Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-12-2003, 08:26 PM   #1
The Hierophant
Thoth - Egyptian God of Wisdom
 

Join Date: May 10, 2002
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
Age: 41
Posts: 2,860
The term 'imperialist' seems to be thrown around alot in today's international political arena, and almost universally with negative connotations.
Why?
__________________
[img]\"hosted/Hierophant.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /><br />Strewth!
The Hierophant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2003, 09:40 PM   #2
Djinn Raffo
Ra
 

Join Date: March 11, 2001
Location: Ant Hill
Age: 49
Posts: 2,397
I don't think anything is wrong with being an Empire or bearing that label. Every one in history has shown that all Empire's decline and eventually cease to be an one. The people do not though..

The term Imperialist however is a little different imo of being an Empire. Once a nation has become an Empire their is the hope that it can be a benevolent one and not such as history has given us in the past.

My definition (or what i have always interpreted 'Imperialist' as), is that Imperialist means one nation, people, civ, seeks out to vassalize other nations, peoples, civs. Assert their dominance of them and plunder their resources. It is almost an ideaology pre to the Empire part of it to me. A nation, people, civ that seeks out more land, power, resources, income, growth has Imperialist designs.

The question then regards why does Empire have a negative connotation?

That depends on the Empire.

Do they retain their dominance:
..through the Sword?
..through God?
..through the Common Good of the People?
..through Drugs and Mind Control?
..through Chance. By sheer chance Empires rise and fall and their is never any puppeteer at the helm.. It all comes down to luck.

Have you ever heard of a benevolent Empire? After all i'm sure that every one of them to date has said that they were benevolent...

[ 01-12-2003, 09:53 PM: Message edited by: Djinn Raffo ]
Djinn Raffo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2003, 11:26 PM   #3
Yorick
Very Mad Bird
 

Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 52
Posts: 9,246
Why is the concept of Empire a bad thing? For the same thing that a 'control freak' is viewed negatively.

Imposing ones will on others to their detriment. The Roman Empires existence ended up decimating the Celtic cultures it controlled. The Bristish Empire wiped out the indigenous cultures of many areas it controlled. The Mongol Empire was incredibly destructive to those who weren't Mongols.

Need more?
__________________

http://www.hughwilson.com
Yorick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2003, 06:12 AM   #4
The Hierophant
Thoth - Egyptian God of Wisdom
 

Join Date: May 10, 2002
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
Age: 41
Posts: 2,860
Great answers Djinn and Yorick.
So it is an issue of a conscious will to control the affairs of others? Where one person or group of people applies force (whether physical, cultural or intellectual) to bend or break the will of another group who hold beliefs or cultural identities contrary to the pressuring group? Hmmm. Yes, sounds a little anti-social to me too.

to Djinn - A question I have for you is where does the Nation stop and the Empire begin? Nations involve groups of people of similar mindframe and identity merged into one cultural community. In order to do this, wills need to be imposed. Are Nations merely mini-empires? Your thoughts?

to Yorick - So one aspect of the negativity of empire involves the clear detriment of certain groups and/or cultures through the actions of another? Would the reliance of the 'western world' upon cheap mass-labour in Asia and south/central America for manufactured consumer goods (such as shoes, plastics, coffee etc.) count as imposing a detriment on other cultures in order to gain benefit for another? If so (and only if), would western consumer culture be seen as an imperialist force? Thoughts welcome....
__________________
[img]\"hosted/Hierophant.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /><br />Strewth!
The Hierophant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2003, 06:56 AM   #5
Mouse
Ironworks Moderator
 

Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,788
Throughout history, a major catalyst for the social, cultural and political evolution of the nation state has been the subjugation of weak or declining geopolitical groupings by more vigorous ones, generally by conquest. It’s Darwinisn on a grand scale.

This does not always have to be a negative thing. There would not be the rich cultural mix in say Southern Europe if there had not been waves of conquest and reconquest over the centuries in that area.

Just a thought
__________________
Regards

Mouse
(Occasional crooner and all round friendly Scottish rodent)
Mouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2003, 07:49 AM   #6
Shaide
Dungeon Master
 

Join Date: November 5, 2002
Location: Cordoba(andalusia)(spain)(europe)(the world)(the system solar)(the universe)
Age: 44
Posts: 91
I think the term imperialist is bad, think about it:

-Romans first state imperialist in the world. They were hated for the people, into europe and North of Africa. Cesar was the lover and hater man in this age.

-Mongols they were feared for the people in all knowlegde world.

-Spain the first country which got conquered half world (half Europe, all South America and Central America and half of North America, half Africa, and Pacifican island). They were hated too. "Catholic kings" was the hater word.

-La France, Napoleon tried to get all Europe, but he didnt get South of Spain ,Italy and Portugal, and the north of Dutchland (Germany), He was hated.

-British, the second country wich got conquered half world.

-Germany. Hitler. Only this word.

-USA. They want to have all control in oil in the world. They dont conquer countries, but they say: if you dont do that we want to, we'll say all world that you are a bad country, and then we'll attack you. The normal people dont like the bush politician 'cause they are so belician, why do they wanna attack all world?. What do they fear?. Bush is like hitler, and he is a fascist, like Berlusconi or the B***** of Franco, the people in USA dont have any freedom to say or be that they want to. If you say that you are a muslim, the people hate you, and the police look you like a criminal. (I hate the religion 'cause is the evil root in the world), and they have the SS or american Gestapo known as FBI. Really, I dont understand how the people in USA like to live there, in a country without freedom....

