 |
|
ElvisMonster
|
|
Jackson, MS
Jan 2002
time: 23:18
|
|
You've GOT to be f**king joking, right?!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
 |
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999
time: 06:18
|
|
An more obvious and less controversial explanation for concentration camps as tile improvement would be that they also served as work camp and the prisoners as slaves. From the website of Dachau:
quote:
In the period before the war, the prisoners had to work both in the management and the maintainance of the camp, as well as in different types of SS-owned industries: road construction, gravel pits and cultivating the moor. During the war years, the manpower of the prisoners became even more important to the German armaments industry. From 1942, a network of subsidiary camps and work detachments were established in which over 30,000 prisoners worked almost exclusively for the German armaments industry.
As German airplane production became more and more endangered, the Nazis decided to produce important armaments, airplanes and rockets in huge underground factories. As a result, two large camp complexes were established, as subsidiary camps of Dachau: Kaufering and Mühldorf. |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
ElvisMonster
|
|
Jackson, MS
Jan 2002
time: 23:18
|
|
First off, I'm not a politically correct "thought nazi", and I do enjoy the historical parallels that the Civilization series tries to create. However, a disgusting human tragedy like the Holocaust should not be trivialized in this manner.
You know what? On second thought, why don't we take it a little further! Let's make Jews an actual resource in the game?! Then you can build improvements to get the most out of your resource! You could have camps with ovens or showers, or even both! You could even add different commands to the units so they can rape or even just lay the smack down on the Jewish resource tiles! It would create happiness for your Civ and even possibly improve the moral of your units! Wait, then we'd have to figure out a way to actually make "moral" a measurable, tangible, statistic.
Also taken from the Dachau website:
"During the war Dachau concentration camp became a place of mass murder. Beginning in October 1941, thousands of Soviet prisoners of war were brought to Dachau and shot. Also, others who the Gestapo, the Secret Police ordered to be executed, were transported to Dachau and killed.
A large number of prisoners were misused by SS doctors for medical experiments. There were high altitude experiments, cooling and freezing experiments, a series of malaria experiments and others. An unknown number of prisoners died excruciating deaths.
So-called invalid transports began in January 1942. More than 3000 prisoners were taken to the former sanatorium at Hartheim castle near Linz, and murdered there with Carbon monoxide.
There were 30,000 registered deaths in the Dachau concentration camp. Additional, thousands who were not registered were murdered in Dachau. The prisoners died of starvation, sickness, exhaustion, degradation, beating, and torture. They were shot, hanged and killed with injections.
In1942 a gas chamber was also built in the Dachau concentration camp, but inexplicably, it was not used. It was located within the new crematorium, a larger building whose construction with four ovens became necessary when the first crematorium, which had only one oven, proved inadequate."
Have some respect for what is very well one of the more disgusting and deplorable events in the history of humanity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Immortal Wombat
|
 |
in perpetuity
Dec 2000
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ElvisMonster
You know what? On second thought, why don't we take it a little further! Let's make Jews an actual resource in the game?! Then you can build improvements to get the most out of your resource! You could have camps with ovens or showers, or even both! You could even add different commands to the units so they can rape or even just lay the smack down on the Jewish resource tiles! It would create happiness for your Civ and even possibly improve the moral of your units! Wait, then we'd have to figure out a way to actually make "moral" a measurable, tangible, statistic.
|
 It would be possible I suppose. How would the AI cope?
quote:
Have some respect for what is very well one of the more disgusting and deplorable events in the history of humanity. |
By ignoring it?
Personally, I don't see how it would help in a game, (if you're so far behind you need to resort to drastic measures, then going to war with the whole world isn't going to help matters...) but if a 'holocaust' event is in there, not against any one group, but as a way of, yes, exploiting the population as a resource, then I don't have a problem with it. But it would cost seriously on the diplomatic side of things.
Isk, Start a game with 21 players, load the map, and then resave as a scenario.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TheArsenal
|
 |
Sunny Southern California
Mar 2002
time: 21:18
|
|
Gentlemen, I don't think this is a great idea. But if you press forward:
Change: Concentration Camp to "Internment Camp" or "Work Camp". Then it is less specific, slightly less horrendous, and something the Americans, Germans, and Japanese all did to some degree. Change "Holocaust" to something like "Ethnic Atrocities", "Ethnic Cleansing", "War Crimes Against Civilians".
And while I agree there would be great Advantages to prod. and comm. you would have to make the Disadvantages way more punitive. You can't, after all, reward this behavior long term in light of its horrid real world consequences. Perhaps: along w/ the massive regard hit, all civs which you do not have peace treaties with automatically go to war with you, and subsequent cease fires/peace treaties with these civs are impossible. Perhaps after awhile, major decrease in civ happiness as your populace figures out what the military/gov was up to and have to live with the stigma.
And for Pete's sake, don't mention "prisoners [turned into] soap" in the GLs description.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Peter Triggs
|
|
Gone Fishin, Canada
Jan 2000
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
And for Pete's sake...
|
... what Pete could really use is the occasional answer to a question about SLIC.
