Hebrews/Israel As New Civ?

[MooFreaky]

On top of that, the "Palestinians" have achieved near nothing of importance in the modern world, while Israel, with just a few million inhabitants, has more nobel prize winners than countries like China or Spain. And then I'm not talking about Jewish nobel prize winners, I'm talking about Israeli nobel prize winners. If you start comparing on religion, you're looking at 12 Muslim nobel prize winners compared to 197 Jewish nobel prize winners, despite islam having approximately one hundred times as many followers.

That is a bit misleading. The Nobel Prize is highly bias toward the West. It is a very prestigious award and it isn't necessarily deliberately bias, but the West's ignorance of the achievements and "great people" of the Middle and Far East is hardly news.

 

[Leyrann]

That is a bit misleading. The Nobel Prize is highly bias toward the West. It is a very prestigious award and it isn't necessarily deliberately bias, but the West's ignorance of the achievements and "great people" of the Middle and Far East is hardly news.

I would still argue that 2000 times as many nobel prize winners per capita (if you compare on religion) is quite significant. I would also like to mention that 7 of the 12 muslim nobel prize winners won the nobel prize for peace, which is the most controversial nobel prize. EDIT: I don't know what they won it for, though, don't take this as me implying that they're not worth winning it, I don't know that.

 

[pgm123]

It would be less controversial to call Ancient Israel "The Hebrews."

I don't know. That's a bit of a stretch, though not the first time they went with a language. The least controversial would be to go with the southern kingdom of Judah. Slightly more controversial is the northern kingdom of Israel with the Omrids. The post-Hellenistic Kingdom of Judah would be a bit controversial, but mostly innocuous. The Unified Kingdom of Israel is the most Civ, but the most controversial. I think they'll keep it as a city state, though.

Pretty sure Muslim countries will ban the game (or at least cause an uproar among such countries) should Firaxis add an Israel civ to the game which wouldn't be good for business.

The only possible way for an Israel civ to be in the game is if the devs make a Palestinian one as well and release them side by side.

I would suspect the countries that are at war with Israel would take major issue. It might be ok in Egypt and Jordan, but it wouldn't be without controversy internationally either. I don't think a Palestinian civ will make it less controversial. Though a Philistine civ is interesting. I'd love a mod with a zoomed in Canaan with Samaria, Judah, Egypt, the Pentapolis of Philistia, etc.

 

[Kyro]

I don't understand why people like to downplay the significance of Israel and Jews.

Without the Jews the Abrahamic Faiths don't exist. Without the Abrahamic Faiths modern society won't exist.

There are more Jewish Nobel Prize winners than any other race despite them being a vast minority.

Jews control a significant portion of the world's economy.

They survived a genocide.

Their cultural Identity, language and religion has remained intact for thousands of years despite being scattered across the earth without a homeland. Oh, and genocide kinda helped that I guess. Sarcasm*

Modern Israel has managed to thrive against the odds despite having enemies on all sides. Anyone heard of the Six Day war?

Their disproportionate influence, tenacity for survival and cultural fortitude is unmatched by any other Civilization in existence and so I daresay they deserve a place in Civilization.

 

[luigilime]

I don't understand why people like to downplay the significance of Israel and Jews.

Without the Jews the Abrahamic Faiths don't exist. Without the Abrahamic Faiths modern society won't exist.

There are more Jewish Nobel Prize winners than any other race despite being a minority.

Jews control a signficant portion of the world's economy.

Modern Israel has managed to survive the odds despite having enemies on all sides .Anyone heard of the Six Day war?

Their disproportionate influence, tenacity for survival and cultural preservation is unmatched and so I daresay they deserve a place in Civilization.

the problem is that it's a highly controversial country politically nowadays, even though they have all the rights to be part of the game.

 

[Kyro]

the problem is that it's a highly controversial country politically nowadays, even though they have all the rights to be part of the game.

I'm just going to put things in perspective here.

There are many Civilizations who have comitted many atrocious acts who are in Civ 6 right now. War Crimes? Genocide? Oppression of people? Nuking somebody?

Nobody batts an eye when they are included despite the political controversy of these acts.

Yet now when we make mention of a Civilization that is "controversial" solely for existing everybody loses their minds.

Talk about double standards and hypocrisy.

 

[Leyrann]

the problem is that it's a highly controversial country politically nowadays, even though they have all the rights to be part of the game.

£$@% politics.

 

[Siptah]

I'm sorry for continuing the discussion on this off topic. I hope I can refrain from doing it, but it just seemed to be a misunderstanding...
It's really not about modern politics from my side, it's about history. And to me, many people 'lose their minds' advocating ancient Israel. It really starts with the fact that they seem to be unable to differentiate between an ancient state, a modern state, ethnicities and a religion and mix it all together to give it more significance. I really wouldn't like modern Israel to be in the game, but I'd prefer it to the ancient kingdom.

