Pan-Asia - symmetry for symmetry's sake?

[Jacozilla]

70 years ago Europe was very un-united. They called that a world war. They're pretty united now. This game is 200 years later. What makes you an expert on what people who's grandparents have not even been born yet will do or feel?

The simple yet powerful consistency of history. Every time a group of humans, sometimes a minority, sometimes a majority, thought that surely the next X generation(s) will be more utopian than now - it always, always comes crashing back to more ethnic divide, factionalism, and war.

And since you're using Europe as an example, no - they are not more united now than WWII era 70+ years ago.

They aren't less united, but not more. Just different. Back in WWII era, Europe lacked monetary unification but had fairly specific national identities, more homogenous populations that may have bickered as a local family but even without the EU, acted as a block on many occasions.

They now have a monetary union and more coordination for geopolitical negotiation to favor the EU block as a whole, but far more factionalized with new immigrants and far less homogenous populations that is leading to the strife we see re: national identities re-emerging in each euro country.

And as shown by the Greece default, the EU is far less united in how to deal with the issue that will just get broader over time - the haves vs have nots, the inclusion of member countries that identify themselves as part of the EU but not as Europeans (e.g. Greece, Bulgaria, etc).

TL;dr - what makes you think the 100% track record of history for continuing ethnic and geopolitical divide over time will not continue?

 

[m15a]

TL;dr - what makes you think the 100% track record of history for continuing ethnic and geopolitical divide over time will not continue?

I have no idea whether this is true, but you're not saying that groups never unite (temporarily), right? That is, you're not claiming that, at all times, people have been dividing themselves into smaller and smaller cultural and political entities, right?

The BE factions are just some groups that happened to be united at a single point in time to launch a colony. All of those factions may have broken up on Earth right after the launch of the colonies. So, I don't think the story of BE doesn't contradict the notion you're suggesting.

 

[rune42]

Nothing in the game suggests that Japan and China are united. None of their city names are Japanese, and PAC's leader doesn't speak it. The best you can infer about PAC is that Mongolia, Korea, Vietnam, and Cambodia are a part of it. Their cities are a combination of Chinese, Vietnamese, Mongolian, and Korean, and their leader's given name is Cambodian.

Future Japan will probably be DLC or in an expansion. (probably combined with Taiwan. Theres a good possibility that South Korea and the eastern end of present-day Russia are a part of this sponsor as well, depending on how you look at PAC and the Slavic Federation)

 

[Ryoga]

TL;dr - what makes you think the 100% track record of history for continuing ethnic and geopolitical divide over time will not continue?

Unification happened all around the world, many of what you call nations today where once several divided city states or small kingdoms.

That goes for China, Japan, Italy, Greece, Germany, India, Russia and many others.

I don't think that imagining China and Japan united would be more hard to imagine that it would have been to imagine Sparta and Athens under the same national identity or Florence, Venice and Genoa, or the Hokkaido Ainu and the Ryukyuu islanders.

BTW if things went differently you would consider Taiwan and Korea some regions of "Japan" as well and the Philippines would be part of the U.S. as with the Hawaii.

Does that mean that everyone is happy and living peacefully together? No, in several cases there are tensions and there's always people that want their little small subcultural people to gain their own independence, but that they were united is a fact.

What makes you think that different cultural identities absolutely won't unite, be annexed or enter into federations (etc etc) just because of their perceived differences?

 

[Jacozilla]

Unification happened all around the world, many of what you call nations today where once several divided city states or small kingdoms.

That goes for China, Japan, Italy, Greece, Germany, India, Russia and many others.

I don't think that imagining China and Japan united would be more hard to imagine that it would have been to imagine Sparta and Athens under the same national identity or Florence, Venice and Genoa, or the Hokkaido Ainu and the Ryukyuu islanders.

BTW if things went differently you would consider Taiwan and Korea some regions of "Japan" as well and the Philippines would be part of the U.S. as with the Hawaii.

Does that mean that everyone is happy and living peacefully together? No, in several cases there are tensions and there's always people that want their little small subcultural people to gain their own independence, but that they were united is a fact.

What makes you think that different cultural identities absolutely won't unite, be annexed or enter into federations (etc etc) just because of their perceived differences?

all valid points. but i didn't state nor reply to the point Minor made (which mine was reply to) as an absolute - e.g. ALL nations will continue to splinter and factionalize, nor deny some nations in common ground (or to be formed common ground) may come together or further aggregate.

My point was and is that history has always shown the continued splintering of tribal/nation/ethnic whatever grouping ppl want to identify with as the flavor of that generation. So like shifting sands, while some aggregation may be happening, an equal or even more splintering occurs.

And that specifically in the PAC case here, my reply to the thread OP was that it's not a safe assumption, and indeed historically, a probability that while other nations may aggregate and unite - it is far more likely that if there ever was a fictional world in which a PAC came around, it would be via forceful unification of Japan and China.

Your sparta and athens analogy is somewhat not the best one - i get the point and grant the example - but in that specific case both city-states identified themselves as Hellenic or Greek. A more correct analogy for the Japan v China case would be something like sparta and persia - could those entities have united or formed a cooperating block ala EU? Maybe. Probable? Highly unlikely.

 

[Ryoga]

A more correct analogy for the Japan v China case would be something like sparta and persia - could those entities have united or formed a cooperating block ala EU? Maybe. Probable? Highly unlikely.

Actually it sort of happened that Persia and Sparta fell under the same dominion if you consider Alexander the Great's conquest.

