DGIT4-Maelstrom at Sea

[Blasphemous]

I'll see about reclaiming my turn this evening after dinner. I didn't move out of my chair much today (I don't ahve school on Fridays) so I'm kinda lethargic... Dinner usually solves that. If it does and I feel up to the job, I'll take it.

 

[SpikeIt]

I'll see about reclaiming my turn this evening after dinner. I didn't move out of my chair much today (I don't ahve school on Fridays) so I'm kinda lethargic... Dinner usually solves that. If it does and I feel up to the job, I'll take it.

If only I didn't have work on Fridays...

 

[Blasphemous]

But you don't work on Sundays and I do... Well, I don't work at all, but I have school and in my case that's close enough (don't ask.)

 

[Smellincoffee]

You have school on Sundays? You are a commie.

 

[Blasphemous]

You have school on Sundays? You are a commie.

Dude, I live in Israel. Home of the Kibbutz. The place where there is only one electric company and it used to belong to the government. This dump also happens to be officially a "democratic Jewish state" (a statement that I find contradictory) and that means school on Sundays. Till recently there was school on Friday as well (not in my school, but generally) but now they made a law that no highschool should be open on fridays.

 

[SpikeIt]

Dude, I live in Israel. Home of the Kibbutz. The place where there is only one electric company and it used to belong to the government. This dump also happens to be officially a "democratic Jewish state" (a statement that I find contradictory) and that means school on Sundays. Till recently there was school on Friday as well (not in my school, but generally) but now they made a law that no highschool should be open on fridays.

I didn't know the weekend was "shifted" in Israel. I guess it makes sense given the sabbath. I don't see the contradiction in "democratic Jewish state", but then again, I don't live there, and quite frankly I really don't know much about the political makeup of Israel. As for the electric company, we have lots and lots of companies here, but for any given location you have a choice of only one. Same for Cable TV. That's so called capitalistic "competition" for you. And they are both regulated by the state.

 

[Blasphemous]

Well, the contradiction that I see in a democratic Jewish state is that church should be seperated from state and it's not entirely democratic if your religion/ethnicity is a part of what defines you as a citizen.
About the electric company, I guess that's really not a good example, but the government used to own the phone company as well (among other things) and till recently the whole phone situation was a mess... Now there's competition for internet services and international calling services and that apparently made the situation much healthier.
When the state was created, there was alot of socialism involved and the Labor party ruled for ages. (I'm a radical left-winger in Israeli politics so I'm fine with that, even though I would be a bit more thrilled if my fellow citizens were predisposed to vote for the Labor party these days as well. Anyway, the deciding issue in elections here in the last few elections is nothing but the Israeli-Palestinian situation. The economical issue is non-existant for most voters. The economy ain't too existant at the moment either. =\)

 

[SpikeIt]

But isn't what mostly defines Israel as a nation is the religion of its people? I do believe in a separation of church and state, but I don't believe that's necessarily a Democratic quality. But obviously a mix of the two can lead to some conflicts of interests as can be seen in your country and in mine as well.

As for socialism, I think there is an aspect to that in most actual governments (as opposed to the "ideals" of those said governments). Social Security and welfare are both programs here in the US that are definitely of a socialist bent. And political issues here involving health care for all citizens is definitely a socialist issue.

As for your elections, I guess it doesn't really come to much of a surprise what the prime issue has been. And really, here in the US, despite issues such as the economy, stem cell research, and health care, the main issue will of course be the war in Iraq. People are always going to vote for and have the most passion for the issues that are the most publicized, whether they will have the most direct influence on their immediate futures or not.

Anyhow, shouldn't we be discussing the politics of a little known group of people called the Vikings and their "mid-east" situation?

 

[SolarKnight]

I Got it.

The turns will be up by sunday.

SK.

 

[Blasphemous]

1. But isn't what mostly defines Israel as a nation is the religion of its people? I do believe in a separation of church and state, but I don't believe that's necessarily a Democratic quality. But obviously a mix of the two can lead to some conflicts of interests as can be seen in your country and in mine as well.

2. As for socialism, I think there is an aspect to that in most actual governments (as opposed to the "ideals" of those said governments). Social Security and welfare are both programs here in the US that are definitely of a socialist bent. And political issues here involving health care for all citizens is definitely a socialist issue.

3. As for your elections, I guess it doesn't really come to much of a surprise what the prime issue has been. And really, here in the US, despite issues such as the economy, stem cell research, and health care, the main issue will of course be the war in Iraq. People are always going to vote for and have the most passion for the issues that are the most publicized, whether they will have the most direct influence on their immediate futures or not.

