1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

If your country was in Civ4...

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by TheAmerican, Aug 22, 2007.

  1. karlkrlarsson

    karlkrlarsson Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Regarding the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

    There are two says among political scientists
    One is: The more rights you have in your constitution, the less you have in real life.
    The other is: If your country has the word Democratic in its name, then it probably isn't democratic.

    Also a good point by Magicalsushi. There could excist some kind of extreme civil religion. North Korea could be a theocracy with the personal cult around the leader as its creed.


    EDIT: Evil Twin: I agree that some new laws in the US are bad, but to call the US a police state because of it is extreme. There are genuine police states in the world, and they are nothing like the US.


    KK
     
  2. TheAmerican

    TheAmerican Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    179
    I wish people would stop bashing the US. The majority of the insults aren't even good, and most of them don't make you think.

    But anyway, I'm not about to turn my own topic into a US vs the World debate.

    I put Universal Suffrage for the United States, because everybody is allowed to vote. Like somebody else said before, the Representative civic belongs with countries like Iran. Iran has suffrage, but it isn't universal. Not everybody can vote. I'd like to add something to that though.

    Civilizations with the Representative civic could still have kings and in Iran's case, a religious supreme leader. However, there is an elected body that is picked by the people. This elected body represents the people and may even have an executive, but there is still an absolute ruler or semi-absolute ruler in power, and this ruler still has authority over these representatives. It isn't democracy, its more of a constitutional monarchy.
     
  3. karlkrlarsson

    karlkrlarsson Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    I agree with you TheAmerican regarding not argueing about politics. Hope I haven't added to it.

    I don't agree fully with that interpretation American. It's good, but lacking. I think qwert hit the nail on it's head in his post.

    In a way I think this discussion is more fruiteful in the direction it is taking. Instead of labeling our home countries, we could find typical cases that fit with the different civics.

    KKL
     
  4. Ravellion

    Ravellion Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Amsterdam, Netherlands
    I have to disagree with Free Speech, Emancipation, and Free Market here. Why do you think these civics apply? Look to issues regarding women, other religions than Islam, domestic political reform, and the state of Israel, and I find it hard to detect the Free Speech and Emancipation civics.

    The free market might fit, but only because none of the others really do. it kind of wins by default, even though if you would list economies from "free" to "restricted", I doubt it would fit in the top 50%.
     
  5. SickCycle

    SickCycle Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    376
    Location:
    Greatest Country in the World
    Is the U.S. becoming a police state? Here are the top 10 signs that it may well be the case.

    1. The Internet Clampdown

    One saving grace of alternative media in this age of unfettered corporate conglomeration has been the internet. While the masses are spoon-fed predigested news on TV and in mainstream print publications, the truth-seeking individual still has access to a broad array of investigative reporting and political opinion via the world-wide web. Of course, it was only a matter of time before the government moved to patch up this crack in the sky.

    Attempts to regulate and filter internet content are intensifying lately, coming both from telecommunications corporations (who are gearing up to pass legislation transferring ownership and regulation of the internet to themselves), and the Pentagon (which issued an "Information Operations Roadmap" in 2003, signed by Donald Rumsfeld, which outlines tactics such as network attacks and acknowledges, without suggesting a remedy, that US propaganda planted in other countries has easily found its way to Americans via the internet). One obvious tactic clearing the way for stifling regulation of internet content is the growing media frenzy over child pornography and "internet predators," which will surely lead to legislation that by far exceeds in its purview what is needed to fight such threats.

    2. "The Long War"

    This little piece of clumsy marketing died off quickly, but it gave away what many already suspected: the War on Terror will never end, nor is it meant to end. It is designed to be perpetual. As with the War on Drugs, it outlines a goal that can never be fully attained -- as long as there are pissed off people and explosives. The Long War will eternally justify what are ostensibly temporary measures: suspension of civil liberties, military expansion, domestic spying, massive deficit spending and the like. This short-lived moniker told us all, "get used to it. Things aren't going to change any time soon."

    3. The USA PATRIOT Act

    Did anyone really think this was going to be temporary? Yes, this disgusting power grab gives the government the right to sneak into your house, look through all your stuff and not tell you about it for weeks on a rubber stamp warrant. Yes, they can look at your medical records and library selections. Yes, they can pass along any information they find without probable cause for purposes of prosecution. No, they're not going to take it back, ever.

    4. Prison Camps

    This last January the Army Corps of Engineers gave Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root nearly $400 million to build detention centers in the United States, for the purpose of unspecified "new programs." Of course, the obvious first guess would be that these new programs might involve rounding up Muslims or political dissenters -- I mean, obviously detention facilities are there to hold somebody. I wish I had more to tell you about this, but it's, you know... secret.

