Follow TV Tropes
Aren't both phrases basically referring to the same thing? A reference to God to justify one's action?
Well, one of the core tenets of Marxism is how the shared experience of the proletariat transcends national boundaries, so in theory communism has no reason to target a specific ethnic or religious group (class warfare, like the Soviet campaign against the kulaks, the Khmer Rouge targeting glasses-wearing intellectuals, or Mao's Cultural Revolution, is another story). In practice, yes, specific ethnic groups were targeted in events like the Ukrainian famine, Stalin's mass deportation of minorities, or China's attempt at cultural genocide in Tibet.
But for the most part, communist regimes excel at oppressing, brutalizing and killing their own people, whether in the name of ideological purity or out of good old-fashioned incompetence.
Yeah. Although I doubt dude's aware of that, he just seems like someone who wanted a comparison for the sake of having one to call out Paradox with, and picked the worst possible one.
The period between 1054 and 1215 (the Schism and Fourth Lateran, respectively) was a period when they were working to define Catholicism's identity and unity. For example, the whole clerical celibacy thing wasn't firmly settled until the 1200s - before then, the Pope simply didn't have the influence to make local priests listen on the subject.
Ideologies are rarely without internal contradictions. The one above about Communism is one example. A typically American example would be the American Dream, where anyone can go from rags to riches, which in reality is nowhere close to true.
Well, not really. My understanding is that "Allahu akbar" means "God is great" and is a overall common phrase for a Muslim . Very different from "Deus vult" which is only used for memes and racism.
Edited by Heatth on Oct 20th 2019 at 11:02:25 AM
Yeah “Allahu akbar” is closer to “thank god” than “god says so”.
Inshallah would be a closer literal equivalent, also meaning "God wills it", but it has a very different context.
Inshallah is, so far as I know, more often used as "[if] God wills it" or "God willing", rather than "I'm about to carry out God's will".
Edited by Balmung on Oct 20th 2019 at 8:21:35 AM
>China's cultural genocide against Tibet
No, no, my friend, you misunderstand. Tibet has always been part of China. Even in the eras depicted in Crusader Kings 2 and Hearts of Iron 4, Tibet has always been a part of China and has never been anything else.
US Gamer article on CK3 with the most comprehensive rundown of the new features that I've found.
Honestly, the worst thing about the Deus Vult stuff aside from the fascists is that it's really hard to find concrete info on just what CK3 is.
Is the phrase "Allahu Akbar" technically also usable in Christianity since even Arabic Christians refers to God as Allah?
Speaking of CK 3, I'm kinda surprised it uses the same engine as Imperator (although I hear that it's technically Imperator using CK 3 Engine, so...)...also wonder about the supply and attrition system: will they nab the new Imperator system or go back to the old one.
I think Arabian Christians might still refer to the Christian God as Allah. Don't quote me on that though.
Maltese Christians do.
Another article with information on CK3. Its author also made a reddit thread with even more info.
It confirms a lot of things, like factions, 867 start date and no more decadence. One minor thing I really liked is that now you only need to siege fortified holdings, and not every town and church is fortified (castles always are), which means no more sieging of everything your opponent control. Another cool detail is stress, which is a new mechanic to enforce roleplay and make personality traits matter. Basically, you can still do whatever you want, but if you take a decision that goes against your character's personality they accrue stress (for resisting their impulses, I guess) and overtime it will have negative effects.
Ooo, I like that. Very roleplay of them.
I wonder if they'll ever include the early middle ages in a game. There was plenty going on in Europe at the time.
I mean, the Charlemagne DLC pushes the start date back to 500AD or so.
I wonder if there'll ever be a strategy game about our current time. Maybe something starting mid 18th or 19th century and going all the way to the 21st or 22nd.
In CK 2? I don't remember that.
There's a mod called When The World Stopped Making Sense that starts in 476 AD.
It's 769AD, sorry. Still Early Middle Ages though.
I wonder if them taking out the decadence mechanic means that they'll be addressing Blobbasid.
Taking out Decadence will make it even easier for Blobbasid to be stable. I wonder what else they'd change to fix that place.
Wouldn't work on several levels.
From a PR perspective, it's far too risky. For example, how would they represent cores? Would they give Kurdistan cores in Turkey, Iraq, and Syria? Would they not?
Would they give the PRC cores on Taiwan?
There are a large number of sticky issues that could bog down their development with controversy.
Not to mention that gameplay-wise starting in the 18th century and going to the 21st simply wouldn't work, Victoria 2 has enough problems going from the Civil war to proto-World War 1. This would be even worse and would almost certainly be a terrible mess.
It's a cool idea but it's not going to happen, ever.
> Taking out Decadence will make it even easier for Blobbasid to be stable. I wonder what else they'd change to fix that place.
Hopefully it means playing as Muslim ruler won't mean constantly being at war
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?