B L, the purpose is not to always oppose the others. It's just that political parties in Germany and generally in Europe have firm, counterexposed ideas and views and are *very* clearly defined. A lot of people vote for another party every election but most who stick with one *really* identify with those views. If they state them openly it's very hard to turn the other way without appearing to be a political opportunist. The difference to the american system is the greater variety of parties (for example in Germany there are two great ones SPD=labor party & CDU=conservatives but also many other who also have a great influence through coalitions - FDP=liberals, The Greens, PDS=left wing and so on). To survive in such a variety is harder and therefore these parties do a lot to make their beliefs clearcut from the ones of their oponents. I just say that compared to the German, Dutch, French and Spanish systems the British and American ones look a bit plainer, which in fact is better for the government because it is easier to enforce policies.

Phaedyme, you're right... Hell, if I look at Jim Clancy's hair I always ask myself if he is in fact a cyborg.... Wait a moment.... The Yor Collective taking over CNN!?!?

~SDC~

Frogboy: Although your political views do worry me a little bit (been reading on your site ) I must say that you seem to be a *very*, *very* nice person. LOL I must genuinely thank you for this truely remarkable game! Keep that stuff coming... LOL

~SDC~

Hehe, I just came across the Sanderians (lost Democratic party civ) in my game I'm playing right now. It was a lot funnier after having read through this topic earlier.

I wonder if it's just a coincidence that they are friends with the Fundamentalist minor civ in my game? They are the ones who "believe they have the answer to all the universe's problems." LOL

All I ask is that all my political enemies be converted into bone flecked jam to spread on my toast. And they say *I'm* the ogre? Ak. I'll club their heads and eat their bones for that!

~SDC~

"I would imagine that a Unified Humanity could only come about through a Socialist government."

Keep imagining.

"Right winged politics only serve to perpetuate the gap between the haves and the have nots"

Funny, many would say the same of the left in America. Class warfare is what they run on every election year.

I don't hate the rich, because I want to be rich one day.

DblDamage

I'm satisfied as a middle class citizen, and I invite all the poor and the rich to join me.

The US is a country reknown for their Propaganda skills "being second only to Hitler" and it shows (FoxNews, CNN.. and that's only the commerical side of things)

Conservitives by characteristics are opposed to change.. How would somone who opposes change get a world government going?

Ever notice Conservitives don't make the best diplomats? Napoleon, The Current Isreali Prime Minister, Bush Jr., Most Monarchs, Fascists, Stalin.

So HOW would Conservitives unite the world? The obvious means: At gunpoint. Because they can't succede by diplomacy unless guns are involved. Latest example: US defying the UN and attacking Iraq.

~SDC~

"Verenti", don't take it so seriously. This Thread was meant to be for in-game amusement, like taking a brake in between the game, like to read questions and answers in the forum, like to download yet another update, like to help the community with your knowledge of the game or computer hardware. That's what this is all about, to have a great environment for gaming and joy, to be a member of an international family, and perhaps even as a first step to global peace and understanding

Me, I'd like the 'Conserve' party to be in power - more jam for everyone! LOL

A possible name for a silly party is the McGillicuddy Serious Party which, seriously, got a couple hundred (or was that thousand) votes in the last general election in New Zealand. Including mine, the election before that

It's a shame that parties are labelled 'conservatives' or 'progressives' when their actions so often contradict the name (if you were to assume that conservative meant conservative and progressive meant progressive).

It's also crazy to call things 'left wing' and 'right wing' - brings to mind the thought you need both sides in order to have one working bird.

Anyway, what's this about the 'fourth estate' and the 'fifth estate'? Don't those people own enough properties already?

Enough silliness LOL

Damian

~SDC~

New Zealand regularly has a bunch of loonie parties who get a few hundred votes nation wide (though note, the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party got over 3% of the vote in 1999).

Unfortunately, the McGillicuddy Serious Party (with their stated policy of tying ropes to the tectonic plates and pulling on them to cause an earthquake, in order to knock all the buildings down to make room for zigzagging bullock tracks) no longer exists. Still, parties like them, the Natural Law Party (advocating cosmic peace and harmony through yogic flying) or the UK's Monster Raving Loony Party are always fun to watch (and generally have great policy manifestos .

