 |
America an independent tribe?
This poll is closed. |
| Yes! God bless America! |
   |
217 |
47.28% |
| No! Only civilized nations deserve to be independent! |
   |
193 |
42.05% |
| I don't care. |
   |
49 |
10.68% |
| Total: |
459 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Mister Hand
|
|
The addition of "Culture" to the game alone justifies the inclusion of America. At no time in history has the influence of a culture been so widespread (for good or bad).
Also, it helps sell copies in the Southern U.S.A. to those who have always had a hankerin' to kick Lincoln's ass!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
oriel94
|
 |
Sydney, Australia
Oct 2001 time: 15:15
|
|
My list of 'civilizations' for Civ4 (some of the names - marked '?' - are in draft form but they represent the essential idea). Some are modern, some are ancient, and some are both. For easily offended or thin-skinned types, the order is entirely random and signifies nothing:
West Europeans (French, Germans, Spaniards, Italians etc) ?
East Europeans (mostly the modern slavic countries) ?
Anglosphere (Americans, British, Canadians, Australians, NZers) ?
Sub-Saharan Africans ?
Latin Americans ?
Arabs
Chinese
Indians
Japanese
Romans
Greeks
Persians
Babylonians/Sumerians ?
Hebrews/Jews/Israelites ?
Egyptians
Meso-Americans (Aztecs, Incas etc) ?
Last edited by oriel94 on 06-11-2001 at 05:32
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sun Zi 36
|
|
quote: "You pointedly disregarded everything you could not explain away and expect me to infer that language + idea = culture. I'll put it this way, if I take flour, eggs, and bread and combine them, do I get bread? No, I get something else. The American culture is significantly different than that of Britain, Canada, or any other English speaking culture." |
This paragraph is just so confusing and ambiguious that I need clarification . Is the egg/flour/bread example supposed to support the first sentence or the last sentence?
If the first, u have just nullified the link between the last sentence and the rest of your posts. The last sentence just stands alone empty with no backing.
If the example is supposed to support America's distinct culture, which i think is more likely, then it still seems confusing. What specific aspects of culture (since its not ideas or language) are u talking about that is different in America?
Some of the specific aspects of culture that are the SAME for "Anglosphere" is already argued by Oriel94 above (3days ago or something) so I won't go into it again.
The argument that the mixture of culture in America is a different "culture" (i m already noting self-contrdiction as i type this) is flawed. Simply put, if it is a mixture of cultures, then it is not one culture. If it is one distinct culture, then it cannot at the same time be multiple different cultures. Yes, I admit that different cultures can transform into one culture over time. But America still consists of multicultures, not one culture. it is just too tempting to fall into the cage of confining culture in terms of political borders or geographical terms.
quote: "The addition of "Culture" to the game alone justifies the inclusion of America. At no time in history has the influence of a culture been so widespread (for good or bad).
Also, it helps sell copies in the Southern U.S.A. to those who have always had a hankerin' to kick Lincoln's ass!" |
The first paragraph still fails to appreciate the difference between country and culture. America is a mulitple of cultures, as i said b4.
The second paragraph fails also to appreciate the topic of the discussion. Selling the game has got nothing to do with culture and thus whether America SHOULD be a civ.
oriel94: I mostly agree with ur list from an entirely cultural uniqueness point of view. But as some others pointed out, differences between cultures within continental Europe may be more than contenental Europe vs Anglosphere. I dont think Chinese and Japanese are really that different either, compared to maybe Spanish and German.
Further, even if ur list is right accoording to cultural uniqueness, i think cultural influence also needs to be assessed (some even thinks that this is the only thing to assess to justify America in the game). Since the difference within "Western Europeans" is not small (while difference within Anlgosphere is) and individual Western European cultures did have large influence, some of them should be included separately. Maybe combine Latin American/Meso American since they did not have large influence and Latin American is not really VERY unique culturally.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
oriel94
|
 |
Sydney, Australia
Oct 2001 time: 15:15
|
|
We are conducting this rather fascinating discussion in a particular context. At least I think so. The context, or so it seems to me, is whether the Americans can be considered a civilization for the limited purposes of Civ3. In a sense, every country, every region, and perhaps every family has its own unique culture in some sense. But not every country/region/family can have its own civilization.
According to Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntingdon's influential 1996 book, "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order" there are only 9 true 'civilizations' in the modern world (he makes no argument about ancient or extinct civilizations). Wanna know what they are?
Western
Latin American
African
Islamic
Sinic [Chinese and Chinese derived/influenced]
Hindu
Orthodox [ie Eastern Orthodox Christianity]
Buddhist
Japanese
On Huntingdon's account, the only country which is co-extensive with a single culture is Japan. The US is in the 'Western' civilization, not surprisingly.
If the context of our discussion is who should be a civ for the purposes of a computer game where the number of players is necessarily limited (i.e. not the complexities of the real world) then Huntingdon is perhaps not a bad place to start. We might do a very little refining, renaming and adding a few ancient/extinct civilizations to bring us up to the maximum limit *for the game* - we're talking about a game here folks, or at least that's what I thought the forum is for.
As you know, I would make the Anglosphere a separate civ for the game. That's not to deny strong primary links between the Anglosphere and Huntingdon's Western civilization, or strong secondary links between the Anglosphere and Huntingdon's Orthodox and Latin American civilizations. I won't reiterate those reasons, which I have set out at [too much] length earlier in the thread.
For the purposes of the game, *as currently structured*, I think having the Americans in is fun even if it's not strictly accurate to regard them as a Civilization in every sense and for all purposes. I bought Civ3 to have fun.
Maybe the civs in Civ4 (oh happy day!) will be structured differently.
All of this is, of course, IMHO.

