South African Wars Mod

[The Capo]

You are completely misconstruing what I am saying Sagitario. I know they were two different things, that happened at two different times, but I am saying they have elements of eachother (racism, intolerance, inhumane treatment of people etc.) in them. I am also saying that, while one COULD be considered "worse" than the other, I don't think that is a big deal to the people who experienced both of them. I don't think you could go to someone like a sex slave now and say "well, at least you aren't in the holocaust," it's just an idiotic stance to take. That's like saying dying from an explosion is better than dying from cancer. You're still dead.

But again, none of this has anything to do with your asanine remarks about apartheid. So even ignoring all of this, you are still a complete moron.

 

[Sagitario]

You are completely misconstruing what I am saying Sagitario. I know they were two different things, that happened at two different times, but I am saying they have elements of eachother (racism, intolerance, inhumane treatment of people etc.) in them. I am also saying that, while one COULD be considered "worse" than the other, I don't think that is a big deal to the people who experienced both of them. I don't think you could go to someone like a sex slave now and say "well, at least you aren't in the holocaust," it's just an idiotic stance to take. That's like saying dying from an explosion is better than dying from cancer. You're still dead.

But again, none of this has anything to do with your asanine remarks about apartheid. So even ignoring all of this, you are still a complete moron.

No matter what you say trans-atlantic slavery wasn't a planned extermination of a people you're continued REFUSAL to say the Holocaust is the WORST tragedy in history says quite a bit.

I have to wonder do you feel as bad towards the thousands of white Rhodesian civilians killed during the Bush War or the Ancient Egyptians (Semitic Caucasoids) who were exterminated by Nubians (Sub-Saharan Africans), etc. I'm 99.9% sure you pick and choose who you feel bad for.

The situation is going to keep getting worse for Black South Africans while more and more White South Africans leave the country so we'll see who benefits from apartheid in the end.

 

[Androrc the Orc]

No matter what you say trans-atlantic slavery wasn't a planned extermination of a people you're continued REFUSAL to say the Holocaust is the WORST tragedy in history says quite a bit.

Worst tragedy in the history of mankind? That's quite an exaggeration you have there. Many things worse than the holocaust happened in ancient times; what sets the holocaust apart is that it was done in a time where such things are abhorred, while in ancient times it was not uncommon practice.

I have to wonder do you feel as bad towards the thousands of white Rhodesian civilians killed during the Bush War or the Ancient Egyptians (Semitic Caucasoids) who were exterminated by Nubians (Sub-Saharan Africans), etc. I'm 99.9% sure you pick and choose who you feel bad for.

AFAIK no one can say for sure yet what the Ancient Egyptians were, in terms of race. I have read hypothesizes about them being Semitic, as well as well as them being descended from Nubians, and there are even more hypothesizes as for their origin.

The situation is going to keep getting worse for Black South Africans while more and more White South Africans leave the country so we'll see who benefits from apartheid in the end.

No matter how bad the situation is or becomes, that doesn't make what was done in apartheid right. In my opinion, the best for South Africa would be to envisage becoming a mixed-race society, with Afrikaans as it's main language.

 

[The Capo]

LOL, this is ridiculous, but I must reply...

No matter what you say trans-atlantic slavery wasn't a planned extermination of a people you're continued REFUSAL to say the Holocaust is the WORST tragedy in history says quite a bit.

First of all, I never said it wasn't the worst. But I will say this right now, I don't know if it was or wasn't the worst. In recent memory it probably was, in mordern times, it probably was. But just as you imply in the next statement I'm going to quote you on, you can't ignore the horrible atrocities that have occured. The holocuast, and I'll say it yet again, was an awful event. It showed how deplorable humans can't act towards eachother, especially using positive excuses to get away with it. But again, I never refused to say it was the worst tragedy in history, although I am not sure if it is fair for me to say that. It was terrible, it sickens me just thinking about what people had to go through. What I HAVE been saying was that both are bad, and are horrible examples of humanity at its worst. They are also both symptoms and exampls of systemic racism, which you seem to be expounding. I don't get how you could be pro-apartheid but deplore the holocaust. I don't know where you ever got the idea that I was denying the horrors of the holocaust.