    5. Touchscreen Voting Machines

    Despite clear, copious evidence that these nefarious contraptions are built to be tampered with, they continue to spread and dominate the voting landscape, thanks to Bush's "Help America Vote Act," the exploitation of corrupt elections officials, and the general public's enduring cluelessness.

    In Utah, Emery County Elections Director Bruce Funk witnessed security testing by an outside firm on Diebold voting machines which showed them to be a security risk. But his warnings fell on deaf ears. Instead Diebold attorneys were flown to Emery County on the governor's airplane to squelch the story. Funk was fired. In Florida, Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho discovered an alarming security flaw in their Diebold system at the end of last year. Rather than fix the flaw, Diebold refused to fulfill its contract. Both of the other two touchscreen voting machine vendors, Sequoia and ES&S, now refuse to do business with Sancho, who is required by HAVA to implement a touchscreen system and will be sued by his own state if he doesn't. Diebold is said to be pressuring for Sancho's ouster before it will resume servicing the county.

    Stories like these and much worse abound, and yet TV news outlets have done less coverage of the new era of elections fraud than even 9/11 conspiracy theories. This is possibly the most important story of this century, but nobody seems to give a damn. As long as this issue is ignored, real American democracy will remain an illusion. The midterm elections will be an interesting test of the public's continuing gullibility about voting integrity, especially if the Democrats don't win substantial gains, as they almost surely will if everything is kosher.

    Bush just suggested that his brother Jeb would make a good president. We really need to fix this problem soon.

    6. Signing Statements

    Bush has famously never vetoed a bill. This is because he prefers to simply nullify laws he doesn't like with "signing statements." Bush has issued over 700 such statements, twice as many as all previous presidents combined. A few examples of recently passed laws and their corresponding dismissals, courtesy of the Boston Globe:

    --Dec. 30, 2005: US interrogators cannot torture prisoners or otherwise subject them to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

    Bush's signing statement: The president, as commander in chief, can waive the torture ban if he decides that harsh interrogation techniques will assist in preventing terrorist attacks.

    --Dec. 30, 2005: When requested, scientific information ''prepared by government researchers and scientists shall be transmitted [to Congress] uncensored and without delay."

    Bush's signing statement: The president can tell researchers to withhold any information from Congress if he decides its disclosure could impair foreign relations, national security, or the workings of the executive branch.

    --Dec. 23, 2004: Forbids US troops in Colombia from participating in any combat against rebels, except in cases of self-defense. Caps the number of US troops allowed in Colombia at 800.

    Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can place restrictions on the use of US armed forces, so the executive branch will construe the law ''as advisory in nature."

    Essentially, this administration is bypassing the judiciary and deciding for itself whether laws are constitutional or not. Somehow, I don't see the new Supreme Court lineup having much of a problem with that, though. So no matter what laws congress passes, Bush will simply choose to ignore the ones he doesn't care for. It's much quieter than a veto, and can't be overridden by a two-thirds majority. It's also totally absurd.

    7. Warrantless Wiretapping

    Amazingly, the GOP sees this issue as a plus for them. How can this be? What are you, stupid? You find out the government is listening to the phone calls of US citizens, without even the weakest of judicial oversight and you think that's okay? Come on -- if you know anything about history, you know that no government can be trusted to handle something like this responsibly. One day they're listening for Osama, and the next they're listening in on Howard Dean.

    Think about it: this administration hates unauthorized leaks. With no judicial oversight, why on earth wouldn't they eavesdrop on, say, Seymour Hersh, to figure out who's spilling the beans? It's a no-brainer. Speaking of which, it bears repeating: terrorists already knew we would try to spy on them. They don't care if we have a warrant or not. But you should.

    8. Free Speech Zones

    I know it's old news, but... come on, are they . .. .. .. .ing serious?

    9. High-ranking Whistleblowers

    Army Generals. Top-level CIA officials. NSA operatives. White House cabinet members. These are the kind of people that Republicans fantasize about being, and whose judgment they usually respect. But for some reason, when these people resign in protest and criticize the Bush administration en masse, they are cast as traitorous, anti-American publicity hounds. Ridiculous. The fact is, when people who kill, spy and deceive for a living tell you that the White House has gone too far, you had damn well better pay attention. We all know most of these people are staunch Republicans. If the entire military except for the two guys the Pentagon put in front of the press wants Rumsfeld out, why on earth wouldn't you listen?

