What constitutes a civilization?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am not belittering you, you aren't responding to a single point and resolving back to a sense of Euro-Centrism and ignorance. It just doesn't work that way.
You sound utterly inane to think there is nothing.

I just don't understand how you think only focusing on a Euro-Centric view validates anything (it doesn't it makes you sound silly and like you are trying to sound like a fool) that you are saying at the moment.
Honestly, I don't think he is being serious at this moment. He had no idea bout either of them so how is supposed to have any credibility in regards to history.

And to ignore every point about culture and their effects on the Americas? I doubt he has ever been south of the USA

I find it silly that you think they shouldn't

Its just from your original post its evident you have a very Euro-Centric view of the world and don't seem to know about a lot of civilizations outside of the view, which is kind of the point I am trying to make.
Sounds like you really don't know about a lot of these civilizations.

Am I to take that seriously now?
 
Am I to take that seriously now?

Because you haven't replied to a single point :lol:

I can't help it because its true, I am not sure if you are being serious because you aren't responding to anything ;)

If you don't say anything substantiative then you can't help it if people think maybe you aren't being serious. Resorting to Euro-Centrism as a defense doesn't work.
 
Because you haven't replied to a single point :lol:

I can't help it because its true, I am not sure if you are being serious because you aren't responding to anything ;)
I do by principle not get involved in a deeper discussion with people who do not uphold a common courtesy. I dismiss their arguments as invalid by the basis of them being uncivilized. ;)
 
I read a lot of comments about how many people and the game itself have a Euro-centric view of history and the world. I do not think this is due to ignorance or racism (although that may be a very small factor for some people, but overwhelmingly I don't think it's the case).

There is a reason why many people have a Euro-centric view, and that's becasue Europe basically took over the world. Like the saying goes, the sun never set on the British Empire. The same was probably true for the Spanish, French and others. And modern day America (a European offshoot) also has an empire that the sun never sets on. America has approximately 1,000 military bases in 150 different countries, it's an empire whether people like to admit it or not. I would say that up to around 1500 AD Europe did not have any more influence in shaping the world than any other region. But from 1500 onward, Europe has had more influence in shaping the world as it is today than any other region.

Also, in Europe empires have come and gone, but western civilization has continued. Here is an example, the Aztecs developed a great amount of technology and flourished for a long time. In many regards, the Aztecs were superior to Europe. But the Aztecs did not really shape the world of 2012 AD. The Spanish destroyed the Aztecs empire, along with their religion, language and everything else. Today Mexico speaks Spanish and is mostly Catholic. So who played a bigger role in shaping modern Mexico, the Aztecs or the Spanish? The same could be said for almost every part of the world. All the borders of countries in the Middle East were drawn by the British Empire. The Arabs had nothing to do with the borders and countries that exist in their own region.

The fact is, western civilization works. The west just has a very methodical, almost a scientific method of integrating technology and using it to conquer others. Gunpowder for example, the Chinese are the ones who invented it. But Europe is the one who took a Chinese technology and integrated it with their own to invent cannons and guns. And the reason why China is becoming a superpower is because they are becoming more and more westernized. They are abandoning their traditional culture and adapting a western culture. Western civilization works, the Europeans are the ones who started western civilization, and the Europeans played a bigger role in shaping the modern world than anybody else. That's the reality whether people like it or not. That is why many people and the game have a Euro-centric view.
 
I am not going to discuss with someone who tries to belittle others into thinking their point of view is the one and only way to go. It is a waste of time. If you want to discuss, try to do it like a decent human being, alright? :)

and exactly what do you try to do when you post something in any thread?

Moderator Action: This is exactly what should have been stopped with closing the thread. Don't continue it.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

I do by principle not get involved in a deeper discussion with people who do not uphold a common courtesy. I dismiss their arguments as invalid by the basis of them being uncivilized.

:lol: hahaha sure, you don't answer nothing for that :lol: or maybe because you don't know why answer, sir ;)

Moderator Action: This is exactly what should have been stopped with closing the thread. Don't continue it.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889


The Spanish destroyed the Aztecs empire, along with their religion, language and everything else. Today Mexico speaks Spanish and is mostly Catholic. So who played a bigger role in shaping modern Mexico, the Aztecs or the Spanish?

both cultures were important, don't think that native american influence in modern latinoamérica is few and weak, that's a huge mistake, aztec race is still existing, like another main races of the continent, you cannot compare mexican spanish with spainard spanish, maybe have the same roots, but both langages have been influenced for hundreds of aztec words, expressions and slangs, that today, for a spaniard it's hard to understand a mexican, same with the rest of latinoamérica

the Europeans are the ones who started western civilization, and the Europeans played a bigger role in shaping the modern world than anybody else. That's the reality whether people like it or not. That is why many people and the game have a Euro-centric view.

