Governments vs. Economic systems.

[N35t0r]

I was thinking last night about it.

The economic system would be entirely separated from the government (with some restrictions)

For economic system, there can be several forms of capitalism (mercantilism, etc.), communism, some sort of tribal stuff for early in the game.

Just thoughts.

------------------
Dear earthlings, dont panic.
Occupation will be painless.
There is no way to avoid it.

[Builder]

as long as it wont make the game too complicated.

2

[N35t0r]

2 what?

[Dom Pedro II]

Well, SMAC had the social engineering which wasn't too overcomplicated. If you switch a bit of the names, it could certainly work with this.

[Deathwalker]

I think this would needs more thought but it could addto the game so long as it did not make it over complex.

------------------
I have walked since the dawn of time and were ever I walk, death is sure to follow

[Biddles]

A lot of earlier posts talk about this. (See social engineering list). I agree that economic systems should be separate from the government system (For god's sake, communism is not a government system, it's an economic ideology). I don't know about 5 different forms of capitalism though (if your going to do that incorporate the sliding scales idea from the list). One form of capitalism is pretty much the same as another form (maybe just have laissez-faire and controlled or something), because then you have communism/socialism, barter economy, guild economy (don't know what you'd call that), and maybee a future economy such as a communisim-capitalism mix (kim stanley robinson - mars trilogy)

------------------
- Biddles

"Now that our life-support systems are utilising the new Windows 2027 OS, we don't have to worry about anythi......."
Mars Colonizer Mission

[Tical_2000]

I don't know about this. It seems that certain governments and economic systems go hand-in-hand. Separating them would make for some weird political situations (A democratic communism??? or a capitalist dictatorship???) I think that government and economic systems should be the same as in all the previous Civ games for the sake of simplicity and political reality.

[Dom Pedro II]

quote: (A democratic communism??? or a capitalist dictatorship???)

Tical, I think you have fallen prey to capitalist propaganda. First of all, why haven't we ever seen a democratic communism? 2 reasons: the only two major countries to become communist (Russia and China) have had LONG histories of being ruled by autocrats. There knowledge of how to run a democracy was almost non-existent. Its not a matter of the idealism of Marxists, it is the culture of the country... The second reason is that these were both revolutions. Revolutions almost always lead to dictatorships or anarchy. The United States was very lucky, but even then, few people know that the Continental Army almost stormed Philadelphia and overthrew the Congress shortly after the war.

The other thing is that Capitalist Dictatorships are very common. Name any non-Communist or Fascist dictatorships... there have been many in the course of the 20th century alone. Monarchies? Those are dictatorships with nicer names. But if that still doesn't convince you, the U.S. would not have helped the Brazilian military overthrow the socialist-friendly democracy in 1964 unless they thought the dictatorship would be capitalist.

I say, separate the two. A modified version of SMAC's system could work quite well without being too complicated. In fact, it might even be easier because it will be using terms we recognize rather than the SMAC future terminology (for techs, etc.)

[Tical_2000]

I wouldn't dare question your political-historical knowledge but talking plain theory, capitalism is private ownership of means of production by individuals while dictatorship is total control of all political-social-economic affairs by the state. The two definitions contradict each other. When left to civvers like us, our minds could concoct endless forms of economic and political systems that could work together in theory but for the sake of simplicity and gameplay, I think the same government-economic model for all the previous civ games should be the same in Civ3.

(Wait a minute, maybe I've mistook dictatorship for totalitarianism. Oh well.)

[Dom Pedro II]

Ok, Tical_2000. You sparked my curiousity. I was having some doubts so I checked out good old Webster to see what the definition of those words are...

dictator: a ruler with absolute power and authority.

totaliterian: designating of, or characteristic of a government or state in which one political party or group maintains complete control under a dictatorship and bans all others.

I don't think that dictatorship means that the dictator total controls the economy. I think that most dictatorships have had free enterprise although under government regulation. There is something called dictatorship of the proletariat that controls the entire economic sysem. which is basically a communist dictatorship.

I also took the liberty of looking up fascism.

Fascism: a system of government characterized by rigid one-party dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private economic enterprise under centralized governmental control, belligerent nationalism, racism, and militarism, etc.

This shows that under the dictionary's definition, there is a definition of the economic system under fascism, a government system. I must, therefore, agree that there is some validity to leaving the system as with the other civ games.

[N35t0r]

what i meant by diffrent types of capitalism is basically about some guy who came up with this theory of the government creating work, even though it had to employ people to dig holes and people to fill them up.(well, not literally). Using this system, economies greu amazingly, but it led to a crash in the stock markets. I think, not sure, though...

[Ribannah]

I think it would make sense if the type of government would limit the choices of economy types. However, a gliding scale is still realistic.

For instance, a Democracy could vary from 100% Free Market / 0% Planned to 67% Free Market / 33% Planned (limiting the economic systems to 2 for the sake or argument), depicting the differences between the USA and Europe.

Communism (yes, a government type) would then allow the opposite third of the line: there was a big difference between the USSR and Yugoslavia. Then Fundamentalism could perhaps be stuck in the middle.

Or maybe there could be some overlap.

------------------
If you have no feet, don't walk on fire

[Dom Pedro II]

I like the gliding scale idea. What about the other governments?

[Biddles]

A dictatorship is a government where a person holds control of the country through the backing of the military. This doesn't mean that they control the economic system though, (alexander the great, julius caesar and napoleon were all dictators but they didn't control the private enterprise of their empires).

This doesn't mean that a dictator can't control the private enterprise of the country (saddam hussein is the perfect example of a dictator who controls the countries private enterprise).

Tical, government systems and economic systems do not go hand in hand, in theory or in practice.

[N35t0r]

yeah, and to be allowed to "move the slider" more than x amount, you would need to have discovered y advance.

of course, there would be a gradual change, unless a revolution is held as well.