I have to wonder do you feel as bad towards the thousands of white Rhodesian civilians killed during the Bush War or the Ancient Egyptians (Semitic Caucasoids) who were exterminated by Nubians (Sub-Saharan Africans), etc. I'm 99.9% sure you pick and choose who you feel bad for.

Semitic Cuacasoids? What kind of ridiculous crap is that? That sounds like some you'd hear on stormfront or something. Regardless of who the ancient Egyptians were, they weren't "exterminated" by Nubians. I mean, what I don't understand here is what your whole point is? First you claim that apartheid was a positive thing, which implies that European-style Imperialism is a good thing, and then you go ahead and denigrate Nubians for doing the exact same thing to Egyptians. Which, by the way, is completely untrue anyway. And I feel badly for anybody who is unfairly treated, especially when violence and unfounded propaganda is used to convince people of idiotic ideas and towards violent actions. Just like a feel badly for you right now.

The situation is going to keep getting worse for Black South Africans while more and more White South Africans leave the country so we'll see who benefits from apartheid in the end.

Again, I never once denied that currently the South African economy is worse than it was. I also never once said that the conditions of living had dramatically increased since apartheid ended. I made two simple points that you have yet to refute (1) apartheid was racist, bigotted, and intolerent, and was a symptom of colonialism, and (2) black South Africans would never want to go back to apartheid.

For some reason, by me saying this, you went off on some diatribe about slavery and the holocaust, which (again I have said this before, I believe this is the third or fourth time now) have nothing to do with apartheid other than the fact that they are all examples of systemic racism. Do you deny that all three are examplse of systemic racism?

 

[Androrc the Orc]

Semitic Cuacasoids? What kind of ridiculous crap is that? That sounds like some you'd hear on stormfront or something. Regardless of who the ancient Egyptians were, they weren't "exterminated" by Nubians. I mean, what I don't understand here is what your whole point is? First you claim that apartheid was a positive thing, which implies that European-style Imperialism is a good thing, and then you go ahead and denigrate Nubians for doing the exact same thing to Egyptians. Which, by the way, is completely untrue anyway. And I feel badly for anybody who is unfairly treated, especially when violence and unfounded propaganda is used to convince people of idiotic ideas and towards violent actions. Just like a feel badly for you right now.

Indeed, I have never heard of Nubians exterminating the Ancient Egyptians.

 

[Sagitario]

First of all, I never said it wasn't the worst. But I will say this right now, I don't know if it was or wasn't the worst. In recent memory it probably was, in mordern times, it probably was. But just as you imply in the next statement I'm going to quote you on, you can't ignore the horrible atrocities that have occured. The holocuast, and I'll say it yet again, was an awful event. It showed how deplorable humans can't act towards eachother, especially using positive excuses to get away with it. But again, I never refused to say it was the worst tragedy in history, although I am not sure if it is fair for me to say that. It was terrible, it sickens me just thinking about what people had to go through. What I HAVE been saying was that both are bad, and are horrible examples of humanity at its worst. They are also both symptoms and exampls of systemic racism, which you seem to be expounding. I don't get how you could be pro-apartheid but deplore the holocaust. I don't know where you ever got the idea that I was denying the horrors of the holocaust.

I don't have a problem with apartheid because apartheid's ultimate goal was to partition South Africa into multiple nations based on ethnicity. Multi-ethnic nations have Consistently failed. Yugoslavia, Lebanon, Iraq, British Mandate of Palestine, Pre-Republic India/Pakistan, Rwanda, etc. Everything the apartheid government said would happen did.

Semitic Cuacasoids? What kind of ridiculous crap is that? That sounds like some you'd hear on stormfront or something. Regardless of who the ancient Egyptians were, they weren't "exterminated" by Nubians. I mean, what I don't understand here is what your whole point is? First you claim that apartheid was a positive thing, which implies that European-style Imperialism is a good thing, and then you go ahead and denigrate Nubians for doing the exact same thing to Egyptians. Which, by the way, is completely untrue anyway. And I feel badly for anybody who is unfairly treated, especially when violence and unfounded propaganda is used to convince people of idiotic ideas and towards violent actions. Just like a feel badly for you right now.

Ancient Egyptians had DNA that DIRECTLY correlates to the Berbers. I don't know how else to describe Berbers other then "semitic caucasoids" I guess "white indigenous middle easterner" is better? Ancient Egyptian is related to modern Berber and Coptic, both spoken by people descendant from the Ancient Egyptians. Nubians DID invade Ancient Egypt and the two Nubian dynasties that resulted from t hem are what led to the decline and conquest of Ancient civilization.

