not. I would like them to be in. But I would like a social engineering matrix, similar to AC, even better. But over at Firaxis they seem to think: The less the merrier.

[Bill3000]

I'm not going to be happy if there is a total limit on 5 governments. We better be able to edit the total amount and what they do.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by TechWins
Well, after stating it millions of times that nationalsim isn't a government choice in Civ3 I was finally proved right by a Firixian.

The only thing I don't understand is why Firaxis didn't stop this rumor before.

[Urban Ranger]

Why?

Rumors makes good fuel for discussions, if nothing else.

[isaac brock]

Originally posted by Ralf
Like one could imagine it would be, if everybody who inhabited our planet where true angels or true moral geniuses, like Jesus himself

Jesus was not a moral genius. He just managed to leave the fugging cross once they stopped looking.

The difference between a religion and a cult is measured only by success.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by BlackStone
I don`t believe that there are or have ever been and fundy govs in the world.

What about the U.S.

Just like with a fundamental gov't in Civ2, the U.S. makes lots of money; no one cares when it spies go around overthrowing governments; Americans seem perfectly happy having their troops stationed all over the world, outside their "cities;" and when other countries try to seek peace, the American gov't ignores them.

Sounds pretty fundy to me.

[Sabre2th]

We all know that's not true, Tingkai. Your post may be light-hearted in nature, but the constant "America-bashing" in these forums really gets old. Almost none of the people who say things like that have actually lived in the U.S. Get off your high horse, your country is just as bad.

[RedWhiteArcher]

"America-bashing" in these forums really gets old

"America-bashing" isn't restricted to this forum.

Almost none of the people who say things like that have actually lived in the U.S

That seems to be very logical. If people are bashing America than its very logical to assume that they live in other countries.