In terms of definition, the thing that I find most amusing are the differences in definition of "Liberal" - people here refer to many right-of-centre policies as liberal (or neo-liberal) whereas they would be the core of American Conservatism.

|Zero|

cant remember who mentioned JFK dems. but there is no such thing JFK and republicans have same ideals this day and age.scary aint it

Verenti, I have been trying to keep things light. I didn’t want to get in to this, but here goes:

I disagree with your assessment that conservatives are opposed to change. George Bush wanted to change the Iraqi regime, and it looks like that will happen. Ronald Reagan’s policies helped bring down the Soviet Union. In my opinion, the US now has to deal with all the problems that were allowed to grow and fester during the eight years of neglect in the previous administration.

Just because other countries opposed the US policy towards Iraq does not make them right. They have their own personal agendas to protect. Real leaders do not always take the easier path, they do what they feel is right.

The UN will never succeed in creating a world government. It is a place for world leaders to meet and talk... and talk…and talk…. Its policies are an abject failure, and it has become irrelevant.

I don’t know what country you are from, but take a good look around you. How much of American culture has seeded itself around you? Movies, books, cars, cola, hamburgers, music, the internet, GalCiv. This is how one becomes a world leader. Not by gunpoint, by freedom, opportunity, and innovation.

If you are happy with your current social status that’s fine. I have ambition, and a desire to make my family’s life better through the pursuit of wealth. If I stay in the middle class, so be it. At least I know I made an attempt to better my situation instead of being stuck in idle.

There is an old saying on usenet - once somebody brings up Hitler, the conversation is over. This will be my last post in this thread.

DblDamage


~SDC~

Verenti, when you say "propaganda," what do you mean? I'm asking because you said it's morally wrong.

I'll use an in-game example to illustrate: You have a world on the edge of Drengin space. So much so that the population is talking about joining the Drengin, 'cause their culture is so much more advanced, etc. So you fund a propaganda (information spread for the purpose of promoting a cause) campaign. Now, I assume that campaign will describe how the Drengin find the skin of other races a delicacy, how they march slaves to the death furnaces...now, how is this immoral? Not the marching and the skin-eating, the *telling people about it*.

~SDC~

Long live the GOP!

The fact that your giving it a spin, A Terran spin. Propaganda is "3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause" (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary) and that's wrong, its the manipulation of information thats immoral, the spin thats almost always there that's immoral, its the posters, the slogan, THATS whats evil about propaganda.

DblDamage - You probablly won't read this but I may be happy with my Social status, But I'm not happy with society, the corruption festering carcass of civilization where need is replaced by greed. I live in Canada, and we spend 10 billion dollars a year on holding criminals. If we placed the money into social welfare, education, etc. maybe we could prevent the crimes by educated out citizens better. I have ambition too, except mine don't extend to my family only, it doesn't stop at my countrymen, it extends to my species, to Homo Sapien. See I have no selfish need to improve my standing, that only keeps the greed ball rolling. On Iraq: By change you mean put a puppet regime to give them controll over a region rife with turmoil. Maybe putting soldier in the Middle East isn't the best thing.. Maybe, If America is TRUELY interested in peace freedom and liberty, they can go in and deal with the problems with Isreal oppressing inhabitants of the West Bank. Maybe they should stop funding a government that brutally suppresses people throwing rocks with missiles and armed forces. Maybe if America cares about the world they could spend some of its money on feeding the nations in the undeveloped countries, not like their anti terrorism bill in 2002 couldn't of ended world hunger. Instead they exploit the populations via Neo-Colonialism. You know why the UN will never succede in creating a world government? Superpowers. Countries unwilling to relinquish the reigns of power. As for the American culture, Americans have corperations, not culture. Culture in the traditional sense was associated with fine arts. Do you associate McDonalds with 'Fine arts'? Do you associate Coca Cola with 'Fine Arts'? Do you associate Cambells soup with 'Fine Arts? (Little joke there)Corperations DON'T make you a world leader, they're only a temporary solution to a growing problem.