Again, I never once denied that currently the South African economy is worse than it was. I also never once said that the conditions of living had dramatically increased since apartheid ended. I made two simple points that you have yet to refute (1) apartheid was racist, bigotted, and intolerent, and was a symptom of colonialism, and (2) black South Africans would never want to go back to apartheid.

For some reason, by me saying this, you went off on some diatribe about slavery and the holocaust, which (again I have said this before, I believe this is the third or fourth time now) have nothing to do with apartheid other than the fact that they are all examples of systemic racism. Do you deny that all three are examplse of systemic racism?

1) The original Dutch settlers colonized an uninhabited part of South Africa (Capetown area) and were pushed north by the British AT THE SAME TIME the Zulus were moving into South Africa. After World War 2 it became obvious there were going to be conflicts between different groups even between Dutch and English White South Africans.

2) If apartheid is racism then what is Black Empowerment Policies in South Africa?

 

[Androrc the Orc]

2) If apartheid is racism then what is Black Empowerment Policies in South Africa?

Racism. But two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[The Capo]

2) If apartheid is racism then what is Black Empowerment Policies in South Africa?

For something to be racist, it has to work on the premise that one race is innately superior to another. While I am not famiilar with the Black Empowerment Policies used in South Africa, I do tend to disagree with any policy that treats people differently based solely upon race. Policies that treat people different based solely upon economic standing, or take into past historic insults are not the same thing in most cases but usually tend to be. Since I can only speak from experience and the education I have (something it seems you should learn Sagitario) I don't know if the Black Empowerment Policis in South Africa are racist, they might be, and if they are they shouldn't really be done (particularly if it is hurting the people of the country as you seem to think they do). But what you are doing, again, is saying "well, since South Africa was more prosperous in the 80s, and they had apartheid back then, it must mean that partheid results in prosperity." That is not solid reasoning. You aren't taking into account the global economy and the effects of increased globalization (most western, white countries are not doing as well as the era of apartheid) or climate change that, even in small doses, can severely change the agricultural output of a region rather quickly. That area of Africa is one of the places it will effect the most, you are also ignoring payments or creation of debt as well. Basically you are just an idiot who is clrearly a racist and (for some reason) wants to make a mod about South Africa. I'd suggest shutting up and working on your mod, because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Sagitario]

For something to be racist, it has to work on the premise that one race is innately superior to another. While I am not famiilar with the Black Empowerment Policies used in South Africa, I do tend to disagree with any policy that treats people differently based solely upon race. Policies that treat people different based solely upon economic standing, or take into past historic insults are not the same thing in most cases but usually tend to be. Since I can only speak from experience and the education I have (something it seems you should learn Sagitario) I don't know if the Black Empowerment Policis in South Africa are racist, they might be, and if they are they shouldn't really be done (particularly if it is hurting the people of the country as you seem to think they do). But what you are doing, again, is saying "well, since South Africa was more prosperous in the 80s, and they had apartheid back then, it must mean that partheid results in prosperity." That is not solid reasoning. You aren't taking into account the global economy and the effects of increased globalization (most western, white countries are not doing as well as the era of apartheid) or climate change that, even in small doses, can severely change the agricultural output of a region rather quickly. That area of Africa is one of the places it will effect the most, you are also ignoring payments or creation of debt as well. Basically you are just an idiot who is clrearly a racist and (for some reason) wants to make a mod about South Africa. I'd suggest shutting up and working on your mod, because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

The whole goal of apartheid in South Africa was to partition the nation. The white minority government (Whites were 21% of the population for most of SA's history) of South Africa knew that if there was black majority rule, the country would become corrupt (which it has) and the government would do ABSOLUTELY no planning for the future what so ever. Why? Because the VAST MAJORITY of the population is uneducated. ANC was a terrorist group which blew up grocery stores and attempted to do the same to power plants. The fact of the matter is that ANC has handled the country so badly compared to the National Party that is has turned the engine of the continent into the crime capital of the world.

