There were attempts to make an explicitly Atheist state in France before the game time frame started. The question was up in the air clearly.
Religion
- Thread starter Sovereign
- Start date
-
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.
There were attempts to make an explicitly Atheist state in France before the game time frame started. The question was up in the air clearly.
The Cult of the Supreme Being wasnt exactly athesit but heavily centralised secularism and also a bit insane, although id love to have seen it for the amazingly tall paper-mache statues and all the fantastic parades that went on. It was more about anti-clericalism than it was irrleigious, taking the authority away from the church which supported and legitimised the old regime rather than any move towards Atheism, there was no declaration of the non-extistance of God but rather a offical statement of 'the universe is crazy and who knows what is out there, there is definitely something but we dont know what it is or have any reason to think it likes us.' which is more dedicated agnosticism than Atheism, saying we dont know who God is, NOT God doesnt exist.
If were speaking of the time period Atheism isnt communist, its Prussianism, the followers of Nietzche and ive got no idea if thats how you spell his name, and his ilk or if we want to go fringe minorities the more crazy of the romantic poets. But either way totally Atheism was not a popular movement as in what is was during the time it only merits a political stance. A prostant nation ruled by an Atheist government more than covers the desire for an Atheist state, as it would take more generations than the game covers to change that if it ever would.
If were speaking of the time period Atheism isnt communist, its Prussianism, the followers of Nietzche and ive got no idea if thats how you spell his name, and his ilk or if we want to go fringe minorities the more crazy of the romantic poets. But either way totally Atheism was not a popular movement as in what is was during the time it only merits a political stance. A prostant nation ruled by an Atheist government more than covers the desire for an Atheist state, as it would take more generations than the game covers to change that if it ever would.
I think so too, there was also a lot of effort being put into proselytising athiesm. The 180 during the Second World War was a massive difference of former Soviet policy prior to that they had not even allowed the existence of patriachates.
My ideas:
If uncivilized country: RELIGION MATTERS A LOT like in Europa Universalis.
If civilizad: RELIGION CAN OR CANNOT MATTER A LOT. If have to choose just matters a little. Even Democratic high secularizad countries like USA had some religious problems with non cristians and even catholic citizens, of course nothing like the uncivilized ones.
British Empire was taken as an impartial State among the Hinduists and Muslims in India, The had more problems with nationalist than with religious differences.
If uncivilized country: RELIGION MATTERS A LOT like in Europa Universalis.
If civilizad: RELIGION CAN OR CANNOT MATTER A LOT. If have to choose just matters a little. Even Democratic high secularizad countries like USA had some religious problems with non cristians and even catholic citizens, of course nothing like the uncivilized ones.
British Empire was taken as an impartial State among the Hinduists and Muslims in India, The had more problems with nationalist than with religious differences.
I like this idea, 'Uncivs' should be alot more prone to religious unrest. And getting out of 'Unciv' status should generate alot of fuss and resistance from concervatives and the religious lobby. But once 'Civilised', religion takes a backseta, having bean beaten or accomodated in the public sphere.
so...
Uncivs play a more "In Nomine" game.
Civs play a more "Ricky" game.
It would be better if it was kept separate from the Civ/Unciv thing, religiousness/secularization should be a separate thing based on for example the issues of the major parties, issues of national POPs techs researched and % of Clergy POPs...
Hope there will be a game in wich if you play uncivilizad you play In nimine and if you are civilizad play Vicky!
That´s my dream, from ROME to HOI3
That´s my dream, from ROME to HOI3
I like this idea, the "Taiping" and "Mahdi" movements come to mind.
Also, if i think of Ottoman Empire/Turkey, in this time period, modernization was always en pair with secularization efforts.
I think secularization should be done through technology, not civ/unciv status. It's more flexible and fluid that way.
And/or what Ahura Mazda said:
And/or what Ahura Mazda said:
Technology and unciv-status should have an effect too I thonk, but there shouldn't be only one single thing that defines religiousness...
