Stop the America-bashing!

[siredgar]

While I almost never included America when I played any of the Civilization series (starting from the original computer version by the way), it should not be debated as to whether it should be included or not.

America is a powerful national grouping with its own distinct brand of culture and identity. Yes, it is a relatively new "civilization", but so is France or England to the people of Egypt or China:

America-- 300 years
England-- 1,500 years
France-- 2,000 years
China-- 5,000 years
Egypt-- 6,000 years

These are all approximate numbers, so please don't debate with me on a few hundred years or so.

If we do our math, Egypt is about four times older than England which is about five times older than America. If the English call Americans "new", to the Egyptians this would be like the pot calling the kettle black!

Having lived in Europe for a while, I am familiar with the resentment that many Europeans have against the "upstart" Americans. The English are particularly vehemently critical of their former colony. This is partly because they have acheived so much in such little time. It is, in some ways, similar to the way the Chinese and Koreans feel towards the relative newcomers in Asian power politics, the Japanese.

However, it is also partly because of the relative decline of European power. Many Europeans will admit to you that they feel that Europe is slowly declining.

Personally, I usually play "Britain" and claim New York, Boston, etc as "British" cities.

Nevertheless, in my opinion, for Europeans to say that America does not belong in Civ III is truly "arrogant".

[siredgar]

Another point:

Early in the game of Civ III, thousands of years zip by just like that. However, later in the game, it goes one year per turn. So, can someone do the calculations on how many turns Egypt was at its height and how that compares to America?

[YefeiPi]

I don't know, but when I think of America, distinctive culture does not come to mind.

[Dauphin]

Having lived in Europe for a while, I am familiar with the resentment that many Europeans have against the "upstart" Americans. The English are particularly vehemently critical of their former colony. This is partly because they have acheived so much in such little time. It is, in some ways, similar to the way the Chinese and Koreans feel towards the relative newcomers in Asian power politics, the Japanese.

However, it is also partly because of the relative decline of European power. Many Europeans will admit to you that they feel that Europe is slowly declining

Where do you draw your conclusions from, because they are very different to the general feeling of most people I know.

1) We don't hold resentment for what you do or have done, the cause for most anti-american feeling is the way you do things and your attitude, generally seen as arrogant.

2) We don't see a decline in European power. Todays Europeans are just more concerned with personal welfare than global dominance so it isn't even an issue. Further, with the EU's integration we feel stronger as an economic bloc.

[Trifna]

Originally posted by YefeiPi
I don't know, but when I think of America, distinctive culture does not come to mind.

So I'll try to put some distinctive stuff...

it is the culture of:
fast-food
fast-everything
free market
comsumption society


All this seems pretty representative of what they think, how they think, who they are: representative of their culture. It's a culture of "as a person, do what you desire in the limit of the laws". the generalities of American culture seems pretty distinctive to me. The mix of culture they are made a long way from what it was originally, the whole is bigger enough from the sum of the parts.

[KoalaBear33]

I don't think this game tries to include the civlizations that really dominated the world. There are a lot of civilizations in the game that really didn't do much in the long term. I don't think America really belongs here but they deserve to be included more than Germans, Russians, etc. I think civs from civlization 1 were more historically accurate. Civs like the Inca, Aztecs, Vikings, etc did more things in a longer period of time. The civs that were included are really for selling the game (not historical accuracy or fun factor). For instance, the Spanish should be included before the Russians. Also how about civs like the large Turkish empire?

KoalaBear33

[War4ever]

well lets face it ......many of the tribes in civ have had some sort of power in the world, or large populice, or ancient beginnings.....

culture in america is rampant all over the world.... MCdonalds, coke...etc.... while these aren't the pyramids... americas culture is rampant everywhere...

more people speak english in china than in any other culture in the world.... not that english is american...... but thats not the point.

like it or not....american culture in its form is everywhere......

that said.... iroquois are a little weird to have in civ but then again....they were slaughtered by the "amazing" american culture and warfare......

this is a mockery of reality of course.....so take with a grain of salt

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by War4ever
that said.... iroquois are a little weird to have in civ but then again....they were slaughtered by the "amazing" american culture and warfare......

My guess is that as long as you keep bashing others, others will keep bashing you.

[Ecowiz Returns]

I think all this questioning if the Americans are a Civilization as no sense at all.

True, USA has only less than 300 years.

True, most of cultural roots come from England.

But let's not forget the USA is one of the first multicultural countries in the World. Remember the sad event of the 11th of Septmeber. Almost every world nation has someone to cry about for his death in the World Trade Center.

The same way we find in history cities flourishing with trade and cultural interaction (Babilon, Athens, Rome, Antuerp, Lisbon, Venice, London...) now New York is just The Most Important City in the World .

Guys, let's take out both Russia and American. Now, which civilization we have to start the Space Race with?

We cannot only look back and forget the single fact that History is on the making right now. And in future years, the XXth century and, at least the beggining of the XXIst century will be recalled as the times of American Dominance.

And, although most unfortunate, it's normal to be arrogant when you're on the top. We Portuguese know, we've been there.

