No progress? What about The Illiad? That'd probably qualify as a National Wonder in Civ terms. What about philosophy? How can you possibly say that more progress was made under Alexander's splintered empire than in a single free Greek city-state?
Pacifism does.
Yeah... The Illiad was some progress... Why it's the story of a civilization falling apart from the inside while it goes off to erradicate another... some progress. The fact of the matter is, the Greek world DID achieve far more socially, artistically, and technologically in any given century of Alexander's splintered empire and it's divided, ofter warring satraps, than in the entire preceeding millinium. Granted, it would not have done so without the preceeding millinia of philosophers and thinkers to prepare the minds of the people for the revolution of thought, but said revolution would have been repressed by the Greek society of the day, and such thoughts would have not found a place to bloom and invent. Quite simply put, due to the randomness of not central authority. Diplomacy between the greek city states were in a breakdown. Athens was in a political and moral decline and probably would have shed it's democracy within a decade. The Schools of the philosophers that make Greece so famous for it's culture and learning were mostly unheard of in the days before Philip because the philosophers were a rejected and persecuted class of society during the centuries approaching Philip's conquest of Greece. You see it's not that the progress was not made to begin with, it's that whenever progress was made, and equal ammount of regression took place. So many elements were in conflict, that had they been unified they would have the building blocks for the foundation of an empire, but as they stood, they were quite busy undion themselves, so it must be given that without the philosophers of classical Greece the seeds would have never germinated because they were never planted. But as it is the philosophers of Greece would have simply faded into history had an environment that was supressing their thoughts haddn't have turned into an environment that was allowing them to live without fear of being destroyed. Even the written copies of the Illiad are found in manuscripts that were scribed in the days of Alexander's splintered empire. Though democracy and many other philosopical ethics did not exist during the Alexandric Empires, the memory of their existence in the first place not only survived but spread beyond the confines of Greece during the this period.
ChrTh said:
...All that the Town Hall Civic would represent is that the Central Government does not intervene in the operations of the city; thus no upkeep....
All it means is that the Government doesn't centrally aid in the fullfillment of the cities' needs. The system of upkeep between cities is still there, only cities help or hurt each other without the interferance of a central authority. There are ways it could work in theory, and even in practice, but it would not be a government with no upkeep or buracracy, and there would still be a capital settlement, although its significance will change, from being a seat of rule, to being a meeting place for a council. The Government form, is known as Confederation. It is the government that the early United States employed. And during that time the Federal Government was more involved than people imagined. It wasn't by any means a supreme authority over anyone, but it did both enact duties and grant boons. States and cities did help each other out, and if more money was needed than was available it had to come out of the Federal government's coffers, and if there was more money being made than was needed to pay off debts, then some of it could make it into the coffers, but most of it would just be reinvested into the economy, and that is what accounts for the superior economic development of Confederations. The progress of Ancient Greece as a nation, mostly occured during the times a singular alliance of cities held the attention of the public at large. The rest occured as a result of the teachings of the philosophers and their schools, who usually provoked the wrath of the society more often than the respect thereof. When a confederation works, every city is still not for itself; in fact, having every city for itself defeats the purpose of confederation and is why the confederations of Greece ultimately failed. (Pellopanessian Wars anyone? Or how about their failure to repel Philip's invasion when they both outnumbered and outteched him?) In a functional Confederation, cities pull together to assist in the burdens and share in technological acheivments but enjoy fincancial profits individually. Also they have a federal government, that may not be powerful in authority but is powerful in potency... that is the ability to raise armies in times of crisis, the ability to prevent local militias from acting outside of their jurisdiction(mainly the raiding of other members of the confederation), the ability to reveiw new territories for induction. This role can be served by representatives from every territory, or by a variety of other means that don't involve a controlling federal government. A federal legislator is not a necessity, nor is an executive firgurhead, but some sort of central council is involved, and while their powers are lax, they are in place for an important purpose. The cities or counties, or whatever provincial level is the constituent unit of representation through seat on the council, essentially rule themselves as they will. The closest thing to federal laws is aggreements concerning pratices. Tax policies are hit or miss. The central coffers get filled when the the provinces approve the collection of a tax. And the allocation therof is just as hit or miss. The central coffers are used to finance something when the provinces approve spending on a project.
My argument here is different from my argument in my previous post, becasue I did misunderstand what was stated... however, the assertion that there would be not city upkeep is completely unrealistic. Changing the method by which resources are allocated does not negate the need for said resources. And in functional societies, elements that cannot fend for themselves are assisted, and when elements that cannot fend for themselves are unassisted, revolts are born. There would be no civic upkeep, but city upkeep would still exist.
I think if something like this were put into place, it would look more like this:
Confederation
No Upkeep
-25% Distance Upkeep in All cities.
rate and
rate are fixed at 50%.
+1
per specialist
City Upkeep is deducted from the city's
and
output.
Alternatively the fixed rate might be 40% instead of 50%. Some Gold always manages to funnel up to the top in any system, regardless. Plus unit upkeep would still have to be paid. Or +1
per specialist could be made as +1
per specialist instead. This could represent the system of circumstancial taxation in lieu of universal taxation.
Another issue is what would be the required tech. It would need to be somewhere in the Medieval or Renaissance eras... or since the rates aren't addjustable, it could be introduced before the discovery of Drama. But just what Ancient or Classical tech would allow it?
Hmm... I guess the game is balanced as it is for a reason. It's far from perfect, and yet it is hard to change without unbalancing it.
for every city, but that seems like a reduced-power Representation (although the No Upkeep may make it worthwhile).
