Pop Ethics Rework in 1.5 - Concerned about one of Wiz's statements

[gdj]

I guess what you're saving is not mean as irony.


Ok let's say that we have 2 POPS - one is a pacifist human and the other is a reptilian who happens to like to eat humans for dinner. They live next to eachother.


So..

According to your logic: the human POP would learn to like/stop fearing the reptile POP ..because he lives in the same area and they are able to spend time with eachother.


I can tell you that IRL - that wouldn't end well.

Because those 2 pops share radically different values.

On the other hand if you'd have 2 pops: the reptile POP and a monkey-man POP who both like to eat humans and both like to wage war - they, though different species, would burry their initial fear/dislike because they follow similar hobbies and interests.

Same goes for a human POP and a star-trek-volcan POP.

The main criteria IRL is the culture and belief system not time both groups spend with eachother.

OK; let´s assume a human-eating reptilian lving among humans would obviously not be allowed to eat humans on a human controlled world.

In an area with a lot of these reptilians, the humans in that area would feel threatened.

In an area, where none of thes live, xenophobia may rise too, as their "taste" is the most disturbing (and perhaps only) fact about these strange reptilians the humans in that area know.

In an area where one of these reptilians live among hundreds of humans, problems are not really likely, the outnumbered reptilian is not a threat, and people will find out that he/she is doing a lot of other things too than eating.

So yes, values matter only on a limited scale.

 

[The Founder]

The history of slavery, military service and citizenship in Rome disagrees.
In the beginning they had issues even giving fellow italians citizenship. "Barbarians"? You have to be joking!
A few centuries later the law was "everyone who did voluntary military service was made a citizen. Slaves included."

If there is one good example for change over a large timeframe, it has to be the Romans. They existied for just about 1.2 milennia.

 

[gdj]

Did they romanize in the first few centuries? Obviously yes. Die they romanize in the last century, with "barbarians" comprising the majoroty of the roman army? Nope. Did Rome fall soon after? Yes. Where´s the disagreement?

 

[Derp]

No really guys, here's proof that spaceman societies should work a certain way [cites iron age primitives]

 

[Madzai]

... the targeted group is so large and visible that it is perceived as "invading". Consequently small groups of xenos living freely in your surroundings are more likely to cause xenophilia ...

Tell that to Jews or Gypsies. And i'm not talking about XX century only. Pogroms and other stuff was wide-spread since Medieval Europe.

 

[The Founder]

Did they romanize in the first few centuries?

What exactly does "romanisation" mean in this context?
Settling people of original romand descent?
Culturally converting people to the roman culture?

Because they did one thing in the beginning. And later they did the opposite.
Romans were nothing, if not willing to adapt.

 

[AlphaAsh]

...however from what i have seen, over 60% (in some cases even over 80%) the stereotyped behavior and traits that follow are correct, and acknowledging they exist is not an expression of bigotry but stating the obvious

The biggest pile of horseshit excuse for being a bigot, right there. Impressive.

 

[faljen_isus]

How do you explain then that polls indicate a higher degree xenophobia in areas where no xenos are present, as well in areas where the minority is very large, while the same data show very little xenophobia in communities that have an existent but small xeno population? Apart from that there are probably two brands of xenophobia (fear of the unknown vs. active disdain for what you know), values and stereotypes seem to have only limited impact on the perceived "threat" (thought the "threat" is likely an illusion).

i know what is the scientific explanation, and i can tell you that it is probably correct in the environment the poll was taken
however, i can attest to it not being correct in the environment i live in
in my case, the most vocal xenophiles are the ones who have little to no contact whatsoever, or if they have it they pick and choose the cases that are adequate for their cause
i dont do that, i interact with the broadest range of subjects and derive my own findings from that

i was personally a vocal proponent of the scientific consensus as you yourself are, however i found it highly incorrect the more i went into the subject matter
you, perhaps, live in a different environment where the case is different than mine, and i cannot say that you lie
i can however say that in my case your statements do not apply

noone here needs to believe me, nor like what i say, but what i say is true nonetheless

 

[jose2534]

I feel that people like to make this kind of "mental experiments" in scenarios were government, power, death, symbolic death, symbolism, historical and social context, state run propaganda (good or bad depending on the viewer), law enforcement, law itself, traditions, culture, communication, empathy, apathy, love, hate, psychology, ethic and moral codes, values, education, and another factors doesn't apply.