~SDC~

must... stay..... out..... AHHHH

"
The US is a country reknown for their Propaganda skills "being second only to Hitler" and it shows (FoxNews, CNN.. and that's only the commerical side of things)"

There is a difference between propaganda and a free press. Hitler and saddam had one news source, and that source was only there to provide what the government said. So when the germans lost an entire army group at stalingrad, they were strategically redeploying, not getting there ass kicked. Or for a more recent example, the Iraqi Info minister saying were not in baghdad when we were a block away. The good thing about our press is that despite the biases (there will always be biases) we have many alternative to choose from. From Fox to CNN.

"Conservitives by characteristics are opposed to change.. How would somone who opposes change get a world government going?"

Define change. Conservatives are against a socialist state, which is why I'm one of them. Socialism is a great idea, everyone works, everyone benefits. The only problem is that it simply won't work. There will always be people who want more for less or just won't work at all. Were not even socialist and we have this problem with our current welfare programs. How will adding more help?

"Ever notice Conservitives don't make the best diplomats? Napoleon, The Current Isreali Prime Minister, Bush Jr., Most Monarchs, Fascists, Stalin."

This is something I'm getting sick of. The war is over and a lot of evidence is out. Of the 3 major countries who opposed us, France had 50 billion dollars in oil contracts, sold conventional arms and planes, etc. Germany built some of the extensive bunker systems and also sold arms to Iraq( i believe, can't remember for sure. Russia, well there is the spying allegations, the selling of their coronet antitank missiles to Iraq ( which is the only reason why they took out any of our tanks) and the sales of night vision goggles. With this evidence out, is hard to understand why they tried to block us? They were trying to cover up shady deals that they had with Iraq while in was under UN embargos. The UN was and is a sham. It has no backbone or will to uphold it's own resolutions. This makes it a superficial organization that you could just say yes to with no fear of reprisal, which saddam did for 12 years.

I suppose you would say Clinton was a good diplomat, since he used war to cover up his own scandals. Oh and nice try trying to group conservatives with stalin and fascists LOL. Hillary CLinton said herself that Socialism was Communism with a heart. I hope you knew that.

"So HOW would Conservitives unite the world? The obvious means: At gunpoint. Because they can't succede by diplomacy unless guns are involved. Latest example: US defying the UN and attacking Iraq."

I argued the UN point above. To tell you the truth, I think the world isn't going to be united for a long time. And noone, not even the US, could take over the world. The sheer amount of area that you have to cover after the war would be undoable. I think that this conflict showed us who are friends are and who is playing the other side or both sides (France).

One last thing. Debates over politics tend to get heated. Please take this post for what it is, My opinion. If you disagree with it, That's your right and I wouldn't have it any other way. This post was not meant to bash anyone (besides the Clinton's ). I was trying to debate points that I felt were incorrect


Later

~SDC~

"DblDamage - You probablly won't read this but I may be happy with my Social status, But I'm not happy with society, the corruption festering carcass of civilization where need is replaced by greed. I live in Canada, and we spend 10 billion dollars a year on holding criminals. If we placed the money into social welfare, education, etc. maybe we could prevent the crimes by educated out citizens better."

Maybe you could, but maybe those criminals would just sit around and collect welfare checks before they go and rob the corner store. For every up in welfare there is a down.


"I have ambition too, except mine don't extend to my family only, it doesn't stop at my countrymen, it extends to my species, to Homo Sapien. See I have no selfish need to improve my standing, that only keeps the greed ball rolling."

Noble, and I wish more people truely believe that. If people could put the needs of the world above their own, the world would be an actual utopia. Who knows where it could go from there. My point is, alot of nations, people in general aren't willing or ready to do that. You use america as an example so I will use France. Bottom line, their political stance was about money and world influence. They wanted to prove to the world that they could stand up to us and win. They also wanted to keep their shady deals shady. Hopefully in the future, it will hapen

"On Iraq: By change you mean put a puppet regime to give them controll over a region rife with turmoil."

It's not going to be a puppet regime, it's going to be a democracy like your countries and mine. Everyone would get a voice. Maybe a fundamentalisty dictatorship like all the other would be better?

