Piecing together the civs and their leaders... - Page 2

Provost Harrison · June 15, 2001, 11:13

The thing is though LeRosso, Lenin and Trotsky were the architects, they were the ones when the great expansion of Russian industry and culture began. Stalin took the new workers state and manipulated it into something very sinister. Yeah, I quite agree about not getting drawn into all the political correctness mush, but he did do some despicable acts....

Footie Mad · June 15, 2001, 11:19

Im all for "evil" leaders but the thing I wanted to say was that if you are going to do it, do it all the way.

LaRusso · June 15, 2001, 11:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
The thing is though LeRosso, Lenin and Trotsky were the architects, they were the ones when the great expansion of Russian industry and culture began. Stalin took the new workers state and manipulated it into something very sinister. Yeah, I quite agree about not getting drawn into all the political correctness mush, but he did do some despicable acts....

Provost, Trotsky was a great coup organizer, Lenin a schemer who was actually the first one to put gulags into place. They were for Russsian revolution what Danton and Robespierre were for French, while Stalin is more of a Napoleonic, etatistic figure. He simply realized world revolution ain't gonna happen soon so he started tightening his grip through centralization.

Footie Mad · June 15, 2001, 18:35

Alot of people died during the building of the pyramids, does this make the egyptian leader controversial?? Come to think of it there are not many leaders without a lot of blood on their hands....perhaps Gandhi as an exception

Dr Strangelove · June 15, 2001, 20:27

I think it would be a neat idea if each civ had a group of several leaders to choose from and the ability to change leaders as circumstances demand or permit. Greece could have Pericles as a peace leader (though he wasn't really that peaceful) and Alexander as an expansioinist leader. Normally Pericles would rule and Greece would get some sort of development bonus. After a period of reversals or some other sort of duress the Greek civ would be allowed to have a chance at changing to Alexander's rule each turn. Alexander would convey some sort of military benefit, but would only be available for a certain number of turns.

El hidalgo · June 17, 2001, 04:53

Quote:

Originally posted by LaRusso

Now, now, a typical piece of revisionist history. Absolutely no one can or shall be compared with a man who basically planned to turn whole nations into soap.
Even Churchill admitted in his speach to the Parliament that Stalin 'inherited Russia with a plough and left it with a nuclear bomb'. Hitler left Germany in ruins.
As for Stalin's human rights record, well, let's judge him against his times (just like we do in the case of Genghis Khan and Peter the Great).

Oh one more thing, I propose Dubbya as one's American leader on Deity level (for HP). What a guy....

I understand that you're not defending Stalin, but I still think some information is in order. Even judged against his times, Stalin comes out looking very bad indeed. This is getting off topic, I know, but I am afraid I could not refrain from commenting. However, I would not like to take the thread further in this direction, arguing about who is more evil among the evil world leaders of history. Stalin indisputably murdered more people than Hitler. Not to defend Hitler, but just to put things in perspective. And of course Dubya, whatever you may think of him, is nowhere near in this league. (I know you were just being facetious, but still.)

From the Museum of Communist Atrocities:

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/econo...mfaq.htm#part5

"Stalin's slave empire lasted so long and went through so many waves of victims that one is left speechless. So many millions perished within the Gulag Archipelago for so many reasons, or for no reason. With a minimum of 5,000,000 slave laborers from 1931 to 1950, and a minimum death toll of 10% per year - both improbably low figures - one can conclude that Stalin's camps claimed a minimum of 10,000,000 victims, and easily two or three times as many."

. . .

