Ibero-american civilizations

[yellfromhell]

One thing I forgot:

When I said in both cases (Portugal and Holland) the head of the power was in the european countries until the colonies independence, I should have made an exception for a period of time in the portuguese case: during Napoleons invasion, the portuguese king moved to Brazil, and so the head of the empire.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by yellfromhell
I commited and error not saying "Pancho Villa was the only man IN ALL THE 20TH CENTURY that invaded USA continental territory". I appologize for that. About Pancho Villa being a bandit that robbed people, well, that can be discussed. If you consider legendary Robin Hood a bandit, well then Pancho Villa was a bandit. Anyway, if he was or not a bandit thats not the problem: in fact he did occupy a town in USA continental territory in the early 1900s. That doesnt look like what Al Capone did.

yellfromhell,

I have no problem with any of your comments except for the concept of Pancho. He was never leader of Mexico. His reign of influence lasted 8 years, from 1915 when the US backed Carranza as President of Mexico to 1923 when 7 gunmen riddled his car with bullets (sound like Capone?). Al Capone controlled several cities and Chicago was much larger than Columbus, New Mexico.

You must also put the time period into this. This was 1917, while Pancho raided a town for 4 1/2 hours (he and his "entire civilization of 500 bandits" attacked Columbus at 2:30am and were driven off by 7:00am) he never occupied it. In fact, he only did it in an attempt to get back at America (VERY similiar to Osama BinLaden) for not supporting him in his cause and hopefully cause the US to go to war with Mexico who he also had a grudge against. John Chisolm controlled almost half of New Mexico and his control lasted longer than 4 1/2 hours.

I can see Pancho as a civ and civ leader in an Old West scenario but that's it. I think anyone would be more qualified as Mexico's leader representation, Santa Anna, Maximillian, etc.

If you consider Pancho's actions an invasion, I could get 500 neighbors together, drive across the US-Canadian border and torch some town then hold off the local law enforcement for 4 1/2 hours and qualify as a civ!

[yellfromhell]

Ghengis,

Certainly you make my arguments look like joke. But realize I didnt say "Mexico invaded the US", but "Pancho Villa, a mexican, was the only man who...". Thats all. I dont think also that Pancho Villa should be the mexican civ leader. I put his name in the poll because I personally believe his name is better known for the anglo-saxons than Santa Anna (and if you look at a poll titled "nationalities" you`ll see that more than 50% of apolyton members that post in these threads are anglo-saxons).
About the 'invasion', well, formally it was one. I understand the point of your argument, but there`s no other word than 'invade' for what Pancho Villa did (no matter if it sounds ridiculous).
In the end, something very conected with a discussion thats been taken in another thread: ¿which leader would most of the mexicans prefare for their civ? They would probably say 'Pancho', but most likely say "Moctezuma". That would confirm in part that they are proud of their Aztec influences and that they are the rightfull heirs of the Aztec culture. ¿What do all of you think about that?

Hugs

Yellfromhell

[Aro]

Yellfromhell,
Well, You probabily could do it, in a multi-player game, cause I'm a terrible player...
But... As a matter of fact, by the time the Brazilian Empire took the Rio Grande do Sul, you in Uruguay had the stronger schollarity in the continent, if I'm not wrong and confused with dates. Because this, I suppose, by the end of the independent period (Republica de Piratiny), Rio Grande became the state with the highest literacy level in Brazil. Anyway, I dont like so much of this part of the Brazilian history, I think our destiny is more pacefull. I'm a builder... BTW, we was in the same side once, in the Paraguay War, don't we? Imperialism is a contagious disease...
In the future, who knows, if Mercosur works after all, we could be under a single flag, maybe the 'Estados Unidos de la America del Sur'. What you thik about?
Answering your last post: what about Emiliano Zapata? He was a leader, too, and anglo-saxons knows him. They even made a movie, with Marlon Brando!

[Antxon]

As a spaniard with very strong ties with Portugal I want to suggest an 'Iberian civ'. That way we can join the history of both countries. At one time our two empires were ruled by the same kings.
I propose Viriato as our leader, as he is a hero for the full Iberian peninsula.
I will try this civ

[Aro]

Antxon,
Great idea. Viriato was a great leader, and was signifficant for boths countries. BTW, the Iberian peninsula history is full of great leaders. King D. Affonso Henriques, for exemple... and a legendary one: El Cid!
In XVIth century, the combined posessions of the two countries covered all the world!! Could be a civ with cultural bonuses: a lot of writers and painters (especially Velazques and Goya, I love them!!) and great naval research.
Yeah, I'd like to try this Civ, too.

