Which leaders would be offensive?

[LightSpectra]

(I know the biggest reason Hitler isn't in the game is because all Nazi symbols are banned in Germany which is a no-no for the video game market, but that's not what this topic is about.)

Some have complained about Stalin and Mao Zedong's existence in the game, being mass murderers. But are there any leaders that would be too offensive to be in the game at all? Like, do you think you would hear many complaints if Ayatollah Khomeini, Hideki Tojo or Fidel Castro were in Civ4?

 

[Wolfshanze]

"Offensive" is in the eye of the beholder... one reason I don't care too much for "Political Correctness"... as that's nothing more then forcing a certain group of people's opinions and values on others who may not share the same view.

Hitler and Stalin were both mass-murderers... as were some of the other leaders in the game. What makes one mass-murderer politically acceptable and another not? The hypocracy of political correctness at it's finest folks.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao... Good, Bad... doesn't matter... they are all a part of history, and this is a game about history... I'm not too fond of white-washing history. Show it as it is (at least how a game may show it... obviously things like genocide aren't covered by the game, but the existance of a national leader is), and go with it.

Hitler and Stalin were both very bad people... they were also critical and important historical figures and leaders of their nations, and in a game like Civ4, should be represented.... just because they are in the game, doesn't mean anyone indorses or approves of what they did... they are simply there.

Maybe have an option to "remove" certain leaders from the game for those easily offended, but that's about it.

My two cents.

 

[Pieman]

I find it a bit odd that despite the outrage that would accompany the inclusion of Hitler, hardly an eyebrow gets raised about the inclusion of Stalin and Mao Zedong, who both caused more deaths than Hitler ever did. It's not that I want Hitler in the game, far from that, it's just seems quite ironic that Mao Zedong and Stalin, two of the most brutal and callous dictators in the 20th century, are included without any fuss, at least compared to the idea of the inclusion of Hitler. Still though, if we were to not put any brutal dictators, tyrants and madmen then a fair few of Civ's leaders (i.e, Genghis, Qin Shi Huang) wouldn't be in the game.

Anyway, I think a whole bunch of possibly "offensive" leaders, such as Pol Pot, Hideki Tojo, Mussolini etc wouldn't ever be put in because (1), loads of people would complain it would be politically incorrect or something and (2) Most of them didn't leave a significant enough impact on the world, the slaughter/suppression of many people (often their own contrymen) aside.

 

[gettingfat]

It depends on who these leaders murdered. You get what I mean

And to be strict, Mao did not "murder" his people. He indirectly and unintentionally caused the death of his people because of his romanticized ideology and pathetic love for political conflicts. I always say the most dangerous people in the world are charismatic idealogues with ambition turning prominent politicians.

 

[AfterShafter]

You wonder why Hitler is poo-poo'd for being evil by people who play Stalin without thinking twice? Not to be too conspiracy theoryish, but...

After WWII, the Russians were the bad guys, so in America kids were taught to look at them as dehumanized communist monsters, and traces of this social conditioning continue to this day - and who cares if this guy killed a bunch of Commies over the ocean? Meanwhile the Jewish community, after WWII, came into very prominent positions in the media, publishing world, and intellectual world... I remember as an undergrad years ago, I had to read at least five different accounts of Jewish people during the Holocaust in the course of five years and I was just recently asked for help on a nephew's paper on exactly that subject, years later. Ask yourself, how many movies do you see about the Russians as anything but Cold War monsters, and how many movies you see about Jews being taken from their homes in Germany? Not to belittle what happened to the Jews in WWII, but with all the hardship in the world that goes more or less unnoticed, they have taken about 8000% their alloted time on the pity podium.

It's a combination of what the audience was sensitive to and what group was given a podium. The Americans weren't sensitive to Russian plights, while they were to Jewish, and the Russians were not given a podium to tell tales of their woe, while the Jewish were. Now, Hitler is a demon, and Stalin nobody cares about.

 

[dante alighieri]

You wonder why Hitler is poo-poo'd for being evil by people who play Stalin without thinking twice? Not to be too conspiracy theoryish, but...

After WWII, the Russians were the bad guys, so in America kids were taught to look at them as dehumanized communist monsters, and traces of this social conditioning continue to this day - and who cares if this guy killed a bunch of Commies over the ocean? Meanwhile the Jewish community, after WWII, came into very prominent positions in the media, publishing world, and intellectual world... I remember as an undergrad years ago, I had to read at least five different accounts of Jewish people during the Holocaust in the course of five years and I was just recently asked for help on a nephew's paper on exactly that subject, years later. Ask yourself, how many movies do you see about the Russians as anything but Cold War monsters, and how many movies you see about Jews being taken from their homes in Germany? Not to belittle what happened to the Jews in WWII, but with all the hardship in the world that goes more or less unnoticed, they have taken about 8000% their alloted time on the pity podium.

