Slave trading, taboo trading, and the Opium War

[Tanglefoot]

I have just recently purchased EU and I am still getting familiar with the game. I have managed to make it to 1590 playing the Iriquois on the fantasy scenario. I reached West African shores for the first time around 1540 and when I landed units to explore I was a little shocked to see that the province I had landed in traded slaves. I've played other games of this type from this time period (Uncharted Waters-N16 & Imperialism-Win98) and neither game included slaves as trading commodities. After recovering from my initial shock at discovering this existed in EU I was able to settle down and come to grips with the fact that it was a hard reality of the time frame covered by EU. I was a little surprised that it was included in the game because slave trading represents a 'taboo' element of trading to me because I live in the United States and I have a deeply ingrained consciousness on the subject because the United States was the final destination for this trade and ironically, I'd be willing to bet that the target market for this game is the U.S.; the final destination of the very trade (slavery) we try to to put behind us as a national conciousness. So, it wouldn't surprise me if other American players have a bit of difficulty adjusting to this aspect of the game. Fortunately there are many other African provinces in the game that do not trade slaves and it can be easily avoided if one so chooses to establish colonies or trading posts in Africa.
I do admire EU's courage for being upfront in dealing with the issue of slavery in it's game. You have crossed a boundry no other game seems to want to touch. And though I admire you for having the resolve to deal with 'taboo' issues, I feel you fell a little short in 'going all the way' on the matter of taboo trading subjects. Just as slave trading was a hard reality of the world from 1492 - 1792, so was the trading of drugs a hard reality then, and still is today. As proof to the truth of what I say, one only needs to do a little research into the Opium War fought between England and China in the early 1840's. Yep, that's right, a documented drug war involving the trade of illicit substances. In a dissertation on the Opium War, Richard Hooker (www.wsu.edu/~dee/CHING/OPIUM.HTM)states 'by the 1830's, the English had become the major drug traffiking criminal organization in the world; very few drug cartels of the 20th century can even touch the England of the early 19th century.'
I'm not asking EU to add drug trade to the game; it would really be 'politically incorrect' and I could see where it might cause legal problems for marketing and distributing. I guess my whole point to this is: why did you decide to cross one taboo boundry and not the other?

[Martinov]

Oh no the fourth thread on this subject! You should see the mob hysteria on the others, this huge amount of pc bashing, fear of pc etc over nothing, as far as i can tell.

As a politically correct, ie considerate, person, i assure you that it is in fact more denigrating, and historically dangerous, to 'ignore' or 'exclude' true elements.

I's say that the criteria when considering the 'appropriateness' of the handling is a)is it accurate depiction? and b) does it unnecessarily belittle people/tragedy?.

Generally if its a) then it cannot be b) because accurate reportage of the human experience cannot be belittling be definition.

I think Eu accurately depicts slavery for what it was, a disgusting money grab by people unconcerned about human suffering (they probably labelled their opponents 'politically correct dogooders').

But thats how life was back then. And how it remains in much of the world at the moment. In the us, what passes for government is moving to abolish the mininum wage.

As Eu is a historical game it is appropriate that such a large economic social factor be modelled.

As for drugs,what's the problem there? again, the opium trade is historical fact, shameful perhaps, perhaps something to apologise for, but immutable and a part of govt policy/history, even today the us has found it useful to consort with drug crime from time to time (cambodia, panama).

'Political correctness', 'do-gooder' etc are terms manufactured to achieve the goals they purport to criticise, slanting the language we speak to encourage particular views of life.

[AndrewT]

>I do admire EU's courage for being upfront in dealing with the issue of slavery in it's game. You have crossed a boundry no other game seems to want to touch.

Not so. SSG's Gold of the Americas not only had slaves, but the players captured and exploited them for labour. The slaves got their revenge with the occasional revolt.

The facts are that slavery was rife in Africa before the Europeans ever got there. Africans sold their fellows to other Africans, Arabs, anyone who was buying. Certainly the Europeans took it to another level and shipped them across the Altantic, but this is worse in degree only.

[Suleyman]

EU is a game that follows history. That means that taboo topics are covered if that is in fact what happened.

You say that slave trade is taboo, because slavery is moraly wrong.

How about warfare? Warfare leads to mass killing, mass slaughtering of people. Warfare leads to plundering of villages and cities, and the raping of civilizan women. Why did you not raise an issue with the immoralities of warfare?

How about religious persecution? The fact that the Spanish had done ethnic cleansing on the Moors of Granada. Or the fact that the French persecuted the Protestant Huegenots? These are also topics covered in EU. Aren't all of this just as morally taboo as slave trading?

EU is a historical game. And history is full of things we would consider morally taboo today: killing, raping of civilians, razing innocent towns, ethnic cleansing, religious persecutions, Christian kings happily beheading their wives, Muslim sultans having a harem of 300 concubines, turning prisoners of war into slaves, and slave trade, etc.