These are my reason.... Imperialist is a bad term. The Out-freedom.
Shaide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2003, 07:57 AM   #7
The Hierophant
Thoth - Egyptian God of Wisdom
 

Join Date: May 10, 2002
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
Age: 41
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally posted by Mouse:
Throughout history, a major catalyst for the social, cultural and political evolution of the nation state has been the subjugation of weak or declining geopolitical groupings by more vigorous ones, generally by conquest. It?s Darwinisn on a grand scale.

This does not always have to be a negative thing. There would not be the rich cultural mix in say Southern Europe if there had not been waves of conquest and reconquest over the centuries in that area.

Just a thought
Indeed. Sometimes the sweeping away of the old by the new can lead to renewed growth in various fields. Like a West Australian bushfire [img]smile.gif[/img]
Then Mouse, would you say that the value of imperialist human expansion rests solely upon the personalized moral values of the individual? If it is immoral to subjugate others, then it is immoral to expand empire...surely? If not, then is it possible that the opposite applies? If all opposing voices are silenced, does morality change form? And in which case, does the christian-based morality of Western governments stem from the imperialism of the christian faith? Had the cult of the christ not been bureactratised by the Roman papcy and expanded (at times by force of arms), would the prevalent focus on guilt and judgment in Western philosophy be present today?
Is imperialism merely a concept of organized practicality? All forms of human social relationships involve the manipulation of others in some shape or form, no matter how subtle. When does manipulation become subjugation? How much 'freedom' really exists in the free world? When viewed from a far enough distance, are any modern Nations really any different from one another? Are we all part of the 'axis of evil'?

Thoughts... ?
__________________
[img]\"hosted/Hierophant.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /><br />Strewth!
The Hierophant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2003, 07:57 AM   #8
skywalker
Banned User
 

Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: VT, USA
Age: 63
Posts: 3,097
Quote:
Originally posted by Shaide:
I think the term imperialist is bad, think about it:

-Romans first state imperialist in the world. They were hated for the people, into europe and North of Africa. Cesar was the lover and hater man in this age.

-Mongols they were feared for the people in all knowlegde world.

-Spain the first country which got conquered half world (half Europe, all South America and Central America and half of North America, half Africa, and Pacifican island). They were hated too. "Catholic kings" was the hater word.

-La France, Napoleon tried to get all Europe, but he didnt get South of Spain ,Italy and Portugal, and the north of Dutchland (Germany), He was hated.

-British, the second country wich got conquered half world.

-Germany. Hitler. Only this word.

-USA. They want to have all control in oil in the world. They dont conquer countries, but they say: if you dont do that we want to, we'll say all world that you are a bad country, and then we'll attack you. The normal people dont like the bush politician 'cause they are so belician, why do they wanna attack all world?. What do they fear?. Bush is like hitler, and he is a fascist, like Berlusconi or the B***** of Franco, the people in USA dont have any freedom to say or be that they want to. If you say that you are a muslim, the people hate you, and the police look you like a criminal. (I hate the religion 'cause is the evil root in the world), and they have the SS or american Gestapo known as FBI. Really, I dont understand how the people in USA like to live there, in a country without freedom....

These are my reason.... Imperialist is a bad term. The Out-freedom.
Remember this is Shaide's opinion...take a breath and feel free to oppose her views with respect as I'm sure she will respect yours. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Mark
skywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2003, 08:07 AM   #9
The Hierophant
Thoth - Egyptian God of Wisdom
 

Join Date: May 10, 2002
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
Age: 41
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally posted by skywalker:
Remember this is Shaide's opinion...take a breath and feel free to oppose her views with respect as I'm sure she will respect yours. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Mark
Good to see you're valuing people first Mark [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
Just as an aside, Shaide is more than welcome to stand up for herself if she feels the need But it's good to see you're making an effort to keep things clean

shaide - Do not forget that many of the dictators you mentioned were also dearly loved as well, especially for the prosperity they brought to select groups of people. Also, just an honest question, have you ever lived in America?

[ 01-13-2003, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]
__________________
[img]\"hosted/Hierophant.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /><br />Strewth!
The Hierophant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2003, 08:15 AM   #10
Mouse
Ironworks Moderator
 

Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,788
Hierophant, you are obviously thinking very deeply on this subject. At the moment I'm at work and don't really have time to answer. However, just consider where we would be without the dynamic of social change that conquest/imperialism brings. Surely the result would be an increase in social and cultural stagnation ?

I don't consider that all examples of the subjugation and assimilation of the weak by the strong are to be applauded. However, and even with my Western/liberal upbringing I can see how this process can bring positive benefits.
__________________
Regards

Mouse
(Occasional crooner and all round friendly Scottish rodent)
Mouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Empire at War Riftmaker Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) 0 01-25-2005 05:58 PM
Empire Djinn Raffo General Discussion 1 01-09-2003 09:34 AM
Empire Earth!!!!!! SecretMaster Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) 5 07-30-2002 11:03 PM
Empire Quest Legolas General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 77 01-30-2002 09:41 PM
Ok, I'm totally wrong, wronger then wrong. (Spellcasters) ArmageddonX Baldurs Gate II Archives 2 12-09-2000 03:53 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved