Sid and Mao - what's up with that?

[KrazyHorse]

"pre-medi[t]ated murder of tens of millions"

Please provide documentary evidence. Most of the deaths were due to starvation, and it is questionable whether a Nationalist government wouldn't have had the same problem after a decade of war.

[Mankind]

Why Mao is so happy...

perhaps Mao is such satisfied and happy that he will be in civ3 so he smiles all the time?

If I would have to step out in civ3 also I would be satisfied and happy and...

[sorry spelling errors i have to quick ... uh never mind...]

[tatterdemalion]

Originally posted by Jason Beaudoin
There are a lot of leaders in CIV3 that are just as guilty as Mao. Pointing him out of the crowd is rediculous.

BTW, Bismark is an excellent choice for the Germans.

Agreed. I dare say all the leaders chosen are guilty of abuses in one form or another. Even Lincoln squashed dissent during the Civil War. That's not the point.

The point is: I think it is nasty to set up the website choreography to favor one of the bloodiest leaders in history. Also, all of Sid's games give nice treatment to Mao and the Chinese communists. Why not choose Winston Churchill? Machiavelli? Lady Jane? Anyone else once for a change.

[KrazyHorse]

Has anybody else noticed that Sid looks sort of like Mao? In a European way, of course.

[tatterdemalion]

proof

"Please provide documentary evidence."

Hmmm, I have a strong feeling that anyone who demands proof of communist atrocities in that tone of voice would not be satisfied by any proof offered.

[KrazyHorse]

Not at all. But pre-meditated murder in the tens of millions is ridiculous. In toto, it's estimated that 30 million Chinese died in the circumstances surrounding the civil war and Mao's leadership. Almost all of these were from starvation and many were from the actual war. Neither of these factors can be likened to "pre-meditated murder".

By the way, I agree that Mao was certainly a crazy-ass ****er who is in no way a hero, but unfactual claims like the one you made annoy me.

[Earthling7]

Mao was a scumbag. Wether he killed them for fun like Adolf, or starved them to death because he couldn't be arsed, like the Taliban, is irrelevant. He was an idiot and that's that.

[Alex]

I think Firaxis has chosen the most famous leaders that are easily related to the civs or nations they represent. To us, modern westerners, Mao is easily related to China, but of course he is probably not the best choice, from a politically correct point of view.

Take the greeks, for instance. Most people identify them with Alexander the Great, but he was Macedonian. Despite Demosthenes´ warnings, Philip from Macedonia conquered what we think today as being Greece (at that time, there were just a bunch of city-states that would unite in times of dangerous crisis; take the Persian wars, for instance).

In terms of political leaders, maybe Pericles would be the most accurate choice, but how many people really know him? For me, I would think of Socrates, Plato or Aristotle, but that´s because of my philosophical background, so I don´t think it counts (I know they were not political leaders, but, hey, Plato always wanted to make his "republic" dream real - and failed -, while Aristotle was Alexander´s teacher)...

[mactbone]

AAAARGH! Anyone feel like they're arguing with Bob Dornan here?

OK, you have a game. You want to sell it. You have animated leaders in the game that can look happy or sad. Which do you pick for advertisements. The happy "I'm playing Civ3" look, or the "Oh crap, I just got blown up" look?

Now, they pick Lincoln and Mao because, I'm assuming here. They were the first ones done. Say it again, they were the first leaders they got animated. So, do you wait a month or two to get the word out about Civ3? Or do you use the first two available rulers?

BTW, Machiavelli was probably as bad as Mao if you want to look at it that way.

Why aren't you arguing against the Iroquis leader, or the Japanese leader? It's because you have a bone to pick and aren't intelligent to realize none of these leaders are perfect. Sid is not AFAIK a communist, and I'm sure from an emotional perspective he dislikes Mao. But from an historical perspective he makes a lot of sense.

BTW, who's Lady Jane? Do you mean from G.I. Joe?

[KrazyHorse]

8 day Queen of England.

[Jason Beaudoin]

You must feel it convenient to peg me as Anti-American. I can assure you that I am not. That, my friend, is pathetic to even suggest. I never said anything against the Americans.

I'll tell you what we should do tatterdemalion, you make a list of leaders for each CIV, making sure that none of them have been ruthless or none have been murdurers (directly or indirectly), and we'll send the list to Firaxis. Is that better?

This way, we can all feel better about having a politically correct game, which is devoid of any negative historical event.

Maybe, tatterdemalion, we should take slavery out as well, because slavery is politically incorrect.

Wait... but that's not all, we can't have war in our game either because that would only foster more animated and simulated killing. That wouldn't be nice. We would be adopting a Mao way of doing things, and that would be politically incorrect.

[Earthling7]

Sid a commie? How many versions of CivII were released? He is the pinnacle of capitalisam

[mactbone]

So why is Lady Jane special? In G.I. Joe she was one of about three female Joes. I think she was kind of important in the show too...

[Jason Beaudoin]

Why aren't you arguing against the Iroquis leader, or the Japanese leader? It's because you have a bone to pick and aren't intelligent to realize none of these leaders are perfect. Sid is not AFAIK a communist, and I'm sure from an emotional perspective he dislikes Mao. But from an historical perspective he makes a lot of sense.

Well said MacTBone. That's exactly my point.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by tatterdemalion

Somehow, I doubt you will agree with that proposition, because to the Left, Hitler is always worse than the Communists.

Reality check: It has been the Left that has been one of the most enduringly vocal opponents of China's dictatorship. Amnesty International has consistently opposed continued extension of Most Favored Nation trading status to China. The Left has been vociferous in decrying China's human rights record and do the most to keep the Tiannamen Square massacre in the forefront of people's minds when it comes to dealings with China.

It has been the capitalist business interests, spearheaded by Right-leaning Republicans and fueled by lobbyists, that have been cozying up to the Chinese regime and ignoring the atrocities there. They have had consistent help from "New Left" groups that in no way or shape represent the ideology or ideals of the Left (ask either).

Was Mao bloody? Yes. Does he represent what is probably the most singularly important period of Chinese history in relation to the rest of the world, for good or bad? Yes. I therefore think he is a good choice.

Cheers.