Last edited by oriel94 on 06-11-2001 at 10:13
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Sun Zi 36
|
|
I also have that book "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order". There are a few criticisms I want to make of his divisions. Firstly I think the difference between the South-East Asians and Middle East people justifies them being in different civilisations even if they share the same religion. His Buddhist civlisation seem to contain peoples who share little in common except Buddhism (and even that is weakly shared as there are many different branches). And, as I said, I don't really think there is too much difference between the Chinese and the Japanese compared to maybe the Spanish and the Germans. I think he may have concentrated too much on religion and ideals in his divisions. Of course, our purpose of division is entirely different from his so it is no suprise we may be coming from different angles.
I also think having Anglosphere as a civ is a good idea. But I think it is neither fun nor correct to have America as a civ. Anglosphere and America can't exist together as civs. I think it's more fun to have America and all its cultural Allies speak with one voice as a single civ than just America.
My political views would probably be classifies as "left" in your (conservative) terms. I think people should have a social conscience and thus governments should be there to uphold social justice and quity. Market forces does not do well in these areas. I don't think this means "the state acting as either nanny or kindergarten cop", just that people should not be handicapped in their lives bcos of their social economic backgrounds or prejudices on things that do not relate to their personal quality.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Arent
|
|
I think huntington made Japanese a distinct culture cause they actually have their own religion (shinto).
drake: Not everyone in Europe. There are just a lot of people wary of extremism cause of WW2, sovjet union et cetera. They don't want this to happen again and thus can sometimes be a little overbearing/lecturing.
Arent
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Fresno
|
 |
Europa
Sep 2001 time: 06:15
|
|
Oriel, Drake Tzuntzen & Arent: I've had it with people putting words into my mouth. This was the last time I participated in the Nazism-discussion.
The only thing I would like to add is this: I am not someone who calls every conservative a Nazi, or every socialist/social-democrat a communist. I am a leftist liberal and I respect everyone, wether he/she agrees with me or not.
Last edited by Fresno on 06-11-2001 at 23:57
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Arent
|
|
Fresno:
You were not overbearing, you had your point calling oriel such. Some of his statements were not that qualified.
I can understand Drake cause some people really exaggerate their point and I had some nice (one way) conversations so far (not only with Europeans that is, but also with some Usaians). That's why I said not everyone in Europe takes it that far.
Arent
Last edited by Arent on 07-11-2001 at 02:02
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Arent
|
|
double
Last edited by Arent on 07-11-2001 at 01:58
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sun Zi 36
|
|
Well, i wouldn't have as much knowledge as u. Yes, i agree there are differences. However, the amount of difference depends on whether you view it relatively or empirically. If u compare Chinese and Japanese by themselves, then u can spot a lot of differences, and even more as u indulge deeper and deeper into studying them. But if u take back a step and view the difference between China/Japan comparative to other cultures, u may find they do not differ that much at all. That is perhaps the reason why our views differ. Agree?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
oriel94
|
 |
Sydney, Australia
Oct 2001 time: 15:15
|
|
I hesitate to enter the China-Japan discussion, as I'm far from expert. I do, however, remember reading a chapter from Paul Johnson's brilliant "Modern Times" describing the background to Japan's invasion of China in the 1930s. Johnson took the view that the similarities - not the differences- between the two cultures/civilizations were the more superficial. In particular, he argued that the Japanese conception of time (linear) gave them an important edge over China with its far more fatalistic cyclical conception. (There were, of course, numerous other cultural and material factors which he discusses, but the time thing sort of sticks in my mind).
Something similar was, I think, later argued by Huntingdon.
Euro-lefties will delight in the knowledge that "Modern Times" is prescribed reading for CIA and US State Department trainees (even though Johnson is an English Monarchist! - the Anglosphere strikes again).
Yours,
One of the "Ubermensch" 
Last edited by oriel94 on 07-11-2001 at 09:07
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Fresno
|
 |
Europa
Sep 2001 time: 06:15
|
|
Arent:quote: You were not overbearing, you had your point calling oriel such. Some of his statements were not that qualified. |
I'm sorry, I misunderstood you. Thank you very much for your support.
Drake Tungsten: I already explained two times what I meant. Please read my previous posts.
Last edited by Fresno on 09-11-2001 at 17:38
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sun Zi 36
|
|
Well, i haven't played Europa Univeralis. I still think that would create problems relating to the definition of civilisations. I don't think independence of colonies into nations mean anything like they are immediately detached to the mother country culturally. National independence are things that happen below the civilisational level. It has got little to do with culture anyway.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Oligarf
|
|
About those colonies. In Civ II civilizations were randomly split up when the capital was taken. Something like that could also happen with colony-like cities or areas.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sun Zi 36
|
|
Well, that is just an idea created by the game makers to try to make the game more excitiing by introducing a special feature.
I dont think the split really should mean national independence, bcos civs are entities that share common culture. It is possible although highly unlikely that there's suddenly a shift in culture within a civ just bcos the capital has been captured.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sun Zi 36
|
|
quote: "I would argue that revolutions typically occur after cultures have diverged, due to lack of understanding and shared values, e.g. American Civil War.
After the capital falls, there is much less unifying force within a nation/civ, and thus the schism." |
Yes i agree that this could happen, but it is very highly unlikely that the disturbance can be to the extent that the entire CIVILISATION is broken apart. To use your American Civil War example, although culture may have diverged, the disturbance was not so servere that u could say the North and the South are difference civilisations.
quote: "I just wanted to add the America should be included in the list of civs because some of us just plain *have* to have cities we can remember the names of, and it is much easier to have the computer provide the names automatically. " |
And that is a compelling reason why America should be a civ? I would think not.
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|