Does it real make much sense in the timeframe to couple secularization and technology? Austria for example was as a society not very secular even at the end of the timeframe, but had one of the most thriving scientific communities at the time - the universities were very anticlerical at the time but still the whole of society was not even becoming quite attached to political catholicism when the catholic social teachings lead to the foundation fo parties like the Christian Socials in the early 20th century.
Yes, that's why it's not enough to only have tech/civ-satus as a criteria, it should be a combination of as many factors as possible! Technology played a part of it (that's why the universities were seculerized), but in general society it wasn't enough to neutralize the religious policies of the government and the still relatively powerful catholic clergy!
Despite my earlier post in this thread, i must agree that you have a good point there.
I don't know. I think this gets into dangerous territory. At least in English the word "uncivilized" carries a LOT of negative connotations. Coupling that with religion could be seen as insulting to those with religious beliefs. (I must admit to feeling a little uncomfortable with the idea myself.)
That's true...it would suggest that more religious societies were also less civilized; and while this civilizing advances and secularization do seem to correspond to one another, this is not always the case (as someone pointed out earlier with the Austrian example; also many christians and jews in the modern western world are just as "civilized" as atheists are).
The role of religion in the 19th century and Vicky 2
The role of religion in the 19th century waned in the wake of nationalism, but did not completely disappear.
With the onset of secularisation a conflict between clericals and anti-clericals emerged. This conflict was particularly heated in Catholic countries where the Roman Catholic Church had large landholdings. Many liberals in these countries saw these (sometimes inefficiently managed) landholdings as a rigid brake on economic growth, which explains their anti-clericalism. The conflict first emerged in France during the French Revolution and spread to Spain, Portugal and their former colonies in the first half of the 19th century. In Italy the clerical/anti-clerical divide emerged during Risorgimento and was furthermore defined by the conquest of the Papal States. That event caused immense tension between the liberal Italian state and the Vatican, which lasted until after the First World War. In 1891 Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) issued the encyclical Rerum Novarum, in which he addressed the challenges faced by industrial society and relaxed the Church’s reservations against constitutional democracy. This enabled democratically oriented Catholics to found Christian Democratic parties, which still exist in many European and Latin American nations today. Perhaps Christian Democracy should be simulated somehow in Vicky 2’s politics. Note that not all anti-clericals were atheist. Joseph II (Austria, 1780s), Benito Juarez (Mexico, 1860s) and Cavour (Piedmont and Italy (1850s and 1860s) were Catholics themselves. I therefore support the view made by some other contributors to this thread that atheism should not be included as a seperate religion but as a political viewpoint in religious policy (as it is in Vicky 1). One contributor noted that not many people declared themselves to be atheists. I do think however that the clerical/anti-clerical tension should have more flavour than it had in Vicky 1.
Conflicts between religious denominations, which were typical of the EU3 era, grew less violent and less common in the 19th century. This does not mean that they completely disappeared. In Germany Bismarck initiated a Kulturkampf against the Catholic minority in southern Germany. He saw Catholics as unpatriotic and thought they were more loyal to the Pope than to the German state. The Kulturkampf dominated German politics in the 1870s and led to the founding of the Centre Party, a Catholic Christian Democratic party. In the 1880s the Kulturkampf was over and Bismarck relied on the Centre Party to counter the surge of socialism.
In the Netherlands, of old a majority Protestant country, a mild clerical/anti-clerical conflict coexisted with the presence of a large Catholic minority that predominantly lived (and still lives) in the southern provinces of Noord-Brabant and Limburg. In the 1870s Dutch liberalism grew anti-clerical, which demonstrated itself in an anti-clerical education law, which stipulated that only secular state education would be financed. As reaction that this law, conservative Calvinists under the leadership of Abraham Kuyper founded the Anti-Revolutionary Party (ARP) in 1879. Kuyper and his fellow Calvinists did not only create a seperate Calvinist party, but also Calvinist schools, Calvinist leisure associations and a Calvinist newspaper as well as the Calvinist Free University of Amsterdam. This was the Calvinist pillar. At the same time the Catholic minority sought to emancipate from two centuries of discrimination. In 1853 the Vatican installed bishops in the Netherlands for the first time since the 16th century. The Catholics were hit as well by the anti-clerical education law of the 1870s and also organised their own pillar in a similar fashion as the Calvinists (Catholic party, Catholic schools, Catholic associations, Catholic university, etc.). Even though the differences between Catholics and Calvinists in 19th century Netherlands were immense both Catholics and Calvinists found each other in their opposition against the secular education law. There also was a win-win situation for both denominations. The Calvinists could use the Catholics as allies against a pervasive liberal state, while the Catholics could emancipate by participating in government coalitions with the Calvinists.