nobody is saying that western civilization isn't important, but that's not fair that the rest of non european civilizations doesn't be considered enough important to be in the game, history and civilizations started before the western culture born, nobody want to eliminate european civilizations, what we want, is diversity
 
nobody is saying that western civilization isn't important, but that's not fair that the rest of non european civilizations doesn't be considered enough important to be in the game, history and civilizations started before the western culture born, nobody want to eliminate european civilizations, what we want, is diversity

I never said that non-European civs are not important enough to be in the game. The game would be pretty boring if it consisted entirely of European civs. To have a fun and exiting game there has to be some American civs (meaning the American continents such as Inca, Maya, Iroquois etc). There also has to be civs from Eastern Asia, the Middle East and Africa. It adds flavor and diversity to the game.

I would also like to see modern day South America represented in some way, they are the only continent not represented by a modern Civ besides Antarctica (which is uninhabited) and Oceania(and Australia is part of the British Commonwealth so they are already represented by England). That is why I think Brazil should be added, it may not be a perfect Civ but it's the best fit to represent modern South America.

But all that said, it does not change the fact that Europe has had more influence in shaping the modern world than any other region. Mexican Spanish is WAY more similar to Castillian Spanish than it is to the Aztec language. The same could be said for the English language. The state of "Connecticut" has a name that is derived from Native American language. So American English has some Native American influence, but it's still English. Mexican Spanish has a lot of Aztec influence, but the language is still Spanish.
 
There also has to be civs from Eastern Asia, the Middle East and Africa. It adds flavor and diversity to the game.

sure, ther'es still important civilizations, specially in middle east, like the assyrians, the hittites, the hebrews, the Zulu, I would like the Manchu, the australian indigenous(maybe the noongar or the palawah), the inuit or the khmer

I think Brazil should be added, it may not be a perfect Civ but it's the best fit to represent modern South America.

agree, Brazil perfectly would be a civilization, have the "requeriments" that the another civs have to be included in game, Brazil and Gran Colombia, that will represent most of the territory and the andean culture, both will truly represent Latin America, not just the native Americas.

Mexican Spanish is WAY more similar to Castillian Spanish than it is to the Aztec language. The same could be said for the English language. The state of "Connecticut" has a name that is derived from Native American language. So American English has some Native American influence, but it's still English. Mexican Spanish has a lot of Aztec influence, but the language is still Spanish.

well, you cannot compare them, basically because colonization in North America was completely different from the south, americans still are a white race, with a western culture, their english are a lot different from british english, but not too different, americans don't use sioux, or iroquouis words because they aren't native americans.
South America people are different, mestizos, it means that have part of native american and part of the european customs and culture, language included, and for that reason South America is considered an culture appart from Europe and Native America
 
We had a thread like this about 6 months ago, which is why i havent been here in 6 months, about why Canada has never gotten included in Civ. My arguement was;

Its an independant nation.
It played a major role in both world wars (Vimy Ridge, Juno Beach, Escorting convoys (which Canada did solo for a large part of WW2 even without Radar), etc. Canadian soldier were thrown into the most vicious sectors against the German elites during both World Wars and often emerged victorious. So much so they found a great deal of respect from the enemy. We also flew more missions over Libya then any other nation.
It is culturally distinct from its nearest relatives (England and the US). Canada has a much more 'resolve' attitude. Willing to overcome what comes at us while promoting peace and cooperation but also willing to fight when it is necessary.
We are technological distinct. Canada is actually a world leader in robotics and telecommunications.
Our economic distinction comes from a modified freemarket, which is why we survived the recent economic collapse relatively unscathed. Also we have a greater respect for 'Green' ideals then most nations, while sadly not caring for the Koyoto accords..

Anyways, the arguement that won out, supported by a moderator, was that Canada was not a Civilization because we weren't created through conflict. Essentially Canada's independance was won from England through diplomacy and not through rebellion.

I'm not interested in arguing the Canadian issue anymore, just stating that the only definable quality which any form of authority has stated is required to be considered a Civ for the game Civilization, to my knowledge, is that the civ needs to be created through combat.
 
Why is anyone arguing with this troll anyway?

Moderator Action: Please do not call someone a troll. We regard it as trolling in itself, because even if someone has been warned for trolling, you labelling them in such a way is not going to produce any sort of reaction but a negative one.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
There was much going on after conquest and the colonial period in the Spanish American possesions. Yes, we speak Spanish in Mexico, and no, its not really that diferent from the one spoken in Spain, TBH I sometimes have more trouble understanding other latin american accents than the Spanish one. However thats also an indicator of the rich cultural process that's been happening in latin america since colonial times. The natives didnt dissapear, or their culture completely destroyed, since the begining we've had a process of syncretism, everything mixed: simbols , traditions, clothing, language, traditions, food, I mean, all culture mixed.