[jasev]

Originally posted by KoalaBear33
I think civs from civlization 1 were more historically accurate. Civs like the Inca, Aztecs, Vikings, etc did more things in a longer period of time.

Sorry, bad examples. The Inca only lasted as a civilization about 200 years, and they were a true kingdom (more exactly, an empire) only for 100 years until the spanish arrived. The aztecs founded Tenochtitlan on 1325, so they lasted almost 200 years. And the vikings... well, they achieved great navigation advances, but I'm not sure they are a true civilization. I tend to consider them more as barbarians.

[Oligarf]

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=28065

Just go here to discuss this matter, I like the subject but discussing it in several places at the same time saying the same things, is simply not fun.

[siredgar]

Originally posted by Oligarf
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=28065

Just go here to discuss this matter, I like the subject but discussing it in several places at the same time saying the same things, is simply not fun.

Oligarf, I know that there are other threads discussing why America should not be included in Civ III. Creating this thread with a heading SUPPORTIVE of America was my intention.

Anyhow, has anyone done the math on the turns yet? I'd be very curious to see that. Maybe a comparison with the five countries I talked about earlier: America, England, France, China, and Egypt.

[siredgar]

Of course, American foreign policy and its general sentiment of self-importance are also reasons for European resentment. But I didn't want to get into that. It's really that whoever is at the top is always going to be criticized against. I've noticed that the English are particularly critical. I wonder if that has anything to do with that America was a colony of England and now it has England in its pocket (especially for foreign policy), hmmm?

[Dauphin]

I've noticed that the English are particularly critical. I wonder if that has anything to do with that America was a colony of England and now it has England in its pocket (especially for foreign policy), hmmm

Former colony status has little if anything to do with it, IMHO. However common bonds such as language and general cultural tendencies means that the US and Britain are closer than most other nations - and the most critical people are usually your closest friends.

Besides, the English have a nack of criticising everyone and demoting the acheivements of everyone, especially themsleves.

It's really that whoever is at the top is always going to be criticized against.

That is by far the main reason for US bashing IMO. If America had been around 1,000 years the feeling would still be the same.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by YefeiPi
I don't know, but when I think of America, distinctive culture does not come to mind.

No doubt he typed this while wearing blue jeans, eating a Big Mac, and possibly even listening to rock and roll. Cheers.

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
Further, with the EU's integration we feel stronger as an economic bloc.

Crunch,
I agree with the rest of your post but I thought all this talk of EU "integration" was funny coming from a guy who's avatar shows the "dis-integration" of a British flag into an English one.

Just my little attempt at irony...

[d_dudy]

ok, i'm not sure if you were supporting us or not, but i'm thinking not:

Originally posted by Trifna


So I'll try to put some distinctive stuff...

it is the culture of:
fast-food
fast-everything
free market
comsumption society


All this seems pretty representative of what they think, how they think, who they are: representative of their culture. It's a culture of "as a person, do what you desire in the limit of the laws". the generalities of American culture seems pretty distinctive to me. The mix of culture they are made a long way from what it was originally, the whole is bigger enough from the sum of the parts.

(bold, mine)

that part in bold, it's called freedom

[Ribannah]

Er, no. It's called ego-centrism, rather.
The laws define the extent of a citizen's freedom.

Trifna is correct, the USA is the ultimate consumption society.

[siredgar]

Civilization III uses "civilizations" from different periods/groupings:

I: Ancient Times
Egyptians
Babylonians
Greeks
Romans
Persians

II: Cultural Perpetuations
Chinese
Indians

III: Indigenous Tribes
Aztecs
Zulus
Iroquois

IV: Colonial Times
English
French
Russians

V: Nation-States
Germans
Japanese

VI: Modern Times
Americans

Please correct me on any of the above. It's just a rough grouping I did in a couple of minutes. No flaming, please!

The point is that they're all from different periods of time or groupings. Thus, the Americans are not in the same category of "civilization" as the English, who are not the same category of civilization as the Chinese or the Greeks.

By the way, has anyone completed the mathematics on the number of turns for each civilization in its height?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Oerdin
No doubt he typed this while wearing blue jeans, eating a Big Mac, and possibly even listening to rock and roll. Cheers.

jeans - traditional workwear. Was it invented in the US?

Big Mac - hamburgers are definitely not an US invention.

Rock and Roll - don't think that's a US invention, either.

[yin26]

Simple fact checking would make you look a lot less silly, UR:

jeans - traditional workwear. Was it invented in the US?

Yes, it was invented in the U.S. 1872, Levi Strauss brings it to the scene in a profound way. Prior to that: Immigrant weavers from Yorkshire, England, produced heavy cotton fustians -- cotton-twill jeans -- from a cloth mill in Massachusetts as early as 1638. In 1789 George Washington toured a mill in Massachusetts that was weaving both denim and jean. By 1849 a New York manufacturer was advertising topcoats, vests and short jackets in blue jean.

Big Mac - hamburgers are definitely not an US invention.