"On April 7, 1935, Stalin issued a decree authorizing the death penalty for children as young as 12 years old. While far more of Stalin's subjects died in slave labor camps and man-made famines than from execution, even here the numbers are startling. There were approximately one million executions during the Great Terror of 1936-1939, and probably over five million for his entire reign. The executed were often Stalin's opponents within the Party, or his less eager friends, or foreign Communists. Large numbers of officers were executed. Polish POWs taken in 1939 were executed en masse in Katyn and elsewhere. Almost all of Stalin's comrades in the Russian Civil War were executed or assassinated at his orders: Trotsky, Zinoviev, Bukharin, Kamenev, Rykov, Tomsky, and (as recent discoveries confirm) Kirov. Many of these were tortured, bullied, and threatened into condemning themselves in the so-called "show trials," where they absurdly confessed to large-scale espionage and subversion. The poetic justice of the trials of Stalin's ex-comrades is palpable, since a Nuremberg-style trial of the Communist leadership for crimes against humanity would have condemned most of them to death. So numerous were Stalin's victims that amongst the oceans of innocents executed, justice occasionally accidentally descended upon the guilty. "

Rasputin · June 17, 2001, 05:35

who cares who they put as leader , i always rename my leader after my self and my civ name too.. .!!!

Footie Mad · June 18, 2001, 17:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Rasputin
who cares who they put as leader , i always rename my leader after my self and my civ name too.. .!!!

You name all the AI civs after yourself too?

June 18, 2001, 19:19

El Hidalgo a very good report, and yes as a 12 year old in 1956 I stool up one day after hearing the news that he was dead and said very good, very good indeed. I met and knew a Russian family in 1949/50 and they told story to my mother and me and asked us never to repeat the story to anyone for fear of the KGB and they live just outside of Fresno Ca. Now that is fear.
I too sometimes used the Names of my Children for Cities in Civ 2. I also used my name for the leader always unless I play CTP 2 and then I used Leemur for the money cheat.

June 25, 2001, 23:35

I'm moving this thread back to the top so that maybe two our young people can read each and every post.

LaRusso · June 26, 2001, 04:14

blah blah blah
okay hidalgo, the benefits of internet is that EVERYONE can quote something.
now the page you refer to is maintained by a weekend historian, workday professor of economics. which is fine. then again, neoliberal economists have quite a resentment towards any state control and are mightily pissed of at any etatists.

i do not think that this debate is spinning out of control (as hidalgo remarks) nor is this something that should be overlooked. choosing leaders is important, because an effort should be made to chose the one who satisfies two criteria:
1) springs into mind easily
2) made a profound impact on that civ
3) epitomizes 'geist' of the civilization

now let's see stalin and hitler. why should the first one be there and the other one should not?
(i will here refrain from throwing numbers with many zeros around. solzhenizin once said that 60 million people were killed during stalin reign in russia - there should be around 50 mill. russians nowadays according to that calculations there should be no more than 50 mil. russians altogether)

1. hitler was a maniac. his vision was one in which he would exterminate everyone who was not arian and pretty much was lost in his astrology, paganism and nordic mythology. he had lucid moments, but essentially he was a lunatic and that led him to several important blunders.
now the biggest charge you can put agains stalin is that he was paranoid. he ruled his country with methods of some previous centuries, but then again, his country LOOKED like it was in 18th century. any of you ever seen russia with your own eyes, even nowadays? you'd know what i am talking about. in 1910 germany had 98% literate population, russia had single digits. population like that is not ruled through direct democracy and benign welfare state

2. hitler had mass murder camps. stalin had brutal labor camps he inherited from lenin (NB solzhenicin had his cancer operated in Gulag and survived. now i do not know of many similar stories in aushwitz and dahau)

3. pretty much every 'successfull' russian ruler ruled like stalin. peter, catherine, etc. pretty much NO successfull german ruler ruled like hitler - he was a stupid exception. bismarck, IMHO is the real epitomization of a first class german politician, the one who really cleverly manipulated europe for several decades and multiplied german power manifold. as for russia, peter the great and stalin are dead even, if human rights activits among us can swollow the fact that peter did not respect minorities, was rather rough to rebels and did pretty much as he saw fit.