At any rate the "maybe" part is enough. This is science fiction, not futurology. If it's possible (and Japan and China entering in a cooperation agreement is not impossible), there's really nothing to complain about.

My point was and is that history has always shown the continued splintering of tribal/nation/ethnic whatever grouping ppl want to identify with as the flavor of that generation. So like shifting sands, while some aggregation may be happening, an equal or even more splintering occurs.

I don't agree about that. The way I see it the world is becoming increasingly less fragmented.
The reason most science-fiction stories depict futures with fewer and bigger geopolitical blocks or even world unification is because they recognize that trend.

 

[kyrilocy]

TL;dr - what makes you think the 100% track record of history for continuing ethnic and geopolitical divide over time will not continue?

Just one old saying: anything long divided will surely unite, and anything long united will surely divide. My opinion? It's more like a circle rather than a one direction trend.

And for the OP, just 30 yrs ago china and japan were pretty good buddies. Tide could change very fast.

 

[Mustakrakish]

THIS stopped you from buying the game? THIS? Of all the possible fair reasonable... reasons... this? THIS?

 

[Homusubi]

the title suggests they're co-operating rather than that they are 'united' per se. maybe the great mistake put things in perspective and they were like 'ok, we need to co-operate if we want to survive'

In a perfectly rational world, that would have been what happened... but this isn't rationality, it's POLITICS.

 

[True_Candyman]

In a perfectly rational world, that would have been what happened... but this isn't rationality, it's POLITICS.

If this is all that is putting you off the game, why don't you just buy it, go into the xml files and change Pan-Asian Co-operative wherever you see it to Sino-Asiatic Dominion, or whatever floats your boat. It's not very hard...

Pan-Asianism isn't new though, it's been around hundreds of years in some form or another. There was at several points in the 19th and 20th century some significant conferences which could have put Asia on a track towards uniting. It's not nearly as far fetched as you think.

 

[RonMar]

It's not a union of countries really, but multi-national corporations which are the sponsors of the colonies.

 

[LoneRebel]

Seriously, Firaxis. Do you really think that Asia, given its current situation, has any chance of uniting? It seems a bit idealistic to me to say the least. Japan, for example, would (I hate to say this, but it's true) rather be part of America than China. (Of course they'd rather be their own country than either. The government, along with a significant proportion of the people, just hate China THAT MUCH over there).

Shouldn't you at least say that the feeling's mutual? Why leave that out?

Let me just repeat what someone said earlier in the thread. This game takes place 200 years in the future. 200 years ago, the idea that France and Germany, let alone all of Europe, would be in a peaceful voluntary union was unthinkable. Not an exaggeration. Completely unthinkable.

That said, I would have preferred it if Japan and Korea were in their own faction/s, and Southeast Asia had its own faction. Considering the well-known Chinese superiority complex and the disdain they feel for other Asian peoples (for everyone else on the planet, actually, but other Asians feel it the most simply due to proxmity), any union of China with other countries is unlikely to be an equal union even if it were voluntary and not simply China invading everyone else. I kinda feel sorry for any Asian countries forced to work with China. Well, the Philippines is part of Polystralia at least.

 

[kirbdog]

The way I see it the world is becoming increasingly less fragmented.

I don't know...

In 1940 there were only 65 independent countries. Today that number has tripled.

 

[kyrilocy]

It's not a union of countries really, but multi-national corporations which are the sponsors of the colonies.

According to the background info they reveal pre-release, PAC as one has its own air force and budget, so it's more likely PAC is a country. May be not officially or written into its constitution, but its a united country (maybe like soviet union) instead of a "cooperative".

 

[LyonQ]

Future Japan will probably be DLC or in an expansion. (probably combined with Taiwan. Theres a good possibility that South Korea and the eastern end of present-day Russia are a part of this sponsor as well, depending on how you look at PAC and the Slavic Federation)

Japan might be independent in some form or another but China has de jure claims over Taiwan and Korean kingdoms have historically paid tribute to China as well. Likely PAC includes Taiwan and Korea.

But honestly, a Sino-Jap PAC would be wonderful. Why can't there be an Asian superpower to rule them all

 

[Mount Suribachi]

A little over half a century ago, America was among Japan's fiercest enemies. A little over a century before that, America was warring with.. Canada. What on Earth makes you think that the geopolitical affinities of 2014 have anything at all to do with how they might look in this one representation of a future many centuries from now?

Not even that, in 1945 America was engaged in total war to defeat Germany in alliance with Russia. Less than 10 years later America was prepared to engage in global nuclear war to protect Germany from Russia.

Alliances change.

 

[kingsbury]

Look on the bright side OP at least its not Dota 2.

 

[forty2j]

Not even that, in 1945 America was engaged in total war to defeat Germany in alliance with Russia. Less than 10 years later America was prepared to engage in global nuclear war to protect Germany from Russia.

Alliances change.

Speaking of which, I wonder when our cooperation agreement with Russia expires. They appear to be Guarded.

 

[kyrilocy]

Speaking of which, I wonder when our cooperation agreement with Russia expires. They appear to be Guarded.

Cooperation agreement should not be an issue. Do what as you wish, commander.

 

[r0ck]

because its harder to unite asia than its to unite people that have been warring for the past 300000 years, right?

or you really think that africa is peacefull and everybody is just kumbaya-ing into space?

now, if you read pac's lore, youll see that pac DOESNT want to go to space, and its the leader that goes off and spurns two other ships: one for herself and one for africa, all in trade for the african resources (for building the ships).

so maybe she is flying with only the selected-reasonable-few. From all the leaders, its only herself and Reggie who seem to be not completely nuts.