So far for me, the one that it's closest to the more plausible scenario is @gdj, it has been a nice time reading your answers in this topic.

Please remember that we are all subject to Stellaris fictional and artistic rules, this ones say, for example, that ships “sink” in the void when destroy, or that there is sound in the emptiness of space, and creatures of diferent planets can comunicate without a problem. We are not seeing a scientifically accurate depiction of reality; we are seeing an artistic interpretation of it.

And for me it does this so well that it allows our imagination to fill out the holes of, for example, “how much individuals are in a pop”, or “how the armies behave in battle”, or “how do this species reach space”, or “in what does my ethos consist”. Stellaris is for me a game that I like to identify as “imagination inductive game”, in that it means that the game makes you work your head around the empty of some narrative aspect.

 

[ashbery76]

What exactly does "romanisation" mean in this context?
Settling people of original romand descent?
Culturally converting people to the roman culture?

Because they did one thing in the beginning. And later they did the opposite.
Romans were nothing, if not willing to adapt.

It failed too.Nobody called themselves Romans after it fell for long did they.

 

[gdj]

i know what is the scientific explanation, and i can tell you that it is probably correct in the environment the poll was taken
however, i can attest to it not being correct in the environment i live in
in my case, the most vocal xenophiles are the ones who have little to no contact whatsoever, or if they have it they pick and choose the cases that are adequate for their cause
i dont do that, i interact with the broadest range of subjects and derive my own findings from that

i was personally a vocal proponent of the scientific consensus as you yourself are, however i found it highly incorrect the more i went into the subject matter
you, perhaps, live in a different environment where the case is different than mine, and i cannot say that you lie
i can however say that in my case your statements do not apply

noone here needs to believe me, nor like what i say, but what i say is true nonetheless

I certainly did not want to discredit your personal experiences and your opinion, or make a moral judgement about it whatsoever. It would be ludicrous to do so, or to assume that you lie etc.

What exactly do you propose for a decent modelling or xenophobe/xenophile and militarist/pacifist tendencies in the game? OPs model? Something else?

 

[Rubido]

It failed too.Nobody called themselves Romans after it fell for long did they.

Well, i am. It's my name )

 

[Ramiel]

It failed too.Nobody called themselves Romans after it fell for long did they.

You sure about that? The term 'Byzantine' is a relatively modern invention, the empire now known as the Byzantine Empire called themselves Roman up till Constantinople fell in 1453. Even after that people in some areas still referred to themselves as Roman with pride. Heck, the modern state of Romania literally means 'citizens of Rome'.

 

[PirateJack]

There's also the Holy Roman Empire to consider, which existed all the way through to the 19th century.

 

[The Founder]

It failed too.Nobody called themselves Romans after it fell for long did they.

Except for the entirety of the Byzantine Empire. Up until the 4th Crusade kind off killed it (wich is ironic as they initiated the whole 1st Crusade).
Roman Nationalism existed for literally 2000 years (500 BC to 1450 AD). Ignoring the Roman Kingdom (anotehr 250 years).

I would go as far as saying: The Commonwealth of man with it Fanatic Militarist/Xenophobe Ethos is a damn good approximation of the early Roman Empire, down to it's drive type. It will change of course. But that is exactly what the new Mechanic is there for:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=689073779

Overall you and the OP are just trying to get your views accepted while bashing everyone opposing. Wich does not work. With the words of a certain Blond and Blue eyed Women: "Let it go!"

 

[Tyrannical Prince]

That's an oversimplification and false. Canada, the US and some of Europe are good examples of racially, ethnically and religious diversity with little to no conflict.

How are those examples of good racial/ethnic/religious diversity?