"Maybe putting soldier in the Middle East isn't the best thing.. Maybe, If America is TRUELY interested in peace freedom and liberty, they can go in and deal with the problems with Isreal oppressing inhabitants of the West Bank.
Maybe they should stop funding a government that brutally suppresses people throwing rocks with missiles and armed forces."

Agreed, the Israeli government is less than civil to its palestinian population. This is because of terrorist attacks, which leads to further suppresion, which leads to more attacks, etc. It's a giant circle. Their all fighting over a piece of land that they consider holy. Stupid to me, but cvastly important to them. Although the Israeli's are no angels, neither are the palestinians. Everytime there is a cease-fire, they start another bombing campaign.

"Maybe if America cares about the world they could spend some of its money on feeding the nations in the undeveloped countries, not like their anti terrorism bill in 2002 couldn't of ended world hunger."

Maybe we would, if the nations we do help feed and cloth didn't despise and loath us. It cracks me up really. We(british and USA) liberated the french, and they have still acted like arrogant snobs to us since they took power, fighting us in any decision we make. Were always the first in a natural disaster to send aid, we always sent troops( I believe the most also) in UN led attacks. Yet we are called selfish? I'm not going to lie Verengi, this one pissed me off. We have always done our part and then some. Maybe if the rest of the world would do equal amounts, world hunger would end. Instead you have countries trying to keep dictators in power that starve their people because it makes them a few bucks.

The anti-terrorism bill you have no business touching. That's a matter of our security.

"Instead they exploit the populations via Neo-Colonialism. You know why the UN will never succede in creating a world government? Superpowers."

I think corruption fits here better. Superpowers are what keeps the UN in check. And gives the UN most of its power, btw. The Un would have fallen apart a long time ago without the US

"Countries unwilling to relinquish the reigns of power. As for the American culture, Americans have corperations, not culture. Culture in the traditional sense was associated with fine arts. Do you associate McDonalds with 'Fine arts'? Do you associate Coca Cola with 'Fine Arts'? Do you associate Cambells soup with 'Fine Arts? (Little joke there)Corperations DON'T make you a world leader, they're only a temporary solution to a growing problem."

So a country's art is a reflection of how good of a country they are? Please. We have art, we have monuments. We have all those. Is that what makes us a good country? No. The people make this country great. Not the politicians, not the corporations. The people who are willing to work hard and make a life for themselves out of nothing are what make/made this country what it is today.



~SDC~

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#54 by Avatar Frogboy - 4/24/2003 5:42:54 PM

All I ask is that all my political enemies be converted into bone flecked jam to spread on my toast. And they say *I'm* the ogre? Ak. I'll club their heads and eat their bones for that!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Deep down inside, you secretly long for a cold hearted Republican to lower taxes, brutalize criminals, and rule you like a king!"

*Stands up and applauds DannyB*

I happen to think the USA is more of a corporate democracy than a democracy. If you really look at where alot of these laws come from, they come from lobbyists (sp?) who were hired by coroporations to push the agenda of the company. There are god only knows how many frightening copyright bills that are coming through that are backed by MPAA, RIAA, and perhaps ISDA. The DMCA was pushed through by content holders. The copyright extension by the same people. The wireless/telecom laws are influenced by the telecoms. Enegery industry pushes for their laws. In that respect, if enough money is spent, they can bring enough cogressmen in line regardless of political party. It's all ran by the dollar in this country. I dont know if it'll ever be overtly corporation controlled though.

*drops his 2 pennies in the bucket*

Wow. Perhaps many of you should have kept quiet and been thought fools rather than speaking out and removing all doubt.


As for me, I'll choose the former on this subject.

Citizen PontiusBruinPilot on 4/25/2003 at 2:36:02 AM said;

/QUOTE ON

Wow. Perhaps many of you should have kept quiet and been thought fools rather than speaking out and removing all doubt.


As for me, I'll choose the former on this subject.

/QUOTE OFF

Gee; and you almost made it too.

Elrikk


~SDC~

He he he... Nice one Frogboy!

~SDC~

And into the debacle i go .