4. Anyhow, shouldn't we be discussing the politics of a little known group of people called the Vikings and their "mid-east" situation?

1. Well, yes, that is a defining factor, but the problem is that it legtimizes all kinds of screwed up confusions of syagogue and state. For instance, the only way to get legally married in Israel is through the Rabbinate. And the only way to divorce a Rabbinate marriage is to go through the Rabbinate again. And they live by the laws of the Torah and Halacha. That means there are women who are bound by law to a man who lives with a different woman, because the man is the one sho gets to decide about a divorce according to Judaism. Another example is the fact that there's a fine for opening businesses on Saturdays in some cities (I don't know about relatively secular cities such as Tel Aviv, but Jerusalem is definately dominated by the religious sector.) I understand the need of the country to be a sanctuary to the Jewish people, but they doesn't mean it needs to be a religiously Jewish state. Apparently many agree with me - in the last elections the "Shinui" ("Change") party that opposes religious coersion (best way I could translate the Hebrew term, not sure coercion is exactly the right word) got a sizeable chunk of the Knesset.
2. Yes, I know. It's just that in the founding of this country it had a part in forming the systems and that is still reflected today.
3. Well, it's not about publicity here really. Terrorism here is very active as I'm sure you know, and while the world only knows this via TV, we know it every time we enter a mall having to go through a metal detector and empty our pockets (and in many cases have our abdomenal region scanned with a handheld metal detectors to check for bomb-belts.) Security guards are everywhere, as well as army and police forces.
4. Hey, it keeps the thread alive between turns, if we had anything on topic to say, we probably would. =P

 

[SpikeIt]

That's the funny thing about religion. Religion has a very strong influence on people that often puts them in a position to have conflicting beliefs with what might make the most sense from a governing standpoint. Its apparent to me that there is a very stong mix of government and religion in Israel from your statements. Probably stronger than anywhere else except for maybe other parts of the mid-east. The thing is, even where religion is supposedly not so much a part of the government (hmmm, like here in the US), religion is extremely influential, despite efforts to keep them separate. I don't think I could imagine a politician becoming a president in this country if they were not Christian. It just wouldn't fly at least not today. And issues such as stem cell research or capital punishment are very much influenced by religious groups.

Not too long ago, the press highlighted a number of instances where the church was denying communion to several politicians because some of their stances on issues were opposite of those of the church. Definitely some not so subtle coersian there. Similar messages were relayed by church clergy at mass about keeping religions beliefs core to your everyday beliefs.

I guess my point to all this is that even if the church and state are kept separate, religion is such a motivating factor in the beliefs of many, many people, that it ends up influencing state doctrine regardless.

I do have to ask though, as I'm not well versed in the inner working of the Judaic church. The Rabbinate - is that the name for the governing body of the Judaic religion (ie, similar to the Vatican to the Roman Catholic Church), or to a government organization in your country? I'm guessing, in a way its both. Actually, now that I think about it, Israel is likely similar to the Vatican in that way, excepting that no one really lives in the Vatican besides members of the church.

Your divorce example is interesting because it really speaks of a need for change - to the religious rules (being the same as the state rules doesn't really make much difference). And change in religion doesn't happen very quickly. If say, the state allowed divorce in this circumstance, but the Judaic law did not, sure the woman could get her divorce and justly so, but she would not likely be able to fully celebrate and follow her religion as a full member. So there would be a distinct consequence to following state doctrine as opposed to religious bylaws. Now, if she was not religious in the first place, this may not matter. I guess the difference comes down to choice. With both state and religious doctrine one and the same, choice is limited to the laws of the religious body, but with separate laws for both, state law covers those who are not religious AND those who are, but choose to work outside of their church and deal with the consequences entailed.

As far as terrorism and Israel, you are correct. I can hardly imagine the day to day rituals you all have to deal with as far as prevention is concerned. But that is why its so influential in your politics as it is the focus of all public attention. It would be hard to ignore. I didn't mean to suggest that dealing with terrorism is less important than any other pressing issues in Israel.

I've actually enjoyed this discussion a lot, but we probably should refrain from continuing much more before a moderator steps in because we are wildly off topic here. Thanks for the exchange. Now back to the "where is so and so" postings...

 

[Blasphemous]

That's the funny thing about religion. Religion has a very strong influence on people that often puts them in a position to have conflicting beliefs with what might make the most sense from a governing standpoint. Its apparent to me that there is a very stong mix of government and religion in Israel from your statements. Probably stronger than anywhere else except for maybe other parts of the mid-east. The thing is, even where religion is supposedly not so much a part of the government (hmmm, like here in the US), religion is extremely influential, despite efforts to keep them separate. I don't think I could imagine a politician becoming a president in this country if they were not Christian. It just wouldn't fly at least not today. And issues such as stem cell research or capital punishment are very much influenced by religious groups.
Not too long ago, the press highlighted a number of instances where the church was denying communion to several politicians because some of their stances on issues were opposite of those of the church. Definitely some not so subtle coersian there. Similar messages were relayed by church clergy at mass about keeping religions beliefs core to your everyday beliefs.

