Titus Ultor
-
Posts
893 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Titus Ultor
-
-
That concept both excites and disturbs me, Michael. ;p
Seriously... the world of the ancients was a very varied and artistic one: many cultures used art as a function in pleasing the gods. Now wonder they tried so hard, eh? Shields and other forms of equipment (especially among barbarians) were seen as more than just gear for killing and avoiding being killed. They were seen more as avatars of one's heritage and religion, of honor and nobility. The idea of uniform equipment would probably have made many Celtic peoples uneasy, to say the least.
-
There's a lot of history in alleys...while the tenants, roads, and even some buildings might change, very times do people wish to expend the effort to fix up an alley. In Rome, I hear, there are a lot of small, winding alleyways that have existed for centuries.
-
We all have our idea of an utopia. Perhaps you haven't taken the time to create one with as much detail as in Thomas Moore's "Utopia" or Yieul's "Melville". However, maybe you should. I know Michael has some basis of ideas. I'm sure most of you could create your own with a bit of time and effort.
It this a fruitless exercise? Hardly. Imagining the society you would like to create is a crucial part of selecting your political affiliation, outside of entangling surface issues. Maybe you'll end up aligning with a party that you never expected you would otherwise write off because of their stance on an issue or two.
I don't have mine, yet... I'll have one soon, though.
Yieul, maybe you should begin: maybe it'd be best if you just moved the end of the TEC column to here.
-
I never said the American form was what I wanted either. biggrin.gif Besides, what about my little haphazard proposal?
Your proposal is somewhat appealing, in that it encompasses something I've always wanted (direct elections). However, for obvious reasons, it's a bit incomplete. What about checks and balances? Seperation of Powers? Also, if a district is based on population and not along cultural lines, then two major conflicting viewpoints may exist in a single place, but one is the majority in that region?
All those representatives are POWERLESS (this IS scary) if the people do not agree with them. They aren't as a President or even a Prime minister. They aren't elected for a certain period of time : they are chosen by the people, dismissed by the people, at any time. (My ideal is having a State where Unanimity is the rule to change something within the laws and ways, and people dismissed when they aren't good enough to have general support.)If terms were not in place, John F. Kennedy would have been taken out after the Bay of Pigs, and would have never done any of the great things that overwhelmed that one mistake (designed by Eisenhower, actually). The whims of a population from day to day are not reasons to remove leaders. A single mistake shouldn't lampoon an entire administration.
Leadership is given time because political power is not an easy thing to manage. A newly elected official will probably make more than one mistake early on. Unless the people are fully educated and understanding (something I've never seen in any of my studies in all of history), power will become more of a "flavor of the month"/pop world-esque function of society, rather than a more stately function, as removed from the modern world of advertisement as possible.
If people could be expected to be fair, educated, informed and capable, then I would have no problem with your system, Yieul. However, I can no longer believe that humanity has that ability.
-
Michael...take a look at the U.S. Constitution. An entire branch of government is chosen by other politicians, another is chosen by a special group of electors. Even half the final branch is based more on statehood than actual representation of the populace.
The proposed European constitution reminds of the American constitution in that it recognizes states' rights (semi-pun) over individual rights. While I think states' rights (in the American sense of 'state') is a sham given our similiar cultures, European states' rights(in the scholarly sense of the word) is a concept that accounts for the difference in culture between, say, Italy and Belgium.
-
I'm certainly (and I don't believe you're implying) using that argument, but I am quite willing to use the argument that no national or international constitution, in any circumstance, will appease all nations completely, and especially not all individuals.
There may be some sacrifices for certain causes in the present (for instance, in Belgium), but those are relatively small in light of the larger political machinations of the world. It wouldn't be too incredibly different from New York not signing the U.S. Constitution because the English and Dutch populations had issues, and the document didn't address it.
To call the EU "a tool of the neo-liberal elite" may be a bit much: sure, it's leans left, but the EU is characterized by progressive nations in the first place. Also, not to disparage you (Klaas) in any way, but giving clearly partisan sites in order to allow others to learn more isn't quite standard practice. I'm aware that there are some issues with the Constitution as it is, but I'm also aware that the ratification of it would be a large step forward in maintaining European status and interests around the world.