Dude, nobody is talking about the inventing but the marketing and mass recognition of a CERTAIN and AMERICAN hamburger.

Rock and Roll - don't think that's a US invention, either

I guess this is just a troll, but: African musical traits were brought to the U.S. beginning in 1619 and fused with the European music brought by the colonists. Hard to believe you are A) this ignorant B) this hard up for a troll and/or C)this lazy not to look up basic facts.

[siredgar]

It would be great if Civilization III could have time-triggers that allow Civs like the Americans to "emerge" after a certain point in history or an event (like a certain civilization advance).

For example, the English civilization falls into disarray after its capital is conquered by the Russians. So, a few cities declare independence and change their city names to American ones.

This would be kind of like in Civilization II. Has anyone seen this happen in Civilization III yet? I don't think it does any more.

Also, in Civilization II new Civs would emerge when a Civ was destroyed. These would catch up very quickly, too. This could be a way to introduce Civs like the Americans in the latter part of the game. This doesn't happen either does it?

[Rosacrux]

Actually, to get this straight, some of you are calling BigMacs(TM), Blue jeans and Rock'n'Roll "cultural achievements"????? Mon dieu...

USA should be (and is) in for one reason:

It's the worlds largest gaming software market. That's all.

And... I don't really feel quite comfortable with all that USA bashing either... don't you think it's time to move on? If you don't like USA, don't use em (even change the BIC file so they are not in the game anyway).

But stop doing this, it's tiresome...

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I agree with the rest of your post but I thought all this talk of EU "integration" was funny coming from a guy who's avatar shows the "dis-integration" of a British flag into an English one.

Well the sooner the whole of Europe becomes English the better.

[dexters]

Originally posted by YefeiPi
I don't know, but when I think of America, distinctive culture does not come to mind.

When I think of Canada, a distinctive culture doesnt come to mind either. We have a bunch of Frenchies and English speakers 99.9999999% of the world population mistake for Americans.

In anycase, read my post

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=36890

[siredgar]

As far as I know, McDonald's is more popular in Beijing than in New York.

Anyhow, let's get back to a real discussion.

Any thoughts on the ideas that I have proposed?

Thanks.

[dexters]

I've lived in the third world, and to them, eating out at Mcdonalds and KFC are a sign of affluence. Only the small middle class and even smaller upper class can afford to eat at those places.

It is infact something poorer people strive for. To be able to get a peice of the American dream and eat out at an American restaurant.

[yin26]

It's also the case that a lot of middle to low-level chains in the States make MUCH nicer facilities when they open abroad. For example, Coco's Restraurant, which is just 'o.k.' in the U.S. is built like some kind of almost luxury restaurant here in Korea. The same, to some degree, for fast food places. I suppose this is because they are catering to a middle to upper class group and built accordingly.

At any rate, American culture can often take 'upgraded' forms in other countries that make Americans (or other Westerners) think: "Why do they think Coco's is such a big deal? Gee, they must be really hard up."

[ntyatecafe]

Originally posted by siredgar
As far as I know, McDonald's is more popular in Beijing than in New York.

Anyhow, let's get back to a real discussion.

Any thoughts on the ideas that I have proposed?

Thanks.

I've just started CivIII, and am not up on all the details yet, but you have aroused my curiosity. Do you know when in the game the turns shorten? I'll start working on the math.

My thoughts towards having America as a civ are this: IT'S A GAME!!! Not meant to be historically accurate! Otherwise, carriers wouldn't be in danger from Man-O-War's, and tanks would roll over almost all opposition save other modern era units.

I love America. I've lived here all my life. And for those of you who say that "Doing whatever you want within the limits of the law is 'ego-centrasism'", I pity your limited understanding and ask that if you do not understand something...then do not criticize it.

As for American arrogance...this might be a shocker, but not all Amercans are arrogant. That is like saying all French are rude (which is not true. The few French people that I've known so far were very nice). Again I ask you to reserve your criticism until you actually know what you are talking about.

But, I digress...Siredgar has a point. For those who must see the reasoning, let's work together. I'll start trying to do the math, but if any of you are willing to help, it would be welcome.

siredgar, I'll see what I can figure out, but any info you could give me would be useful. Thank you.

[siredgar]

ntyatecafe,

A big welcome to you! While I've been playing the Civilization series since the original computer version, I am relatively new to the site, too.

Anyhow, I'm glad to see your enthusiasm! This would be a more scientific approach, I would think, than just talking about Big Macs and blue jeans.

Does anybody have the breakdown of how many years it takes for one turn during different parts of the game? That would help a lot!

Regardless, I'll take a stab starting with the Egyptians and Americans:

Supposedly, they flourished for 3,000 years. This only equals 60 turns!

However, I think before we debate this issue, it's important to determine whether it should be the civilization's "height" or the period they existed. For example, the Americans have existed for about 225 years (that's 225 turns!) However, they have had significant power for only about 100 years, that is 100 turns.

Nevertheless, that is still more turns than the Egyptians!

Interesting, hmmm?

What do you people think?

Thanks.

Edgar