I do not know if this has been discussed on the old forum, and i know this my bring up current events, but i believe it shoud be discussed. Also what about a 3 or 4 gendered society? I would like to know how this may effect game-play and how it will be implemented.
If there is racism and sexism in Thrive:
Step 1: Form a dictatorship
Step 2: Make all citizens equal in rights (I can explain my democratic dictatorship in another thread)
Step 3: Set up surveillance cameras and drones everywhere
Step 4: Wipe out all known racist and sexists by kidnapping them in the middle of the night and killing them
Step 5: Feel satisfied in what you’ve done and continue monitoring your citizens
a bit extreme, also what if some of your citizens like, for example having control over they’re spouses, particularly your leaders?
Depends on what you mean by control.
that was just an example, another is not having to pay there slaves.
your plan has some holes:
1 surveillance cameras and drones may not have been developed yet.
2 its vary extreme your citizens may revolt.
I’m just talking about somewhere down the line in your creatures civilization. Also robots can be produced in extreme numbers and you will still have your military, no one would dare rebel against their leaders with that much military force.
They aren’t slaves if they are paid. My empire would have slaves but it would be war criminals, meaning no racism involved because it’s not a specific people.
i guess their is the extreme way, but i would like to just see how it turns out
I feel like I’ve made the perfect empire to embrace extreme dictatorial rule with democratic progressive values. I just realized I didn’t explain how it maintains democratic systems.
democratic and dictatorial are opposites so. (democratic = “relating to or supporting democracy or its principles.”)
I think what you’re referring to is “communism.” Most communist countries were nominally democratic, preferring names such as “democratic republic,” or some permutation. In addition, it’s not like communism hasn’t associated itself with anti-racist and anti-sexist causes. Mao Zebelgium himself is well-known for saying “Women hold up half the sky.”
When I say democratic I mean rights and voting as this is a planetary government type more than a national government type. The government is designed to keep the people happy while providing extreme order and stability in the empire. The planet is split into sections and each section has a leader, here are sections smallest to largest and how the leader comes into power; city (voted)–> district (voted) --> province (voted) --> sector (selected from province leaders) --> continental (selected from sector leaders) --> hemispheric (selected from continental leaders) --> planetary civil [this is personalized to MY ideal world (genetically engineered emperor and empress designed to be compassionate and care about the people) they could also install a hemispheric leader as the emperor or empress] + planetary military (supreme commander of all the planetary forces). The highest tier of the government is split between civil and military, the civil section is responsible for keeping the people happy while the military section is responsible for protecting the planet and protecting the citizens as law enforcement.
I don’t know how sexism and racism should be treated in this game. For racism, many species have different race like human, dog, cat, horse ect. Called sometime breed, but it mostly the same thing. I don’t think racism should be really integrated in gameplay but more roleplayed. For example, some race are less good at certain thing than other. So for example you have member of your species evolving in a hostile environment, the species will probably concentrate on brute force than intelligence. While other member of your species that are in more social and peaceful area of your planet will concentrate in intelligence than brute force. I think racism and sexism can be concept that appear in a certain stage of a intelligent species, where certain member of your species will have belief. For example you can have people thinking the female should have certain right, or male should have certain right. That race should be allowed that, or they can’t or can do that.
Well you could have racism if lets say you enslaved this one version of your species because they had smaller horns and darker fur then you could have racism because they belive that because they have larger horns and lighter colored fur they are superior and to have sexism lets say the men of the society are not treated equal because the female think their superior to males then you have sexism
I think, my idea of belief system can be pretty good to roleplay. Because what their believe is not necceseraly true. So you could have civil unrest based on false thing, wich could be interesting.
That is a good idea
The concept of racism as @Riblix described could also be a basis for racism against aliens. While there may be a view of incompatibility between different species, aliens could also be discriminated upon by their traits, like color or the size of appendages. You come in with bias and you find some thing they do worse than you and call your discrimination justified.
Another bias I’d like to bring up is bias surrounding artificial lifeforms (robots and clones). The same “incompatibility” view would potentially be one reason why there would be bias against robots. You find some negative trait (being made in a lab, being a stupid robot, or on the reverse side being a squishy organic) and discriminate because of that.
Honestly, most bigotries spring from the view of incompatibility, then justifying it with a negative trait the victim of bias has.
As your society becomes more tolerant, the incompatibility view decreases and you’ll put aside your biases.
But we didn’t discriminate against aliens we discriminated between ourselves so you should be able to discriminate against another version of your species
i agree with both of you. your citizens would, in reel life discriminate against many things.
Huh, I thought the most important demand of a demographic (groups of people: gender, race, heritage, sexuality, etc) justice movement is, y’know, the voting franchise? So they can actually function as part of a democratic society instead of relying on allies?
Coming in a close second would be protections against defamation, discrimination, et cetera. The stuff that makes equality happen in practice rather than only on paper.
Since you’re just pointing fingers at a general movement, you could also be referring to material justice (ie: environmental, economic, education, something else that doesn’t start with e)
Even then, that’s a way to make people more able to participate in a democracy, or they have a central argument that those that wield unreasonable power should be held accountable.
Opposing these movements, in fact, seems more compatible with a dictatorial authority. A fractured, stratified, and poorly-educated society is much easier to rule over than one that believes in dignity and solidarity among all people.
For how much you cite 1984, I feel you’re misusing the reference, and not recognizing the specific tools the Inner Party used to keep the population in check. They raised their citizens on the bare minimum, making any improvement in conditions (or worsening, because they’ve also been able to control meaning) seem like manna from heaven. They fostered animosity and curtailed enjoyment in their citizens, all playing back into the hands of the secret police. What resistance they did have was a honeypot, already infiltrated.
The insanity that started Ingsoc’s domination was conscious - its only belief is a lust for power.
I don’t know about you, but whatever progressive movement you’re trying to refer to, including the youth movement, is a genuine effort to improve conditions for themselves and others.