 

[Leyrann]

I'm sorry for continuing the discussion on this off topic. I hope I can refrain from doing it, but it just seemed to be a misunderstanding...
It's really not about modern politics from my side, it's about history. And to me, many people 'lose their minds' advocating ancient Israel. It really starts with the fact that they seem to be unable to differentiate between an ancient state, a modern state, ethnicities and a religion and mix it all together to give it more significance. I really wouldn't like modern Israel to be in the game, but I'd prefer it to the ancient kingdom.

The reason the ancient state, the modern state and the religion (and I suppose also the ethnicity) are mixed together so much is because they are so intristically bound together. Almost all inhabitants of ancient Israel (less so in the modern day, which includes a significant Arab population) were Israelians and jewish, and even in the diaspora, their descendants often considered themselves jewish and Israelian and married with other jewish and Israelian people, and they have always considered what is now (again) Israel their home. And even in these days, almost all people who consider themselves Israelian (excluding said Arabs, of which a major portion considers themselves "Israelian" in the sense of "living in the state of Israel", instead of "descending from Israel") consider themselves jewish and a significant portion lives in Israel, and a significant portion from those who don't live there now plan to live there one day. Meanwhile, non-Israelian people that considered themselves jewish have always been a very minor group.

 

[c4c6]

There are more Jewish Nobel Prize winners than any other race despite them being a vast minority.

In the concept of CIV Judaism is more a religion than a race.

 

[Kyro]

In the concept of CIV Judaism is more a religion than a race.

Well in the concept of reality Judaism is a Religion and Jew is the Race. Many modern Jews are secular and many others don't adhere to Judaism.

The reason the ancient state, the modern state and the religion (and I suppose also the ethnicity) are mixed together so much is because they are so intristically bound together. Almost all inhabitants of ancient Israel (less so in the modern day, which includes a significant Arab population) were Israelians and jewish, and even in the diaspora, their descendants often considered themselves jewish and Israelian and married with other jewish and Israelian people, and they have always considered what is now (again) Israel their home. And even in these days, almost all people who consider themselves Israelian (excluding said Arabs, of which a major portion considers themselves "Israelian" in the sense of "living in the state of Israel", instead of "descending from Israel") consider themselves jewish and a significant portion lives in Israel, and a significant portion from those who don't live there now plan to live there one day. Meanwhile, non-Israelian people that considered themselves jewish have always been a very minor group.

It is funny how there is a need to separate ancient from modern times only for Israel. We understand that a Civilization's identity isn't to be divided by time for all Civilizations. Except Israel. Israel has to be an exception because there are people who believe that it shouldn't exist, Maybe we should ban Germany from the game because many people believe that Nazi Germany should not have existed.

 

[Liufeng]

I don't understand why people like to downplay the significance of Israel and Jews.

Without the Jews the Abrahamic Faiths don't exist. Without the Abrahamic Faiths modern society won't exist.

There are more Jewish Nobel Prize winners than any other race despite them being a vast minority.

Jews control a signficant portion of the world's economy.

They survived a genocide.

Their cultural Identity, language and religion has remained intact for thousands of years despite being scattered across the earth without a homeland.

Modern Israel has managed to thrive against the odds despite having enemies on all sides. Anyone heard of the Six Day war?

Their disproportionate influence, tenacity for survival and cultural fortitude is unmatched by any other Civilization in existence and so I daresay they deserve a place in Civilization.

Forgive me, but you're post here is just too wrong in too many levels to let it past like this.

First off, people are not downplaying Israel and jews. They're just taking into account actual politics and marketing décisions. And Firaxis won't certainly add Israel in order to not lose the arab market, just as they won't add Tibet so that they won't lose the chinese market.

Second, we must not mix Jews and Israel, as bound together as they are. We either are talking about the jews, which are a religion, or israel which is a state (in the broad sense of the term). Many jews may have won Nobel prizes, but were they more regarded for their religion, or for their nation ? Did people consider Nadine Gordimer as a jew or a South african ? Do people consider Henri Bergson more jew, or french (I can garantee you it is the latter) ? You simply can't say can't say jew = israeli. Even about the money, you should realize that the Rockefeller family is more american than israeli, like Rothschild has its family in many places, but not in Israel.

Also, surviving a genocide is hardly a criterium to be in Civilization. With that, I could say that we should add a Hutu civilization (which wouldn't make much sense, of course). Now the fact of maintaining somewhat their cultural identity is more a criterium just like the tenacity you spoke of !

Well in the concept of reality Judaism is a Religion and Jew is the Race. Many modern Jews are secular and many others don't adhere to Judaism.

There is a human race, composed of many ethnicities. Please avoid saying "jewish race".

