I imagine words like "inspiration" and "admiration" are more suitable.
wikipedia entry suggest there's a good bit of debate about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois_Confederacy#Influence_on_the_United_States
Was this really necessary?
- Thread starter Del Pino
- Start date
I imagine words like "inspiration" and "admiration" are more suitable.
wikipedia entry suggest there's a good bit of debate about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois_Confederacy#Influence_on_the_United_States
brianshapiro
King
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2003
- Messages
- 775
I'd think it was more admiration than inspiration. Americans already had inspiration from writing by European philosophers, like Locke and Rousseau, who idealized the natural state of affairs between men. To people in America, the Iroquois constitution must have just been an example of what the philosophers were talking about. Although, Rousseau himself spoke of the noble savage, and was probably thinking of native cultures that Europeans had run into.
In no way does the text you are referring to even come close to saying this. I think you are very much misinterpreting the tongue-in-cheek humor.
The civilopedia has always has some character in its writing style, and Civ V is no exception.
I have one question to 2K
In Russia description is writen: "It has been invaded and overrun by Goths, Huns, Mongols, French and Germans, yet remained uniquely Russian."
Just wonder... Was Poland not mentioned intentionally?
To mention Goths or Huns?!
And not to mention Poland-Lithuania and "time of troubles"?
I bet it was intentional - because then again would be a noise around to add Polish Civ
Am I right?hehe manipulation everywhere...
Jerrymander
Epistemologist
I know what ottomans are, I put my feet on them when I watch television. Didn't know they had an empire, though.
I have one question to 2K
In Russia description is writen: "It has been invaded and overrun by Goths, Huns, Mongols, French and Germans, yet remained uniquely Russian."
Just wonder... Was Poland not mentioned intentionally?
To mention Goths or Huns?!
And not to mention Poland-Lithuania and "time of troubles"?
I bet it was intentional - because then again would be a noise around to add Polish Civ
hehe manipulation everywhere...
Most people don't know that Poland conquered Moscow
brianshapiro
King
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2003
- Messages
- 775
With all the complaints about euro-centrism, there's much more bias in Western studies against Eastern european peoples than against peoples in Asia, Africa, the Americas. Its simply assumed that peoples in Eastern Europe, between Germany and Russia, were just dumb peasants who were afraid of vampires and aren't even worth mentioning.
The Almighty dF
Pharaoh
It's true (that that's an image many hold for east europe), I made a map parodying this mindset awhile back. "The World (As Seen By 'Masses')". I need to remake it sometime...
Most of South America was Brazil, central American was "Mexico", east europe was just the start of Russia, Poland, and a very, very large, swollen "Transylvania/Romania" to represent "Generic 1400s Land Where Everyone's Superstitious And Hay Litters The Cobblestone Streets"
It's kinda like how the middle east is just one big ol' Saudi Arabia ruled by Iran's Ayatollah with the technology levels of Libya and the tolerance levels of Afghanistan, or everything in subsaharan Africa is just "Africa", a land covered in jungle, filled with native people, starving people, and militants.
I think we (not Americans, people in general) have a bad habit of seeing the world, culturally, as some sort of Disneyworld like theme park. There's Pagodaland, there's Mexicoland, Sovietland, etc.
omnimutant
Warlord
I guess I'm not buying Civ V. It's bad enough that they heavily skewed historical facts in Civ IV, and designed the game around what seems like a stupid political agenda... For a game that's supposed to be this shining beacon of historical accuracy, every version of Civ keeps getting worse. I had fun playing these games for a long time, even ignoring the glaring inconsistencies, but I'm done. My entertainment dollars will be better spent elsewhere.
Is it really? I've never heard anyone claim that before.
Drakarska
Epic Dadness
Just because I'm curious OM, Which glaring inconsistencies were you referring to?
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
Yes, it was. Civ I would have been that beacon during it's times. And slowly the beacon has been dimming. It has now burnt out almost completely since they have decided to add odd political-motivated statements throughout the whole civilopedia (so it was stated, might be unknown).
Most of my complaint is on the fact that they bothered to have the whole Ottoman entry filled with junk not about Ottoman.