Its useless to try to decide how much is native, and how much Iberian, as it depends on your point of view, for example, the peninsular Spanish viewed criollos (europeans born in America) as something diferent, mestizos and natives were almost alien.
Spanish culture wasnt peninsular in America, only the ruling elite was. and that diferentiation would cost them in the independence wars. However there's a unique syncretic culture born out of that centuries old mix, and its quite diferent from country to country, heck its even diferent from regions.

What Im trying to say with all this is that latin american culture IS diferent from Spanish one, and also from native culture, we've got a lot of cultural roots. Latin America is still a massive melting pot to this day, in no way the same to its Spanish and Native past.
 
the reason why China is becoming a superpower is because they are becoming more and more westernized.

lol this man really can't differ westernization from modernization

Gunpowder for example, the Chinese are the ones who invented it. But Europe is the one who took a Chinese technology and integrated it with their own to invent cannons and guns.

if his logic of westernization works, then europe is the one that was easternized

They (china) are abandoning their traditional culture and adapting a western culture.

I really can't imagine a country that more than 99% of it's people cant speak english are adopting western culture, and I've never heard that chinese celebrating 1 january as a real new year, so, how can they be adapting western culture and abandoning tradition? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Moderator Action: Warned for trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
lol this man really can't differ westernization from modernization

You are the one who seems to be incapable of recognizing a difference between westernization and modernization. People in China today are going to McDonalds and Kentucky Fried Chicken. That is not just modernization, that is a cultural change.


if his logic of westernization works, then europe is the one that was easternized

Gunpowder was a Chinese invention. But Europe used a Chinese invention and applied it in a way that has never been done before to invent cannons and guns. And they used that technolgoy to conquer most of the world. Hong Kong was a British territiory until just a few years ago. I ask you, did China ever hold any territory in the British Isles, or anyplace in Europe for that matter?



I really can't imagine a country that more than 99% of it's people cant speak english are adopting western culture, and I've never heard that chinese celebrating 1 january as a real new year, so, how can they be adapting western culture and abandoning tradition? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Of course China still has a lot of their own traditions. And, English is not a requirement for westernization. A country can become westernized and speak any langauge, the language means nothing. Germany is a westernized country, but I geuss you would argue that they are not becasue they don't speak English. But China's culture is no way near as traditional as it was even 20 years ago. 20 years ago the Chinese dressed in traditional chinese clothing, they at traditional Chinese food almost exlusivley, and many other things. Today, Chinese businessmen dress in Western stlye suite and tie, they eat Western food and traditional Chinsese food. China's cities have very interesting skyscrapers, but it does not really have a Chinese look to it at all. They could easily build skyscrapers with a traditional Chinese facade, but they are not doing that. They are bulldozing entire villages that have existed for thousands of years. You could take the skyscrapers in China, and transplant them in New York and they would not look out of place, they would fit right in.


So if you are going to argue with my statements, that is fine. You can believe whatever you want. But don't be a child and attack me at a personal level, with your stupid little smiley faces laughing at me. That is so immature and childish, if you had a decent argument you would have no reason to resort to doing such a thing. You clearly have a very poor argument and cannot argue me on my facts. I'm sorry that you cannot accept reality for what it is. Europe has had more influence in shaping the modern world than anybody else. There is nothing special about Europe or white people, it just happened to be them who had the most influence. It had to be somebody, there is no way that out of all the regions in the world all of them are going to have an exactly equal amount of influence in shaping the modern world, it's absolute nonsense. It could have been Asia, Africa, or anyplace else. But events in history just turned out in such a way that it was not Asia or Africa, it was Europe. So you can believe whatever you want. You can believe that grass is purple and the sky is green. You can believe that Europe doesn't have any more influence than anybody else. But your beliefs don't change reality, reality is what it is.

Moderator Action: Please don't return fire. Report people you think are trolling, rather than responding in kind.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
 
Also, the Chinese still celebrate their traditional New Year. But as far as the business world in China is concerned, January 1st is the new year. China uses the same fiscal calendar as everybody else. And the fiscal calendar is based on the Gregorian calendar, which is western.

And just becasue western culture has the most influence and is dominant doesn't mean it's the best. The Gregorian calendar isn't even a good one, that is why we need a leap year. Some cultures have a calendar that is so accurate there is no need for a leap year.

So Western civilization may not even be the best, but regardless, they still have the most influence in shaping the modern world whether it's good or bad.
 
Moderator Action: Four actionable posts since being reopened.

It can stayed closed this time.

If you wish to discuss history, please visit CFC's World History subforum. If you wish to engage in any other off-topic discussion, please visit one of our off-topic forums.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom