Why are the Zulu always in Civilization

Status
Not open for further replies.
I actually thought the Native American civilization was terrible addition. I do not know why they didn't bring back the Iroqous or Souix. In some ways it seemed offensive lumping all these different tribes with their own history into one category. (Reminds me of the old racists quote of they all look alike).

They could also go after the Cherokee, Apache, Seminole, or Pueblo as well.

Celts fit because they actually were somewhat a united people that referred to themselves as such. Celts were not totally united but they were one entity (like the Sumerians or like China and India at times which both were made up of many states at times and other times where united).

Back to originally topic. I read up some more on Zulu. One counter-argument to my argument is that the Zulu are still a factor today (11 million live in Union of South Africa today). I don't think they should get the first cut over other African civilization such as Ethopia or Mali but they probably deserve a spot.

The two big ones that I think deserve a spot are:
1. Israel - I have stated my reasons
2. Austria - Although I think Holy Roman Empire may fit that spot now.

Other lesser notables: Aborigine or Polynesians (for those that want a group in a particular area, we have nothing in the Pacific), Hungarians, or Goths/Huns.

Sorry for all the posts guys, had a lot to respond to and thanks for your discussion.
 
phungus420 said:
Name recognition, especially in the context that there really aren't any other Sub Saharan cultures with anywhere near the name recognition that the Zulus have.

With regard to Israel, that may be correct, but given the fact they seem hellbent to emulate their former oppressors and force the occupied Palestinian people into atrocious ghettos, illegally and immorally annexing their territory with settlements and opressing them with structural legislation, the fact they are denied admission into Civ is apropriate.
Click to expand...

Certainly by that you mean that multiple Arab countries simultaneously collaborated to declare a holy war on the Israelis and they beat the Arabs' to hell and took the spoils of victory, then, yes.

Israel certainly deserves to be in the game.
 
The only other black civilization I can think of in South Africa is Zimbabwe, and I don't think we know any of their rulers. I'm glad Mali got included this game.
 
volbound1700 said:
I also found it offensive that all Civilopedia could talk about Christianity and Islam was violence and sects. In fact the entire Church of Nativity background is wrong. Since when did Protestants or any other Christian sect outside the Catholics invade and conquer Bethlehem/Israel in the name of their religious sect?
Click to expand...

By the times of the Crusades there were NO other Christian sects in the West. Therefore it would be kind of hard for Protestants to do so. It's not that there's something intrinsically different between the Catholics, Protestants and all other Christian groups.
 
The top 5 reasons to have the Zulus in the game:

5. "Shaka Zulu" is the coolest leader name ever.
4. Their city names are impossible to pronounce. Distinct syllables are so overrated.
3. Zulu is the only Civ to start with a "Z", and every car enthusiast knows that the letter Z is the best.
2. Everyone appreciates a crazy warmonger that will attack your tanks with a 100 spearmen.
1. The most satisfying phrase ever is, "Shaka's my b***h, Fool!"
 
volbound1700 said:
I agree 100% with what you said. I know that not all Buddhists, etc. are not violent but they do not mention anything about violence in their civilopedia while almost the entire Christianity entry is about violence and sects and taken over the Roman Empire with no mention about the actual faith.
Islam mentions 5 pillars but the rest is pretty much violence blah blah blah as well.

Yes I know Islam and Christians (or people that claim to be that religion) have had done bad things. In fact I question whether the Christians that committed those acts are REALLY Christians. However, Civilopedia could have had a more fairer entry. It is expected though because everywhere I turn, I hear people bashing my religion and stating totally incomplete arguments about my faith. I assumed this community would understand because every history professor I had or have ever talked to since graduation has presented a more accurate and fairer view of religion while the media and pop culture totally makes up false history (such as the Church of Nativity article on this game) that attacks a particular faith.
Click to expand...