Finally, there are 2 Israels : a modern nation and an ancient kingdom, both having their problems. Modern Israel, as I said earlier, is too much controversial (and very young also), due to its conflict with Palestine and its apartheid policies. Again, adding it would cause too much trouble between the fan communities or even the marketing departments with high risks of banning the game in arab countries.
And on ancient Israel, it was an insignificant kingdom historically Wise. Its importance simply comes from biblical accounts, and even its greatest Kings are legendary figures which we do not know if they ever existed.

 

[Leifmk]

Finally, there are 2 Israels : a modern nation and an ancient kingdom, both having their problems. Modern Israel, as I said earlier, is too much controversial (and very young also), due to its conflict with Palestine and its apartheid policies. Again, adding it would cause too much trouble between the fan communities or even the marketing departments with high risks of banning the game in arab countries.
And on ancient Israel, it was an insignificant kingdom historically Wise. Its importance simply comes from biblical accounts, and even its greatest Kings are legendary figures which we do not know if they ever existed.

And in between there was the Judean kingdom (Roman client etc.), it'd be hilarious if the next official leader was Herod the Great.

 

[Kyro]

Forgive me, but you're post here is just too wrong in too many levels to let it past like this.

First off, people are not downplaying Israel and jews. They're just taking into account actual politics and marketing décisions. And Firaxis won't certainly add Israel in order to not lose the arab market, just as they won't add Tibet so that they won't lose the chinese market.

Second, we must not mix Jews and Israel, as bound together as they are. We either are talking about the jews, which are a religion, or israel which is a state (in the broad sense of the term). Many jews may have won Nobel prizes, but were they more regarded for their religion, or for their nation ? Did people consider Nadine Gordimer as a jew or a South african ? Do people consider Henri Bergson more jew, or french (I can garantee you it is the latter) ? You simply can't say can't say jew = israeli. Even about the money, you should realize that the Rockefeller family is more american than israeli, like Rothschild has its family in many places, but not in Israel.

Also, surviving a genocide is hardly a criterium to be in Civilization. With that, I could say that we should add a Hutu civilization (which wouldn't make much sense, of course). Now the fact of maintaining somewhat their cultural identity is more a criterium just like the tenacity you spoke of !



There is a human race, composed of many ethnicities. Please avoid saying "jewish race".

Finally, there are 2 Israels : a modern nation and an ancient kingdom, both having their problems. Modern Israel, as I said earlier, is too much controversial (and very young also), due to its conflict with Palestine and its apartheid policies. Again, adding it would cause too much trouble between the fan communities or even the marketing departments with high risks of banning the game in arab countries.
And on ancient Israel, it was an insignificant kingdom historically Wise. Its importance simply comes from biblical accounts, and even its greatest Kings are legendary figures which we do not know if they ever existed.

You know people are desperate when they try to separate the race that makes up the Civilization from the Civilization itself. Do you have any idea how absurd it would sound if you used the same reasoning with other Civilizations?

Well maybe you don't. Let me demonstrate:

Chinese people cannot represent the Chinese Civilization.

We should separate Germans from the German civilization.

If you have to split hairs to prove your point it means you have a weak argument.

All the political reasons given so far are moot because they pale in comparison to what is truly controversial and you repeating them does not make them any less hypocritical in nature.

 

[Liufeng]

You know people are desperate when they try to separate the race that makes up the Civilization from the Civilization itself. Do you have any idea how absurd it would sound if you used the same reasoning with other Civilizations?

Well maybe you don't. Let me demonstrate:

Chinese people do not represent China.

We should separate Germans from Germany.

If you have to split hairs to prove your point it means you have a weak argument.

All the political reasons given so far are moot because they pale in comparison to what is truly controversial and you repeating them does not make them any less hypocritical in nature.

And tell me then : what is truly controversial ? Since for you all the political reasons are "moot", tell me what is the real controversy here.
About desperation, not at all. There are civs's I really wish for (like the Khmer), other that I don't really care and would be okey with their inclusion (Israel is part of it) , and other I really don't want/like (like Macedon). I'm simply putting things realistically.
And of course I'm seperating a Civilization from an ethnicity. You took Germany's and China's case, but you realize the latter is certainly a civilization, but there are tons of ethnicities. The main one are Han, but if you look into the city list, there's a city called Shenyang that's originally mainly Manchu. A jew civ is a non-sense in fact that throughout most of their history, they were part of another nation or civilization. Take, for instance, one of the portuguese présidents : Jorge Sampaio. Should he be considered as part of a jewish civilization, or a portuguese civilization ? Another example ? Look at Catherine II of Russia. She's originally prussian, but does it prevent to be seen by everyone as russian ? Of course not. And not even germans go out and claim "she was a great german queen".
Anyway, I do not wish to drag this conversation any longer, since it has little to do with the topic. Simply, I don't mind an israeli civ, but it is simply not feasable economically speaking, at least for now.

