The Lost Civilization

I am really tited of the utterly foolish and downrigh opressive notion that somehow feelings of offense must take precedent over... well, over everything, but specially over freedom of expression and consequently, over creative freedom, as this is the case.

Amen to that. Turns out we're in a minority out there.
 
Does anyone know whether the inclusion of Hallie Selassie was either controversial among Rastafarians or cleared with their religious leaders?

As far as I know Selassie had nothing to do personally with the beginnings of Rastafarianism. They adopted him into their beliefs independent of him. It is the Ethiopians who they should have got permission from.
Well, the name "rastafari" comes directly from Haille Selassie - I believe "Ras Tafari" was his given name.
 
Well, the name "rastafari" comes directly from Haille Selassie - I believe "Ras Tafari" was his given name.

I believe you're right. I meant to say that although they venerate him, he personally had nothing to do with establishing the religion.
 
Well, the name "rastafari" comes directly from Haille Selassie - I believe "Ras Tafari" was his given name.
I believe "Ras" is more of a title (but I'm not sure, my Ethiopean is a bit rusty :p )

Edit:
The name Rastafari is taken from Ras Tafari, the pre-regnal title of Haile Selassie I, composed of Amharic Ras (literally "Head", an Ethiopian title equivalent to Duke), and Haile Selassie's pre-regnal given name, Tafari.
 
There is a difference between the manufactured offence you're talking about with dad's army and black hawk down and the offence to the Pueblo people.

Rather than being about representations, the issue for the Pueblo people was that their spiritual beliefs determine that it would be wrong for Pope to be represented, regardless of how. It seems to be more similar to how Mohammed is not supposed to be represented.

What you are doing is in essence amounting to an ad hominem argument: Pueblo feelings are "authentic", whereas veteran's feelings are "manufactured", just because.

Yes, it might be that they consider the depiction of Pope as an offense, short of the same way Muslims consider visual depictions of Mohammed as heretic. But that's the catch: these are their beliefs, not mine's. The notion of somehow other people who do not follow my religion or beliefs must adhere to its code of conduct regardless speaks more volumes about the ones that makes such statements rather than about the "insensibility" of the others.

Then again: feelings of offense harm noone, whereas self censoreship has already damaged this game by depriving us from having yet another interesting civ to play with, and trowing working hours of firaxis into the garbage bin.

Amen to that. Turns out we're in a minority out there.

But why don't they respect our feelings, dude? I am feeling deeply offended by that!

Employing feelings and crocodile tears on a discussion amounts to nothing but a blame game and circular reasoning. It all amounts to "my feelings are superior to yours". Feelings have no place into a rational discussion, much less on the public arena.
 
Well, the name "rastafari" comes directly from Haille Selassie - I believe "Ras Tafari" was his given name.

Tafari Makonnen was his given name; Ras was a royal honorific. He was certainly fully aware of his role in Rastafarianism, never officially either accepted or denied his role as their first messiah, and met Rastafarian leaders during a state visit to Jamaica.

In any event, what matters is the cultural perception - Pope never gave his personal permission to be used as a cultural icon three and a half centuries after the fact. It's the people who treat him as a religious figure who should be consulted. Selassie has that role in Rastafarianism, not in the country he ruled. If you were to make a game depicting Mohammad, would you consult Muslim leaders or the Saudi authorities?
 
Btw, there is a statue of Pope in the Capitol Building. Every state has two statues.



It looks like this is what the art was based on.
 
Does anyone know whether the inclusion of Hallie Selassie was either controversial among Rastafarians or cleared with their religious leaders?

As far as I know Selassie had nothing to do personally with the beginnings of Rastafarianism. They adopted him into their beliefs independent of him. It is the Ethiopians who they should have got permission from.

BTW: The Iroquois have a good case for being offended that their leader is Hiawatha, a fictional character invented by Longfellow. Though I believe Longfellow meant well toward the Native Americans by 19th century standards. The Iroquois would be right to insist that one of their actual leaders who impacted their history would be a better choice than a Anglo-cized invention.

I wondered about that, actually.
 
Well, the name "rastafari" comes directly from Haille Selassie - I believe "Ras Tafari" was his given name.

I believe you're right. I meant to say that although they venerate him, he personally had nothing to do with establishing the religion.
Indeed, he was not active in its formation, but he was relevant and revered from the beginning.

And thanks to all who corrected me that 'Ras' was a title, only Tafari was his given name. It's a while since I did the research for me Rastafari religion mod.
 
Does anyone know whether the inclusion of Hallie Selassie was either controversial among Rastafarians or cleared with their religious leaders?

As far as I know Selassie had nothing to do personally with the beginnings of Rastafarianism. They adopted him into their beliefs independent of him. It is the Ethiopians who they should have got permission from.