Pple should not bash your or anyones religion. They should not say there religion is right or anything like that. Im not religious what so ever. But in my opinion I just don't believe in anything like. There's no proof. It's fine that other pple are religious but they shouldn't force there's on pple who are not religious or a different religion.
 
I agree 100% with what you said. I know that not all Buddhists, etc. are not violent but they do not mention anything about violence in their civilopedia while almost the entire Christianity entry is about violence and sects and taken over the Roman Empire with no mention about the actual faith.
Islam mentions 5 pillars but the rest is pretty much violence blah blah blah as well.

Yes I know Islam and Christians (or people that claim to be that religion) have had done bad things. In fact I question whether the Christians that committed those acts are REALLY Christians. However, Civilopedia could have had a more fairer entry. It is expected though because everywhere I turn, I hear people bashing my religion and stating totally incomplete arguments about my faith. I assumed this community would understand because every history professor I had or have ever talked to since graduation has presented a more accurate and fairer view of religion while the media and pop culture totally makes up false history (such as the Church of Nativity article on this game) that attacks a particular faith.
Click to expand...

Well its not like the representations of some other holy shrines are correct either. The Kong Miao is just a name for any Confucist Temple, not a specific one; the Mahabodi is not so correct either.
 
volbound1700 said:
Based on my view? Wow you are so biased. My point was that the history in Civilopedia was bad which is true. Protestants did not invade Bethlehem to take the Church of Nativity. I do not know any Christian sects other than the Catholics that did that.

I do not believe we should have a "STATE" religion but no-state religions include China today, Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany. Wow that is some good company for you religion haters. The first thing totalitarians do is ban or limit religion. THAT IS FACT. Inquisition was Catholics in Spain, not Baptists/Protestants. KKK was not made by Baptists, in fact the KKK has openly criticized the church and one of the most famous KKK court cases involves the bombing of a "Baptist Church." Ever heard of the 16th street church bombings in Birmingham?

It just saddens me how ignorant people are. It was funny how the other 5 religions on civilopedia had actually descriptions of their religion. Then you get to Islam and you do get the 5 pillars then mention of violence. Christianity's civilopedia mentioned nothing about the faith other than it took over the Roman world and was violent.

A better more fairer entry could have been, "Christians believe that Christ is the Son of God. They were started by Jesus over 2000 years ago and a collection of followers who followed him. Apostles such as Paul help spread Christianity through the Roman World and beyond. Over time schism have erupted in the church causing splits into the major groups which are Protestants, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Coptic, Syrian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Armenian, and Morman faiths."

It saddens me how ignorant some people are when it comes to religions and history.
Click to expand...

What? Mussolini's Italy and Franco's Spain, both totalitarian hell-states, allowed the Catholic Church to run rampant over people's lives. Some, not all.
 
It's hip to blame religion for the world's problems. And for a lot of people, it's easier than thinking.
 
volbound1700 said:
Based on my view? Wow you are so biased. My point was that the history in Civilopedia was bad which is true. Protestants did not invade Bethlehem to take the Church of Nativity. I do not know any Christian sects other than the Catholics that did that.

I do not believe we should have a "STATE" religion but no-state religions include China today, Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany. Wow that is some good company for you religion haters. The first thing totalitarians do is ban or limit religion. THAT IS FACT. Inquisition was Catholics in Spain, not Baptists/Protestants. KKK was not made by Baptists, in fact the KKK has openly criticized the church and one of the most famous KKK court cases involves the bombing of a "Baptist Church." Ever heard of the 16th street church bombings in Birmingham?

It just saddens me how ignorant people are. It was funny how the other 5 religions on civilopedia had actually descriptions of their religion. Then you get to Islam and you do get the 5 pillars then mention of violence. Christianity's civilopedia mentioned nothing about the faith other than it took over the Roman world and was violent.

A better more fairer entry could have been, "Christians believe that Christ is the Son of God. They were started by Jesus over 2000 years ago and a collection of followers who followed him. Apostles such as Paul help spread Christianity through the Roman World and beyond. Over time schism have erupted in the church causing splits into the major groups which are Protestants, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Coptic, Syrian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Armenian, and Morman faiths."