 

[Sagitario]

For something to be racist, it has to work on the premise that one race is innately superior to another. While I am not famiilar with the Black Empowerment Policies used in South Africa, I do tend to disagree with any policy that treats people differently based solely upon race. Policies that treat people different based solely upon economic standing, or take into past historic insults are not the same thing in most cases but usually tend to be. Since I can only speak from experience and the education I have (something it seems you should learn Sagitario) I don't know if the Black Empowerment Policis in South Africa are racist, they might be, and if they are they shouldn't really be done (particularly if it is hurting the people of the country as you seem to think they do). But what you are doing, again, is saying "well, since South Africa was more prosperous in the 80s, and they had apartheid back then, it must mean that partheid results in prosperity." That is not solid reasoning. You aren't taking into account the global economy and the effects of increased globalization (most western, white countries are not doing as well as the era of apartheid) or climate change that, even in small doses, can severely change the agricultural output of a region rather quickly. That area of Africa is one of the places it will effect the most, you are also ignoring payments or creation of debt as well. Basically you are just an idiot who is clrearly a racist and (for some reason) wants to make a mod about South Africa. I'd suggest shutting up and working on your mod, because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

About the mod. I'm a PPL major (Political Science, Philosophy, and Law). I teach 2 Brazilian Portuguese classes and 2 Latin American Spanish classes. I also have an internship and work at a advertising agency. So, I apologize if I have NOT been putting enough effort into learning the XML and map editing

 

[The Capo]

About the mod. I'm a PPL major (Political Science, Philosophy, and Law). I teach 2 Brazilian Portuguese classes and 2 Latin American Spanish classes. I also have an internship and work at a advertising agency. So, I apologize if I have NOT been putting enough effort into learning the XML and map editing

I thought someone was making a map for you?

You can work on the mod without the map in place. What you can do before you start anything like the civics, and BTW I believe the start of this argument was what the effects of the apartheid civic should be. I still think it shouldn't be a labor civic, but a legal civic.

What you need to do is have a good idea as to exactly what you want your mod to be like. When does it start, what civs are options. Do you want the civs to change throughout time (i.e. should it start before Europeans arrive, or as they arrive, or what?) or should they remain the same the entire time? If you want them to change, it will require a lot of work and I suggest taking a look at RFC (Rhye's mod) and using that as a basis for what you do here. He also has an extra civic category which might be good for a mod like this, particularly if you are starting out as a European civ. You also need to figure out if you want religions in it or not, and if so which religions they should be. If not you could figure out how to change the religions to something else, or you could always do away with them entirely. I think for your purposes you should have them as part of the mod, but they should just spread naturally (i.e. rather than through missionaries, it would be too easy to spread them with missionaries in a mod/map like this). I don't think any civ should have the holy shrine/city for Christianity though. The most difficult part for you, probably, will be figuring out the unit and technology situation. Not because you are stupid (although I happen to think you are ) but because it is difficult to balance these out, especially for a completely new situation. You might also need two different tech trees and two different (sometimes intersecting) unit upgrade paths (one for the native Africans and one for the Europeans). What I'd also suggest doing to make the map a bit more realistic is create an impassible jungle terrain. You could block the northern portion of the map off with this (you might need to make impassible desert too for this) so it seems a bit more realistic. I was going to make a Conquistadors mod where there was impassible jungle terrain that only the natives could pass through, I know the majority of your map won't have jungle, but this could be an idea you might want to use.

BTW: It doesn't matter what people intend on doing, the ends do not justify the means, the way they go about it is what is important.

 

[Sagitario]

I thought someone was making a map for you?

You can work on the mod without the map in place. What you can do before you start anything like the civics, and BTW I believe the start of this argument was what the effects of the apartheid civic should be. I still think it shouldn't be a labor civic, but a legal civic.

I realized that the latest scenario is going to be World War I. Apartheid wasn't implemented until the 1950s. Also, prior to Apartheid Coloreds had the right to vote in Cape Province. Apartheid can't be a option.

What you need to do is have a good idea as to exactly what you want your mod to be like. When does it start, what civs are options. Do you want the civs to change throughout time (i.e. should it start before Europeans arrive, or as they arrive, or what?) or should they remain the same the entire time? If you want them to change, it will require a lot of work and I suggest taking a look at RFC (Rhye's mod) and using that as a basis for what you do here. He also has an extra civic category which might be good for a mod like this, particularly if you are starting out as a European civ.

