facisam or no facisam in c3c??
- Thread starter Vietcong
- Start date
Blunt_Axe
Chieftain
u might have to wait for the game to come out to find out about that.... unless you can blackmail or extort one of the beta testers? 
Refering to me, perhaps?
Yes, you're right, fascism is "special" from the rest of despotisms (is that a word? 
). But it's still a type of despotism, since despotism simply means rule by an absolute ruler, which obviously describes fascism. And how exactly is it stronger?Like I've said before, I doubt they'll include it, because I imagine there'd be more people upset with it being included than with it being left out. And the current problem is that you can only go so far with adding new govs; it's not like there's a whole lot of factors you can implement. If new differences were implemented, fascism (along with some other new govs) would make an interesting and worthy addition to the game.
Sturmgewehr
Warlord
I personally think that "choosing" one government from a list is stupid. I much prefer the SMAC method of running your country. The Civ 3 method means that every nation living under a certain government system will have the same restrictions and bonuses as every other country under the same government. When in real life, our democracies each have different policies towards such things as industry, drugs, labour, etc. As for Fascism, it was not the government itself that distinguished itself from Despotism. it was the intense nationalism. As well, Hitler's racial policies made Fascism famous. Looking back to WillJ's post on the "islamic Sultanate" I don't think it would be a problem, unless your country is NOT Islamic. There should be a religous tolerance system, like in Europa Universalis, seeing as religion has played such a large role in the history of man. Oh and one other thing, why do the American citizens appear to be NATIVE AMERICAN? Do you (Firaxis) mean to tell me that the Native Americans came across from Europe to take over and kill other Native Americans?
Naaaa, the "Islamic" part isn't racist. It's just a matter of fact. Using your example, there is a difference between Germanic Fascism and Italian Fascism. They upheld different values, and if you're looking to give people a clear idea of what kind of government you're describing, you have to be that specific. As far as an Islamic sultanate goes I would assume it would be modeled after a combination of the former Ottoman Empire and perhaps the Persian/modern Iranian government systems. I don't think it's racist or prejudice to use those types of government. It's just that, a type of government, not a classification of a people.
Anyway, the Native American Americans thing has always bugged me. I think that they need to have European civilians with a default of Greco-Roman palatial architecture. But that's just my opinion
.
Anyway, the Native American Americans thing has always bugged me. I think that they need to have European civilians with a default of Greco-Roman palatial architecture. But that's just my opinion
.Er, if your country isn't Islamic, you wouldn't have a Sultanate. It's like saying to not say "Christian Pope" so that a Hindu civ could have a Pope too. Unless by "your country is NOT Islamic" you mean in historical terms, in which case, that's irrelevant. The Romans were never communist, but they can be in the game (as it should be) (just an example).
Maybe they should have called it "theocracy" instead of Islamic Sultanate, so it covers all religions (that's what I'd have done). But AFAIK there's no difference in saying Sultanate and Islamic Sultanate.
Sturmgewehr
Warlord
That is more or less the point I was trying to prove
Slightly off topic (only slightly) is it true that the Russians chose against Islam in the past because it did not allow drinking?
Say what? I was arguing against you!Originally posted by Sturmgewehr
That is more or less the point I was trying to prove
You're saying that if a "popedom" (don't know the technical term) is included, you wouldn't want it to be called Christian, so as not to discriminate against other religions? What the heck? Or am I mistaken about you thinking that it should be called Sultanate instead of Islamic Sultanate, and rather you think it should be called something else (which I agree with)?What I'm thinkng is that if you're, say, the Germans, and you switch to Islamic Sultanate, it's simulating that you convert to Islam and make yourself Sultan (which isn't as far-fetched as it seems, at least not if you're already a despot or monarch, although it'd probably go against all the other Muslims). But that brings me to my second paragraph: It'd probably be better if it were called theocracy.
But maybe we shouldn't argue about this until the game is released and we see how it's implemented. Maybe it's just for a scenario/conquest or something.
Sturmgewehr
Warlord
I think by now you can understand that I am not very good at prolonged arguments 
err conversations, whatever. Anyways, as long as you can run the Vikings or Native Americans under a Pagan religion I am happy. Perhaps for a "holy war" scenario you could make one religion hate any other country with a certain other religion? JIHAD.
err conversations, whatever. Anyways, as long as you can run the Vikings or Native Americans under a Pagan religion I am happy. Perhaps for a "holy war" scenario you could make one religion hate any other country with a certain other religion? JIHAD."Slightly off topic (only slightly) is it true that the Russians chose against Islam in the past because it did not allow drinking?"
yes, ivan had a chocse of islam and christanity, ivan liked islam becuss he chold have as many wifes as he whanted, but he allso liked to drink. and thats not alowed in the islamic riligon, so he chose cristanity so he chold drink..
edit: allso i have seen some ppl use the word jihad(spelling)
it dose NOT mean holy war!!!!!!
jihad means confilict aginst evil(or any other force, filling or oposeing ideas ect.) with in ones iner self..
yes, ivan had a chocse of islam and christanity, ivan liked islam becuss he chold have as many wifes as he whanted, but he allso liked to drink. and thats not alowed in the islamic riligon, so he chose cristanity so he chold drink..
edit: allso i have seen some ppl use the word jihad(spelling)
it dose NOT mean holy war!!!!!!
jihad means confilict aginst evil(or any other force, filling or oposeing ideas ect.) with in ones iner self..
Sturmgewehr
Warlord
That is amazing IMO.
According to dictionary.com and the Oxford English Dictionary, it does. Basically, it simply means a struggle against something unwanted (even though this isn't what dictionaries seem to say), which includes holy war. Therefore, calling a Muslim holy war "jihad" is correct. Calling "jihad" "a Muslim holy war" is incorrect, since it can mean other things.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Straight on Will J. We tend to associate "Jihad" with holy war because the only Jihad we westerners hear about are those proclaimed by fanatics against "unholy" stuff, but the quest for personal improvement is also a form of jihad, as are many, many, many other things.
trumpeteer
Player of Trumpet
That is not true. A jihad was never meant as a way of purging the world of "infidel," and until the modern age, it only was a means of ridding one's world of evil. The Western understanding (or lack of) of jihad is the bin-Laden-style "Holy War" that the media talks about.
What I find ironic is that though a jihad is considered "evil" in the West, the word "Crusade" is talked about as bringing "good" to the world.
Unfortunately, in today's world, there are a few nuts who ruin Islam's reputation all over the world.