The thing is that the *really* progressive places - albeit Europe - are now mostly very secular. I share the sentiment of Europeans that it's disgusting that the presidential candidates in the US talk about their religion. I don't care what they believe, and nobody else should. I may be a rabid atheist, but I have nothing against faith. I only have problems when its institutionalized. Faith should be a personal issue, not a public one.

I do have to ask though, as I'm not well versed in the inner working of the Judaic church. The Rabbinate - is that the name for the governing body of the Judaic religion (ie, similar to the Vatican to the Roman Catholic Church), or to a government organization in your country? I'm guessing, in a way its both. Actually, now that I think about it, Israel is likely similar to the Vatican in that way, excepting that no one really lives in the Vatican besides members of the church.

Well, it's interesting... There isn't really a Jewish church. There are the leaders of different sects of the religion, but there's no definitive authority on Judaism. The Rabbinate afaik is a government institution that's in charge of religious issues. At some point the office of internal affairs must have put divorce and marriage in that category.
There is the Central Rabbinate of Israel but there are also rabbinates in all kinds of cities around the world because I know they brand commercial food products kosher and it always says who branded it. Some religious people will only take it from certain rabbinates or only if it's branded by a certain rabbi to a certain standard (there are many different levels of kosherness, none of which have much to do with the original commandments from the Torah.) The thing is all these rabbinates make a killing off of this... They get payed for the "heksher" (the branding of kosherness) and then even a citizen like me who wouldn't give a rats ass if my butter had pig fat in it has to pay because the heksher raises the price of the product. According to a Shinui political ad from two elections ago, dog food and toilet paper also go through heksher and also cost more because of it.

Your divorce example is interesting because it really speaks of a need for change - to the religious rules (being the same as the state rules doesn't really make much difference). And change in religion doesn't happen very quickly. If say, the state allowed divorce in this circumstance, but the Judaic law did not, sure the woman could get her divorce and justly so, but she would not likely be able to fully celebrate and follow her religion as a full member. So there would be a distinct consequence to following state doctrine as opposed to religious bylaws. Now, if she was not religious in the first place, this may not matter. I guess the difference comes down to choice. With both state and religious doctrine one and the same, choice is limited to the laws of the religious body, but with separate laws for both, state law covers those who are not religious AND those who are, but choose to work outside of their church and deal with the consequences entailed.

Well, I saw a documentary about women fighting for their divorce and some of them were of course religious, but I recall at least one of them getting so pissed off that she was just yelling and bawling at the rabbinate and saying that she's sick of "this f**king religion". The whole building heard her yelling and the rabbis just decided to give her what she wanted. (Apparently they can do this if they want to, but they usually don't.)
But more importantly to me, a secular person should never need to abide by religious law. And secular people in Israel definately do have to abide to the Jewish law. Lately many many young couples go over to Cyprus to get married simply to escape the Rabbinate. Hopefully that will one day end with laws for civil union, or even better, an actual constituion for Israel (we don't have one because it would make it hard for the religious people to Coerce the rest of us, and it would also be hard to oppress Palestinians if we had a legal document entailing human rights.)

I've actually enjoyed this discussion a lot, but we probably should refrain from continuing much more before a moderator steps in because we are wildly off topic here. Thanks for the exchange. Now back to the "where is so and so" postings...

We'll stop when the new turnlog is up. Once that's up we will have somehting on-topic to discuss.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Hey, invite CurtSibling and a couple of others and we'll have a thread that could be in Off-Topic. Of course, the main difference is that you two are sending long, thought-out replies that comply with the rules of English usage, whereas in OT...well. Just go down there and look around.



Edit: 2K posts. Marvy.

 

[-0blivion-]

Well, you two have been busy bees.
Gratz SC, looking forward to your turnlog SK

 

[SpikeIt]

Hey, invite CurtSibling and a couple of others and we'll have a thread that could be in Off-Topic. Of course, the main difference is that you two are sending long, thought-out replies that comply with the rules of English usage, whereas in OT...well. Just go down there and look around.



Edit: 2K posts. Marvy.

Wow! That is a scary place over in OT land. Talk about asking for flame wars...