Edit: Just to be on topic, I don't think this is a very good idea at all. Not only is it in very questionable taste, but it could also easily generate a lot of unwanted controversy.
Last edited by Peter Triggs on 21-03-2002 at 14:39
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dale
|
 |
Sir! Why do you keep clicking on me?
Dec 2000
time: 15:18
|
|
Just on this topic, you may be able to change the idea slightly to be based more around social eugenics. For those who don't know, social eugenics revolves around human behaviour and primitive genetic study. The "science" as it was called, concentrated on the identification of qualities that were "good" and "beneficial" to the nation, and these qualities were promoted as acceptable social standards. Two most notible eugenics movements were the Nazis and the Race Betterment Society (in USA). So in all respects, the yanks began this trend.
quote:
The term eugenics comes from the Greek roots for "good" and "generation" or "origin" and was first used to refer to the "science" of heredity and good breeding in about 1883.
Within 20 years, the word was widely used by scientists who had rediscovered the work of Gregor Mendel. Mendel had meticulously recorded the results of cross-breeding pea plants, and found a very regular statistical pattern for features like height and color. This introduced the concept of genes, opening the field of genetics to a tumultuous century of research. One path of genetic research branched off into the shadows of social theory, and in the first quarter of the twentieth century became immensely popular as eugenics. It was presented as a mathematical science that could be used to predict the traits and behaviors of humans, and in a perfect world, to control human breeding so that people with the best genes would reproduce and thus improve the species. It was an optimistic school of thought with a profound faith in the powers of Science.
The trappings of science, anyway. Even in its day, many people saw that eugenics was a dubious discipline, riddled with inconsistencies. But it was championed by a very prominent and respected biologist, Charles Davenport, and its conclusions told many people what they wanted to hear: that certain "racial stock" was superior to others in such traits as intelligence, hard work, cleanliness, and so on. In this view of human behavior, the work of Sigmund Freud was disregarded, while the ideas of behaviorism were just gaining ground.
Local eugenics societies and groups sprang up around the United States after World War I, with names like the Race Betterment Foundation. The war had given many Americans a greater fear of foreigners, and immigration to the United States was still increasing. In 1923, organizers founded the American Eugenics Society, and it quickly grew to 29 chapters around the country. At fairs and exhibitions, eugenicists spread the word and hosted "fitter family" and "better baby" competitions to award blue ribbons to the finest human stock -- not unlike the awards for prize bull and biggest pumpkin. Not only did eugenicists promote better breeding, they wanted to prevent poor breeding or the risk of it. That meant keeping people with undesireable traits in their heritage (including alcoholism, pauperism, or epilepsy) separate from others or, where law allowed, preventing them from reproducing.
These vocal groups advocated laws to attain their aims, and in 1924, the Immigration Act was passed by majorities in the U.S. House and Senate. It set up strict quotas limiting immigrants from countries believed by eugenicists to have "inferior" stock, particularly Southern Europe and Asia. President Coolidge, who signed the bill into law, had stated when he was vice president, "America should be kept American. . . . Biological laws show that Nordics deteriorate when mixed with other races."
Behaviorism was introduced in 1913, and the genetic work of Thomas Hunt Morgan and others became known through the 'teens. After World War I, few scientists joined the ranks of the eugenicists. As the weight of the scientific community shifted toward behaviorism and true genetics, popular opinion followed. John Watson's articles about childrearing and self-improvement popularized behaviorism still further. The eugenics craze was already fading when the horrors of institutionalized eugenics revealed in Nazi Germany during World War II doused it entirely as a movement.
|
Maybe change the building to be "Eugenics chapter" with relevant gains. Well, everyone was in it so why not?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ElvisMonster
|
|
Jackson, MS
Jan 2002
time: 23:18
|
|
While I appreciate the efforts of some of you to take the edge off of the original post, there are still several points that I think need to be made.
As far as concentration camps increasing the productivity and economy of a nation, how does removing a large number of merchants, professionals, and laborers from the workforce, and then starving them, killing them, raping them, and beating them increase a nation’s productivity? There is no historical evidence that supports the argument that concentration camps in any way shape or form increased Germany’s productivity or boosted Germany's economy. Those improvements can be directly attributed to industry increasing production for the war effort. The same thing happened in America, remember?
Now as far as attempting to draw parallels between American internment camps and German concentration camps, the only similarity between the two is that specific groups of people were removed from the general population based solely on their ethnicity. The Japanese Americans that were placed in internment camps were not subjected to the horrors that took place in German concentration camps. I'd list specifics, but there are far too many and I'm quite sure that each of you can name three or four on your own. Although the internment of Japanese Americans during World War Two was an oppressive and paranoid act, it pales in comparison to the Holocaust.
And finally, boiling this debate down to whether or not the pursuit of eugenics is worthy of inclusion in CTP2 makes things simple. Eugenics was proven (as the previous post clearly states) to be, for the most part, baseless scientifically. Pursuing a useless tech doesn't provide a nation with any benefit in "real life" so what effects would eugenics provide a civ in CTP2? Civil unrest and disorder due to the growing oppression of segments of your population? Loss of prestige among other more "enlightened" civs for your inferred genetic superiority by perusing this "tech"? And if eugenics provided no benefit to a civ, why bother including it?