-
Roma Victor! Paul and I will have to have a good ol' fashioned civil war for one of our first games.
Rome really seems to be ahead, but only time will tell!
-
I would vote yes, as far as I've read of it (I would read it all, but it doesn't interest even me, the political science major). I'm moving to Europe as soon as they'll let me...does that count?
Moreover...I'll have to read the rest before I can give a full opinion. European unity is important. World wars seem to happen when there isn't unity.
-
Spain had begun to develop a more modern Spanish much sooner than, say, French or English. In fact, the "King's Spanish" (with its most noteable feature of the lisped 's') appeared in the mid-to-late 1400s. Spain had far too much Muslim rule before that to have French as its court language, to be sure.
French wasn't so much a language of various courts as a common language among all nobility. Any noble from any nation, be it Russia or Portugal, would probably know some form of his own vernacular, Latin, and French. Latin was used for study, French for foreign relations, and the vernacular for nearly every other aspect. It was almost very much like modern English's formal and informal styles, albeit much, much more extreme.
-
You might definately want to point out... nearly every structure of society. I think the only major similiarity is the language.
You may want to examine the reactions to major economic changes: specifically, the Great Depression and the Reunification.
Finally, isolationism, nationalism, and militarism. Note their replacement by more modern ideologies, such as globalism, inter-Continentalism, and pacificism.
-
I read them (the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings trilogy thing) in third grade. I didn't really understand them, though. So when I reread them in 9th (two years ago) it was much, much better.
-
Military spending for the U.S. before September 11th was still higher than all of the E.U.'s. Now, it's extraordinarily higher. I'm not saying that it's needed, or that there's much of a reason for such a high-tech military... however, military strength is one of the key components of influence.
-
The French nce as the language of the civilized made most apparent during the 19th century originated much, much earlier than that.
For instance, English nobles, beginning in the 11th century, had always spoken French, despite the development of the English language among their peasantry. Eventually, French was replaced by English, but this took writers such as Chaucer to really force French out of the nobility
Obviously, the French spoke French...and with the "murder" of Latin in the 1600s (Newton's "Principii" was the last great work in the language), French became the language of conversing intellegencia and merchants throughout Europe. This was most likely due to France's central location, rising wealth and power, and the French language's similiarity to Latin (it resembles it closer than Italian, even). Thus, lingua franca.
France as the world's pre-eminent second language (or first, in the case of France herself and her colonies) ended when the empire of France was more or less knocked off of the world stage by the dual blows of the Franco-Prussian War (to summarize: roughly 3/4 of Germany, without much to show in the way of empire, decimates the French in 1871) and World War I.
This talk of French of a court language was true in pre-Elizabethan England (as aforementioned), but true to a lesser extent in other major powers. During Napoleon's campaigns, his puppet governments used French law, custom and language; however, most of this protocol was discarded as quickly as French rule, at least in the Major Powers (my knowledge of smaller powers (namely Belgium, Netherlands, et cetera is a bit weak, sadly.).
When dealing with English today, it is a simple matter of this: where is poltical and economic power centered? In the United States. No one nation wields larger power and influence. Even the entire E.U., if they banded together without attacking each other (as European powers seem to have a habit of doing), has less G.D.P. and military spending than the U.S.
The fact that English (though it could be any language) is so widely taught is directly responsible for the diversity and, thus, wide range of skills of Wildfire Games, by the way. While it may or may not be representative of the whole movement, we are one example of globalization's helpfulness.
One more thing: this discussion certainly wouldn't be possible without globalization.
-
"Drop it Like It's Hot" - Snoop Dog featuring Pharell
Don't taunt me too much.
-
I don't have much to say on this topic, because I have to go bed, but I do have one quick observation off of one of Klaas' points:
Next to that we're taught Fench since when we're 10-years-old, while English when we're 12. That doesn't sound too logical to me since English is much more important.So why obliging us to study French instead of German or Spanish? Why don't they give us the choice? Quite simple: we're Flemings, aka second-class citizens in Belgium.
