 |
|
CygnusZ
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ElitePersian
What kinda terrorism options were there gonna be, before the recent events? |
Suitcase Nuke
Poison Water Supply
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CygnusZ
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mannamagnus
I never poisoned one water supply and I have nukes disabled in Rules.txt.
If you say that a military campaign is equal to having deathcamps you basicaly also say that what Bush is doing now is similar to what Hitler and Stalin were doing (only on a smaller scale, but hey ... he's new to the job  ) |
Yes, what President Bush is doing is extremely similar to what Hitler and Stalin are doing depending upon your world perspective. It can be argued, with a great deal of success, that President Bush is attempting to further perpetuate a pattern of American Imperialism and Assimliation to other nations. Indeed, I think that Bush and Bin Ladin become very similar when you think in terms of motive. To both parties, the end rationalization of the conflict is the belief that they are going to war to fight "evil".
The concept of "Death Camps" and "Forced Labor" is indiciative of these imperalisitic policies which were exercised by both Stalin and Hitler. While military conquests is not exactly the same per se, it is quite related in its basic nature, and indeed America has at times of war created adapataions of this form. Remember, that in WW2 Women were used to replace Male Labor. This is an analogous solution to the production problem which was solved in other countries through the use of forced labor.
Furthermore, if it is the very nature of Imperalism that it creates forced labor. Excluding these exceptional wartime circumstances which you have provided, if we can consider the "day to day" functions of societies which are depednant upon mercantalist econmic policy the concept of a "mother country" to its child is more valid when percieved as the connection between a master and a slave. It is questionable, but yet there is a glimmer of truth in the accusation, that America has "enslaved" the Middle Eastern nations with its political and economic intervention. So it is reasoned that if America were not constantly exerting its pressure and force upon the nation's they would be able to enjoy a higher standard of living due to the reduced demands that the nation puts upon them.
So, yes. Considering the nature of Imperalism which America in a way practictions I think it is somewhat contreversial but may in truth reflect "Forced Labor". The scars of imperalism have left many scars upon the third world. Modernization theory can only explain the "how" of getting out of economic depression, but through Dependency Theory it becomes possible to see the "why" the third world has in a way been put into the shackles of slavery.
Which of course makes the big puzzle, about why Canada which was under imperialistic rule became so sucessful. Various solutions to that problem have been proposed, but I would tend to side upon the theory that mercantilisitic economic policy tends to reinforce and exaggerate the socio-economic state upon which the country had at the start. Since Canada was begun by European with traders' and some social mobility, those traits became exaggerated. Since the Middle East had greater stratification and little mobility (let us say that the farmer had to give 10% of his crop to some sort of figure) , those stratified aspects became so exaggerated that it acted as a much harsher vice than it had previously been (which would mean the farmer would now be forced to surrender 90%, and in addition would no longer be planting food which he could eat, but rather that which could be sold).
Am I making sense here? Imperalism by nature involves forced labor upon various levels. Some more obvious, and some more discreet. If one takes the view that America has exerted imperalistic force upon the Middle East, it would then become a logical conclusion that it is true that America benefits from a form of forced labor from the middle east. President Bush, in this day and age, uses such policy in order to obtain forced labor... even during peacetime.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CygnusZ
|
|
I was pointing out how imperalistic policies can lead to situations of forced labor like he was describing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bisonbison
|
 |
my bathtub, CA
Aug 2001
time: 00:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by CygnusZ
Am I making sense here? Imperalism by nature involves forced labor upon various levels. Some more obvious, and some more discreet. If one takes the view that America has exerted imperalistic force upon the Middle East, it would then become a logical conclusion that it is true that America benefits from a form of forced labor from the middle east. President Bush, in this day and age, uses such policy in order to obtain forced labor... even during peacetime. |
Whoa there. Forced labor's not just a term you can throw around whenever there's massive economic disparity. There are two parts here: the FORCED part, and the LABOR part. Forced labor involves the involuntary conscription of a population - whether it's a domestic population in peace [think American slavery], a domestic population in war [think Stalin], or a foreign population in war [think Hitler, or many POW camps]. These are forced labor situations - they involve governmental power, mandatory work and insignificant compensation.
To compare any of these with the effort to bring women into the American workforce in WWII equates FORCED labor with NOT FORCED labor. Do you see how women voluntarily taking jobs for various reasons [better pay, patriotic duty, desire for training, need to support family] is morally different from any of the above?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Admiral PJ
|
 |
Southeast England , UK
Dec 2000
time: 05:15
|
|
Birth Of The Federation is a good game, not as good as civilisation of course, but interesting. Its very similar to Master Of Orion2 but it has lots of minor alien planets that you have to try and seduce to join your Empire/Federation or the others get them.
Each minor planet can build wonders when you get them to join which are cool, and even have some extra ships to help you.
It has nice semi real time Space battle scenes, which can involve multiple allied Empires against otherse, but these aren't as good as MOO2 or civ tactically , you just tell them to run or attack or a couple other things and prevent them draining your shields, but it looks very pretty - they are in full 3D  .
Bush may be a right wing greedy dumb pig.. but hes not as bad as Hitler and isn't really a fascist or Imperialist.
It is good if America gets involved more with foreign affairs, it isn't separate from the rest of the world so shouldn't pretend to be - It should aim to try and create a World Union and world peace with free aid and economic help, not just try and use Big business and Globalisation - its in the States' interests primarily to prevent another World Trade disaster.
