A proposal for ideology names

[Txurce]

There have been more calls for renaming Autocracy to something more like an ideal further up the thread.

That doesn't mean it has broad support, which is what Gazebo said.

I tend to be conservative with change proposals, but Vox Populi has already changed the names of most of the policy trees. Some of them (Fealty, Industry, Imperialism) were tied to changes in function, but others (Progress, Authority, Artistry) seem more for the sake of flavor and consistency. And I think there is a consistency issue with Autocracy being a system of government while Freedom and Order are ideals.

Your definitions (Autocracy being a system of government while Freedom and Order are ideals) are, inevitably, subjective. What system of government is "Order"? Want to bet whatever you propose can't be argued against? Or that an "Autocrat" couldn't head such a government?

There is some inconsistency at every single level of the policy tree. That's not going to change.

 

[Gazebo]

There have been more calls for renaming Autocracy to something more like an ideal further up the thread.

I tend to be conservative with change proposals, but Vox Populi has already changed the names of most of the policy trees. Some of them (Fealty, Industry, Imperialism) were tied to changes in function, but others (Progress, Authority, Artistry) seem more for the sake of flavor and consistency. And I think there is a consistency issue with Autocracy being a system of government while Freedom and Order are ideals.

the names of branches were changed to reflect a change in purpose/focus. I can't say the same for Autocracy.

 

[Blue Ghost]

That doesn't mean it has broad support, which is what Gazebo said.

Fair. I was under the impression that people were generally in favor of the change, but if they're not, I won't try to push it.

Your definitions (Autocracy being a system of government while Freedom and Order are ideals) are, inevitably, subjective. What system of government is "Order"? Want to bet whatever you propose can't be argued against? Or that an "Autocrat" couldn't head such a government?

There is some inconsistency at every single level of the policy tree. That's not going to change.

You lost me there. I was pointing out that Order is NOT a system of government, and neither is Freedom, while Autocracy is, hence the inconsistency. I don't see how that's subjective.

I'm fine with things staying as they are, if people prefer it that way. Not a big deal.

 

[Blue Ghost]

the names of branches were changed to reflect a change in purpose/focus. I can't say the same for Autocracy.

Okay, that's fair. I don't really see how Artistry is different enough from Aesthetics to warrant a name change, but that could be just me.

 

[Magean]

3 people hardly equal 'broad.' This feels very much so like change for the sake of change.

G

Indeed it is, but aren't there some precedents of change being its own motivation regarding ideologies' names? ;p (in that they weren't necessarily changed just at the time of full policies overhaul)

EDIT: I don't want to seem demanding or annoying. At the end of the day it's completely unimportant. It's just that VP is so close to perfection that it'd be a shame not to go for some extra perfectionism...

 

[tu_79]

I'd use, in order of preference:
1. Liberty, Freedom
2. Equality, Socialism
3. Homeland, Might

 

[balparmak]

Renaming Autocracy into Fraternity would anything but extinguish the controversy though, considering what it entails... It's practically an oxymoron. Likewise, I think Order is fine as it is, renaming it into something directly referring to socialism/communism would attract even more controversy - as leftists stand for Equality but usually don't like what the Eastern bloc did in its name (which is what the tree is mostly built on), so we would see yet additional battling on ideologies' names.

I'm not 100% behind Fraternity, as you'd see in my post, but it is far from an "oxymoron". First fascist (fasci) movements emerged just like that, as solidarity groups and leagues, fraternity (strength through unity and all.) always remained an important concept in fascist discourse. It is not about humanistic fraternal love. Order is fine to a degree, but too restrictive.

I was having a hard time understanding the enthusiasm for Might, since others are essential concepts in political theory/philosophy, while Might is just a side note, then I realized from the posts above that Authority already exists as a policy branch in VP? Too bad. Anything is better than Autocracy though; Might, Glory, Supremacy, Strength even simply Power.

 

[Ziad]

I can see the appeal for changing the name. Autocracy is indeed a system of government.

I think Might is a good choice!

 

[civplayer33]

I don't understand why this gets dragged up again and again...it seems to me that there is an unstated issue underlying here that has to do with some of the disturbances going on in western society right now.

Authority is exercised by any government, a government without authority is no government because it can't govern.

Autocracy is a system of government in which the power is held by one person, which is true for fascist dictatorships; it is also true for some non-fascist dictatorships but neither the Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-State nor a Democracy has this property so I really don't understand why people think it doesn't fit (yes I have read all posts).