 

[Uberfrog]

You know people are desperate when they try to separate the race that makes up the Civilization from the Civilization itself. Do you have any idea how absurd it would sound if you used the same reasoning with other Civilizations?

Well maybe you don't. Let me demonstrate:

Chinese people do not represent China.

We should separate Germans from Germany.

There is a difference here. Rather than representing a reasonably continuous national identity, the Jewish people represent a continuous cultural and religious identity that has survived despite its people spending most of history (at least within the timespan represented by a game of Civilization) as an international diaspora. The biblical United Kingdom of Israel and Judah is the central idea behind the modern state, but it cannot really be considered its direct predecessor. From the Lost Tribes of Israel, to the Babylonian Exile, to being under the rule of the Seleucids and the Romans - all of these things informed Jewish identity and culture (and the religion!). But the people who adhere to that culture have been living in various countries all over the world for the last 2000 years.

Regardless, I don't think I would consider Chinese Americans a part of the Chinese civilisation, at least as far as Civ concepts go. You probably wouldn't even consider the notion that German Americans are somehow representative of Germany. They are instead an economic and cultural asset of their adopted country, particularly one like America, which is almost entirely composed of immigrants. It is a sad result of the other-ing and persecution of Jews throughout history that we even consider the idea that Jewish Nobel Prize winners are somehow automatically associated with some idea of an Israeli civilisation.

There is unquestionably a Jewish culture that millions of people identify with. It is not, however, one that falls easily within the mechanics of a game of Civ, because it has been defined by the historical experience of not having a state.

There are ways to represent parts of it - either focussing solely on the ancient kingdom (largely historically unattested outside the Hebrew Bible), classical province (the Hasmonean Kingdom wasn't really an independent entity) or the modern state (politically controversial*). You could even try and blob these all together: there was a rather good mod for Civ V that had King David as a leader with Maccabees as their unit and a kibbutz as a unique improvement. This is probably the way least likely to upset anybody in a major way, but is, historically, a bit of a stretch to unite them under one umbrella.

*As to whatever any of us individually thinks is "truly controversial", that is indeed moot. Whether you believe it justified or not, including a modern Israel civ would be something that would attract vehement criticism from some quarters, and for that reason, Firaxis is quite unlikely to consider adding them to Civ.

In any case we can be 100% sure that DLC05 will not be Israel, since Israel is not in Africa, and nor is it in Southeast Asia.

 

[bbbt]

If it they brought back Civ 4 style nationalities into the game, I think would be interesting to have 'The Hebrews' represented with some sort of nomadic mechanism - i.e. they can be citizens of other civ's cities, but contribute to both that civ and and their 'homeland'. Of course, that in itself would unfortunately be controversial as it would play into negative depictions of Jews as loyal to themselves over country.

I think it could be an interesting mechanic though. Also, for the Irish - maybe combined with an immigration mechanic? Double population growth, but population emigrates - but immigrants in other civs send Tourism back home?

 

[Uberfrog]

If it they brought back Civ 4 style nationalities into the game, I think would be interesting to have 'The Hebrews' represented with some sort of nomadic mechanism - i.e. they can be citizens of other civ's cities, but contribute to both that civ and and their 'homeland'. Of course, that in itself would unfortunately be controversial as it would play into negative depictions of Jews as loyal to themselves over country.

I think it could be an interesting mechanic though. Also, for the Irish - maybe combined with an immigration mechanic? Double population growth, but population emigrates - but immigrants in other civs send Tourism back home?

The thing is, a diaspora is not a cultural trait. It is something that is generally motivated by entirely outside forces, whether that be purely economically motivated emigration, or the forced dispersal of a people by some great calamity or conflict. In the case of the Jewish people and the Irish, it is largely the latter. The Jewish diaspora came about because their state was destroyed at the hands of invading empires. Then as a minority living abroad they were so persecuted that many groups had to resettle multiple times. Likewise, the Irish left Ireland in their millions because of a disastrous famine. Making these remarkably bad and unfortunate aspects of these cultures' history a game mechanic is, in my view, both misguided and also unfitting how an in-game Civ is designed.

And beyond simply being "controversial", depicting the Jews as semi-autonomous citizens of other civs is extremely problematic for the very reason you describe. It also isn't what happened in history. Until the 20th century, there simply was no "homeland" for Jewish people living around the world to contribute to. They were just people trying to live their lives despite the best efforts of the cultures they were never quite allowed to integrate with.

 

[bbbt]

Yeah, I don't disagree - I was thinking of it as a game mechanic more than anything legitimately representative of history. At this point just having nationalities that get upset when you are at war with their home civ, ala civ 4 (or was it 3?) could be a bit dicey in it's implications (see Japanese internment).

 

[Mummiesforpeace]

Bring on the Hebrew civ! So let it be written, so let it be done.