 |
| |
|
|
ArchdukeNewell
|
 |
California
Jul 2005
time: 21:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by yin26
For the short-term, it will be collectives like the EU. Surely all of Europe can surpass the United States in whatever it wants, if it can work through its own huge problems. Later, it *will* be China. Money buys most anything, including Super Power status.
|
THE EU!!!??? What kind of drugs are you smoking? First off, have you seen their economy? Basket-case doesn't begin to describe it. Second, the state of their military! I mean, Canada could beat them! Their birthrate is far below replacement levels (ie. NEGATIVE!), so they try to mitigate that by allowing dangerous foreign nationals who want to kill them and take their land to immigrate into their heartlands!!!
I don't see how in the world the EU will ever surpass the US in the short run, or even the long run! They're not as strong as we are now, and they have negative potential. They were great in their day, but their day is OVER!!!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:18
|
|
I don't expect anybody with a love of country to read one of my posts and say "Eureka! Yin has shown me the light!" If these concepts aren't clearn to you by now, maybe they will be later on, though I'm certain the same conclusions won't escape you before too many years longer.
Also, the urge to shoot the messenger is predictable: but resist it. It does you no good. A wise member of the last super power on Earth (at least till a new one replaces it  ) will take very carefully any possible challengers to its status and decide how best to deal with them. But denial and shock are sure signs of impending trouble.
Finally, nobody should take me to mean that any one nation or groups of nations will run off into the sunset leaving the U.S. in a cloud of dust. The fact is that no matter how powerful any group, they are only a few sleepy/arrogant/ignorant decades away from slipping back downward. China, for example, will eventually have enormous piles of money to do most anything it wants...except perhaps stop a civil war if it can't manage to bring the masses into its fold of growing prosperity.
And this is the point: Nations must reinvent themselves at ever faster rates of change in order to stay responsive and in positions of earned respect and leadership. The U.S., in my opinion, has become bloated, arrogant and short-sighted. Of course, I think this is almost unavoidable once you become the leader. The reverse, unfortunately, is also unavoidable: The leader gets replaced, at least for a while.
Again, I don't ask you to like or believe what I'm saying: But just think on it long and hard as the years unfold.
Last edited by yin26 on 16-07-2005 at 07:13
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sophist
|
|
China and India are getting their acts together. It's just a question of time, barring catastrophe. The biggest thing that could keep the US on top is a war between those two countries, though I'm hard-pressed to figure out how there could be a serious war without the US getting involved somehow (Taiwan or Central Asia being likely flash points). I'm not so confident of the EU. Their populations are getting progressively older, even more so than the United States.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alexander01
Firstly, we're referring to Egypt itself, the "Black Lands of the Nile," the Old, Middle, and New Kingdoms, to get that straight. Second, the territorial expansionism of Thutmose III and Ramses II in the Levant does not change the fact that Egypt is in Africa, which is my point.
|
Nice try.
Contradicted by this statement:
quote:
Show me a map in existence that puts Egypt on any other continent than Africa. |
Now I can add maps clearly showing Egypt in Asia in the time of Rameses II and Thutmose III. That is what you asked for, not maps showing that the kingdoms of Egypt were based in Asia.
I'm well aware they weren't. They were, however, for about a thousand years the only significant power on the planet, and on two continents at that.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
|
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ArchdukeNewell
Not a Wonder of the World: Malinese Ivory Mask - Seriously, people, who really thought that was a wonder of the world? |
Gosh, the Europeans who when they first saw it couldn't believe that a supposedly 'primitive' people could produce such anatomically correct objects and therefore attributed it to lost Romans, Greeks or Egyptians.
I fail to see why a 'wonder of the world' has to be particularly large- the Antikythera Device certainly wasn't, and yet I'm fairly sure it constitutes a wonder, as does the first printing press in Asia, or indeed the discovery of the principles behind single point perspective.