    10. The CIA Shakeup

    Was Porter Goss fired because he was resisting the efforts of Rumsfeld or Negroponte? No. These appointments all come from the same guys, and they wouldn't be nominated if they weren't on board all the way. Goss was probably canned so abruptly due to a scandal involving a crooked defense contractor, his hand-picked third-in-command, the Watergate hotel and some hookers.

    If Bush's nominee for CIA chief, Air Force General Michael Hayden, is confirmed, that will put every spy program in Washington under military control. Hayden, who oversaw the NSA warrantless wiretapping program and is clearly down with the program. That program? To weaken and dismantle or at least neuter the CIA. Despite its best efforts to blame the CIA for "intelligence errors" leading to the Iraq war, the picture has clearly emerged -- through extensive CIA leaks -- that the White House's analysis of Saddam's destructive capacity was not shared by the Agency. This has proved to be a real pain in the ass for Bush and the gang.

    Who'd have thought that career spooks would have moral qualms about deceiving the American people? And what is a president to do about it? Simple: make the critical agents leave, and fill their slots with Bush/Cheney loyalists. Then again, why not simply replace the entire organization? That is essentially what both Rumsfeld at the DoD and newly minted Director of National Intelligence John are doing -- they want to move intelligence analysis into the hands of people that they can control, so the next time they lie about an "imminent threat" nobody's going to tell. And the press is applauding the move as a "necessary reform."

    Remember the good old days, when the CIA were the bad guys?

    ------------------------

    Mr. Uthman forgot the most obvious sign of all that the US is now clearly a totalitarian-style police state under the Bush Administration: One out of every 136 US residents is presently in jail. And get this...."The report by the Justice Department agency found that 62 percent of people in jails have not been convicted...." but are merely "awaiting" trial, per AP.

    According to King's College, London, courtesy of its International Centre for Prison Studies, the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the entire world.....more than any dictatorship, terrorist regime or (other) totalitarian state. Higher than China. Higher than Cuba. Higher than any Russian or Middle Eastern or African country. And it's not even close to any other country.

    Per Patrick at top-blog TalkLeft, "The United States has the highest prison population rate in the world, some 714 per 100,000 of the national population, followed by Belarus, Bermuda and Russia (all 532), Palau (523), U.S. Virgin Islands (490), Turkmenistan (489), Cuba (487), Suriname (437), Cayman Islands (429), Belize (420), Ukraine (417), Maldive Islands (416), St Kitts and Nevis (415), South Africa (413) and Bahamas (410)."
     
  6. anonymous-c

    anonymous-c Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    17
    Dude, seriously. Chill out. If you take a look at history you'll see these aren't new problems. They've existed in the U.S. and infact every country on earth, just in different forms.
     
  7. SickCycle

    SickCycle Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    376
    Location:
    Greatest Country in the World
    Thats a little old but it makes a point.
     
  8. karlkrlarsson

    karlkrlarsson Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    To claim that the US is a police state, shows a seriuos lack of knowledge about what police states really are. I don't mean to be rude, but saying the US is a police state is offensive to people actually living in one.

    In lighter news: Can any categorize Belarus?

    KK
     
  9. SickCycle

    SickCycle Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    376
    Location:
    Greatest Country in the World
    Sorry, Real Americans, don't accept that kind of government.. maybe you should go read the declaration of independence.

    You'll be shocked at how much of it applies to our current government.

    Here, it may do you some good:

    IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
    The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

    When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

    He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

    He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

    He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

    He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

    He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

    He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

    He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

    He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

    He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

    He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

    He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

    He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

    He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

    For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

    For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

    For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

    For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

    For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

    For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

    For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

    For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

    For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

    He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

    He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

    He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

    He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

    He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

    In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

    Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

    We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
     
  10. SickCycle

    SickCycle Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    376
    Location:
    Greatest Country in the World
    ... and there is a reason we don't live in a "real" police state, unlike those people we don't accept it and we pay whatever price is necessary.

    You see the smallest of infraction creates intense rage and we don't like much being told what we can do, unlike those people in those "real" police states that let themselves be treated like dogs.

    We fight back, they lay down.

    I'm a real American and this is how real Americans do things, sorry.
     
  11. karlkrlarsson

    karlkrlarsson Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    I think I get your anger Sickcycle. And I guess we can all agree that most nations have problems, the US is no exception. Can we perhaps get back on topic. This was such a nice discussion to begin with. Let me try:

    Cuba
    Hereditary Rule
    Nationhood
    Emancipation
    State Property
    Free Religion

    The labour category lacks a truely modern oppressive system.

    KK
     
  12. TheAmerican

    TheAmerican Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    179
    Why did you give Cuba Hereditary Rule? Aren't they more of a Police State?

    As for Belarus... I had to do a little research but...