Even though the Socialists were not religious, they would also organise their own pillar, forcing the liberal elite to reluctantly organise their own pillar as well.
The political system of pillarisation would dominate Dutch politics until the 1960s.
Belgium would also face a struggle on education laws and pillarised to a lesser extent as well (organising in Catholic, Socialist and Liberal pillars).
The final topic I would like to touch is the relation between modernisation/technological change, being civilised and secularisation. I think they certainly influence one another, but I would not make the relationship too deterministic. Perhaps religious tensions in uncivilised countries should resemble EU3’s religious struggle more, while in civilised nations they should arise in the domain of politics. The invention of positivism and certain biological inventions should increase secularisation in certain POP’s (while not changing their religion). I also think that certain POP’s should be more susceptible to secularisation, such as clerks and those craftsmen that have turned socialist. Not all clerks and craftsmen should exhibit secularisation though, and clerical government policies and the number of clergymen should have a dampening effect.
I’d like to apologise for my long post, but I hope you will appriciate the insights it will add.
The role of religion in the 19th century waned in the wake of nationalism, but did not completely disappear.
With the onset of secularisation a conflict between clericals and anti-clericals emerged. This conflict was particularly heated in Catholic countries where the Roman Catholic Church had large landholdings. Many liberals in these countries saw these (sometimes inefficiently managed) landholdings as a rigid brake on economic growth, which explains their anti-clericalism. The conflict first emerged in France during the French Revolution and spread to Spain, Portugal and their former colonies in the first half of the 19th century. In Italy the clerical/anti-clerical divide emerged during Risorgimento and was furthermore defined by the conquest of the Papal States. That event caused immense tension between the liberal Italian state and the Vatican, which lasted until after the First World War. In 1891 Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) issued the encyclical Rerum Novarum, in which he addressed the challenges faced by industrial society and relaxed the Church’s reservations against constitutional democracy. This enabled democratically oriented Catholics to found Christian Democratic parties, which still exist in many European and Latin American nations today. Perhaps Christian Democracy should be simulated somehow in Vicky 2’s politics. Note that not all anti-clericals were atheist. Joseph II (Austria, 1780s), Benito Juarez (Mexico, 1860s) and Cavour (Piedmont and Italy (1850s and 1860s) were Catholics themselves. I therefore support the view made by some other contributors to this thread that atheism should not be included as a seperate religion but as a political viewpoint in religious policy (as it is in Vicky 1). One contributor noted that not many people declared themselves to be atheists. I do think however that the clerical/anti-clerical tension should have more flavour than it had in Vicky 1.
Conflicts between religious denominations, which were typical of the EU3 era, grew less violent and less common in the 19th century. This does not mean that they completely disappeared. In Germany Bismarck initiated a Kulturkampf against the Catholic minority in southern Germany. He saw Catholics as unpatriotic and thought they were more loyal to the Pope than to the German state. The Kulturkampf dominated German politics in the 1870s and led to the founding of the Centre Party, a Catholic Christian Democratic party. In the 1880s the Kulturkampf was over and Bismarck relied on the Centre Party to counter the surge of socialism.