You need to have a tough stomach, and an open-minded conscience to look at history objectively, especially when you are playing a game that lets YOU recreate some of these atrocities.

By learning history, you are less likely to repeat many of it's mistakes (and atrocities).

And by the way, welcome to EU, it's a great game.

[State Machine]

I would say the big thread in the EU II forum (forget its title but it has a lot of posts), covers the subject pretty well.

Though to one point in Tanglefoot's post. The thread I'm mentioning seems to be predicated on the notion that EU II will be a market failure in the US because it does have slavery in it, and the taboo will kill it. My point, and of several others, I'm sure, was that EU I has slavery in it and has been very successful and not at all controversial, why should EU II be.

Martinov makes an interesting point about accuracy and of belittling the subject. I think, EU handles it at such an abstract level that you are almost disassociated with what the "commodity" is. It is just another cog in your economy, and the income is indirect because it goes through a CoT. Should we be "disassociated" from such a thing? That's where Suleyman comes in mentioning all the other immorallity we don't find troublesome.

[PatMaster]

About the Opium war.
You should read James Clavells Tai-Pan.

[Emperor of Europe]

The EU system only allows one commodity in each province, so naturally it should be the most important. Since slaves were the most important commodity in some provinces, and this is a historical game, it should of course be modelled in the game. I totally fail to see anything terrible in that, and I totally fail to see any courage from Paradox' side. Actually I would be quite surprised, if they ever seriously discussed doing the game without modelling the slave trade. It's just natural for such a game - end of story.

The reason opium trade isn't depicted is of course, that it wasn't the largest commodity compared to spice, tea and whatever. At least not as far as I know. Opium trade became more important later on - in the time period not covered by EU - hence the opium war in the 1840s. Quite an interesting campaign BTW.

Regards,

EoE

[Siegebreaker]

I don't see anything wrong with slave trade, it did happen, so it have to be in EU1 and 2. Without slave trade EU wouldn't be historically accurate.

[Peter Bollmann]

There is drug dealing in the game. You have tabacco and alcohol.

[PatMaster]

You dont have alcohol in the game

[Vulture]

Well imho any form of censorship is bad. Be it in video games, politics, books, cd's etc...
I support freedom of speech by all means. I find this opium & slave trade not offensive. It happened historically so it should be in. Ppl are always complaining that computer games aren't educative. Now there is one game that ABSOLUTELY is educative they want to censor it
If EU would be censored, history lessons should also be censored if they mention slaves etc...

In short: Nothing should be censored...

[Emperor of Europe]

Originally posted by PatMaster
You dont have alcohol in the game

You know: the rest of the free world has alcohol in its wine. It's just you guys with your damn Systembolagets

Just kidding. Let it be known to the world that Systembolaget - government-owned monopoly bottleshops - has one of the best assortments of wine in Scandinavia.

Regards,

EoE

[dralizaar]

Slavery has been around sicne before recorded history...its all throuhg the Bible as well...both the favored by god and those who were enemies of those favored used slaves all through the old testament, every nation up to 400-800 ad era used slaves at some point and it wasnt till this time period where some nations began to stop...but not enforce a stop..Greece, Rome, Egypt all became famous for slave trade ..it wasnt just black skinned africans either...celtic tribesman, goths, vandals, greeks, romans you name it all were slaves ..no one race had a monopoly on the misery suffered by having had relatives who had been beslaved enmass, it wasnt till Charlemagne where the slave trade took a dive..and that only in europe...arabia continued , asia continued, india continued, uzbeks continued this trade

and many still continue this today <the middle east is continual with the stories of this going on>...however even though they werent called slaves, europe reinvented slavery under new names...in many countries serfs were no better then slaves..being owned by their lords and monarchs to be disposed of at their leasure..people want to argue about samantics..but in truth real slaves were often treated better then slaves because a slave's owner saw them as a valuable resource..property..and would at make take basic stesp to keep them alive..such as food and a place to sleep...which millions upon millions of serfs did not have such luxuries often getting 1 maybe 2 meals a week to keep them alive..and that if they were lucky and scrounged well fromt he land as the lords had taken what they planted for his troops to fight a war..

