Thread Tools
Old November 4, 2003, 09:17   #1
mimi
Warlord
 
Local Time: 07:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Where Moose are Meat
Posts: 231
Oh My... Looks like I'm gonna have fun!
Just found that chart of the difs in govts... and am REALLY looking forward to giving fascism a whirl - sounds really cool. No more "missus nice girl" for me.

BTW, what tech is needed for fascism [edit: I mean "where in the tech tree is the fascism tech located"]? My first game is gonna be (rare for me) an eliminate anyone who looks at me game! Wheee- HAW!!!

None of this building stuff 'cause I gotta keep the people happy.
__________________
If pigs could fly we'd all have to wear helmets.
******************************
Please don't be envious of my little girlie brain.
mimi is offline  
Old November 4, 2003, 09:57   #2
Swissy
Civilization III MultiplayerTrade Wars / BlackNova TradersCivilization III PBEMRise of Nations MultiplayerIron CiversCivilization IV: MultiplayerBtS Tri-League
 
Swissy's Avatar
 
Local Time: 06:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,436
Fascism is should be after industrialization like communism. The two government systems sort of parallel each other.
__________________
"The greatest happiness of life is the conviction that we are loved - loved for ourselves, or rather, loved in spite of ourselves."--Victor Hugo
Swissy is offline  
Old November 4, 2003, 10:48   #3
Brundlefly
Prince
 
Brundlefly's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Picksburgh
Posts: 837
Fascism is really just Despotism, isn't it? Why have both types of government? It is redundant..
Brundlefly is offline  
Old November 4, 2003, 10:50   #4
mimi
Warlord
 
Local Time: 07:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Where Moose are Meat
Posts: 231
Workers twice as fast and no food penalty (I think)... sounds good to me.
__________________
If pigs could fly we'd all have to wear helmets.
******************************
Please don't be envious of my little girlie brain.
mimi is offline  
Old November 4, 2003, 11:17   #5
Terser
Warlord
 
Terser's Avatar
 
Local Time: 05:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Imperialist Running Dog
Posts: 107
Quote:
Originally posted by Feephi
Fascism is really just Despotism, isn't it? Why have both types of government? It is redundant..
Despotic leaders are largely interested in personal power and aggrandizement. They sustain their rule through brute force and aren't necessarily interested in promoting an ideology or reshaping society.

Facist leaders, on the other hand, usually assume power supported by a pseudo-religious political movement and have a large number of enthusiastic supporters. Facist leaders may not be particularly interested in personal comforts and wealth, but instead are focus on the true substance of power. Although facist governments have dissenters(as all governments do) much of the population supports the government and embraces its ideology. Society itself is changed to suit that ideology, often with disastrous results for minorities or anyone else deemed nonconformist and non-conformable.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
-- C.S. Lewis

Last edited by Terser; November 4, 2003 at 11:24.
Terser is offline  
Old November 4, 2003, 11:32   #6
Brundlefly
Prince
 
Brundlefly's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Picksburgh
Posts: 837
Quote:
Originally posted by Terser


Despotic leaders are largely interested in personal power and aggrandizement. They sustain their rule through brute force and aren't necessarily interested in promoting an ideology or reshaping society.

Facist leaders, on the other hand, usually assume power supported by a pseudo-religious political movement and have a large number of enthusiastic supporters. Facist leaders may not be particularly interested in personal comforts and wealth, but instead are focus on the true substance of power. Although facist governments have dissenters(as all governments do) much of the population supports the government and embraces its ideology. Society itself is changed to suit that ideology, often with disastrous results for minorities or anyone else deemed nonconformist and non-conformable.

Not sure that I'm convinced of the distinction you are making. Saddam Hussein was widely considered a despot, however he rode to power on the backs of the Sunni Muslim and changed society to conform to Sunni ideals. This is more in line with your definition of fascism. Likewiese, Hitler was largely considered a fascist but any exploration of his character shows him as a megalomaniacal despot, imho.
Brundlefly is offline  
Old November 4, 2003, 11:53   #7
Terser
Warlord
 
Terser's Avatar
 
Local Time: 05:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Imperialist Running Dog
Posts: 107
Quote:
Originally posted by Feephi



Not sure that I'm convinced of the distinction you are making. Saddam Hussein was widely considered a despot, however he rode to power on the backs of the Sunni Muslim and changed society to conform to Sunni ideals. This is more in line with your definition of fascism. Likewiese, Hitler was largely considered a fascist but any exploration of his character shows him as a megalomaniacal despot, imho.
Hitler-Facist
Saddam-Despot

-Hitler rose to power enthusiastically supported by the Nazi party. He and his supporters actually won election to politcal office through democratic means, although it ended up being the last election that was held for a very long time...
-Saddam rose to power largely through thuggery and strong arm tactics. The support of a large scale political movement (the Baath Party) basically came later as a way of consolidating his power.

-Hitler never showed much interest in wealth or personal comforts. Aside from the Berghof, Rolls Royces, and strutting through monumenetal government buildings he seemed to shun materiel wealth in favor of focusing on promoting his insane ideas.
-Saddam, in contrast, appears to have viewed his rule of Iraq as a way of enriching himself and his family. How many palaces were there? Dozens? Each of which contained how many frescoes and gold fixtures? There doesn't seem to be much ideology at work with Saddam--not political, nor religious, nor moral. It was all about his personal wealth and comfort.

Hitler-tried to fundamentally alter German society through genocide, propaganda, an emphasis on conformity, the adoption of some socialist principles, etc. etc.
Saddam-aside from a campagin against the Kurds and the abortive invasion of Kuwait Saddam appeared willing to largely maintain the status quo. It was all about him, not his ideology.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
-- C.S. Lewis
Terser is offline  
Old November 4, 2003, 14:36   #8
grappleman
Chieftain
 
grappleman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 11:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Phoenix Ny
Posts: 59
Good points, Hitler was definitely a fascist and Saddam was most certainly a despot. I think his 60-some palaces can vouch for that one.
__________________
"I came, I saw, and.....then I went home."
grappleman is offline  
Old November 5, 2003, 05:17   #9
bongo
lifer
PtWDG2 Mohammed Al-SahafPtWDG Neu DemogypticaCivilization III PBEMC3CDG Blood Oath HordeIron CiversC4DG The HordeC4WDG éirich tuireann
Emperor
 
bongo's Avatar
 
Local Time: 12:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: MOOHOOHO
Posts: 4,737
Why 60 Palaces? One Palace and one Forbidden Palace is enough for any game

(I know that many of his palaces were built just to send a message to the people, 'You're starving while I'm building palaces. You shouldn't rebelled against me in -91. Mwuhahahaha. Suckers')
__________________
Don't eat the yellow snow.
bongo is offline  
Old November 5, 2003, 15:24   #10
SirOsis
Civilization III PBEMC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamCivilization IV: Multiplayer
King
 
SirOsis's Avatar
 
Local Time: 12:50
Local Date: November 2, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 1,452
You can have 3. Be a Communist and build the Secret Police HQ small wonder.
SirOsis is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:50.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team