Still, I'm sure the Sankore Mosque counts as a wonder in someone's world, even if not yours.
"The scholars of Timbuctoo yielded in nothing, to the saints in the sojourns in the foreign universities of Fez, Tunis, and Cairo. They astounded the most learned men of Islam by their erudition. That these Negroes were on a level with the Arabian savants is proved by the fact that they were installed as professors in Morocco and Egypt. In contrast to this, we find that Arabs were not always equal to the requirements of Sankore."
As a center of intellectual achievement, Timbuktu earned a place next to Cairo and other leading North African cities.
Dubois, Felix. Timbuctoo the Mysterious. (London: W. Heinemann, 1897), p. 285.
http://www.historychannel.com/class.../goldenage.html
 Attachment: sankoremosque.jpg
This has been downloaded 207 time(s).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AeonOfTime
|
 |
Overclocking DOSBox
Nov 2000
time: 06:18
|
|
quote:
@sophist: The Roman Empire didn't dramatically collapse, nor did it decline and fall because of decadence or corruption. That's a myth, no doubt perpetrated by the Catholic Church in order to justify the vast temporal power they acquired in the Middle Ages. The Roman Empire fell over a long period of time for many complicated reasons. |
If you are right, I can throw that part of my knowledge on the roman empire out the window. I learned the corruption part in school, so I guess I will go by the library and get a book on roman history to clarify things up a bit.
quote:
@Alexander01: The Aztecs conquered everyone else around them. The only reasons they lost to Spain = horses, guns, smallpox, allies turned against them. |
What is that supposed to mean? That an 'unfair' loss does not count? You are making less and less sense.
quote:
@Alxander01: Yes, but if they don't have a proper military entity, they won't survive long. All I'm saying is that the military aspect is important! Why is it that when I say one thing, people assume I mean the opposite? |
I agree that the military aspect is important, but it is only one of a civilization's defining factors among many. Focussing only on one aspect of a civilization is bound to lead to false conclusions. And I guess the fact that people assume you mean the opposite of what you write may be due to the fact that you express yours ideas somewhat confusingly 
quote:
@Alexander01: Africa is not the cradle of civilization. Mesopotamia is the cradle of civilization. // @ArchdukeNewell: Africa is not the freaking cradle of civilization!!! |
I have no problem admitting that I am not very well versed in history, so get off your condescent horses and please tell me why mesopotamia is the cradle of civilization and not africa 
quote:
@ArchdukeNewell: The Visigoths destroyed Rome, does that mean Rome shouldn't be included? The point is, they were past their prime |
You can't be serious - so it doesn't suffice to judge a civilization only on the military aspect, now there are even scoring rules??
quote:
@Imran Siddiqui: I said it would nice to have a builder civ and not ALL the civs be militaristic. |
I could not agree more 
quote:
@ArchdukeNewell: I don't see how in the world the EU will ever surpass the US in the short run, or even the long run! They're not as strong as we are now, and they have negative potential. They were great in their day, but their day is OVER!!! |
Hmmmm.. do I smell fear? Jokes aside, the EU does have a lot of problems - but so far it has proven to be worthwile. The countries making up the EU would have a tough job of competing on their own (on a commercial level, mind you) against the other great nations like the US or rising China. And honestly, I don't see the EU as an instance to surpass anyone, but as a means to survive in the future. What Yin26 said goes in the same direction:
quote:
@yin26: Nations must reinvent themselves at ever faster rates of change in order to stay responsive and in positions of earned respect and leadership. |
Well said. It is nice to see that finally, some countries have learned that leadership is not the ultimate goal, but their survival and the welfare of their people.
quote:
@MollyBloom: I'm sure the Sankore Mosque counts as a wonder in someone's world, even if not yours. // the old Town of Djenné and its Great Mosque were named a UNESCO World Heritage Site. |
Thanks for the info! I think we can draw a conclusion at this point: the Mali definitely deserve their place in Civ, and from what I read in this thread they are not only welcome by many, they also have their accomplishments to stand for it. I think what Alexander01 was trying to say (correct me if I'm wrong - no, belay that, I know you would anyway  ) is that compared to the other great civs in the game they are a rather small civilization. While that may be true, it is not less true that they were a civilization (no matter how small) and that as such, they have always had their place in the game as many others still do.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexander01
|
|
And now I understand why ArchdukeNewell left.