The bottom line is that I don't see how including any of these things enhances this fine game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dale
|
|
Sir! Why do you keep clicking on me?
Dec 2000
time: 15:18
|
|
ElvisMonster:
I don't understand how you could discount eugenics, or basic social engineering, or human behaviour from a scenario based on the first half of the 20th century. Eugenics was the single cause of World War II! Nazi Germany brain-washed a generation of German's into believing they were the superior race. Living conditions were very cramped in post-world war I Europe and thus the arguement of "living space" came up. The German's believing they were the superior race in Northern Europe believed they could take land as required. Naturally, the land they wanted back was from western Poland, the Rhineland, and Slovak, which was seperated from Germany after World War I as a buffer to USSR and France. They also wanted the grain fields of the Ukraine (which was an unhappy state of the Soviet Union and supported the Nazi party) to feed their people. Since England and France provided assurances to Poland to maintain it's border integrity, Germany faced a two-front war with Poland and France. This brought in the high-lands of Holland and Belgium to get around the Magniot line. Etc. I don't need to say a history lesson, there's plenty of history books to read.
Anyways, as I stated, the German people's belief (or brain-wash if you will) of being the "superior race", and their need for "growing space", led directly to the start of World War II.
As for the Jewish persecution, no historian knows the true beginnings of the holocaust. The most followed theory is that the Jews held a large amount of Europe's economic power (banking, accounting, etc). Due to their refusal to follow the Nazi partys eugenic tailoring, they became the target of Nazi propeganda. The Nazi's also needed the money that the Jewish community had control over due to still feeling the hardships of the Great Depression and the military need to take these lands (Germany didn't have monetory control till after the Nazi party got power). Therefore, the Nazi's needed an accepted way to take this money from the Jews and thus started the persecution of the Jews. The Nazi party also bred the belief that the Jews caused the Great Depression, and thus caused all the suffering and hardships of the early 1930's. Many historians then believe that the Nazis ran out of room in their concentration camps and thus began the holocaust.
So by combining the power of eugenics to convince the German people they were superior and entitled to these things, and the economic need for this monetary base, the Nazi party were able to brain-wash the populace into providing support for the persecution, and consequently the holocaust.
So in a World War era scenario, I don't understand how eugenics (which is just an extension of nationalism) couldn't be simulated in some way. Eugenics provided brain-washing, propeganda, foreign hatreds, instability between nations, and many other things.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ElvisMonster
|
|
Jackson, MS
Jan 2002
time: 23:18
|
|
I'll try not to write another essay...but here we go.
I'm not discounting or disagreeing with the fact that the Germans felt that they were racially superior to the Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, Poles, etc. I'm saying that "eugenics" as a pseudo-science did nothing but keep legitimate scientific minds from perusing legitimate science. As a tech in CTP2, I see no upside to including it.
Back to your points about the Jews being in control of a significant amount of wealth in pre-WWII Germany; that money was, for the most part, in German banks and being spent IN Germany. The government had control of that money. It was part of the economy! It created no new wealth for the German nation. It merely moved the money from one group of individuals to another.
Were nationalism and/or feelings of "racial" superiority causes of the World War? Yes. I do not, and have not, disagreed with that. My problem is with the trivialization of genocide.
Why not just include National Socialism as a form of government? If anyone chose to do their own homework, as you obviously have, they could infer that the pursuit of this form of government included intolerance and eugenic pursuits.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dale
|
|
Sir! Why do you keep clicking on me?
Dec 2000
time: 15:18
|
|
Yes, I'm a huge history buff of the Imperialism and Socialist Nationalism era (1870 - 1950).  So I have done my homework. 
True eugenics did syphon some brilliant minds into a dead-end, socially destructive, pseudo-science. But in that era it was a really big deal. Moreover, the realisation that nations couldn't survive in a eugenic socialist nationalism state brought about social tolerance and multiculturalism. If it weren't for these actions then countries like USA, Australia, Canada and New Zealand to name a few, wouldn't be where they are now. What I'm saying is that without eugenics, our multicultural societies would never have come about. So I see the benefit to arise out of eugenics and the socialist nationalism era is social tolerance (an actual wonder in World At War once eugenics is discovered). And that, we could ALL do with a bit more of.
True, the banks in Germany added no "new wealth" to the nation. However, the interest rates the banks wanted were not to the government's liking. Also, the inflation rates within Germany were crippling the economy. I think this is where historians and economists base their opinion that monetary control did not fall into the hands of the Nazis till a few years after they took power (the centralisation of the German Federal Bank being the step that comes to my mind).
Socialist Nationalism would probably be a good government to add. Maybe a servere form of Fascism? Population capping, production and commerce bonuses, scientific crippling?
BTW, I just want to point out that in no way do I agree with eugenics or socialist nationalism. I agree with many historians who have labelled this particular era as the "Modern Dark-Ages". But I must admit, I haven't had a debate like this on these forums in a long time. 
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-03-2002 21:01
|