finally, some quasi philosophical questions:

a) wasn't napoleon a brutal butcher of europe? (even for an alleged 'higher cause)
b) was elisabeth I an english version of mother theresa or she also liked to chop a head here and there
c) genghis khan. now there is a guy
d) alexander the great. what the hell did he do as far as punjab instead of developing civil society in greece?
e) julius caesar, one in the string of successful lion feeders (and it was not Whiskas they were feeding them with!)
f) shaka zulu, sitting bull, etc (shall i comment at all?)
g) joanne d'arc - now today she would probably grow beard and be called a taliban
h) dubbya - as people fry in texas every day, ask yourself how different is to chop 1, 100 and 1000 heads for the 'good of the state and society'. i have nothing against the death penalty, but the fact remains that it is a state sponsored murder and that the society decides to 'protect' itself from unwanted 'elements'. sounds familiar?

now do not get me wrong. i do not want florence nightingale as english leader. i do not want ovidius as roman leader. i do not want plato as greek leader, nor do i want pierre currie as french. i want ass kickers, with a caveat that they should not be nutcases like hitler and neron.

over and out

Mokael · June 26, 2001, 13:00

ah, quit it. dictator is a dictator. there's no use comparing them to each other.

Lenin was the worst - good thing he only lasted for couple years. The guy actually ordered murder of children. Stalin lasted a while - that's why he's remebered for his "evil" doings. Hitler? he was a joke. just some crazy dude with 0 leaderhip abilities, but lots of talant to talk about himself and grateness of his race.
but who cares? It's the final out come that counts. Stalin brought country from a deep arse into being a World power. Hitler - well, everybody knows what happened there. Lenin - as I said, he didn't last to long.

btw, I hope they have Nahimov as one of the Russian heroes/leaders1.

Footie Mad · June 26, 2001, 13:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Mokael
ah, quit it. dictator is a dictator. there's no use comparing them to each other.

Lenin was the worst - good thing he only lasted for couple years. The guy actually ordered murder of children. Stalin lasted a while - that's why he's remebered for his "evil" doings. Hitler? he was a joke. just some crazy dude with 0 leaderhip abilities, but lots of talant to talk about himself and grateness of his race.
but who cares? It's the final out come that counts. Stalin brought country from a deep arse into being a World power. Hitler - well, everybody knows what happened there. Lenin - as I said, he didn't last to long.

btw, I hope they have Nahimov as one of the Russian heroes/leaders1.

Hitler had the ability to inspire people and he was indeed a very charismatic leader, people who saw him could not believe that he was such a ruthless killer.

LaRusso · June 27, 2001, 04:08

ah, teppichesser (allegedly he used to chew carpets in his fits of rage)
nakhimov - yup, yermak, suvorov, kutuzov, brusilov, zhukov later, why not....and count potemkin as your chief of internal administration (if you are doing less than well, this great leader should keep erecting fake size 5 cities heheheheh)

Mokael · June 28, 2001, 15:07

and may be they should have Ilya Muromecz, Dobrinya Nikitcsh, and Alesha Popov (all on horseback, of course)

on more serious note - Nevski should be one of the first ones. And may be Oleg?

::sighs:: knowing Firaxis, they probably will stick us with Suvorov, Kutuzov, and Zhukov ..

Mok

Mahdimael · August 9, 2001, 17:51

Ah ha..but if all the computer leaders are evil, then you won't feel so bad about burning their cities to the ground!

Who would the evil people be for each nation in that respect?

Russians-Stalin
Germany-Hitler
England-George III

Romans-Nero/Augustus
Egyptians-Yul Brenner?

...

Provost Harrison · August 9, 2001, 17:54

Thankyou for bumping this thread Mahdimael. It gives me the chance to make the necessary alterations to my 16 included civs. Would appear that the Spanish are out but the Babylonians are in! Will now proceed to make some corrections to the first post

Ecthy · August 9, 2001, 18:00

I thought Spanish are in