This topic has been half-hijacked by people who don't listen to reason. All of this anti-America stuff belongs in an "America Delenda Est" thread.
While I appreciate the point of view of the pro-Mali side, I do not respond well to such belligerence and utter disregard for the opinions of others.
You've accused me of not listening to your arguments. While I have heard every word you've said, all of my arguments have been ignored and/or shouted down with anti-American/European propagandic drivel. You've still not convinced me of Mali's worthiness, because rather than responding to my thoughts, you've simply dismissed them.
And now for my closing statements:
Egypt is in Africa. Every time anyone tries to argue to the contrary, they look a little more foolish.
The Fertile Crescent is the Cradle of Civilization because that's where the oldest civilizations in the world developed (ie. Sumer). The Fertile Crescent consists of Mesopotamia, Canaan and the Levant. That includes Catal Huyuk and Jericho, the oldest cities on Earth.
But neither of those points is even what this thread was about.
"Diversity" is a cushy way of saying "politically correct." My point has been that the inclusion of civs in Civ4 should be based on merit alone, not on race, creed, or color. While I have been willing to hear out the reasoning for Mali's inclusion among the world greats, the explanation has been unsatisfactory.
Ivory masks and mud huts do not Wonders of the World make. I actually wanted to gain a greater knowledge of Malinese wonders that I supposed I might be ignorant of, but the information provided is still found wanting. If there is further proof to explain why Mali is not a second-rate civ, then by all means provide it, but as yet everything that has been said has only:
1. Confirmed my previous opinion of Mali.
2. Lessened my respect for certain members of this forum who do not know how to converse respectfully without using profanity, insults, or epithets of contempt every other word.
Mali is definitely a civilization and no one here has ever tried to say they are not. The entire premise of this thread has been to express the opinion that their accomplishments, though significant, are not on the same level as cultures such as Babylon, China, Persia, India, Egypt, or, yes, the Ottoman Empire. This premise was never an anti-African one, though many have seemed to have read that into my statements. Neither was it a Pro-European or American thread.
Legitimate world civs will not be included in the initial version of Civ4 because of the inclusion of Mali (ie. Babylon, Ottomans, etc.). Go ahead and call me a bad person if that makes you feel better. Your infantile retorts neither hurt my feelings nor strengthen your arguments.
I find it absolutely disgusting that my attempts at reasonable conversation have been met with belligerence, arrogance, condescension and outright hostility. Perhaps some of the fault is mine, I don't know, but I do not appreciate this behavior.
The "logic" of many of the arguments I've heard here has been tenuous at best. Example: "You're wrong because Wikipedia says so." (Not mentioning that they most likely wrote said Wikipedia article.) "You're wrong and/or are a bad person because I disagree with you."
What the issue really comes down to is what each individual's criteria for the inclusion of a civ is, whether the inclusion of a civ should be based on its merit or on diversity. The ultimate result of inclusion on diversity is Call to Power, including such greats as the Polynesians, Jamaicans, Welsh, and "North Americans." As yet, a Civ game has not been created based solely on merit, as all previous Sid Meier civ games have included the likes of the Zulus, Sioux, and Iroquois. Why? For diversity. Another name for this principle is Political Correctness.
If you're convinced that Civ should be based on diversity and I'm convinced that it should be based on merit, then neither one of us will ever change our minds, and we'll just continue to argue. Thus, I point out that we have entirely different paradigms affecting our evaluations of this issue.