In the Netherlands, of old a majority Protestant country, a mild clerical/anti-clerical conflict coexisted with the presence of a large Catholic minority that predominantly lived (and still lives) in the southern provinces of Noord-Brabant and Limburg. In the 1870s Dutch liberalism grew anti-clerical, which demonstrated itself in an anti-clerical education law, which stipulated that only secular state education would be financed. As reaction that this law, conservative Calvinists under the leadership of Abraham Kuyper founded the Anti-Revolutionary Party (ARP) in 1879. Kuyper and his fellow Calvinists did not only create a seperate Calvinist party, but also Calvinist schools, Calvinist leisure associations and a Calvinist newspaper as well as the Calvinist Free University of Amsterdam. This was the Calvinist pillar. At the same time the Catholic minority sought to emancipate from two centuries of discrimination. In 1853 the Vatican installed bishops in the Netherlands for the first time since the 16th century. The Catholics were hit as well by the anti-clerical education law of the 1870s and also organised their own pillar in a similar fashion as the Calvinists (Catholic party, Catholic schools, Catholic associations, Catholic university, etc.). Even though the differences between Catholics and Calvinists in 19th century Netherlands were immense both Catholics and Calvinists found each other in their opposition against the secular education law. There also was a win-win situation for both denominations. The Calvinists could use the Catholics as allies against a pervasive liberal state, while the Catholics could emancipate by participating in government coalitions with the Calvinists.
Even though the Socialists were not religious, they would also organise their own pillar, forcing the liberal elite to reluctantly organise their own pillar as well.
The political system of pillarisation would dominate Dutch politics until the 1960s.
Belgium would also face a struggle on education laws and pillarised to a lesser extent as well (organising in Catholic, Socialist and Liberal pillars).
The final topic I would like to touch is the relation between modernisation/technological change, being civilised and secularisation. I think they certainly influence one another, but I would not make the relationship too deterministic. Perhaps religious tensions in uncivilised countries should resemble EU3’s religious struggle more, while in civilised nations they should arise in the domain of politics. The invention of positivism and certain biological inventions should increase secularisation in certain POP’s (while not changing their religion). I also think that certain POP’s should be more susceptible to secularisation, such as clerks and those craftsmen that have turned socialist. Not all clerks and craftsmen should exhibit secularisation though, and clerical government policies and the number of clergymen should have a dampening effect.
I’d like to apologise for my long post, but I hope you will appriciate the insights it will add.
Wait, so people who come from regions and nations referred to in the game as 'Unciv' should have to put up with that, but let's not risk hurting the feelings of religionists?
Wait, so people who come from regions and nations referred to in the game as 'Unciv' should have to put up with that, but let's not risk hurting the feelings of religionists?
"Religionists" are a more important market than uncivs as witnessed by Paradox not deeming it worth the bother to modify Hearts of Iron so as to appease Chinese censors. Also religion was fairly important in the civlised nations and was the primary impetus behind the Anti-Slavery Society which was very important to Britains foriegn policy during the period.
You always know how to say things in the most unbiased way. That aside, I think you are right that they diverge so greatly from the rest of Christendom as to place them in their own spectrum (not to mention that there are many Mormon sects and variants to legitimize making them their own religious group). I just think it would be funny to have a Mormon state running around Western America, and having them release a Mormon Korea.
Being a New Zelander , you seem to comment on American history an awful lot. Mormons were actually militant during this period, and there were thoughts that they might have their own nation or form a Great Plains State. You might say that this time period was the Mormon Golden Age. According to your previous statements about religious golden ages, Paradox should have a real Mormon on their team, and real Mormon historians to direct the process.
You always know how to say things in the most unbiased way. That aside, I think you are right that they diverge so greatly from the rest of Christendom as to place them in their own spectrum (not to mention that there are many Mormon sects and variants to legitimize making them their own religious group). I just think it would be funny to have a Mormon state running around Western America, and having them release a Mormon Korea.
Being a New Zelander , you seem to comment on American history an awful lot. Mormons were actually militant during this period, and there were thoughts that they might have their own nation or form a Great Plains State. You might say that this time period was the Mormon Golden Age. According to your previous statements about religious golden ages, Paradox should have a real Mormon on their team, and real Mormon historians to direct the process.
You're talking about Deseret...
I thought it's Vicky2 that I can't wait to play, but no thats not really true, I'm looking forward to Vicky2 just to tide me over. It's VIP2 that I'm really sweaty-handed for.