[Jay Bee]

He he, I have been suggesting the merger all along, but our Portuguese friends did not seem to like the idea very much. Glad to see that there is some people who agree with me on this issue.

PS. Antxon, come visit us to the Spanish forum (middle page, under hosted sites). You too Yell & Aro, of course

[Estilpón]

vaya JB, tú por aquí (esto es civ3)

Me has ganado la partida. Mis pm's han sido posteriores

_____________________________________________


Fidel Castro is in the poll. why?????

[Aro]

I'm Brazilian, and my ancestors was jewish people who lived in Portugal, in the XVIth century. This's history, now... But I can see why our portuguese friends didn't like that idea very much, all over the centuries... Last year, I have been traveling over the frontier between Spain and Portugal. It's a fortified city after another, in both sides. Problems with the neighborhood? He he...

Ehm... I couldn't find the Spanish Forum... Where is it?

BTW, are someone thinking about a colonial mod or something? Whith Spain, Portugal, England, Holland and a lot of land to conquer? Over the XVth, XVIth and XVIIth centuries! Wow!

[Aro]

Estilpón,
I think Fidel is in the poll 'cause he is well-knowed by the people. Even they don't like him! I voted for San Martín, but Bolivar is a great name.
And Perón isn't in the poll, or Getúlio Vargas... Thanks God!

[Jay Bee]

Directions to the Spanish Site Forum: main forum page, scroll down til you see the Hosted Sites section. Click on the first one. There you are:

http://apolyton.net/forums/forumdisp...s=&forumid=123

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by yellfromhell
I dont think also that Pancho Villa should be the mexican civ leader. I put his name in the poll because I personally believe his name is better known for the anglo-saxons than Santa Anna (and if you look at a poll titled "nationalities" you`ll see that more than 50% of apolyton members that post in these threads are anglo-saxons).

Are you kidding?? No one (anglo-saxon) has heard of Pancho Villa! They think of it as a Mexican Restaurant chain. Everyone's heard of Santa Anna, he sacked the Alamo. And most people have heard of Maximillian, though I don't think the Mexicans would want him as their symbolic leader.

Those are about the only three that had enough interaction with the US for Americans (okay, Norte Americanos) to have heard of them. But, seriously, I think it should be the leader who most defined and contributed to the Mexican Nationstate, regardless of whether anyone's heard of him.

[yellfromhell]

Ghengis,
Once again: I killed nobody. I may do a lot of mistakes, but that doesnt have to make you angry. ¡Its human!
Eventhough, what you say confuses me more: ¿Why does every united-statian I talk to just knows by sound the name 'Pancho Villa' and nothing about the two others? Maybe its just coincidence.
Second and last: Ghengis, you should know that no matter what options I put in the poll, there`s always someone that´s going to be "touched in his sensibility" by something I did. Well, I cant correct the poll now. Apolyton doesnt give the chance to do it.
Hugs.
Yellfromhell

[yellfromhell]

Estilpon,
Aro was right in what he said about Fidel Castro, but I want to tell you something more:
If you read the first message of the thread, you`ll see I said 2 times that this has nothing to do with Good and Evil. Lets put those categorys a side and try to think in terms of the "influence" or "importance" the leaders have or had.
You know: the 20th century was a period of time in which lots of things happened, changes in every place, many discoveries, etc. I suppose we must over-estimate the 20th century in order to include the American civ in Civ3 (because otherwise they would be out - they are an extremelly young civ in a world with 6000 years of history). And, as you see, Firaxis estimated that way that century. So, Castro lived half of that century as Cubas leader, he`d been on top of the news all the time, he argues with the strongest country in the world, he did great things for Cuba and terrible things for Cuba. Those extremes make him very significant. I could have included the 'Che Guevara' instead, who had inspired many revolts in S.America, fought in Angola, inspired many french students to protests in that 60´s French May, etc. But, as I always say: you can vote with your own leaders if you like: just post your vote and I´ll daily post the partials results of the poll including it.
Hugs.
Yell

[yellfromhell]

