Who is the most nationalistic group on the Forums?

[skallben]

This thread just had to engage flaming wars.

I dunno, at least myself feel that me and Peng Qi have a interesting and civil discussion despite our opinions being worlds apart. It is terribly off-topic though

 

[Angst]

I dunno, at least myself feel that me and Peng Qi have a interesting and civil discussion despite our opinions being worlds apart. It is terribly off-topic though

Personally, I'm always OT, so it doesn't matter to me

However, I think Poles are the most. I don't have anything against Polish representation in the game, though.

 

[cybrxkhan]

hey, USA just passed Poland.

 

[Angst]

Heh, cool. Maybe the Poles finally arrived here?

 

[alex sword]

skallben:

The fact is - NATO does not satisfy to domination win per Civ 4 rules.

Another fact is - Western countries are ones who started two world wars within preceding 100 years (which is nothing from history perspective). I think you are too optimistic thinking Western countries as a whole.

Third fact is about Africa... Do you know China came in Africa with their own strategic interests. Check for example this article - http://www.cfr.org/publication/8436/

Yes I have herad about China, they do need their own "colonies" to grow, just as the west did.

Yes, you are right, I did exaggerate slightly. But the world order is different, the threat of nuclear holocaust makes the chance of another world war pretty minimal. Anyways, if western countries would start another war, wouldnt it be better if we had less weapons to . .. .. .. . up the planet with?

The whole point of my statement was the military concentration in NATO countries and the fact that we still seem to mobilize more, even though there are few threats. For what purpose?

If we put aside that topic concering "domination win", I agree with you completely. Nuclear weapon made new world war meaningless from economic standpoint. The planet is too small for WWIII.

Do you know what the problem is with current world? I mean a root problem, not any symptoms like Afghan or Iraq. I think the root problem is that so called sentient beings - I mean the mankind - have not created yet any planet-wide legislation. They tried it after WWII and created United Nations. This was s step forward but the world (not any given country, but world as a whole) still does not have any constitution, any laws and any police which controls how laws are kept.

The current world as a whole is not a federal liberal democracy. It is not even monarchy. It is not even dictatorship. Actually the world looks like a feudal system, where is a number of strong princedoms - like USA, Germany, China, Russia etc and a number of deprived countries. Feudalism and the only real law is the law of power. Do you like it or no but "strong guys who has enough power" very often do what they want with other people - especially if they do not like laws and there is no police close by.

Feudal system'd worked well in the past but after a while, with economic development, the people understood - this system would not be effective anymore. So they invented property law, constitutation, established courts etc etc. These days "guy who has the power and does not respect laws" will be in jail as soon as he tryes to rape or rob someone almost in any country. The humour is that in any given country, basic laws work, but when we look at internation relationship we will see the same old feudalism. Weak guys has no effective protection against "strong guys". No police, no laws, no defense.

One of these strong princes, for instance, sent his kinghts to a small piece of land (after one of local dwellers had blown up the market in the prince's land), beated and terrorized local population and turned this land to a nice poppy farm. The world looked at this nice pastoral picture and said just nothing. But how would we like if in our own country, the people acted this way? For example, some bastard from your street kills some strong guy's friend or destroyed his property. And will you like if that strong guy, taking revenge, reduces your street to ashes and builds poppy farm there? You will say - why me?! Catch that bastard instead! But you are silent when the same thing happens with other countries.

So, that's why I am saying the current world legislation is feudal law. These days, when globalization came, and the planet is too small, I think this feudal system is not effective any more. We need some sort of global government, global legislation and global police.

I am sure it will happen but I don't know when. I am not idealist and I don't think this idea will be popular among decision makers, at least, right now. Leaders are too ambitious, they prefer start senseless little wars instead of thinking global. And obviously any sort of global government will decrease abilities of local "princes". Probably, some global crisis - like WWII - should happen to change people minds and decrease their leaders ambitions.

 

[skallben]

Alex:
I normally rather focus on the root-problems aswell, I just get so heated up by pro-war propaganda. The world was heading in a decent direction after Soviet fell but since 9/11 everything is just going bad, can't help to get fired up
I agree with you except the one-government thing. I think the power focus needs to be moved downwards in the Pyramid. Basically, one world with some kind of council but the real power should be distributed at organs closer to the realities they represent as it will allways be regional matters to solve. I love the Beurocracy quote in Civ 4 . Corruption is allways an issue when power is concentrated in small factions. An issue with capitalism is that the most profitable solution can sometimes be as foolish as to import something from the other side of the globe than buying from your neighbor, very inefficient if looking from an apolitical point of view. That would not be with a global currency. But then, that is far off - if it's ever gonna happen.

I see a need for more free medias with less biased news reporting. I try to live my everyday life in a manner to support my ideals. For instance, Im a vegetarian - cattle burn 90% of the crop they consume for body energy, leaving 10% for human consumption. That's a enormous waste when you can just grow plants for humans instead. I try to applicate similar ideas when consuming things, every day. Politics goes further than voting and cursing in front of the news (not saying that you do ofc, just ranting ). I think those choices make more of a difference than voting Kolera vs. Cancer in elections. I put in a blank vote to show my discontent. More people should do that so the politicians come with clear and straighforward programs instead of swapping ideals with every Gallup. I don't vote for liars.

My opinion is that education can save humanity, people need to form genuine opinions about their life and the world. We still live in a prejudist world. It's all too common that people have strong opinions that are not their own, that is the bane of democracy. Parents, friends, workmates, "the general opinion" forms people and they never even question it. Might be just in my country (Sweden) but I meet so many people that can't speak up for their opinions and just adapt to the average Joe's conception A or B of things instead. Going to vote for a party with this mindset is also a threat to democracy, IMO it is a resposibility to check out facts about the parties. Even controversial facts and reports from the opposition. There is a fear to express different ideas. A variety of medias with different angles are needed. A school and a society that promote the forming of individual moral values is needed. Tolerance for differing values are needed.

