Does Stalin really belong in the game?

[Wodan]

AS, I don't disagree with most of what you say, but the following two sentences seem to me to contradict each other:

One can see why Firaxis chose not to include Hitler due to the consequences of 1). not having access to the German market and 2). the fallout from some in the Jewish community.

Stalin is only included because there is less of a negative opinion (no outcry) here in Western world.

Which is it?

 

[Billy Bob Joe]

And if people justify Stalin's inclusion is because he was important to Russian civ/world history, I think Hitler was equally so even though his rule was short, because Hitler/Germans was so close to winning WWII it wasn't funny.

Let's use a very basic soccer analogy. Without bringing in any of the crimes against humanity both leaders committed. Stalin is a soccer player that brought his team out of the dumps and made them one of the best soccer teams for many decades. Hitler is a soccer player that brought his team out of the dumps for a few years then started giving the ball away to the other team and kicking own goals.

Now, if we ignore the horrible things both leaders did, Hitler doesn't seem like that great of a soccer player, while Stalin does. This can be roughly equated to their standings on the world stage.

Obviously, the atrocities committed change things, but you can't say that Hitler's achievements for Germany are worthy of notice when all he basically managed to do was create an economy entirely based on production of war materials, then lose a war that could have been won if only he hadn't had a power trip and took control of the military from his incredibly intelligent generals and given it to himself.

 

[Wodan]

all he basically managed to do was create an economy entirely based on production of war materials

That's not an accurate statement. Even a cursory skim of Wikipedia will show.

 

[Ramesses]

If you really don't want to see Stalin in the game, just mod him out, then deny any and all rumors that he ever existed in the first place.

 

[Saim]

I don't know about that. Civilization is a great game, with great leaders. Does this masterpiece of a game, that has rulers such as Abraham Lincoln, Alexander the Great, George Washington, and Winston Churchill really need to be alongside those evil rulers? Hitler and Stalin are not even in the same category as the ones I just mentioned. They don't deserve to be in a game with such great leaders.

Alexander the Great was not an evil ruler? Have you heard of what he did to Greek rebellions?

Hitler shouldn't be in the game. My point is, Stalin shouldn't ethier. And by the way, Stalin killed Jews too. So why is it ok for Stalin to do so, but not Hitler? This anti-semitism should not be tolerated, and in my opinion nethier one of them deserves to be in the game.

*facedesk*

The founder of Stalin's political ideology was a Jew!

He killed Jews, but not due to any anti-Jewish sentiment, at least not as far as I know.

Plus every character has their faults except maybe Gandhi.

Even Gandhi had issues, he would sleep next to nude young women to prove his chastity, in South Africa when he campaigned for ethnic Indian rights he said some pretty nasty things about native Africans, and there's still more.

Like I said before, I give up. All you people leave me alone!

If you have an issue with it, don't respond! It's not like we're tying you down to a chair and forcing you to read our posts!

you seem to contradict yourself. You keep coming back as well.

*more facedesk*

He wasn't the one who had an issue with this thread...

When you manage to make someone as great as Lincoln look like a "bad guy" you know your manipulating the facts.

Perhaps you should actually refute his arguments rather than replace them with blind patriotism (it's a bit redundant to say "blind" patriotism, I know)?

As for Washington? Don't kid yourself. He was the best president America ever had.

Genghis Khan was the best conqueror the Mongols ever had.

His slaves where set free after he died.

And that makes it right?

Also, he said two things that where exactly right. First, he said something like "don't get involved with alliances and such with other countries, it will be bad for us" and he also said "don't have poltical parties. They will divide the nation". He was right about both things. Our alliances got us in both world wars. The after-effects of the world wars was the creation of Isreal. Our alliance with Isreal is what made 9/ll happen. Also, the political parties have divided our nation so much. Its sad really.

He was also a terrorist separatist
I doubt you would be as happy with a Puerto Rican or Hawaiian Revolutionary War...

Anyway, like I said before I give up. You win. Leave me alone.

Are you insane?

Lincoln: I think reuniting the nation is a pretty good reason to go war. Even if he didn't originally set out to free the slaves, he did free them!

Even if the nation doesn't want to be reunited? If the South wants independence, why shouldn't they get it?

This is directly analogous to conflicts like Kosovo, Kashmir, Palestine, etc.

 

[vogtmurr]

Alexander the Great was not an evil ruler? Have you heard of what he did to Greek rebellions?

QUOTE]

There are such incidents in the career of Alexander that tarnish his reputation, but making an example of a city in armed insurrection at his rear, is quite a bit different than a systematic regime of terror in the 20th century. For his time and place, Alexander would have made a pretty enlightened ruler.

Yes by present standards of morality, none of these leaders can justify all their actions. But even Gandhi, for his personal opinions ? Consider their goals and personal achievements. I mention this because the same issue of morality came up in the discussion of History's 10 greatest military leaders.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=304983&goto=newpost

I do agree it is an inseparable part of rating these historical figures, that unnecessary cruelty in the achievement of their objectives should count against them.

 

[Anexus]

I think it was a mistake to add Stalin, but many leaders are controversial. I'm sure a lot of Chinese Americans would be uncomfortable playing as Mao.

Stalin was a very bad person, but Hitler is far more notorious because of how history is written. And he started World War II, it wasn't Stalin.

 

[Dave_Oz]

Yes Stalin belongs in this game

Just like Hitler, Nuclear weapons, Terrorism, sacking cities and pollution belong in this game


Yes they are some of the less proud moments of our history, but its still OUR history, and its very relevant to this game.

If you go down the path of excluding Hitler, Stalin, Terrorism, then where will it end?

If some people had there way, Civilization 5, you'll only be able to farm land. Then we will have people complaining about how mass farming hurts the environment and Civilization 6 will just be one guy sitting in a cave bored.

 

[Supr49er]

Welcome to the Forums Dave_Oz.