An Iberian Civ...
If I was spanish or portuguese, I would prefare to have my own civ. Latinamerica´s case is different: first, no country by itself meets the standards to have its representant in such a way that nobody could argue about it. second: from the very beginning of our countrys, the goal was "independence from Europe and unity for the colonies". This didnt happen because of our "thirst of power", but that ideal is still alive.
I dont know much about what happened with the early iberian civs, but if you believe they had this ideal then an Iberian Civ in Civ4 could be fine.
BTW, thank you for the invitation to the Spanish forum. I`ll be there in a while.
Hugs,
Yellfromhell

[yellfromhell]

Aro,
Yes, I know about the Paraguay war: Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay united to invade Paraguay... Sounds a little surrealistic in these days ¿doesnt it?
Paraguay was a very strong country... by that time it could perfectly be called "Empire". Lets take out Uruguay from the three invaders and imagine just the enormous Brazil and Argentina needing to combat together against Paraguay... it looks so strange...
But, as you say, those times are over.
About an hypotetical unification, it would be wonderful. Unification is stablished as a goal in Uruguayian Constitution. But, you see, today we have very different situations: Argentina is struggling, Brazil is fighting for power in South America against the USA in the diplomatic scene and trying to mantain the international investors while moving to left-hand politics; Uruguay is trying to save its banks and avoid an external-debt cease of payment; in Paraguay the situation looks like that of a civil war... it seems we dont have time to look at each other.
But I never loose the hope. Thats what we loose last.
Hugs.
Yell

[yellfromhell]

Aro,
¿Have you tried 'Colonization game'? Its pretty old but its the nearest thing to the mod you`re willing to play.
There`re no Portuguese or Brazilians, but English, Spanish, French and Dutch, and you have to fight against the others and also against the many north-american indian tribes.
Hugs.
Yellfromhell

[Aro]

Yellfromhell,
You're damn right.
And I know that we killed almost ALL male populace in Paraguay. A genocide. No escuses. Despite this, I never loose the hope, too. I'm trying to educate my children in this spirit: solidarity and union, cultural respect and an open mind. My daugther speaks spanish, my band plays a lot of latino-americans tunes.
After all, could be a lot more easy to convince Firaxis about the need of a Latin-American Civ. I vote for a spanish speaker one, it's more representative. But Spain is not what we want, am I right?

Thanks for the tip, I'll look for the game in the net.
Aro

[Aro]

Thanks, Jay Bee, I found it.

[GhengisFarb™]

I think it would be great if the nations of South America could form a system like the EU, only maybe a 'working' system.

Personally, I've always hoped for a day when all the countries of North and South America could form that kind of an economy. I really don't see any of the nations on those continents having any type of issues with one another (with the exception of US/Cuba but Fidel won't live forever - at least I don't think he will.) like Asia, Europe, of Africa tend to.

Besides, we all have similiar backgrounds and histories. All of us were once colonies and have gained independence and moved forward with control of our own national destinies.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by yellfromhell
Ghengis,
Once again: I killed nobody.

Huh? You aren't Pancho's grandson are you? If so I didn't mean to be running your grandfather into the ground, I just don't see him as the leader of the Mexican civilization.

Originally posted by yellfromhell
I may do a lot of mistakes, but that doesnt have to make you angry.

I've never been angry, I just thought Pancho was a really strange suggestion!

Originally posted by yellfromhell
Eventhough, what you say confuses me more: ¿Why does every united-statian I talk to just knows by sound the name 'Pancho Villa' and nothing about the two others? Maybe its just coincidence.

You got me there. Pancho isn't in our history books, but Santa Anna and Maximillian are considered part of American History. Honestly, though I had no idea that Mexicans viewed Pancho Villa as a great national hero/patriot.

PS: I just can't imagine playing this game and all of a sudden Pancho Villa pops up and says "Come, leader so-and-so, view the mighty Hanging Gardens I have constructed." That just seems so NOT Pancho.