Yeah, we're a little OT, but since we haven't had much else to fill the thread with, I might as well get a bit of an education in Isreali political structure. Its rather interesting, to myself at least.

Congrats on the 2K. Looks like Oblivion is hitting the 1K milestone soon as well.

 

[SpikeIt]

The thing is that the *really* progressive places - albeit Europe - are now mostly very secular. I share the sentiment of Europeans that it's disgusting that the presidential candidates in the US talk about their religion. I don't care what they believe, and nobody else should. I may be a rabid atheist, but I have nothing against faith. I only have problems when its institutionalized. Faith should be a personal issue, not a public one.

Well that's just it. You don't care. I really don't care either. But such a large portion of the American population does care, that its important to at least seem to be religious to cater to a large constituency. Its all about getting votes. Faith is a personal issue, true, but many people would like their leaders to be similar in moral makeup to themselves, hence the public appearance at mass, etc, etc.

Well, it's interesting... There isn't really a Jewish church. There are the leaders of different sects of the religion, but there's no definitive authority on Judaism. The Rabbinate afaik is a government institution that's in charge of religious issues. At some point the office of internal affairs must have put divorce and marriage in that category.
There is the Central Rabbinate of Israel but there are also rabbinates in all kinds of cities around the world because I know they brand commercial food products kosher and it always says who branded it. Some religious people will only take it from certain rabbinates or only if it's branded by a certain rabbi to a certain standard (there are many different levels of kosherness, none of which have much to do with the original commandments from the Torah.) The thing is all these rabbinates make a killing off of this... They get payed for the "heksher" (the branding of kosherness) and then even a citizen like me who wouldn't give a rats ass if my butter had pig fat in it has to pay because the heksher raises the price of the product. According to a Shinui political ad from two elections ago, dog food and toilet paper also go through heksher and also cost more because of it.

Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation of the rabbinate. Basically, each sect of the Jewish religion is led by a rabbinate. But in Israel, the laws of the state are also presided over by the rabbinate as well.

As far as "kosherness" goes, I always found it interesting that items were labeled a particular type of kosher. I didn't really know why. I can see how that sort of branding can be used for gain. Its funny you point out toilet paper. I was reading the latest issue of Wired and there an article about the "Kosher Geek." Apparently this guy works with appliance manufacturers to make appliances kosher. This apparently is especially of concern to Orthodox Jews with the strict rules about lights, etc on the sabbath. It seems todays modern ovens with auto shutoffs for safey make it difficult for Orthodox Jews to heat food, because once the sabbath starts, they cannot start the oven. But if it was left on before sundown on Friday and throughout Saturday, it would be okay to use the oven. With an auto shutoff of the oven, this practice become a bit more difficult. There's obviously a lot more to it than just this example. Interesting article but definitely categorized in the "who would have thunk it" bucket.

Heck before this discussion and that article, apart from the usual stock of food I see now and then in the grocery stores around the Jewish holidays, the only other Kosher item that amused me is the Kosher Japanese Restaurant in my hometown. Somehow kosher and Japanese don't seem to go together. Would there be a rabbi behind the sushi counter?

 

[Blasphemous]

No no, rabbinates do not lead sects, rabbinates are institutions in charge of kosherness and other religious issues in an official manner. Actually I'm not sure. Dictionary.com claims it's any selection of rabbis considered to be a group. But there definately is no institution that operates in the same way as the Catholic church (only for Judaism).
About the different levels of kosherness, it's not a subject I really care for (I like to eat unkosher out of spite, and the small details are not important for that. I definately don't try to keep kosher according to any stanadard.) but I do know that it's basically different interpretations of the same rules. I can't give any example directly of the kosherness branding, but I know for example that in the Passover holiday, Jews do not eat any bread that has yeast in it. Some sects don't eat grain or rice either, probably because they decided the best way to make sure they don't eat the wrong bread is to make sure they can't eat anything of the sort. Now, the traiditonal substitution for bread is the horrible thin, hard, dry "matza" (or matzo or however you wanna decide it's pronounced. It's ma-tzah in Hebrew and that's that.) (Ugly stupid tasteless matzas.) I have some ultra-orthodox relatives, and apparently, when they eat their soup during passover, they keep little brooms at the table (or rather paintbrushes used as brooms) and these are used to remove little matza crums to make sure they don't go into the soup. This is because the soup will puff the matza up and that's apparently just as bad as yeast. So it's considered unkosher if the matza hits the soup. In my family we purpously drop matza into the soup cause it's mroe edible that way. Go figure. Given time, Jews will always find a way to make themselves more miserable. =P

 

[SolarKnight]

Playing now

I can feel the Demigod pressure already.