Order alludes to the top-down forced and deeply regulated organization of society (including a planned economy etc.) that is often seen in Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-States and thus fits them well enough I think.

Freedom alludes to the fact that a free society can only be democratic and the ideology reflects many hallmarks of such societies in its tenets. While it might be better to call it Liberty I do not mind, since despite some apparent views to the contrary on this board by certain people, which I frankly find absolutely disgusting, neither an Autocracy/Fascism nor a Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-State can result in a free society.

To any one keen on romanticizing marxist agenda (which is wildly popular today and is spreading like a virus through the west) I recommend reading "The Gulag Archipelago" by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn or read any of the many historical accounts which detail how people were not "killed or starved by accident" which was claimed by one poster in this thread but were in fact slaughtered en masse throughout the 20th century in both the Soviet Union and China with a brutality and inhumanity that easily rivals that of the Nazis (oh and lets not forget Cambodia and the Killing Fields...).

So please, let it go and stop pretending that fascism was the only evil history has seen and how we now must rename everything associated with it.

PS: I don't mean to accuse everyone here; the people I am talking about know who they are I imagine.
Edit "lets not forget" omitted the "not"

 

[MeowZedong]

Not responding to anything here dont have time. No point in having a political debate on a video game forum, eventually ill have time to sit down and figure out how to change the names in my own game and im happy with that, thanks for those who helped provide those instructions.

 

[civplayer33]

I just realized I may have overreacted a tad with that last post; I'm actually fine with changing to Fascism/Marxism/Liberty.

My anger was due to some earlier posts in this thread and now the fact that it kept getting bumped pushed me over the edge so I apologize...

 

[Ziad]

I just realized I may have overreacted a tad with that last post; I'm actually fine with changing to Fascism/Marxism/Liberty.

My anger was due to some earlier posts in this thread and now the fact that it kept getting bumped pushed me over the edge so I apologize...

You weren't wrong

 

[tu_79]

I don't understand why this gets dragged up again and again...it seems to me that there is an unstated issue underlying here that has to do with some of the disturbances going on in western society right now.

Authority is exercised by any government, a government without authority is no government because it can't govern.

Autocracy is a system of government in which the power is held by one person, which is true for fascist dictatorships; it is also true for some non-fascist dictatorships but neither the Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-State nor a Democracy has this property so I really don't understand why people think it doesn't fit (yes I have read all posts).

Order alludes to the top-down forced and deeply regulated organization of society (including a planned economy etc.) that is often seen in Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-States and thus fits them well enough I think.

Freedom alludes to the fact that a free society can only be democratic and the ideology reflects many hallmarks of such societies in its tenets. While it might be better to call it Liberty I do not mind, since despite some apparent views to the contrary on this board by certain people, which I frankly find absolutely disgusting, neither an Autocracy/Fascism nor a Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-State can result in a free society.

To any one keen on romanticizing marxist agenda (which is wildly popular today and is spreading like a virus through the west) I recommend reading "The Gulag Archipelago" by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn or read any of the many historical accounts which detail how people were not "killed or starved by accident" which was claimed by one poster in this thread but were in fact slaughtered en masse throughout the 20th century in both the Soviet Union and China with a brutality and inhumanity that easily rivals that of the Nazis (oh and lets forget Cambodia and the Killing Fields...).

So please, let it go and stop pretending that fascism was the only evil history has seen and how we now must rename everything associated with it.

PS: I don't mean to accuse everyone here; the people I am talking about know who they are I imagine.

I think the only thing where we agree is in that Autocracy is not an ideology.
Order alludes to the top-down forced... is that Marxist-Lenininst-One-Party-States? Really? Because I thought the same applied to absolute monarchies.
Do you really think that Mussolini or Franco were more autocrat than Stalin or Mao Ze? Party and everything. Fascism also had its party. And only one party was allowed (Partito Nationale Fascista, Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei, Falange Española).
I tried to read "Gulag archipielago", I really tried. There must be better books saying that Russia managed through slaving dissidents and letting them rot forever.

But you arise a question worth of asking. Why are we so cautious with fascism crimes, while not that much with communist dictatorships? And I'd add, why ignoring wild capitalism crimes? (see Dickens' Oliver Twist, a nicer reading). We tend to forget that current democracies are a mix of ideologies, with a bit of socialism, a bit of nationalism and a bit of free market.