.even the noble enlgish years after they themselves ceased being involved in slave trading still had indentured serviutude..only difference from slaves was they had a supposed deadline as to when they were free again..although in reality this could be abused and extended as many times as wanted by "owners" for made up mistakes or crimes commited by the servant...such servants let the first slave revolt in North America in the dismal swamps of Virginia...indentured servants when they were released were not given anything to lvie on ..just dismissed into the wilds...many of these then grew angry and scared..survival at stake...they gathered together under a leader <i forget his name John something i think> and led a revolt up and down the coast of america...it was a fierce campaing before he was defeated and killed..thuse ended the indentured servitude in amercia and enlgand as fears about the reoccurance of such...so began the new era of slavery ..as amercians seeking replacements for their lost workers bought into the idea of slaves from africa...after all these people were selling their own neighbors and families into slavery..if they were selling and the amercians needed help they were buying...it all seemed so logical to them..and the slave trade grew by leaps and bounds under "Christian-Protestant" leadership..which i still laugh at today...people joke about Rome and Catholics with their inquisition and brutality ..yet they continually ignore that it was the "nice" protestants that pioneered indentured servitude <many of these early servants were catholics in hiding or captured during the efforts by english rulers to stomp out catholicism during tis many inward wars..especially against the irish...and many such persecuted sold themselves into such service for the knowledge of food and a place to sleep..which was denied if they didnt...look at the potatoe famine in ireland for example of what was a common thing..only to a larger scale> and it was protestants who first bought slaves and brought them to american shores and propogated this loathesome trade...im still rolling about their holier than thou condemnation of the catholic church lol..glasses houses my friends...

in short not one nation in history is innocent all are guilty at one time of another...and no one people have the monopoly on having been slaves..some more recent sure...i say learn from history..yes it occured but for crying out loud stop whining over it..its done and gone..live for today and use your prescious freedom to enjoy life..should we use slavery in a game ? damn right we should...if we want any sort of historical accuracy...we do not want to pad our histories and hide truths..ignorance breeds contempt as they say...if you dont keep history alive..then it will occur again more easily <look at many neo-nazis who still claim that the holocaust never happened> slave trade belongs in every such history game..it played a huge part in polotics of the time, the growth of nations, the survival of colonies and prosperity of nations...America fougth a civil war over them <in part..the issue was a lot more complex to say that the whole cause of the war was just slaves> and enlgand refused to outright ally with the confederates largely because they were slave owners..talk bout shift of balance that would have made. Awareness of the roles of slaves is important and by keeping it in the eyes in as many places as you can , not whining over it mind you, keeps us aware of just how fragile freedom was and still could be.


As for other taboo trades..yes drugs were a vital trade in china..such trade even spread to parts of indea at times...however much of this trade did not truly develope into such a force till lat 1700's early 1800's which doesnt fit in with the time frame of this game ...if it did then by all means add it...i dont care bout taboo or PC this or that...PC is just a way to say i want to be ignorant of reality so please leave me alone and stop reminding me, or a crutch for people to say my ancestors were abused by yours so you "owe" me...screw that at some point their ancestors ownbed someone else in time...so who are they gonna owe? Wipe the slate live and learn...and for crying out loud move on.

[Splangy]

i dont know if anyones mentioned this but why trade in slave at all? whether you are pc or not you cant hide the truth that slavery sucks when it comes to profit, last time i checked it was like 4d! why waste your time?

[Agelastus]

Originally posted by Splangy
i dont know if anyones mentioned this but why trade in slave at all? whether you are pc or not you cant hide the truth that slavery sucks when it comes to profit, last time i checked it was like 4d! why waste your time?

Mostly that's what I do in EU these days, and I have no problems with a historical depiction of the slave trade.

Modern historical analysis does suggest that overall profit margins for the slave trade were a lot lower than people thought at the time, so EU is more accurate in that respect than many people think.

[Heyesey]

The big profits from the slave trade were on the other two legs of the triangle, I suspect. Anyway. Yup, slavery has been going on since time immemorial and always will. Where there is a market for some commodity or other, that commodity will be provided, regardless of moral or legal arguments. (I don't say this is good, but I'm a pragmatist: no matter how much we try to stop it, it WILL happen.) Witness the modern drug trade, ivory poaching, and the selling of bits of protected species for chinese/eastern medicine. (To name the three examples that came to mind first - not necessarily the biggest or worst offences, before anybody complains )

I'm not sure how much of an opium trade there was during the EU time period, though. Maybe that didn't become a major factor until the 19th century.


On a side note, I'm surprised that in four threads about "games simulating the slave trade" nobody has mentioned Elite yet. Maybe nobody cared in that game because it was slave trade in aliens, not humans.

[beowulf]

A sad and little known fact is that there are more slaves in the world today than there has ever been before.

[Vulture]

True...And the fact that nothing is done about it... A certain Swedish store chain comes to mind... Products made by Asian children. Burn Ikea!!!

[beowulf]

Originally posted by VultureGFF
True...And the fact that nothing is done about it... A certain Swedish store chain comes to mind... Products made by Asian children. Burn Ikea!!!

http://members.tripod.com/~justinaz14/firebombs.html

[Heyesey]

Originally posted by VultureGFF
True...And the fact that nothing is done about it... A certain Swedish store chain comes to mind... Products made by Asian children. Burn Ikea!!!

Hardly necessary. Just don't shop there. If slavery is considered such a huge crime as everybody says it is, nobody would shop there and they'd go bankrupt.

The fact that they don't, and neither do the shoe companies having everything made in Asian sweatshops, tells you a lot about the human mind. "I don't give a toss what other people are suffering, buying this is cheaper than going somewhere else."