Maybe thats another topic if so i'm sorry.
AdmiralPJ - abused, misused, confused.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CygnusZ
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lonestar
Cygnuz Strikes me as one of those guys who believes that only the United States has commited bad things in it's past. And the only country that continues to commit bad things.
His type is the kind that sees Black and White during current events (no gray) and can rationlize any atrocity commited by his own nation.
While America may have been Imperialistic in the past, it ain't a patch on the various West European powers, all the way up to the British landing troops in Sierra Leone, 1999.
To compare Bush to Hitler and Stalin is out of line, especially in the Civ3 forum. Go over to off-topic if you want to troll. |
It isn't a criticism of Bush, its about overall issues that are larger than those simple minded things. It's about long term foriegn policy and international economic dependence. The truth itself is not that America is totally guilty of the forces I've talked about or totally free of them. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
CygnusZ
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bisonbison
Whoa there. Forced labor's not just a term you can throw around whenever there's massive economic disparity. There are two parts here: the FORCED part, and the LABOR part. Forced labor involves the involuntary conscription of a population - whether it's a domestic population in peace [think American slavery], a domestic population in war [think Stalin], or a foreign population in war [think Hitler, or many POW camps]. These are forced labor situations - they involve governmental power, mandatory work and insignificant compensation.
To compare any of these with the effort to bring women into the American workforce in WWII equates FORCED labor with NOT FORCED labor. Do you see how women voluntarily taking jobs for various reasons [better pay, patriotic duty, desire for training, need to support family] is morally different from any of the above? |
The only point I was making about Women's Labor movement was that there are multiple ways to increase production in war. Both were different means to the same ends. That was saying that there are always different ways to achieve the same ends, and that Death Camp labor would be one of many options in CivIII if we were to get that realistic.
The second point I made, was that in a way forced labor can mean forced conscription, but there are other more devious ways to put people into forced labor through the use of economic stimuli. Simply put, I am saying that Forced Labor as described by the Dependency theory advocates De Facto forced labor. Contrarily, conscription would represent the De Jure forced labor.
So, to be very clear. I'm not trying to be Anti-American, but I am trying to point out that economic reality can crystalize a situation in which De Facto forced labor becomes practiced. There is one example of De Facto forced labor that comes to mind...
In Indonesia many girls are promised that if they pay certain men money they will be taken to American soil. When they agree to pay the first $400 they make in America, the men take them to factories in which various American goods are made. Technically, the land which the factory is situated upon is American soil, so the terms of the contract are fufilled. There the girls are made to work for little money until they can pay off the $400. This sort of system is dennoated as contractual slavery. The labor isn't forced, but yet it is (They don't _have_ to work, but they should work or else they'll never get to leave, so they do _HAVE_ to work). No conscription of the work force, but De Facto slavery through the use of economics. In concepts of Global Stratification the same occurs, but it is on a larger level. Smaller Countries depend upon large countries and are forced (but at the same time, not truly forced) to work for poor compensation.
As I said though, this isn't the universal outcome. Remember Canada.
Last edited by CygnusZ on 26-10-2001 at 04:32
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cre8engr
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mannamagnus
So what will be the next suggestion; torture chambers to have captured workers reveal the location of enemy cities?
It's not about some sprites on a computer screen, it's about the person playing the game and enjoying the idea of deathcamps.
Gameplay is not served with this sick idea, disbanding a city in an akward location by the push of a button suffices. |
How about dropping them citizens into the Worm Pits? The very same pits full squiggly worms that eat at your brain tissue in SMAC?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CygnusZ
|
|
No, like Canada was a nation that was in the shackles of imperalism, yet it's economic fallout is not the same as other countries. They enjoy a great standard of living despite the imperalism which has come to foreshadow third world status.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetteroX
|
|
New York,NY USA
Nov 2000
time: 05:15
|
|
I think Uber might have worded things the way he did because he wanted a huge responce, and if thats what he set out to do, he succeaded. I like his idea. If you feel like being a little evil, do it. If you don't like it, don't use it. Same thing with TV, if you don't like nudity violence, cursing etc, turn the channel. I remeber in CTP1/2 I LOVED slavers. This may sound evil to some. I dont support the idea in real life, but in the game it was just great, period. I remeber once having a size 30 city in anient times because of it. pop 7 with 23 slaves, single city with a population of about 1/2 my niegbors whole civ at the time. Like slavers in CTP, death camps could work well if you feel like playing on the evil side. Id say more, but drake said everything I could say, I liked everything he said. I played parts of fallout 2 multiple times just so I could watch my minigun make a guy into swiss cheese or my plasma gun make him into steaming goo.... its just a game, its fun.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CygnusZ
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lonestar
Well, by that same arguement I can say most of the American Southwest was in the shackles of imperialism, and now have a far superior economy.
Same goes For Hawai'i. |
No, you can't because they were part of the Union. Being bought or brought into another country is not continued imperalism. Canada never rebelled or was bought by foriegn nations. Canada is symbolic of the ideal outcome of imperialistic policy.
The main point upon the subject of imperalism, in relation to how it affects nations, is that it tends to stress currently exisiting socio-economic situations.
If you haven't already, read the original post top to bottom making sure you understand the arguments presented.
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
25-10-2001 22:26
thanks sn00p!
(just my little joke)
). Death camps were a fact, disabling such options from civ won't change ANY human lives for the better.
|