It's a combination of what the audience was sensitive to and what group was given a podium. The Americans weren't sensitive to Russian plights, while they were to Jewish, and the Russians were not given a podium to tell tales of their woe, while the Jewish were. Now, Hitler is a demon, and Stalin nobody cares about.

You're right AfterShafter. When i was a kid we still had civil defense drills in school telling us to hide under our desks unless the commies bombed us. Up until the wall fell down one of the cadences we used in army Basic training was

Drill sergeant: What makes the grass grow!?
Platoon: Blood, Drill sergeant, Blood!
DrillSergeant: What kind of blood?
Platoon: COMMIE, Blood, Drill Sergeant, COMMIE BLOOD!.

It was unthinkable to consider the russkies as nothing more than coldhearted villains that would stab babies in their cribs. And it might not be PC, but what you said about the pity podium is pretty much correct too. the problem is being un-PC like that causes people to think of you as an anti-semite.

(I'm not saying you are or appear to be an anti- semite yourself)

I seriously do not want to have to see yet another Hitler thread here, but Hitler is offensive to many people. (myself I will admit included. I'm not jewish, but Hitler would have gleefully had me exterminated for being a minority). the nazis were cruel evil monsters, and just because there have been other cruel evil men in history does not give them a "free pass" to be included in a main stream game. This has been bandied about many times in threads that usually get locked or deleted, so thats all I'm going to say about AH.

 

[paydro]

Do we have any reason to think that the German law about Nazism is really why Hitler isn't in the game? I would think he would be an easy part to remove if so.

Regardless, sure, he should be in the game. Charismatic/Expansive?

 

[Onagan]

for me there are already 3 offensive leaders in Civilization: Churchill, Mao & Stalin.

But it would be offensive if any part of modern israel would make it into Civilization.

 

[szemek77]

For me is the problem not to let Hitler in, but to take Mao and especially Stalin out. There is no doubt, Stalin is the one whose tyranny caused most deaths in the whole history. And there is no doubt that he is still (after so many facts revelaed) treated with some kind of indulgence.

Ironically we would have a big problem to name ONE russian leader in the history , who would be famous enough to put him/her in the game without any controversy Ivan IV the Terrible? Lenin? They were not nice guys either.

 

[Onagan]

I would think Gorbachev would be a good choice, from a western point of view.
But i think every leader in Civilization has things done that weren't that great.

 

[dante alighieri]

For me is the problem not to let Hitler in, but to take Mao and especially Stalin out. There is no doubt, Stalin is the one whose tyranny caused most deaths in the whole history. And there is no doubt that he is still (after so many facts revelaed) treated with some kind of indulgence.

Ironically we would have a big problem to name ONE russian leader in the history , who would be famous enough to put him/her in the game without any controversy Ivan IV the Terrible? Lenin? They were not nice guys either.

Considering the entire Mao/stalin/Hitler circle that always comes up, i agree. i'd like to see Mao and stalin freakin' removed just so the AH stuff would go away. I don't think russia or China needs another leader and if they do, thean, fine, pick some one else, even if its someone only a history Professor is gonna know about. They don't even have to be serious. Charlie Chan for China and the guy that wrote the F***in' Cherry blossoms (which I had to read in high school and bored me to insanity) for russia. This way we can dispense with most of the "He was just as bad as AH so he should/ shouldn't be in the game!" crap.

 

[moggfanatic]

I would actually prefer AH to be included just so I can kick his virtual ass

 

[GIO888]

Yeah - Everyone should be available as a MOD, to be added or deleted.

Personal choice has to be the driver here, cos one person's Hitler is someone else's Stalin.........

Can I just say it is abhorrent to me I can't play as Sylvester the Cat?

 

[jeffreyac]

Good.... Bad.... I'm the guy with the gun.

(WTB Army of Darkness mod!)

 

[Iranon]

Stalin 'feels' more adequate for Russia than Hitler would for Germany though. Russia had several rulers who advanced their countries through oppressive means and at a tremendous cost to human life; whether Stalin belongs in over another is an interesting question but I agree with szemek77 that other obvious choices would also be controversial.
Regardless of how unpleasant he was, he left a legacy to later heads of state (although by no means a comfortable one). As such, I don't have a problem with his inclusion.

