Why doesn't Order and Freedom/Liberty cancel out each other?

I don't think Order is really designed to the "communist" tree, but rather (more simply) reflects a set of policies that a government might use to keep their population in order, and hence benefit larger civs. Some leaders may dabble, some may go hardcore. For example you have the US who is clearly nationalistic, but not so obsessed with order to go all the way down the center track. The fact that nationalism is off to the side of the communism branch leads me to believe this was the intent. You can easily be nationalistic without being Communist, and vice versa.
 
It's not the Communism tree, it's the Road to Communism. Though the real road to Communism is Socialism, Planned Economy, than Communism. United Front and Nationalism are just two things that contribute to going down the road, but they aren't needed.
 
It's Communism. It's also the policy tree that exposes the designers' prejudices - like our Russian friend says, they must be communist sympathizers to link the Totalitarian State limitations to Autocracy and not the tree with actual Communism in it.

This thread is stupid. I'm going to start a new one. We need a new policy tree that has something to do with reality so's I can be a bad boy** when I want to, bundle all the Totalitarian government types into it and give it some realistic benefits.

Give me half an hour.

** - I don't want other people suffering under coercive regimes in real life. But this is a game. Some times I want to just set up and kill everything. In the game, not real life - you're not hurting anything by oppressing electronic digits, but the designers made it so their "favorite" flavor of oppression is split from their "politically incorrect" flavor of oppression and made it so the "nasty" stuff that works (ie, police state etc.) isn't associated with some of the things that make the "nasty" governments evilly effective.
 
It wouldn't be right to link Communism with Autocracy. As said before, it is the oppressive version of Communism, while at the same time it isn't. It's really only what you make it out to be. Besides, Communism really isn't needed for Conquest, it's better for Cultural or Scientific victories anyway.
 
There is no existing (past or present) version of Communism that wasn't/isn't oppressive. As our Russian friend posted (Road to Serfdom) there's a good argument that there's no theoretical version of Communism that isn't oppressive, ie, that it's inextricably linked.

I think this is just bloody too obvious for words. State control is state control, of course it's oppressive, that's what "control" means - it's coercive. For my purposes, I don't care. Like I said, there are times when I just want to kill everything and drag my subjects along with me.
 
Just saying, but the city of Turin where they build Ferraris in the sixties and seventies had a communist government. I haven't heard of any gulags or economic repression occuring over in Turin.

Same goes to Allende in Chile. He may have done some actions that were of dubious legality (the Chilean Supreme Court found his appropriation of trucks illegal), but torture and the secret police came after he was deposed by Pinochet (who, interestingly enough, refused to privatize the copper mines).

A far better statement would be that Soviet-Inspired communism is oppresive. More accurate that way.
 
Sorry if this is necroing, but it looks like they saw this. :goodjob:
 
aatami said:
They did a small part of your request for gameplay reasons only.
Or then the developers are just prejudiced and stupid.
Click to expand...

Why, because they allowed "Free Speech" and "Communism" to co-exist for so long?

I'm perplexed as to why a country with so much emphasis on independence (that whole Sisu thing is just "right") has so much sympathy for a coercive government type. I'm also sad that someone from that culture would find so much to dislike in mine. I know a lot of Finns, it's not universal, but you seem reasonable, ??

It might be that more direct experience with Soviet control would have changed your mind, and for awhile it looked like Finland was going to go the way of the Baltic states - happy that didn't happen. But are you sure you don't have a bit of the "grass is greener" perspective on Soviet style Communism?
 
Regardless of how stupid making Order and Freedom mutually exclusive is, I'm puzzled that they made Order the wide empire tree and Freedom the tall empire one, instead of the other way around
 
You're associating Order with being oppressive, which is what I'm disagreeing with. Those countries were more autocratic than they were socialist. Social democracy is a real thing, and most of northern Europe practices it. And the Freedom tree is obviously based on the USA, which is, as you said, a big country.

Even if you don't agree, they also made Order and Autocracy mutually exclusive.
 
Karl_Rove said:
Just ignore the names for the SPs, they need some work. As is, it is possible to have a Socialist Monarchic Theocratic Communist Democracy with freedoms of speech and religion:lol:
Click to expand...

Sweden?
 
Everyone knows theres no such thing as a socialist democracy! Don't try to fool me Canada! I got proof now!
 
Keejus said:
You're associating Order with being oppressive, which is what I'm disagreeing with. Those countries were more autocratic than they were socialist. Social democracy is a real thing, and most of northern Europe practices it. And the Freedom tree is obviously based on the USA, which is, as you said, a big country.

Even if you don't agree, they also made Order and Autocracy mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...
well you've almost convinced me
but if you think in this way, there should be no exclusive trees

in reality there are no pure freedom or order ofc, but there are tendentions, and freedom and order are opposite directions. peoples under social democracies are not really free as many things are forbidden (swastika is a good exampe) and wealth is redistributed, that is, freedoms of ones are restricted/suppressed for the profit of others ("public interest").

so i think such a mutants, if were allowed, should suffer from a penalty (say bonus effects are 25% less).
 
I would argue that the freedoms that socialistic redistribution of wealth give are greater than those someone living in America has (such as, ideally, health care that is completely free), but that's a whole other can of worms and I'll give you that in the literal sense, they have less.

I can't speak for the rest of Europe, but here in Denmark, people are pretty damn free. We have completely free speech and I'm pretty sure there's no actual law against wearing swastikas. I do know that we have an official political Nazi party; they just never get any votes.

On the other hand, Autocracy and Freedom are and should be incompatible, and it is easy to make a case for Rationalism and Piety, though Piety is kind of a messy tree in that it has both Free Religion and Theocracy available.
 
if we treat order as a peaceful socialsim promoting freedoms (or its politically indifferent form at least) it should not include aggressive policies like nationalism and united front.

rationalism-piety was debated on dozens of pages before now and it seems contraditors did not come to an agreement there.
as for autocracy-freedom, i think it is not that clear too. as we could have some media autocracy where desirable views become dominant by means of propaganda whereas opposition is not suppressed but unpopular just like your nazi party (interesting, i didnt know about it).

ps free healthcare is not an one of basic freedoms, its a priveledge for common people.

pps maybe we should have some mechanism that does not allow to get a last (and most powerful) policy in the tree (+finisher) if an alternative tree is active?
 
With the new changes in the patch, I was thinking if you can have both Piety and Rationalism at the same time..... for a price. Normally if you pick Piety then pick Rationalism or vice versa you get the anarchy thing. I was wondering if it is a good idea to have Free Religion, in new patch give you 1 free policy, give you both Piety and Rationalism under 2 conditions:

1) if that specific 1 point is spent on unlock Rationalism open.
2) Theocracy not picked.

It kinda make sense realism wise and make gameplay more interesting. This mean you can not get Piety Theocracy and finisher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Civ 5 is disappointing
Replies
5
Views
4K
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
B
(Un)Happiness Brainstorm
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
CppMaster
CppMaster
D
Hi gang - it's been awhile 😊
Replies
3
Views
689
raider980
raider980
T
influence and other feedback.
Replies
1
Views
247
Krikkit1
K
Lazy sweeper
Future of AI-gen frame tech, and other AI GPU related things, Nvidia wants to sell us... what is it, really???
Replies
0
Views
398
Lazy sweeper
Lazy sweeper
Back
Top Bottom