South Africa was barely inhabited prior to the Dutch and Zulu colonization. I was thinking the start date should be 1652. Thats the year the Dutch arrived to establish Capetown. The Zulus came into Northern South Africa at the same time.

You also need to figure out if you want religions in it or not, and if so which religions they should be. If not you could figure out how to change the religions to something else, or you could always do away with them entirely. I think for your purposes you should have them as part of the mod, but they should just spread naturally (i.e. rather than through missionaries, it would be too easy to spread them with missionaries in a mod/map like this). I don't think any civ should have the holy shrine/city for Christianity though. The most difficult part for you, probably, will be figuring out the unit and technology situation. Not because you are stupid (although I happen to think you are ) but because it is difficult to balance these out, especially for a completely new situation. You might also need two different tech trees and two different (sometimes intersecting) unit upgrade paths (one for the native Africans and one for the Europeans). What I'd also suggest doing to make the map a bit more realistic is create an impassible jungle terrain. You could block the northern portion of the map off with this (you might need to make impassible desert too for this) so it seems a bit more realistic. I was going to make a Conquistadors mod where there was impassible jungle terrain that only the natives could pass through, I know the majority of your map won't have jungle, but this could be an idea you might want to use.

A impassable jungle terrain would be great for the North-Eastern part of the map which would be were Rhodesia/Mozambique are going to be. South Africa itself doesn't have vast jungles.

 

[The Capo]

Well, I was evisioning the map to inculde the bottom protion of the Belgian Congo, I thought you meant South African wars meaning the southern portion of Africa (i.e. encompassing the Belgian Congo as well), but if you mean only South Africa I suppose the impassible jungles is a bit unnecessary as there wouldn't be as many jungles and it wouldn't effect warfare.

 

[Sagitario]

Well, I was evisioning the map to inculde the bottom protion of the Belgian Congo, I thought you meant South African wars meaning the southern portion of Africa (i.e. encompassing the Belgian Congo as well), but if you mean only South Africa I suppose the impassible jungles is a bit unnecessary as there wouldn't be as many jungles and it wouldn't effect warfare.

The South African wars usually refers to wars fought in the general vicinity of South Africa between 1879 and 1915. If the map ended at the Congo River the conflict between Belgium, Congolese, Angola, and the Katanga mining interests could be included.

 

[nutnut]

Although Apartheid wasn't implemented until the 1950s, was their system beforehand any different to the generic European supremacy of the era?

 

[Sagitario]

Although Apartheid wasn't implemented until the 1950s, was their system beforehand any different to the generic European supremacy of the era?

Well prior to the 1950s the Afrikaners (Dutch South Africans who made up the majority of the white population) were considered second class citizens after the Anglo (English) South Africans.

 

[nutnut]

Well prior to the 1950s the Afrikaners (Dutch South Africans who made up the majority of the white population) were considered second class citizens after the Anglo (English) South Africans.

Would it be worth representing?

 

[The Capo]

I don't really think so, if the purpose of this mod is to be a warfare mod, I don't really see the purpose in including any type of discriminatory practices, whether it be directed at Native Africans or at the descendents of European colonists. Unless those groups have their own civs, and even then I don't see the purpose in it.

If it is anything like American history it would probably be similar to the way the Irish (and subsequent Italian and Jewish) immigrants were treated in my country during the early to mid 1800s, which was pretty bad but not substantial enough to present in a civ mod. It would almost be like putting this aspect into an American civil war mod, it might historically accurate but what would be the point?

 

[Sagitario]

Would it be worth representing?

Only in the last scenario during the WWI era.

 

[Sagitario]

I don't really think so, if the purpose of this mod is to be a warfare mod, I don't really see the purpose in including any type of discriminatory practices, whether it be directed at Native Africans or at the descendents of European colonists. Unless those groups have their own civs, and even then I don't see the purpose in it.

If it is anything like American history it would probably be similar to the way the Irish (and subsequent Italian and Jewish) immigrants were treated in my country during the early to mid 1800s, which was pretty bad but not substantial enough to present in a civ mod. It would almost be like putting this aspect into an American civil war mod, it might historically accurate but what would be the point?

Well for the vast majority of the Dutch and British involvement in South Africa the primary conflict was with the Zulu. Maybe some other groups could be involved around Rhodesia?