Drake L. Dragon
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2010
- Messages
- 128
I love how many Americans love dishing it out but cannot eat the dish themselves, and I am American. The quotation ""Many Americans know very little about the Ottoman Empire (it occupies the blind spot Americans have for pretty much everything between Greece and China)."" doesn't seem that false nor a special accusation either in historical context. Did many Europeans know a lot about Africa, as Europeans invaded into the mainland of Africa? Do many Americans know a lot about the Middle East, as Americans invade into the Middle East? However, the argument seems to be not about the truth of the accusation but the morality of the Civilization Programmers stating such an opinion in the product. Does anybody complain about how the historically-fictional movie Inglorious Basterds had Adolf Hitler shot down by bullets, even though that rendition is historically inaccurate? We obviously aren't angry about whether the controversial subject is factual then. Does anybody complain about how the gangster game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas endorsed marijuana somewhat, even though that perspective does not conform to the majority opinion? Mostly people who are doing so to get a plus one for their political image. Did anybody complain about how the action-shooter game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 included many quotes criticizing American patriotism?
No, even though the gamer would be playing from the perspectives of US soldiers, who are the epitome of American patriotism. From what the situation seems, we the Civilization gamers seem to hold the Civilization Franchise to an international standard, and we expect all the Civilization Programmers to be completely neutral on the history of nations and nations' relations with one another. However, by the nature of the game, we do not notice that the game takes positions biased nevertheless. (Now, I believe that the optimal thing would be to make it so that the nature of the game wouldn't have to be biased, but what I believe and what is are not the same thing.) The Civilization Programmers won't include Adolf Hitler, but they include Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin. The Civilization Programmers have a predominantly European cast of civilizations and absolutely no African civilizations in Civilization, and yet we are angry because of a little comment that probably doesn't even have anything to do with anti-Americanism but a simple evaluation of the western versus the eastern world? Honestly, it seems that this outrage of sorts seems to be most similar to the situation with Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.
The American fanbase of the games seem to be absolutely fumed, because the American fanbase just cannot take anything that could possibly damage the nation's image, even if the quotation could have been taken out of context, even if America is praised substantially in its own profile in the Civilization Encyclopedia, and even if the Civilization Programmers include a lot of things that could be construed as negative for other nations as well.
No, even though the gamer would be playing from the perspectives of US soldiers, who are the epitome of American patriotism. From what the situation seems, we the Civilization gamers seem to hold the Civilization Franchise to an international standard, and we expect all the Civilization Programmers to be completely neutral on the history of nations and nations' relations with one another. However, by the nature of the game, we do not notice that the game takes positions biased nevertheless. (Now, I believe that the optimal thing would be to make it so that the nature of the game wouldn't have to be biased, but what I believe and what is are not the same thing.) The Civilization Programmers won't include Adolf Hitler, but they include Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin. The Civilization Programmers have a predominantly European cast of civilizations and absolutely no African civilizations in Civilization, and yet we are angry because of a little comment that probably doesn't even have anything to do with anti-Americanism but a simple evaluation of the western versus the eastern world? Honestly, it seems that this outrage of sorts seems to be most similar to the situation with Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.
The American fanbase of the games seem to be absolutely fumed, because the American fanbase just cannot take anything that could possibly damage the nation's image, even if the quotation could have been taken out of context, even if America is praised substantially in its own profile in the Civilization Encyclopedia, and even if the Civilization Programmers include a lot of things that could be construed as negative for other nations as well.
wolfigor
Emperor
In these times of politically correctness, if a similar statement was done with a Muslim or African or south/central american country/ethnic-group the hell would break loose with accusations of racism, discrimination, and whatever else.
In terms of equality to the (hypocritical and silly) political correctness times we live, USA people have all the right to complain as any other group.
I just want it to be known that I read this whole thread and the only thing I have to say is- as others have written- why was the US mentioned in a blurb about the ottomans?
Well that and I think I figured out pretty quickly who goes for cultural wins and who goes for domination wins in game by their posts in this thread.
Well that and I think I figured out pretty quickly who goes for cultural wins and who goes for domination wins in game by their posts in this thread.
Disgustipated
Deity
I don't understand how under the United States of America it says we nearly self destructed in the 19th century. I think they are overplaying the civil war. Even if the North had lost, the United States would still exist today (with less states obviously).
Drakarska
Epic Dadness
That would be an interesting debate D, as I am not so sure of your hypothesis. Especially with Mexico capable of coming up from the south and trying to take full control over the SW regions. Hmnn, that would be an interesting scenario to try though. BTW, I agree with you about the beer. Nice tag line.
Similar threads