BTW: The Iroquois have a good case for being offended that their leader is Hiawatha, a fictional character invented by Longfellow. Though I believe Longfellow meant well toward the Native Americans by 19th century standards. The Iroquois would be right to insist that one of their actual leaders who impacted their history would be a better choice than a Anglo-cized invention.

Aren't Longfellow's Hiawatha and the Iroquios Hiawatha separate people? Wiki says Longfellow's Hiawatha is based on Manabozho, an Ojibwe hero, and was mistakenly named after the Iroquios Hiawatha.
 
Does anyone know whether the inclusion of Hallie Selassie was either controversial among Rastafarians or cleared with their religious leaders?

As far as I know Selassie had nothing to do personally with the beginnings of Rastafarianism. They adopted him into their beliefs independent of him. It is the Ethiopians who they should have got permission from.

BTW: The Iroquois have a good case for being offended that their leader is Hiawatha, a fictional character invented by Longfellow. Though I believe Longfellow meant well toward the Native Americans by 19th century standards. The Iroquois would be right to insist that one of their actual leaders who impacted their history would be a better choice than a Anglo-cized invention.

Wrong Hiawatha. The Hiawatha in the game is a person known by Iroquois folklore as the inventor of their constitution and, essentially, co-founder of their confederacy. He's entirely different from Longfellow's Hiawatha so I can see the confusion, but they certainly didn't use that character.
 
Do you think we'll ever hear the details they had worked out already? I am intrigued as to what the UI was and the bonus to settling near mountains, maybe this portion at least could be recycled into a Chachapoya civilization?

Tis a shame, that concept art was shaping for a cool leaderscreen.
 
I hope they release more art of what they did and tentative thoughts on traits. My guess is they're still in the play balancing stage so they couldn't definitively say what the final traits would be. But I would like to see what the Anasazi mountains looked like, their UU, and UI (I believe). Even if it's just in concept art form, it would be fine. But it would be nice to see everything that could have been.
 
Do you think we'll ever hear the details they had worked out already? I am intrigued as to what the UI was and the bonus to settling near mountains, maybe this portion at least could be recycled into a Chachapoya civilization?

Tis a shame, that concept art was shaping for a cool leaderscreen.

The Chachapoya would be an interesting civ that they could have used instead. I doubt they will use it though since they are fairly unknown. The art styles they created specifically for the Pueblo could 'roughly' translate to the Chachapoya. They were a large confederation of cities that controlled the trade between the Amazons, Northern S. America, and the rest of S. America. They have been called "The Maya" of South America. Kuelap is an amazing city and the architecture is quite exquisite. There is even evidence that the Chachapoya traded with Polynesians [As seen by Polynesian plants being used in Chachapoya sarcophagi]
====

If I had to guess what the Pueblo UI was... it would probably be some sort of desert canal for irrigation.
 
What you are doing is in essence amounting to an ad hominem argument: Pueblo feelings are "authentic", whereas veteran's feelings are "manufactured", just because.

Yes, it might be that they consider the depiction of Pope as an offense, short of the same way Muslims consider visual depictions of Mohammed as heretic. But that's the catch: these are their beliefs, not mine's. The notion of somehow other people who do not follow my religion or beliefs must adhere to its code of conduct regardless speaks more volumes about the ones that makes such statements rather than about the "insensibility" of the others.

Then again: feelings of offense harm noone, whereas self censoreship has already damaged this game by depriving us from having yet another interesting civ to play with, and trowing working hours of firaxis into the garbage bin.



But why don't they respect our feelings, dude? I am feeling deeply offended by that!

Employing feelings and crocodile tears on a discussion amounts to nothing but a blame game and circular reasoning. It all amounts to "my feelings are superior to yours". Feelings have no place into a rational discussion, much less on the public arena.

Actually i was referring to the fact that next to none of the supposed "offended" community for Dad's army etc actually appeal against it. It's not the veterans doing the moderating, but people on behalf of them. In this case, the pueblo people have genuinely shown they are offended by it, hence not "manufactured".

I think offended is entirely the wrong word to use here too. But regardless you've made it clear what your stance in on cultural differences, over offence belief or otherwise so i'm not gunna get into it.

I'm not gunna try and justify what firaxis have done either. I'm not even saying i agree with it, i'm just letting you know there's a difference that you missed. :)
 
I am really tited of the utterly foolish and downrigh opressive notion that somehow feelings of offense must take precedent over... well, over everything, but specially over freedom of expression and consequently, over creative freedom, as this is the case.

I agree. We can always find some fool who gets offended. Free world can not function with this kind logic.
 
Top Bottom