Pre - Turn thoughts:

Two enemies at Demigod level, ouch! Well lets see if I can make lightning strike in the same place twice
and put us back on the path of survival.

Technology Situation:

Parity with England, Arabia and Mongols,
Up Monarchy on China,
Up Writing, Currency and Monarchy on the Ottomans,
Down Republic and Feudalism on Russia,
Down Monotheism and Feudalism on Spain.

Diplomatic Situation:

Frankly, I don't like it. The mongols want 220 gold for peace and I am going to take it,
I don't want to be fighting two enemies at once, not at this level anyway.

This makes the current situation:

Peace with all but Arabia.

Embassies with all but England.

Arabia will offer peace for two cities, but one is a jungle cesspool and the other I don't even think we can see yet, so I think we can manage for now, at least until we take Baghdad.

Military Situation:

We only have one enemy now, so lets see what we can do about surviving his attacks.

move two swords into stockholm for defence.

I look at our forces, and see that we have 8 swords, 2 archers and a catapult, looks like more catapults will have to be put on the shopping list.

Plan:

Survive!! Just Survive. (And have fun doing it )

Turn 1 70 AD:

Well the spears evacuate, and a sword moves up close to our territory, so I fortify some units, and relocate others to enhance our defence.

Turn 2 90 AD:

The sword attacks and dies, yellowing one of our swords, another appears from the north.

Bergen riots, damn.

Rey: Spear -> Sword.

lux increased.

The two pesky spears and sword are dead.

we are now connected by road to the chinese.

Ottomans down to 3 cities.

Turn 3 110 AD:

4 swords appear, nice

Trondheim: Sword -> Sword.
Copenhagen: Sword -> Sword.

kill 2 swords.


Turn 4 130 AD:

Ottos and Russia sign peace.

Oslo: Barracks -> Sword.

Sword dies attacking one of ours.

Bombard and kill another sword.

Turn 5 150 AD:

Holy crap, they have MDIs, one just killed an elite sword, this looks bad.

Birka: Walls -> Barracks.

Rey: Sword -> Sword.

Bombard and kill the MDI, kill some more swords, maybe this won't be so bad.

Turn 6 170 AD:

Trondheim: Sword -> Sword.

Kill more swords, losing one, we are getting more elite units as time passes,
so hopefully we will get a leader soon.

Turn 7 190 AD:

Spearmen guarding workers is killed, good thing i put a sword with him.

Bergen: Sword -> Sword.

We are getting more and more swords towards the hostilities,
so sooner or later we should be in a position to go on the offensive (If the damn mdis's didnt keep killing the elite ones ).

Turn 8 210 AD:

Copenhagen + Rey: Sword -> Sword.

Mongols start Sun Tzu's.

We need to get feudalism, our swords can handle the mdis, we just need a little more oomph to turn the fight around.


We can get peace for three cities, but I want to get us into a better position.

Turn 9 230 AD:

Trondheim: Sword -> Sword.

England start Sun Tzu's.

Kill another MDI.

Turn 10 AD:

Arabs start Sun Tzu, Nooooooooooooo.

Move 3 swords towards Baghdad. they can be retreated if necessary.

Summary:

Wow, that was a tough set of turns, but we are holding, I was considering bringing china in, but thought that would lead to us losing the chance to make a serious dent on the arabs, we are getting stronger, we just need feudalism now, but it's too expensive atm.

Good luck next player.

SK.

 

[SpikeIt]

Given time, Jews will always find a way to make themselves more miserable. =P

Now come now. Little brooms to sweep away crumbs? I can't see how that would make anyone's life more miserable!

I've had matzo numerous times myself. The food stores practically give the stuff away around Passover. In fact the co-worker in the cube across from me spreads peanut butter on them and seems to like them that way. I guess it must be pretty good peanut butter. Matzo ball soup is pretty good, but you're right, the bread/cracker/whatever itself is amazingly bland.

Ooh, looky. It seems we have a turn log... Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

 

[SpikeIt]

Nice job SK. Looked like a harrowing bit of play there. The Arabs have MDI's now? Ouch. But you seemed to hold them off okay. Feudalism is going to be incredibly expensive no matter how you dice it. We just need to keep the research flowing. If we can actually wipe out Baghdad, maybe we can settle for a city or two (if they make sense) and a deal on Feudalism... That might speed things up.

I'm surprised you settled with the Mongols right off. Did they actually have troops on our landmass? I doubt we would have had much to fear from the Mongol navy. But it did open up better peace deals with the Arabs, so it works out okay. We just might have been able to settle for less after a bit of time. Still ironic they settled rather cheaply anyhow. Sound like they would be great allies in the future.