-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
If we have to be strictly correct, the only things I'd really feel the need to change are "Stalinist" to "Marxist-Leninist," and "Leninist" to socialist or something else, I'm not really sure what to put there. The Soviet government during this time never considered itself anything but Marxist-Leninist, and there is and never has been to my knowledge a movement that would call itself Stalinist, even if it liked Stalin. Nobody really uses the term Leninist either, I've only ever heard the term Marxist-Leninist for followers of Lenin.
I'd just as soon leave it as it is though. There's no way to make any of this perfect.
I'd just as soon leave it as it is though. There's no way to make any of this perfect.
History considers it Stalinist though. I think that name is a lot more appropriate than whatever combination the Soviets liked to call themselves. Seems a lot clearer to me.
What is history and who decides what it is? My personal interpretation of history and political ideology is that Stalin did not make enough significant contributions to communist thought to warrant an ideology based on his thoughts distinct from Marxism-Leninism. Though it may be more popular to simply label the Soviet Union under Stalin Stalinist, I hardly see it as strictly accurate.
Appropriateness is a different matter than accuracy, however. HOI3 will not be a political simulator, much less one that claims to be especially accurate, so anything that isn't blatantly incorrect will not be widely considered inappropriate.
Yeah, but only temporarily. "Freedom to exchange implies freedom for capitalism. We say this openly and emphasize it. We do not conceal it in the least. Things would go very hard with us if we attempted to conceal it." (CW, Vol. 32, p. 490) "NEP Russia will become socialist Russia." (CW, Vol. 33, p. 443)
I think that the ideological system should not be limited to just a few ideologies, it should be fully moddable. I also agree that Stalinism should be renamed and/or Leninism be renamed to Trotskyism since that's basically what it amounted too at that point: the opposition Trotskyist parties and the Moscow-supported 'Stalinist' parties. Stalinism isn't an ideology, it was by far used as an insult outside of its occasional mention within the Soviet Union by party members who wanted to suck up to Stalin. It isn't like National Socialism (Nazism) and Fascism, which, although similar in practice, had different goals and claims. Fascism was "neither capitalism nor socialism but a national society free of class conflict" whereas Nazism was "we are for true socialism and a national society, not this Marxist class warfare stuff."
Last edited:
Given ideology names were moddable in HOI2 they will likely be again, thus making it possible for modders to solve the problem for us.
If anything, I think it would be better to either expand the current ideologies to perhaps also include the government types, eg absolute monarchies, constitutional monarchies, presidential dictatorships etc...perhaps only for flavour's sake.
Paternal Autocrat, as some have indicated already isnt exactly an ideology anyway, its more of a government type. So as I said either some expansion or some minor changes would be cool.
Paternal Autocrat, as some have indicated already isnt exactly an ideology anyway, its more of a government type. So as I said either some expansion or some minor changes would be cool.
Except I wasn't talking about the names, I was saying that the ideologies themselves should be moddable and you being able to create multiple ideologies. HOI3 already has ideology changing based on decisions and not a simplistic Left-Right slider like in HOI2, but I'd still argue that more ideologies are needed or at least the potential to create more.Exactly. If someone doesn't like the default names, he/she can change them
Governments would be a good idea too. In fact they should (and seemingly are doing so) merge them. So what if a leader is autocratic? Is he a liberal autocrat? A conservative? A left-wing radical sort of autocrat? Was he put in place in a military coup d'état by, say, the USA to ensure that Communist influence be kept at bay and will make sure to keep capitalism alive? Etc. Left-Wing Radical and Paternal Autocrat are basically treated the same in some cases in HOI2 (like Vargas is listed as LWR in HOI2 as are some military coup d'état leaders in events for various countries in South and Central America) when autocratic should be the government style and Left-Wing Radical should be the ideology. (Though Vargas wasn't LWR...)
Last edited:
The government types are different to the ideologies. You could have a Market Liberal Party in Germany, which wants to re-introduce democracy, but the actual government in power is a National Socialist Party operating a Dictatorship.
In the UK you could have a Market Liberal Party in power, in a Constitutional Monarchy. With a National Socialist Party which would like to introduce a Dictatorship.
The goverment types will be included, and not just for flavour. They will determine whether elections take place that might replace either the Head of State or Government.
Personally, I don't see a problem with ideologies. At the end of the day this is another abstraction which reasonably fits the right-centre-left view of politics. The Left-Wing Radicals for instance IRL could cover parties which call themselves Socialist, Social-Democrat, Labour, Anarchist, Syndicalist, etc. I think ten different political groupings is more than adequate to cover the range of political opinion. If we were to try to identify every type of party in more detail then the whole system would just be too complicated.
The main benefit of HOI3 is that regardless of the names of the political groupings, there is a graphical representation of them. It should be much easier to understand that Poland or Rumania etc. start the game politically somewhere between the fascist views of the parties in the Axis and the democratic parties controlling the Allies, and this helps to influence their alignment diplomatically, regardless of the labels being applied to them. In fact, the colours etc. are absolutely essential. Flavour is great, but a list of party initials for each country that most of us have never heard of is going to be pretty confusing. I'd much rather know a grey party that believes in "Paternal Autocracy" is in power than XYZ Party.