 

[Peng Qi]

Heh, cool. Maybe the Poles finally arrived here?

Methinks you don't understand the word "nationalism." Someone who is nationalistic would vote for themselves for most nationalistic because they believe that it's a good thing.

 

[warpus]

You can be a staunch nationalist in your heart, and not really think it's such a great thing.

Anyway, beat this. U.S.A.

 

[QuoVadisNation]

Anyway,beat this. U.S.A.

Hey, that's not fair! Everyone knows soccer makes you go crazy....

 

[alex sword]

Basically, one world with some kind of council but the real power should be distributed at organs closer to the realities they represent as it will allways be regional matters to solve

There should be some constraints for regional leaders defined on global level. You can call these constaints a world-wide laws or any another term, but these constraints should be considered as "must" for all countries and there should be some world-wide constitution which should define ways how world-wide laws could be modified and how they are controlled.

I think this might be a federation in political science terms.

 

[Peng Qi]

There should be some constraints for regional leaders defined on global level. You can call these constaints a world-wide laws or any another term, but these constraints should be considered as "must" for all countries and there should be some world-wide constitution which should define ways how world-wide laws could be modified and how they are controlled.

I think this might be a federation in political science terms.

I'm not sure if a global government is workable or desirable on the terms that I'm sure everyone would want them on. The way I see it, the most likely path to world government is through conquest; a coalition of states could join forces and crush all opposition to them, but they'd need to wage a massive terror campaign to get the world population to walk in step with their moral values and cultural practices. Of course, George Orwell already wrote that book.

The fact is that people are too different right now and, in my opinion, will be so for the foreseeable future. I mean, look at the massive difference in opinion many of the posters on this thread and I have. I simply would not be willing to tolerate a world government of their design and they would not tolerate a world government of mine, and the amount of space between our two positions is so absolutely massive that there's no point in the middle that we'd both be satisfied with.

 

[bhsup]

Hey, that's not fair! Everyone knows soccer makes you go crazy....

You can be a staunch nationalist in your heart, and not really think it's such a great thing.

Anyway, beat this. U.S.A.

Done: http://youtube.com/watch?v=rq2_YKQGE_U

Haha, just kidding. Here's a stadium one: http://youtube.com/watch?v=2MuLBYYvRp8

 

[El_Machinae]

You can be a staunch nationalist in your heart, and not really think it's such a great thing.

Anyway, beat this. U.S.A.

The anthem sung at the Oilers game will still be a piece of awesome for a long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meLpuF9UMvk

You can't tell due to microphone placement, but the audience was so loud in singing that you couldn't hear the main singer at all. Which is mainly why he quit

 

[Angst]

Methinks you don't understand the word "nationalism." Someone who is nationalistic would vote for themselves for most nationalistic because they believe that it's a good thing.

Nationalism does also grow from looking down at other nations... But I was sarcastic, also, it was a joke. Doesn't matter.

 

[Peng Qi]

Nationalism does also grow from looking down at other nations...

No it doesn't. You can claim that thinking that your nation is awesome implies thinking that other ones aren't, but it's not necessarily true. I'm not a huge nationalist, but I, for example, respect and admire Poland's nationalism despite not being Polish myself (well, I am 1/4th Polish but only by blood).

 

[alex sword]

Hi, these pictures are from Australia APEC ("OPEC" (c) Mr.Bush) summit. I am not saying that my personal opinion corresponds to these pictures. No! The only point is that, probably, USA world image needs to be improved after Afghan and Iraq democractic trasformations. People (not politicians but mere mortals) don't like when strong guys, putting any laws aside, start beating the Zhit out of weak people.

 

[Peng Qi]

Anything those idiots support, I'm against.

 

[Angst]

No it doesn't. You can claim that thinking that your nation is awesome implies thinking that other ones aren't, but it's not necessarily true. I'm not a huge nationalist, but I, for example, respect and admire Poland's nationalism despite not being Polish myself (well, I am 1/4th Polish but only by blood).

Well, that's what I meant I'm just not very good at English, so sometimes I can't express myself properly...

 

[alex sword]

Anything those idiots support, I'm against.

Dangerous statement. You did not even talk with these people, but you already disagree with them and you call them idiots.

What about me - I don't know if they are idiots or not, and I don't know if I agree with them and on which statements. The only thing I know that "people (not politicians but mere mortals) don't like when strong guys, putting any laws aside, start beating the Zhit out of weak people".

 

[Peng Qi]

Dangerous statement. You did not even talk with these people, but you already disagree with them and you call them idiots.

I can see that they are idiots because they compare the United States to Nazis (anyone who thinks that suffers from a complete lack of perspective) and think that the best way to address serious political issues is with crude sexual humor.

What about me - I don't know if they are idiots or not, and I don't know if I agree with them and on which statements. The only thing I know that "people (not politicians but mere mortals) don't like when strong guys, putting any laws aside, start beating the Zhit out of weak people".

Agreeing with an idiot doesn't automatically make you an idiot. I mean, most idiots know the world is round, so obviously agreeing with one who says it doesn't make you an idiot. You can legitimately believe the things that those people believe as long as you express it in an intelligent manner.

Anyway, in reference to your quote, I don't understand why people weren't upset that Saddam was beating the crap out of weak people every day. The Taliban abused women and minorities in their country every day. Why is it so bad that the United States came in and crushed a couple of bullies?