 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Ribannah
|
 |
The Netherlands, Embassy of the Iroquois Confederacy
Aug 2000
time: 06:15
|
|
Nationalism, Fascism nor Fundamentalism is really type of government, they are all social movements (like Liberalism, Conservatism and Socialism). Theocracy and Military Junta are.
Personally, I would place Nationalism in the tech tree before Democracy rather than after, with Enlightenment and Printing Press as prerequisites.
"Nationalism was the most successful political force of the 19th century. It emerged from two main sources: the Romantic exaltation of "feeling" and "identity" and the Liberal requirement that a legitimate state be based on a "people" rather than, for example, a dynasty, God, or imperial domination. Both Romantic "identity nationalism" and Liberal "civic nationalism" were essentially middle class movements.
There were two main ways of exemplification: the French method of "inclusion" - essentially that anyone who accepted loyalty to the civil French state was a "citizen". In practice this meant the enforcement of a considerable degree of uniformity, for instance the destruction of regional languages. The US can be seen to have, eventually, adopted this ideal of civic inclusive nationalism.
The German method, required by political circumstances, was to define the "nation" in ethnic terms. Ethnicity in practice came down to speaking German and (perhaps) having a German name. For the largely German-speaking Slavic middle classes of Prague, Agram etc. who took up the nationalist ideal, the ethnic aspect became even more important than it had been for the Germans. It is debateable whether, in practice, all nationalisms ended up as Chauvinistic and aggressive, but the very nature of nationalism requires that boundaries be drawn. Unless these boundaries are purely civic, successful nationalism, in many cases
produced a situation in which substantial groups of outsiders were left within "nation-states"."
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Soren Johnson Firaxis
|
|
Hunt Valley, MD
May 2001
time: 00:15
|
|
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.
Hope this clears things up...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BlackStone
|
|
London England
Aug 2000
time: 05:15
|
|
I liked the Fund-da-mental option but i think that both it and nationalism are abstract concepts. I don`t believe that there are or have ever been and fundy govs in the world. It is a term angled at certain religious groups throughout the world as a stigma based label to imply backward ideas and the justification of anything. As somebody posted earlier a true fundy gov would represent the virtues of whatever faith it followed, the govs and groups associated with it today could be more accurately described in terms of facist gov label.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
d_dudy
|
|
that's the impression i've always had of nationalism.
i said that in some earlier thread, i'll try to find it.
if anyone remembers me posting that, let me know.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JellyDonut
|
 |
Köln, Deutschland
Jul 2001
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BlackStone
I don`t believe that there are or have ever been and fundy govs in the world. |
Afghanistan? Iran? The US in 10 years? 
But I do agree with you that fundamentalism is not a form of government. Fundamentalism is, if anything, a characteristic of a government, i.e. Afghanistan believes deeply in the Qur'an but that doesn't say how the government should be structured, but it is more often used as a quality of certain close-minded individuals and groups. It (as well as Nationalism) are not governments in themselves but qualities governments can have.
As for the other governments, Democracy should be discovered in ancient times, i.e. the ancient Greeks, and be structured like their government. Republic might represent the modern republics rather than the Roman republic just for the sake of introducing a form of government similar to many, many countries' today, to be introduced at the end of the Middle Ages or the beginning of the Industrial Period (the French Revolution). Communism should be discovered at the beginning of the Modern Period (the time of Lenin) and should represent a Soviet-esque government because true Communism (Marxism, not Leninism-Stalinism) would be WAY too efficient and beneficial for balanced gameplay  . Despotism is good as the default/ancient government.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-08-2001 09:35
No thanks! 
This IS news. So what replaces Fundamentalism? Theocracy? Or is it only 5 Gov-typers in Civ-3? Pleace answer this, because it would clear things up even further.
|