"There is a difference between propaganda and a free press. Hitler and saddam had one news source, and that source was only there to provide what the government said."

Yes there is a difference, however, i wouldn't call it free press when people expressing views that are at odds with the main opinion gets fired when doing so or their privilages of visiting the pressroom gets withdrawn making their jobs impossible. One might even argue that this kind of control over the press is even more dangerous as the public thinks its getting free press thus making the propagande even more effective.

"Socialism is a great idea, everyone works, everyone benefits. The only problem is that it simply won't work. There will always be people who want more for less or just won't work at all. Were not even socialist and we have this problem with our current welfare programs. How will adding more help?"

One of the great ironies of modern civilisation is it not. Everybody knows how we could reach utopia but our suspision and greed makes us wary of trying. And in movies and stories making money for nothing is glorified while hard work is for succers. Then when people listen to the messages we blame them for being lazy and no good .

"The war is over and a lot of evidence is out. Of the 3 major countries who opposed us, France had 50 billion..."

I believe it was the US that provided the majority of saddams weapons so i think you should be very careful when putting moral blame on other coutries. Lets not forget the idolized Reagon administration. These humanitarian people vetoed a UN resolution comdemning saddam for using gas on the kurds. I guess it was ok to gas children when your friends with the US right ?

"The UN was and is a sham. It has no backbone or will to uphold it's own resolutions."

UN is a cham because of coutries like the US ( and france for that matter ). There countries refuse any power that can hurt their selfish policies.

"Hillary CLinton said herself that Socialism was Communism with a heart. I hope you knew that."

Damn, so i have been living in a communist country for 27 years without knowing ( sweden ). Time to bring out the kichen knife for some old time revolution .

"Maybe you could, but maybe those criminals would just sit around and collect welfare checks before they go and rob the corner store. For every up in welfare there is a down. "

Why do you automatically assume this? Countries with high social welfare have fewer criminals per capita and happier people. Dont you understand that egoism create greed and hate while generosity does the opposite ? Does homeless poeple make other feel better about themselves ? Can't you part with that newly bought digital camera is somebody has a better life worth living ? I have a hard time understanding this kind of outlook on the world.

I really could continue answering your points one by one but i think it's time for me to collect my socialwelfare chech so i can buy my new porsch now .

/Falaffel

Verenti: Propaganda is not, by definition, false. It *can* be false, but it's a fallacy to assume it is always.

So, you say propaganda is morally wrong, full stop.

Going back to the in-game example: Is it morally wrong to disseminate information about how the Drengin like to eat human skin (well, anyone's skin) and send slaves to death furnaces? I mean, if you *read* the blurbs in the game about the Drengin, they *do* these things. So, how is it immoral to disemminate the truth, especially if not having the truth could be harmful? Do you think these humans who defect to the Drengin are actually treated well when their new overlords arrive?



~SDC~

Holding the line at Fort Socialism:

Because even handed balance is the only FAIR thing to do. Fairness is at the heart of any 'perfect' society.

"The anti-terrorism bill you have no business touching. That's a matter of our security."

Why do you need security? I think the problem would be better solved if you took a preventitive stance, I'm not talking about bombing the hell out of them and saying "Now they won't try that again!", because that would be deterance, which I also believe is wrong, You should fix their problems so they don't need to kill people to get their point across. If populations didn't dispise the US (face it, a lot of people do, not all of them, but there is alot) then there wouldn't be so supporters for terrorism (seeing as they're using it as the 20th-21st Privateers without the economic gain) so they wouldn't have the resources, supporters, etc. that they do today.

Althought DannyB gave a great responce, He would quote me on Diplomacy and then go on about nothing to do with Diplomacy (Europeans selling weapons to Iraq).. This happened a few times, I got confused (as many of you are getting with my awful writtings.. not the vocabulary, the grammar)

In this conversation, I'm not mad, I don't wish anyone harm except extreme conservitives, then I want you dead, those not in the far right can be reprogrammed

I apperciate falafel's actions. I really do.

Have fun guys. Try not to go on any McCarthist Witch-hunts when I'm gone.

~SDC~