Dominance and Culture

vulture

Chieftain
Joined
Jan 10, 2002
Messages
65
Most people are confusing dominance with militarism. If you look at each culture you will see that there was a time they were the dominate culture of their world. At that time they had a huge military second to no one in the world.

If you want to pick two attributes to describe a culture do not point at what civ had the bigger army... look at what they did with that army. If a nation used its army to conquer its neighbors then you have a good argument for militant.

Today the US is the dominant culture in the world and just as in Civ everyone hates us for it. We have the largest military because we have the most to protect. The US uses it's military to promote commerce abroad much as the British did in the 19th century if a bit less blatant.

US Commercial & Industrious
Britain Commercial & expansionist

Germany and France have both had long military traditions France's colonial period seemed to have more to do with it's powerful rival of the time Britain. Napoleon used his military force to try and impose a trade system that would counter his major rival England economically. No one can doubt Frances domination of luxury goods over the last 300 years and anyone that takes such national pride in food wine and art has to be strongly commercial.

France Militaristic & Commercial
Germany Militaristic & Scientific

em/ puts on the flame retardant
 
yeah but today the us may be industrial and commercial but traditionaly, especially in the first 100 years or so of us history it had a very imperialistic view on things contastantly trying to expand its own land and power (e.g. the hawaians and other pacific islands etc...) sometimes helped by the mexicans starting sh!t they couldn't finish as is probably the phrase used in schools today ;)


the also had to spread out the skills, 1 of each combination. so ifyou want to argue that the french were more militaristic than industrious (which i'm not sure is actually true but i'm not that well read in french history - remember boney was only a very small part of their lineage and besides, he is corsican) then you also have to make the current mil/com industrious instead. this would involve changing the Romans and i'm sure you'll agree that the romans werew more hell bent on dominaton through military forces than the french.
(heh, france i.e. gaul, even got their asses whooped by the romans. except of course in the small gaulish village lead by asterix).
 
The reason when you are work with militarism is not an excuse is still remains militarism no matter some they want to baptised with other words. When you work militaristic you worked for your self all the other are not anythink else than "excuses" the other countries are accepted with the same result. From the result we take the conclusions.
 
The reason when you are work with militarism is not an excuse is still remains militarism no matter some they want to baptised with other words. When you work militaristic you worked for your self all the other are not anythink else than "excuses" the other countries are accepted with the same result. From the result we take the conclusions.

Run that through one more time in English please. I agree that some of the characteristics in the game could've been different but they just go to show you that the point of Civ3 is to rewrite history, not follow it. Therefore, whos to say that when YOU rewrite history, that America will still be Militaristic, in lots of civ games I've seen America die. It just goes to show you that civIII is not actual history. Thats just my 2 cents:)
 
Back
Top Bottom