Already after reading two pages of discussion, I can say I would like to see things unchanged in this aspect.
Naming is also politics and it's a can of worms. The existing naming has worked well since HOI. A quick look in the guide will clear up any misunderstanding relevant to the game. Whether Lenin was a socialist or not should be something for the history forum.
Naming is also politics and it's a can of worms. The existing naming has worked well since HOI. A quick look in the guide will clear up any misunderstanding relevant to the game. Whether Lenin was a socialist or not should be something for the history forum.
I'd even change paternal autocrat to simply Autocratic just to make the idea more clear that it's generally just a single ruler in some fashion.
Leninism and Stalinism refer to schools of thoughts inside communism just like Maoism is one. No reason to change any of these names.
Leninism should be Trotskyism because the amount of literal 'Leninists' who were both anti-Stalin and anti-Trotsky (except Bukharinists) was low internationally.
Were there different groups of people calling themself "Lenninst" and "Stalinist" in the period? I don't think so.
"Troskyist" and "Stalinist" on the other hand would make a lot of sense.
This is the only one that needs chaning IMO.
Why whould National Socialism be Fascism? There is a difference between these two government types. The biggest one probably being that National Socialism incoporates racial supremacy and racism towards some ethnic groups, while Fascism is more of a form of Nationalism.
I agree as well, I don't think many people at this time called themselves "Lenninist" or "Stalinist" at the time, to be honest from my studies you either called yourself "Troskyist" or "Communist" (Of course today we refer to those people who were Communism to be those of the Stalinist school of thought, but at that time I do not believe they called themselves actually "Stalinistic").
Trotsky and his supporter would never have called themselves "Trotskyists", but Marxist-Leninists or Bolshevists.
Members of the Communist Parties belonging to the Communist (Third) International would never have called themselves "Stalinists", but Communists. Though they might also have claimed to be the true adherents of Marxism-Leninism and Bolshevism. While they never used the term, history has dubbed them "Stalinists", since they are so closely associated with one man.
Several groups, not just those associated with Trotsky and Stalin, might go under the general umbrella of Marxism-Leninism.
But the Stalinists were strong enough in terms of their popularity and organisation in very many countries to warrant having their own unique political ideology in the game. The rest of the rag-bag of revolutionary left-wing groups can just be lumped together under "Marxism-Leninism". Few of them would have registered more than the slightest blip on the political radar.
Edit: But from amongst this group came Mao and Tito, with their own views of Marxism-Leninism, independent from Stalin or Trotsky.
...Left-wing Radicals, Marxist-Leninists, Stalinists - that seems perfectly OK to me.
My friend en.wikipedia.org, does not agree with you on that one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Fascism isn't, although portrayed in such a light in this day and age for various reasons, any better than national socialism. They are identical.
The only reason why HOI2 makes a distinction between the two, is to portray "soft-core fascists" such as Franco and Salazar who didn't ruthlessly opress and kill enough people to make it to the A-list.
I would say "Right-Wing Authoritarian" would be the best replacement for "Paternal Autocrat". Broad enough to cover absolute monarchs, strongman dictators, military juntas, oligarchies fronting for the traditional land-owning aristocracy, etc... depending on the country.
On Fascism, I wouldn't take Wikipedia as all that authoritative given that anybody can edit it. As noted, though, there is a clear practical distinction between regimes that carried nationalism to the point of mass genocide and those which merely ordered the state and economy along Fascist principles. I'd leave Fascism as it is, but look for a new nation-independent name for National Socialism (unless the intent is to treat the Nazi regime as unique).
"Stalinism" is often used in anaysis or history pieces in reference to post-Stalin Cold War regimes that resisted the relative liberalization that happened even in the USSR starting with Khrushchev. Examples that come to mind as commonly referred to as such are Albania & North Korea. So, I think it is a valid term for the farthest left end of the scale.
For the step just to the right of Stalinism, though, I'd prefer Communism to Leninism, though. It seems more to the point.
On Fascism, I wouldn't take Wikipedia as all that authoritative given that anybody can edit it. As noted, though, there is a clear practical distinction between regimes that carried nationalism to the point of mass genocide and those which merely ordered the state and economy along Fascist principles. I'd leave Fascism as it is, but look for a new nation-independent name for National Socialism (unless the intent is to treat the Nazi regime as unique).
"Stalinism" is often used in anaysis or history pieces in reference to post-Stalin Cold War regimes that resisted the relative liberalization that happened even in the USSR starting with Khrushchev. Examples that come to mind as commonly referred to as such are Albania & North Korea. So, I think it is a valid term for the farthest left end of the scale.
For the step just to the right of Stalinism, though, I'd prefer Communism to Leninism, though. It seems more to the point.
- Status