You're probably now going to accuse me of cowardice for not responding to every last detail of your sordid assaults on America. This is not because I don't have responses but because responding to your eternal carping is not worth the time it would take to post.
Come back and post again when you're ready to have a civil and cordial discussion. Thank you for your time, and apologies to those of you reading this who have not contributed to the poor behavior referred to above.
- Alexander01
Moreover, Mali ought to be destroyed. The End.
Last edited by Alexander01 on 17-07-2005 at 01:38
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alexander01
While I appreciate the point of view of the pro-Mali side, I do not respond well to such belligerence and utter disregard for the opinions of others. |
I'd like to point out that neither side is innocent in this regard. While you personally have remained very calm in this discussion, Archduke Newell definitely wasn't.
There's a documented phenomenon in internet debates called "polarization", where the positions of each side become more clear-cut as the debate proceeds. In the end, each side becomes more closed to the arguments of the other than at the beginning.
Archduke Newell fell in this trap, and in the end he spout complete ignorance on the Mali achievements (to him, they basically boiled down to one ivory mask). He also showed ignorance of today's Africa, as he wrongly considered the whole continent to be "war-torn... dirt poor... diseased... living in mud huts... and living off the largesse of larger nations who feel sorry for them". Any person who likes Africa would be offended by that.
quote:
You've accused me of not listening to your arguments. While I have heard every word you've said, all of my arguments have been ignored |
I suppose this part is mostly aimed at Molly and Imran. As for myself, the reason why I didn't reply to you is because I disagreed with your premise. Civ shouldn't only include the "top 18", but should include urban civilizations in their variety. Such is my opinion, it is not yours, and no debate can lead anybody to change his mind on that premise.
quote:
"Diversity" is a cushy way of saying "politically correct." |
I disagree. The aim of "Politically correct" is to not offend some group. When Microprose invented female leaders in Civ2, it was a good example of PC. When Firaxis includes an African Civ, it might be aimed at pleasing the black audience in western countries indeed (just like the inclusion of the French + Germans + English from the beginning has been aimed at pleasing these countries' audiences). However, it doesn't only please this target group. As you have seen in this thread, many fans are happy with the inclusion of Mali, and I strongly doubt they're all blacks (Imran and myself aren't, and I have strong supsicions that Molly isn't either).
The reason why I support Mali's inclusion is because I enjoy seeing very different Civilizations. To me, it adds to the playing experience.
quote:
Ivory masks and mud huts do not Wonders of the World make. I actually wanted to gain a greater knowledge of Malinese wonders that I supposed I might be ignorant of, but the information provided is still found wanting. |
If you consider Timbuktu's university as a "mud hut", you won't consider it as a wonder indeed. If you consider Timbuktu's university as a project similar to Alexandria's Great Library, then maybe you'd be more open to think of it as a great achievement.
quote:
Mali is definitely a civilization and no one here has ever tried to say they are not. The entire premise of this thread has been to express the opinion that their accomplishments, though significant, are not on the same level as cultures such as Babylon, China, Persia, India, Egypt, or, yes, the Ottoman Empire. |
I don't think anybody ever claimed the contrary.
quote:
Legitimate world civs will not be included in the initial version of Civ4 because of the inclusion of Mali (ie. Babylon, Ottomans, etc.). |
This is, again, where I disagree. Though Mali didn't conquer as much as the Ottomans, though Mali hasn't first developed a technology that would be used worldwide, I do not think that it makes it less "legitimate" than the Ottomans. You consider such criteria to be what grants more or less "legitimacy" to a Civ. I do not. To me, the criteria a Civ needs to meet are agriculture, urbanism, division of labour, organized government (organized religion/spirituality is a plus). This is why I think most African tribes, while vibrant cultures, don't deserve inclusion in Civ. However, this is also the reason why I consider the Mali, the Ethiopians or the Khmer definitely deserve to be in. They're as "legitimate" as France or Germany in my book.