 

[faljen_isus]

I certainly did not want to discredit your personal experiences and your opinion, or make a moral judgement about it whatsoever. It would be ludicrous to do so, or to assume that you lie etc.

What exactly do you propose for a decent modelling or xenophobe/xenophile and militarist/pacifist tendencies in the game? OPs model? Something else?

personally the OP does state some things good, however you cannot emulate RL in a game to its fullest extent and therefore going for full realism is a futile task, especially trying to appease everyone in the process

also, you have germany right now that has massive state propaganda to increase acceptance of migrants, but still the approval ratings for migrants are going down therefore putting a correlation between government form and actions just doesnt cut it and you have to put in a lot more variables that it is possible right now (way to difficult to programme in and even if possible it would consume a lot of processing power)

i believe we should just let the devs do their job and believe that they will do it right (and they do a awesome job)

 

[gdj]

personally the OP does state some things good, however you cannot emulate RL in a game to its fullest extent and therefore going for full realism is a futile task, especially trying to appease everyone in the process

also, you have germany right now that has massive state propaganda to increase acceptance of migrants, but still the approval ratings for migrants are going down therefore putting a correlation between government form and actions just doesnt cut it and you have to put in a lot more variables that it is possible right now (way to difficult to programme in and even if possible it would consume a lot of processing power)

i believe we should just let the devs do their job and believe that they will do it right (and they do a awesome job)

Interesting. I actually argued against a correletaion between government form/actions and xenophobia, unlike OP. Also, i'm not blind to the problem of extensive immigration to the point that self-segregating communities within communities form, especially not here in germany, and the unwillingness of the left to even talk about it.

What i like about Wiz's planned concept is that it makes a distinction between the status of xenos (full citizens/limited etc.) and correlating this with the ethos of your pops. I think this will work out just fine.

 

[faljen_isus]

Interesting. I actually argued against a correletaion between government form/actions and xenophobia, unlike OP. Also, i'm not blind to the problem of extensive immigration to the point that self-segregating communities within communities form, especially not here in germany, and the unwillingness of the left to even talk about it.

What i like about Wiz's planned concept is that it makes a distinction between the status of xenos (full citizens/limited etc.) and correlating this with the ethos of your pops. I think this will work out just fine.

a major factor is also the behavior of the population in question
from what im told by people from germany, the main reason you are still very receptive to migration is the fact that you didnt create ghettos of your migrants, but spread them out in wider communities, unlike the french and british who created ghettos and now have issues

in my country we have cases where the majority ethnic group is a minority in certain towns, and have 2 completely opposite things happen: in one case the minority (that is in that town is a majority) has no issue with the majority ethnic group and there is cohesion in that society and no tensions whatsoever
in the other case the minority (majority in the town) uses its position and creates ethnic strife and to bully the ethnic group that is the majority on the national level
i mention this because it is a very important variable in the interethnic relations

to put in stellaris terms: if you conquer a planet, and the pops start doing terror attacks and damage buildings it should increase xenophobia, or for instance if in a perfectly balanced pacifist empire one of your if one of your factions starts being rebellious and has xenopops that carry out such attacks it should increase xenophobia
xenophilia should increase if you conquer a planet and the pops are very receptive and dont cause trouble, also if you accept refugees that cause no tensions or assimilate in your society completely

however, implementing such equations and making the game care for such variables might prove difficult, and to make things worse, my statement above is just one of the variables needed to make a good ethics shift module

 

[gdj]

to put in stellaris terms: if you conquer a planet, and the pops start doing terror attacks and damage buildings it should increase xenophobia, or for instance if in a perfectly balanced pacifist empire one of your if one of your factions starts being rebellious and has xenopops that carry out such attacks it should increase xenophobia
xenophilia should increase if you conquer a planet and the pops are very receptive and dont cause trouble, also if you accept refugees that cause no tensions or assimilate in your society completely.

I'd be surprised if such considerations were not taken into account by the devs. After all why else would the rebalancing of the faction system occur at the same time as the new ethos shiftng system?