All non-Quebeckers in Canada are obliged to learn French: are they second-class citizens?
Also, to Yieul... You mention that you are Canadian, and a Quebecker, and you freely admit that it may affect your outllook, which I find to be quite upstanding. I think I can tell you why you may have that viewpoint: Canada has had only a relatively small involvement in all major world conflicts, really only getting involved in numbers of no more than a few divisions in the largest war of human history. Canada has not had any very violent revolution or civil war, either.
Therefore, Canadians are allowed to have differences, since the remoteness and structure of Canadian society has granted them a relatively safe position. However, in, for instance, Germany, with coups, dictators, genocide, nearly 50 million lost in just two wars, a Great Depression, and a few other things besides, is hardly in a position to allow for much differences within themselves and with the neighbors. It just has had too much damage in the past to really sucessfully deal with extremism and polarization.
This ended up taking longer than I expected. I may just end up staying up.
-
That's Argalius, our local fault-finder.
Yeah, dudes! Welcome to the team. Those are some pretty impressive credentials: I can't wait to see what you two can do!
-
I (having never been really into it that much, but I've read the basic four book things and saw the movies) have noticed that pop culture has turned away from it a great deal, and that it's far less trendy and bearable for people to talk about.
However, in its wake, Lord of the Rings has left a great deal more fans and purists than there were before; in other words, the wave has receded, but it left a nice, useful salty residue. If anything, I think it will solve most of TLA's legality issues (they probably won't care as much) and will keep roughly the same audience, with a bit larger of a clientele. Most of the "fans" who appeared while the movies were out probably wouldn't go through the effort of finding and downloading it. The real fans will still come (like they would've without the movies), plus a few new ones, to boot.
-
Those guys who actually do the serious work of the project (unlike myself) are amazing. Both in talent and in work ethic.
Serious props, yo'.
-
Globalization is the response to a century of near constant conflict on the account of nationalism. Cultural heritage is nice, but after over a hundred million people die in only ten years of warfare in their nation's name, it's negative effects begin to outweigh the positive.
This actually brings the topic in a circle, back into the original question: perhaps we have not learned. There are still nationalism, fascism, and dictatorship, even in Europe, the region which started and suffered the brunt of the World Wars.
Globalism, then, is the most obvious solution to this problem. Wars and conflicts almost universally start with conflicts between cultures. Even most civil wars are a result of two seperate cultures under the same nation, with neither side willing to admit the pointlessness of focusing on cultural heritage more than human life and human dignity. Globalism isn't the absolution of culture, or the tyrannical leadership of one culture; it's the realization that it is safest and best to avoid conflict than to defend something which, at best, fosters slight xenophobia and, at worst, breeds racism and nationalism.
-
The first sketches I've seen of it are late 1300s. It wouldn't surprise me, however, if the Muslims had a similiar invention before the Europeans.
-
I love Rise of Nations. It's got great gameplay and graphics, although some people just aren't drawn into it. It's a very interesting and industry-influencing game, to say the least.
-
When it comes to the Quebec-ian patois of French; it is the same thing to French French as American English is to British English.
Not that that matters any: I just think it's silly for an entire nation to learn French (or any language) because one province refuses to, for rather frivolous reasons. It's as if the entire nation of the United States were to be required to be taught Spanish because roughly twenty percent of the population is Hispanic.(primarily centered in Southern and Central California, Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico: meaning that they comprise a majority in one rather large geographical region).
-
No offense, but the Yen is worth significantly less than both. Perhaps you're were confusing the relative strength of their economies: Asia (specifically Japan, China and Indonesia) will soon overtake the Western Powers in the realm of economics.
-
I think both FDR and Reagan both just turned over in their graves, for being listed as equals in nearly any manner. They probably rolled facing away from eachother.
Also, on the topic of the Russo-Japanese War... the Baltic fleet of the Russkies was also sunk, in a second major battle. It was the horrible and pride-crushing war that began the first Russian attempt at revolution in the early 1900s.
Highland Battle
in Screenshots
Posted
Impressive work! I'm very jealous of that sort of talent.
One day... *scheme*