It saddens me how ignorant some people are when it comes to religions and history.
Click to expand...

History has always been my bread and butter, I love studying it and reading it, have since I was a child (Read the Durants History of Roman Empire when I was in middle school). You misinterpret my points. Religion is not the cause of evil, opressing people and stealing from them is just part of human nature. Historically Religion is a catalyst which can be used for good or evil. Since conquests are noteworthy one often forms the impression that Religion is a tool for those in power to seize control and opress others or go on conquests, it is merely a catalyst helping to spur such behavior along. BTW your point on the Nazi's is completely false, Hitler being the right winger he was frequently used religious zealotry in his rhetoric. As for China and Russia, today it is illegal to be a member of the communist party unless you disavow religion, which severly limits those that claim a religion, because being a party member is necessary to scale the latter so to speak. So yes, opression can happen in non religious societies, I never claimed otherwise. Perhaps China is an example of anti-religious zealotry being an ideology can be just as destructive as religiosity. Either way it's human nature that is the root cause, always has been and always will be, but religion can definatly be used as a tool and be a powerful catalyst, always has, and may continue to be so. Of course society will change drastically over the next century, once the aging process is stopped and death is no longer assured religion may find itself waning in influence, but this remains to be seen and is very theoretical at this point. BTW I still hold based on your posts you are one of those people who do believe seperation of church and state is not an ideal situation.
 
As a self proclaimed representative of apathetic athiests/agnostics, we frown upon your religious shanianigans and ask you to get back on topic.

Didn't the Civ 4 team say something to the effect of not being religious scholars when they created the game? To reduce the amount of people complaining that they made christianity/islam useless?
 
Malachi256 said:
It's hip to blame religion for the world's problems. And for a lot of people, it's easier than thinking.
Click to expand...

In the eyes of despotic leaders, religion is merely one tool among many to manipulate the populace into doing things they wouldn't otherwise. Sometimes other methods work better for them, such as singling out a sect as scapegoats (Hitler), using military fear, hating another country specifically, etc etc.

In that context, civ represents them pretty well.

I'm not saying religion is fundamentally bad, but those who use it as a tool to manipulate are among the most despicable beings around. Christianity advocates against killing, and yet there has been a TON of killing in its name ----> it is humans who are responsible for that, not its scripture. The same goes for all others too.

That said, religion is pretty off topic here, the focus being on the inclusion of Zulu against other civilizations. The decision to include Israel wouldn't be based entirely on religion, but it would play a role I suppose (its chief religion is in the game after all). I think Zulu did get the benefit of being among the few well-known African nations to the majority of Civ's target market.
 
Dangit man, every time you post about religion you provoke another response, even if you say "that said". Then that person will provoke you, then you will provoke him etc. etc. until the thread gets locked.

You can't really expect everyone to get back on topic when you can't get back on topic yourself :p.
 
Bridog7 said:
What do you mean by hip.
Click to expand...

He means that the majority of people are doing it, and that most of those people are just getting on the bandwagon instead of taking the stance for personal or logical reasons.
 
phungus420 said:
With regard to Israel, that may be correct, but given the fact they seem hellbent to emulate their former oppressors and force the occupied Palestinian people into atrocious ghettos, illegally and immorally annexing their territory with settlements and opressing them with structural legislation, the fact they are denied admission into Civ is apropriate.
Click to expand...

ok, but Genghis Khan, Mao, Stalin and basically every other leader besides Lincoln and Ghandi are allowed in the game???
 
You forgot Canada in that long list of deserving civs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sword_Of_Geddon
Quot Capita: Majesty
57 58 59
Replies
1K
Views
254K
Sword_Of_Geddon
Sword_Of_Geddon
The Kingmaker
New Project: Comprehensive List of World Civilizations
17 18 19
Replies
366
Views
54K
daft
D
Top Bottom