quote:
I find it absolutely disgusting that my attempts at reasonable conversation have been met with belligerence, arrogance, condescension and outright hostility. Perhaps some of the fault is mine, I don't know, but I do not appreciate this behavior. |
This behaviour comes from the fact that quite a few posters here have been active for years in the Off-Topic "OT" forum, which is a den of sharks
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AeonOfTime
|
|
Overclocking DOSBox
Nov 2000
time: 06:18
|
|
quote:
@Alexander01: The Fertile Crescent is the Cradle of Civilization because that's where the oldest civilizations in the world developed (ie. Sumer). The Fertile Crescent consists of Mesopotamia, Canaan and the Levant. That includes Catal Huyuk and Jericho, the oldest cities on Earth. |
Thanks for the clarification, now that you mention it I remember part of this from my early history classes. I did not make a difference between the cradle of civilization and the cradle of humanity 
quote:
@Alexander01: Legitimate world civs will not be included in the initial version of Civ4 because of the inclusion of Mali (ie. Babylon, Ottomans, etc.) |
You are right about that, but then I feel it would be a shame if Civ did not get a few refreshing changes like that from time to time. It's not like it never happened in the franchise before. Personally, I like the change because it is nice to have some new cultures and not always have the same base of civs. As Soren said, to make a sequel, you keep 1/3 of the original, improve 1/3 and add 1/3 new.
But that does not lessen your feelings about the mali, does it Then let's say, for argument's sake, that we all agree and the mali should not be in: we would have to face the fact, and use the game's promised modding capabilities to replace them with whatever civ we like.
Of course if we did not like having to edit the game to fit our needs, we would be in tough luck and would have to pass on this game in the Civ series and hope the next one will get it right.
Otherwise, I understand your position and that it is final.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Odin
|
 |
Biology Nerd at Minnesota State University Moorhead
Sep 2000
time: 23:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by yin26
As a red-blooded American who just bought a Harley Davidson motorcycle, here's my view:
We have some *very* hard decades ahead of us as we learn to be #2 (then #3, #4?) in the world. We are already losing jobs and some of our leads in various industries are dropping rapidly. In other words, our Golden Age in some respects is declining.
However, if we learn to join forces with the world and adapt to realities, we can maintain an incredibly important position. But it will have to come with some hard lessons of humility and heaping doses of more respect and understanding for other countries and cultures. I do believe, though, that day will come...if slowly. Indeed, it's what I work on every day in my job and is the reason I lived in another country for 6 years learning a foreign language (Korean). I start Chinese language in the fall, also.
At the same point, the American resolve for fighting the good fight (at least when it's against a clear enemy and not something much harder to understand like terrorism) is and has been a wonder. I am speaking, of course, of WW2 -- to which we came very late and very unprepared, I understand.
But since WW2 (Korean War, Vietnam, now Iraq) as our understanding of the enemy has gotten worse and worse, so has our response, sadly. Thus, to the degree that we learn more about the world and our proper place it in, I think the American civilization will yet again prove one of the greatest ever.
This is especially so as long as some of the world's greatest minds continue to seek a life here enriching us financially and culturally. |
I think the US's problem is that it's culture has become superficial, with pop culture more concerned about shocking people than anything else, and that people are generally becoming apathetic in national afairs (When election turnouts of 60% are considered a super-high turnout, you have a problem). The "Greatest American" series on the Discovry Channel a while ago shows the problem, People put REAGAN as the greatest American, ahead of LINCOLN, WASHINGTON, MLK, AND FRANKLIN! Dubya was 6th I beleive, tons of celeberties (including Michael Jackson  ), and no people like Twain, Emmerson, etc
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-07-2005 05:21
You can´t spew out a lot of pro-american propaganda and then flee with the tail between your legs when you get some opposition. There´s always someone here who will call you on your bullshit no matter your political stance.
|