    Representation (Their leader has a little too much power to consider Belarus a legitimate democracy, but they do have elected officals)
    Free Speech (It is denied sometimes, but denying it is still illegal in Belarus)
    Eman
    Emancipation (No slaves, they're allowed to choose their own careers)
    State Property (Their economy is still state controlled)
    Free Religion (They're allowed to worship freely)

    I love saying Belarus too. Bela roose. Not a big fan of their government though.

    So I'm not a real American, because I don't believe we live in a police state?
     
  13. gamedude107

    gamedude107 Permanoob(i play settler)

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    it is in Civ4 :\
     
  14. Fronx

    Fronx Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Messages:
    154
    Most likely unintentional mind typo there, the word "still".

    State Property isn't even considered as some 'big evil', unlike communism might be. Many countries have some kind of state property going on in certain areas.


    Goverment owning some areas in my books is a GOOD thing (as in beneficial to that country and to well being of its citizens), especially on smaller countries. When country is small, corporation(s) might not be so interested in selling certain services as the volume of sales (profit) wouldn't be high, so goverment trought the means of state property gives/sells this service to its citizens.


    Plus, Considering State property <-> Free market, Belarus is (to my knowledge) free market. Reasoning: You can go to Belarus and make a corporation, it is not forbidden, it is not 100% state property, where making your own private corporation would be forbidden. It is OK to create a private corporation.
    Its just that in real life, the change from full state property to (full) free market isn't done in one CivIV turn; most corps are state owned only because of history, and private corporations not being interested enough creating business in Belarus.




    I don't have big feelings about this, but it just caught my eye. There is no "still" in it, as if moving away from state owned corporations would be (automatically, neccesarily) positive development. (in some cases it would be positive, in some cases not).


    Nice, wiki has topic about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_property
     
  15. karlkrlarsson

    karlkrlarsson Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    I have been thinking about this. Hereditary rule doesn't need to mean a king. It works for any system where most power is focused in one person. Adding on that it seems like Castro is passing power to a relative at the moment. I think a police state should use the military or police more active to suppress its people. I don't think Cuba fits the bill. Nazi Germany does.

    There is nothing wrong with state property, but here we are talking of a system of state property. That is the fundament of communism. The level of control the state has over the economy starts at central planning, through mixed economy to free market. Though I would say totally free and totally planned is impossible. I think we should look at the motives of the state. If Belarus allows companies it is only because it suites them, not because they feel it is anyones right to create them.

    This is very close to the US (except for the economy thing). When in reality they are on opposites side of the freedom and liberty spectrum. Belarus being the most oppressive state in Europe. We should be clear on one thing. If we are comparing between modern nations or in history. I agree that Belarus is a lot freer than ancient Egypt, but compared with modern nation it is despotic.

    KK
     
  16. Greeneyedzombie

    Greeneyedzombie King

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    707
    Location:
    Below the sea.
    The netherlands
    Monarchy/universal suffrage
    Emanicipation/heriditary rule
    Free market
    Free religion/theocracy (we have a state religion, wich is obligatory for the royal house)
     
  17. DennisIran

    DennisIran Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Messages:
    75
    LOL YOURE JOKING RIGHT? FREE SPEECH? THEY HANG PEOPLE IF THEY SAY WHATS ON THEIR MIND FOR CRYING OUT LOUD
     
  18. karlkrlarsson

    karlkrlarsson Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    As said earlier. Comparisson is always hard. Especially with categories as limitied as Civ 4.

    I agree with you that freedom of speech and Iran is a poor fit. But instead of typing in caps and implying someone is joking, perhaps you can come with an alternative, and an explenation for your choice. What will it be: Barbarism, Vassalage, bureaucracy or nationhood?

    I don't think having a state religion makes you theocracy. After all, the national leaders aren't the religious leaders. When you say Monarcy, do you mean the civic Hereditary Rule? I agree there is a monarch, but the rule of the nation still isn't hereditary.

    KK
     
  19. Greeneyedzombie

    Greeneyedzombie King

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Messages:
    707
    Location:
    Below the sea.
    The rule is still hereditary. The queen (in this case) is still the head of the state, and will always stay the head of the state. Unless she renounces the state religion, in wich case she will be abdicated. All futere monarch will be head of the state and must be of the state religion. Any who marries in the royal family must change their religion to the state religion.
     
  20. flyingchicken

    flyingchicken Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,783
    The Republic of the Philippines
    • Universal Suffrage/Representation
    • Bureaucracy
    • Emancipation/Caste System
    • Free Market
    • Free Religion/Organized Religion (Christianity)
    Plus a lot of Civ3 corruption.
     

Share This Page