Though I love to talk about politics and ideologies, the only thing that matters for the game is if it is necessary for ideology names to represent better what they are good for. Because after 10 games, I don't read Freedom, Order or Autocracy anymore. I know what they are meant, and I think about them in their real names. We've been playing for so long, and that was just the lesser itch of them all. I just find it sad that in the name of some political correctness, things are not called by their names (I'm pointing Firaxis, now that they don't listen). On the other hand, if we name Autocracy as Fascism, then we would be somehow limited on what this ideology tenets can do. We'll face opinions of people stating that lebensraum doesn't work as it's shown in the current mechanics. Might, or Power, is more open to interpretations.

 

[MeowZedong]

I am a Marxist Leninist. I'm also a historian. I disagree with you strongly on several extremely fundamental levels, and outside of several very very long discussions about history, dialectical materialism, and ideology in a better context; there is no way i am going to be able to properly defend against and refute every capitalist and imperialist response to Marxism. I've had this debate before many times, i will happily have it again, but not here. Any are welcome to PM me, and we can take this elsewhere. But i'm an extraordinarily busy person (civ is really the only game i play and i play only a couple hours a week), doing this would take a lot of i don't have.

 

[civplayer33]

Like I tried to explain with my second post in this thread I made the first out of anger over the fact that historical crimes of Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-States that are well documented were being downplayed to the degree that one could say they are being denied (to me it is the same as Holocaust denial) and that is not okay.
I agree with tu_79 in that Order is not specific enough for Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-States and that they certainly can develop autocratic elements along with Cults of Personality but I would argue that this was more pronounced at least in Nazi Germany; like I said, changing to Fascism/Marxism/Liberty is fine and even preferred by me.

I am a Marxist Leninist. I'm also a historian. I disagree with you strongly on several extremely fundamental levels, and outside of several very very long discussions about history, dialectical materialism, and ideology in a better context; there is no way i am going to be able to properly defend against and refute every capitalist and imperialist response to Marxism. I've had this debate before many times, i will happily have it again, but not here. Any are welcome to PM me, and we can take this elsewhere. But i'm an extraordinarily busy person (civ is really the only game i play and i play only a couple hours a week), doing this would take a lot of i don't have.

While I am deeply opposed to Marxism I agree that this is not the venue for a political discussion about the merits and faults of these systems; my gripe was, as I stated, with the statements that seemed to deny historical crimes by Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-States, which is absolutely intolerable to me.

 

[MeowZedong]

While I am deeply opposed to Marxism I agree that this is not the venue for a political discussion about the merits and faults of these systems; my gripe was, as I stated, with the statements that seemed to deny historical crimes by Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-States, which is absolutely intolerable to me.

well posting about that is a political discussion about the merits and faults of the system. I could very well debate about the double standard (Churchill's intentionally starving millions of Indians and blaming them compared to Mao's poor administration and oversight, torture and assassinations wrought by the CIA in Cuba and Latin America in comparison to Cuba's "lack of free speech"), being held here against Marxist-Leninist states (yes we know they had one party you dont have to say it every time, can debate the reasoning for that too, and also the amount of parties has nothing to do with democracy, Cuba is the most democratic country on the planet right now) . Request where your statistics on these "Historical Crimes" are coming from, and proof or their accuracy, and bring up much worse statistics of the pain and suffering wrought by imperialist countries like the US and much of Europe, on the 3rd world, and ACTUAL war crimes and suffering caused by dictators put in power and backed by US in Latin America, Africa, and Asia (also Pol Pot LITERALLY was not a communist, and no communist in the world would say he is, he was literally paid by the CIA to say he was a communist and we have plenty of proof of this). I could debate these things all day long, unfortunately in this context i cant and wont, so i am forced to sit down and shut the **** up about it. and would appreciate it if you did the same. Quit this double standard, just because your stance (capitalist, not whatever specific kind) is the status quo in the world doesnt mean you stating these things isnt a "political discussion". please. lets just talk about the game we all enjoy.