[yellfromhell]

Ghengis,

I hope you wont feel touched in your patriotic feelings with what Im about to say.
I dont know if the mexicans see Pancho as a national heroe. But its also doubtfull that a russian see Catherine as their national heroe. You see: sometimes the feeling of patriotism is mixed with that of nationalism. Surely the russians would prefare a more modern leader, someone who had taken them to play in the big scenario. For many latinamerican countrys, the nearest they can be to that 'big scenario' is arguing with the biggies (say USA, UK, France, China, Japan, Spain, etc). But just argue, not fight (because latinamerican countries dont act so stupidly). For that reason, bandits or rebels sometimes have the best popularity. Why? Because, they dont have to be carefull of what they say when arguing with the biggies... they can just shoot and hide. That was the case of Pancho. That was the case of El Che. That is the case of Zapatist Guerilla, the case of the sandinist in Nicaragua, etc. All of them have and had a tremendous popularity in certain times. 'El Che', for example, is even more popular than Fidel Castro for latinamerican left-hand politics supporters. And not just for them: in my country, Uruguay, I voted for the liberal Jorge Battle, and eventhough I sympathize with Ches ideals.
All of that comes joined to the disastrous politics USA applied in past century for the Latinamerican issues, and that seems to be continuing in this new millenium.
And you should know something: the best popularity rates and the strongest unity in any country always come when you have an enemy outside. And for millons of latinamericans the US government (not the people) acts like an enemy.
I hope you can position in this side of the scene to understand the point of view Im describing you.
Hugs,
Yellfromhell

[yellfromhell]

Hi Ghengis once again,

We are joint under the same good feelings for the AFTA (Americas Free Trade Asociation) or ALCA in spanish.
But as I said to Aro, the social situation in latinamerica is extremely difficult and attention cant be distracted to that type of issues. Its difficult for a president to talk about macroeconomics when his house-neighbour is yelling for a big change on economic politics. And its even more difficult to reach complete unity of nations (that was what we were talking about with Ato), if not impossible.

Hugs
Yell

[yellfromhell]

Its a petty the one who voted for King Pedro didnt post anything (at least I believe so). It would have been interesting to discuss about his rulership and to analisys some suggestions about UUs and civ characteristics.
¿Do you all know that in Brazil exists a political party that wants the return of Monarchic type of government?
Hugs
Yellfromhell

[yellfromhell]

As the poll has been closed, it seems that Simon Bolivar is prefared by far. Fidel began well but later slowed his march (it seems he is too old ). San Martins case is surprising: just one vote (Aros one). I believe Bolivars name shadowed this austral leader, because in the facts both reached similar goals, liberated nearly the same number of countries, etc.
Now we should think about the characteristics of the latinam Civ and the UUs. ¿Does anyone have any proposal?
Hugs
Yellfromhell

[Aro]

expansionist, I hope. And maybe militaristic, too. After all, ALL of us in the continent have at least one "General Golpista" in our history books...
Err... How can we say this in english?

[Aro]

Yell,
King Pedro I of Brazil? Or Pedro II? Or, I must say, Emperor Pedro I or Pedro II... We never had a King, really. Was an "Imperador"... A little pretentious, I know, but by the time of Pedro II we used to be very nasty. Imperialistic, and so. By other hand, he builted univesities, railroads, factories, astronomic observatories, the Botanic Gardens (where I live!), even telephones! And he had a strong diplomacy. He was an warmonger and a builder, at the same time... And, due the size of the country, he had a lot of corruption, too.
BTW, we have a lot of corruption in Brazil just now. Some things never changes...

[yellfromhell]

Aro,
When I introduced the option in the poll I was thinking of Pedro II, but I didnt remember certainly the number
Sure, he was an emperor. I should have thought about that since he goberned the "Empire of Brazil", not the "Reign...".
"General Golpista" in english... humm... difficult to translate , maybe we could try inventing some vocabulary... we could translate it as "Tiredofweakcivilians" or something like that
Hugs.
Yellfromhell

[yellfromhell]

Yes, for me expansionist and militaristic its fine. A civ prone to have tons of corruption
We cant talk about marvellous scientific developments, or about any link between religion and war (eventhough Brazil and Mexico are the most catholic countries in the world).
We cant be seen as industrial civs... maybe as commercial ones (we always sell the leather to the developed countries and then buy it again when we buy italian shoes )
Hugs
Yellfromhell

[Aro]

Once again, your damn right. A commercial civ... And we can't forget: We are selling all of our strategic companies... We're selling our improvments, in other words! Well... this is quite normal, here... In a certain way, we ARE a commercial civ.
But we agree with the two caracteristics, so we need now an UU. You talked in another post about the 'gaucho'. This unit cames with an interesting concept, it deserves more reflexion. Will be a horseman, I suppose. What do you think?