Paradoxal Civics!
- Thread starter Blaarg
- Start date
Desert-Fox
King
Theocracy & Free Speech -> Theocracy means that you have not allowed to speak(or even think) about other gods than state religion has but freedom of speech means something else... like Iran or countries like that.
Peng Qi
Emperor
Not at all paradoxical. Spain during World War II, for example.
Difficult but not impossible. The slaves would need to be allowed to vote; it doesn't mean they'd need to be freed from their masters.
Again, not at all paradoxical. It just doesn't happen very often.
No, that would just be a nightmare.
Not at all paradoxical. Has happened many times in history.
Desert-Fox
King
It happens same often than North-Korea has democracy because they call themselves People's Democracy 
Actually very few countries have freedom of speech because next step is politicall correctness what disables a lot of freedom.
Actually very few countries have freedom of speech because next step is politicall correctness what disables a lot of freedom.
jkp1187
Unindicted Co-Conspirator
Not a good example. Franco sent a small volunteer force to fight alongside the Nazis and Italians as a cobelligerent in Russia without a declaration of war, both to mollify Hitler and because, in his mind, it was important to defeat the "Godless communists". Spain otherwise avoided participation in the war more due to calculation and the fact that the country had been devastated by the Civil War in the '30s and needed to recover. He certainly wasn't a pacifist, in that he took up arms against (what was then) his own government during the Civil War.
Peng Qi
Emperor
Pacifism is Civ4 doesn't mean "we never fight ever under any circumstances;" it means "we maintain a relatively small or inactive army for our size." It's probably not the best example, though.
CivAgamemnon
King
That is indeed ludicrous! I find it hard to believe that the game designers weren't cognizant of the fact that Bureaucracy sucks up money and production, instead of giving a 50 percent bonus to science and production. It should be a negative bonus of 50 percent. Very little good comes out of a bureaucracy except paperwork and inane rules.
r_rolo1
King of myself
First a historical note: Spain entered in WW II by the side of the Allies ( of course it was after the surrender of Germany and only against Japan when it was clear that the war was almost over, just to get into the victor's table .... )
Abot this one:
Abot this one:
Athens had universal male suffrage for those who had born in Athens from Athenian mother and father ( even today most countreis that have Universal Suffrage difer about the definition of citizen, especially about age and country of origin ( Germany, until some years ago, only allowed as German citizen a person who had "German blood" ( AFAIK, of course ), some countries only recognize citizenship to people over 25 or 21,..... ) ) and had slaves....
bonafide11
Worker
Hah, I agree with others that Decentralization + Bureaucracy is probably the most contradictory combination. The other ones aren't necessarily paradoxical.
Gaius Octavius
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,016
Just an aside, in America, Universal Suffrage is generally taken to mean that women can vote, too.
In game description of Pacifism:
There is no way that Franco was a pacifist by the CIV IV definition.
In game description of Police State:
Free Speech and Police State are surely paradoxal, given the in game description. Pacfism could work, technically, it would result in the weakest police state ever though.
There is no way that Franco was a pacifist by the CIV IV definition.
In game description of Police State:
Free Speech and Police State are surely paradoxal, given the in game description. Pacfism could work, technically, it would result in the weakest police state ever though.
r_rolo1
King of myself
Universal Suffrage means 2 things:-All the citizens can vote ( " No tax without representation" )
-Any citizen vote has the same value than other one
This excludes the non-citizens, of course ( normally the youngsters and the foreins, but ythat is not written in stone).... the problem is there. Who is a citizen? For Germany in a not so far away past, it meant people with "German blood" , in San Marino it requires being 25 years old, in Portugal you can have citizenship by having atleast a portuguese grandfather ( and EU citizens can vote and be elected like the Portuguese citizens, if they live permanentely here )....
Athens had stricter rules than the modern democratical regimes for citizenship, but it would be far more closer from the ideal of Universal suffrage than the UK monarchy in the times of the censitary vote ( pay more taxes, have more votes ).....
Does it mean that children, convicted criminals in jail, foreigners and mentally retarted people can also vote in universal suffrage states?
If that is the criteria, then no state ever at present or in the past is using Universal Suffrage.
Incorrect, as in many countries those with mental illnesses are not allowed to vote, as are some criminals.
EDIT: basically what he said ^^^, came in a bit late
TheRealCzar
Chieftain
Well technically speaking, if you're not allowing ex-convicts and mentally handicapped the right to vote, you don't truely have universal suffrage.
I was refering to this statement:
Those examples are clearly not examples of universal sufferage. Germany can't claim to have universal sufferage and at the same time ristrict sufferage to those with german blood. Claiming they are not citizens, if they have lived in your country thier entire life, is just a means to the end of denying them suffrage, and probably other rights.
I was refering to this statement:
Those examples are clearly not examples of universal sufferage. Germany can't claim to have universal sufferage and at the same time ristrict sufferage to those with german blood. Claiming they are not citizens, if they have lived in your country thier entire life, is just a means to the end of denying them suffrage, and probably other rights.
Then for it to be truly universal, then children, convicted criminals in jails, foreigners, aliens, and the mentally ******ed should be able to vote. Otherwise, it is not universal as there are still some who can't vote even if they wanted to.
Besides, who defines what a citizen is?
Different states have different criteria of determining citizenship. Some states have people simply born on their soil citizens, while others require one or both to be citizens. Some do not allow naturalization, some easily makes foreigners citizens, others make it hard but not impossible.
Similar threads