 

[civplayer33]

well posting about that is a political discussion about the merits and faults of the system. I could very well debate about the double standard (Churchill's intentionally starving millions of Indians and blaming them compared to Mao's poor administration and oversight, torture and assassinations wrought by the CIA in Cuba and Latin America in comparison to Cuba's "lack of free speech"), being held here against Marxist-Leninist states (yes we know they had one party you dont have to say it every time, can debate the reasoning for that too, and also the amount of parties has nothing to do with democracy, Cuba is the most democratic country on the planet right now) . Request where your statistics on these "Historical Crimes" are coming from, and proof or their accuracy, and bring up much worse statistics of the pain and suffering wrought by imperialist countries like the US and much of Europe, on the 3rd world, and ACTUAL war crimes and suffering caused by dictators put in power and backed by US in Latin America, Africa, and Asia (also Pol Pot LITERALLY was not a communist, and no communist in the world would say he is, he was literally paid by the CIA to say he was a communist and we have plenty of proof of this). I could debate these things all day long, unfortunately in this context i cant and wont, so i am forced to sit down and shut the **** up about it. and would appreciate it if you did the same. Quit this double standard, just because your stance (capitalist, not whatever specific kind) is the status quo in the world doesnt mean you stating these things isnt a "political discussion". please. lets just talk about the game we all enjoy.

Funny how you claim to not want to discuss anything while introducing more and more points to discuss and then going ahead and discussing them while I
a) posted a clarification that my first post was made in anger about another poster in this thread who isn't you (yet, at least)
b) was not trying to claim the superiority of any system
c) clarified that my gripe was specifically with the misrepresentation of the crimes of Marxist-Leninist-One-Party-States (that is what I want to call them and I find it both amusing and revealing that you don't like it)

It is also funny how you accuse me of applying double standards while manufacturing the argument in which this double standard is supposed to have occurred and plowing ahead with the discussion you accuse me of starting.

I am also not obligated to mention every single entity that ever committed a crime and comparatively laying them out when I talk about past atrocities; the fact that you reflexively feel the need to point the finger at others is troubling since in this context it hints at your propensity to justify genocidal acts.
I am well aware of the crimes committed by the US and European countries; I am not the one attempting to downplay or deny anything and as a gesture of good will I will leave it at that.

Edit added "that" in "leave it at that"

 

[vyyt]

See, and this is why Firaxis wisely chose vague names for the ideologies, so that everyone can role play and imagine whatever they want under the ideology names and whatever justifies their selection in order to win the game.

Being from Eastern Europe and interested in the history of 20th century, I might have a problem picking Marxism-Leninism (or Fascism), but I am fine picking Order (or Autocracy - as an enlightened dictator, I need to do some mind juggling when picking the lebensraum policy).

So yeah, edit the names yourselves to whatever you like, but I think they should stay as vague as they are in VP.

 

[Magean]

I'm not 100% behind Fraternity, as you'd see in my post, but it is far from an "oxymoron". First fascist (fasci) movements emerged just like that, as solidarity groups and leagues, fraternity (strength through unity and all.) always remained an important concept in fascist discourse. It is not about humanistic fraternal love. Order is fine to a degree, but too restrictive.

I see your point regarding the emphasis on brotherhood in fascist groups, but... still. Fraternity resounds too much with universalism, to which fascism is a polar opposite so... I'd be bothered by this choice. I feel it's like first forcing the motto of the French Revolution onto ideologies, and only then making a case of why it fits. Instead of the other way around.

I was having a hard time understanding the enthusiasm for Might, since others are essential concepts in political theory/philosophy, while Might is just a side note, then I realized from the posts above that Authority already exists as a policy branch in VP? Too bad. Anything is better than Autocracy though; Might, Glory, Supremacy, Strength even simply Power.

Yeah, I agree, Might is far from perfect, it's far from having as much depth as Freedom or Order in terms of political philosophy. Though, I guess one could appeal to (some interpretations of) Nietzsche (will to power and all that) to fit Might/Power/Dominance/Whatever to a tree that's fascism in all but name. I'm not saying that Nietzsche himself was a proto-nazi, though, but rather that nazis found ground in his thought.

But that may all be a little far fetched

 

[Dawnpromise]

If I had to pick I'd rather see Autocracy renamed to Dominance purely due to having a closer number of syllables in the name as apposed to Might. Dominance also just sounds better to me since I see the Autocracy tree being focused on the rule of force rather then the "One World, One Ruler" approach its name seems to apply.

I'll also agree that Autocracy is the odd ideology out by not having a Ideological name like Freedom and Order.

Don't have a big political history rant to back it up but I think "Freedom, Order, and Dominance" sounds better to me and suits the spirits of the Ideologies. Because when you get down to it aren't ALL the civs in the game technically Autocracies being led by immortal rulers who's word is law?