Hitler is much more of a historical oddity and, legal and moral issues aside, would feel extremely odd as a leader for Germany throughout history. Oliver Cromwell and Robespierre are also conspiciously absent, and rightly so... not on account of being controversial/reviled persons, but because they would feel off as rulers representing their countries throughout history.

 

[alpha wolf 64]

I've never figured out why Hitler isnt just excluded from the German version and included in all the others. Seems like such a simple solution to me. Like him or not, but his actions have shaped the world for 75 years.

 

[warpstorm]

I've never figured out why Hitler isnt just excluded from the German version and included in all the others.

What happens if you get into a multi-player game with someone from Germany? Do they desynch because your version is different than theirs?

 

[ManUnited4Ever]

I don't want any leaders excluded; as long as their role in history is prominent enough, they should definitely be present in a game like Civilization. I can understand why Hitler is not there, the Germans don't want him associated with them in any way. I can't imagine Civilization is as popular in the relatively poor countries like Russia and China (still not as rich as Western Europe) as it is in Germany, which may explain Mao Zedong's and Stalin's continued presence. And talking about mass murderers, how come Genghis Khan is not mentioned yet?

 

[Crowqueen]

It depends on who these leaders murdered. You get what I mean

And to be strict, Mao did not "murder" his people. He indirectly and unintentionally caused the death of his people because of his romanticized ideology and pathetic love for political conflicts. I always say the most dangerous people in the world are charismatic idealogues with ambition turning prominent politicians.

Then you obviously understand Barack Obama! The guy has less substance than a piece of loo roll and yet people vote for him in droves. There has got to be something in that, if only that people at the top of the Democrat Party think he is so innocent and naive that he, like Dubya and unlike either Clinton, is corruptible. It is just as well Hitler was a good speaker but insane, otherwise Nazi Germany might have lasted as long as the USSR did. I used to say I'd be Democrat if I lived in the States (I'm Conservative over here, though not a big fan of Cameron, who is not as intelligent or as ambitious as Barack and substance-wise makes him look like FDR) but after the lack of strategy the Dems have shown over the past few months coupled with McCain's age and experience I have to bite the bullet and say Republican all the way.

On topic...I'd like to see Margaret Thatcher included. She comes under the "controversial" role needed to be a good Civ candidate. Her role will be appreciated more once she dies (according to people I know she is not in the best of health and is hanging on by her fingernails, but doesn't want Cameron to get into Number 10 at all) and having read her book (she knew exactly what she wanted to do, exactly how to do it and was able to put it into action with lasting results, good and bad, unlike a lot of leaders these days, who are too timid to upset the press in any way at all and act on principle and not on the results of focus-groups) alongside Obama's I know who I'd rather have running my country.

As for Stalin and Mao, they did not set out to destroy one particular group of people, which is why Pol Pot is not included and they are. Much is made in the Baltic States and Ukraine at the moment out of calling Soviet terror/collectivisation "genocide" but the truth is Stalin was going about industrialisation in the wrong way rather than targeting Ukrainians/Balts in particular. He was not an ethnic cleanser, although certain paranoid policies, including shipping entire small nations eastward, could be called that, it wasn't actually done with the intention of eradicating them, and he died before he could do same to the Jews, so it's not really proveable that he would have been capable of a "Final final solution"; I also know people in Eastern Europe who explain that to many of their parents and grandparents he was both liberator and someone who kickstarted their countries' development, though no-one would say that in public now.

Mao went mental in his latter years and intensified the communisation of China to such an extent that millions probably died, but unlike Hitler he did not set out to destroy, rather to create. I think that is the distinction. I have difficulties even playing Japan as it is now (my grandad was out in Burma just after the war and the less said about that the better...) and I also don't play Queen Victoria because according to historians I know there is something very dodgy about her too.

 

[Edgecrusher]

how come Genghis Khan is not mentioned yet?

The actions of Genghis Khan aren't as personal as the Actions of say Stalin/Mao/Hitler. Napoleon, Alexander, Genghis, Montezuma, the list can go on and on of "Warmongers", this is what makes them a "great" leader in the eyes of historys. The only difference is that tehre are people still alive who can remember the attricities of Mao/Hitler/Stalin, I would think it would be hard to find someone personally affected by Genghis Khan.

incidently

If you look at the 20th Century leaders in the game (quickly memory) those behing:
Stalin
Mao
Churchill
Roosevelt
De Gaul
Gandhi

with the exception of Gandhi, all are WW2 Leaders (?) not to mention that Hitler and Hirohito are available in the download section for anyone who wants them, all they have to do is read a few posts on how to import them.

With WWII being the primary conflict of the 20th century, obviously thats not surprising that the more recent leaders are all from that era.