Command & Conquer latest pawn in war politics

Chris Austin

http://arstechnica.com/archive/news/1048787688.html[^] Anybody seen this. Cracks me up, could you imagine a RTS game where you Send in the Weapons Inspectors. Maybe it will be available on the next War Craft 3 expansion. :) Hey don't worry, I can handle it. I took something. I can see things no one else can see. Why are you dressed like that? - Jack Burton

Jon Newman

It does cross a fine line. The latest game 'Generals' (an excellent game btw) is the USA against China and a terrorist organisation based in Iraq.....hmmmmm.....

"If you just say porn then you get all manner of chaff and low grade stuff."
- Paul Watson, Lounge 25 Mar 03
"But a fresh install - it's like having clean sheets"
- C. Maunder Lounge 3 Mar '03

Jonathan 'nonny' Newman Homepage [www.nonny.com] [^]

Chris Austin

Jonny Newman wrote: It does cross a fine line. In that case they should censor Tom Clancy books. It seems capricious and inconsistent. God forbid somebody makes a movie, book, or game mirroring the current reality. Hey don't worry, I can handle it. I took something. I can see things no one else can see. Why are you dressed like that? - Jack Burton

peterchen

Chris Austin wrote: mirroring the current reality ...with the United States military battling a fictional terrorist group called the Global Liberation Army, which bombs the city with missiles carrying anthrax, killing civilians (follow the news link on the article...) Censorship requires a "fine line", and censoring something more or less means "this one crossed the line - don't cross it, too". I wouldn't have censored this game, but - strangely enough - I can live with this.

Italian is a beautiful language. amare means to love, and amara bitter.
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen

Chris Austin

peterchen wrote: Censorship requires a "fine line", and censoring something more or less means "this one crossed the line - don't cross it, too". But who set's the line? Once you allow it to happen who is to say the line dosen't abritarly move to mirror a current fad. I don't mean this as an indictment against the German gov, I just have an ethical issue with any form of cesnorship. If it happened here I would have launched a letter to my Senator and local rep. Hey don't worry, I can handle it. I took something. I can see things no one else can see. Why are you dressed like that? - Jack Burton

peterchen

Chris Austin wrote: But who set's the line? In the ideal case, "the society" (in the sense of an organizational structure of enough complexity). In an even more ideal case, the majority's opinion: by pressure to "censor" what is deemed unsuitable for display by enough people, and pressure to "uncensor" what is deemed unsuitable censorship. Of course this sounds very optimistic :cool: I am almost paranoid about those "any form of" things: What about self-censorship? (A very heated, recent example would be: Not saying "The US deserved 9/11" even though the thought crosses my mind, or I pondered the thought for a while - because I myself feel this is unsuitable even if I did believe in it (no I dont!)) All societies "censor themselves", e.g. not to shit on the church bench, not to fly off the handle in public, wear some clothes on the way to work... People who violate this, are "outcasts". There are things "you don't talk about", you don't display in public, etc. Point: There is definitely censorship that's needed to make a society "run smoothly", and there's some censorship that's clearly wrong. So there must be a line somewhere ;) The Netherlands allow things that would launch million of letters to U.S. Senators requiring to ban it. Are the Netherlands, therefore, "better" than the US*? Germans have a different view what should be allowed and what not. Many of these things stem from history. *) Note: correct answer is "mu"

Italian is a beautiful language. amare means to love, and amara bitter.
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen

Chris Austin

peterchen wrote: I am almost paranoid about those "any form of" things: What about self-censorship? Great point. I guess I am against any form of Federal Government imposed censorship. If there is going to be censorship, then I want it done on a local level so people like you and I actually have a direct voice. I am a big fan of referendum at a state and local level. I think you are right on about self censorship. I'd argue that self censorship is the only true form of censorship. If say 'Huck Finn' or 'Harry Potter' were removed from local schools & libraries what is to stop someone from going out of town to get it or downloading it from a warez site? Call me paranoid, (because I am :)) but I just don't trust some uptight person or organization telling me what I can and can't read, write or play. I brought up the example of "Huck Finn" because the book was banned along with "Tom Sawyer" from a redneck town in Oklahoma I lived as a kid. Maybe it has jaded my perspective on the matter. Hey don't worry, I can handle it. I took something. I can see things no one else can see. Why are you dressed like that? - Jack Burton

peterchen

Yep, the critical point is where you give up this "self-organizing censorship" I described, and pass it on to some "other" person. However, as we germans distrust big corps more than big govs, our we are more tolerant towards that. A concious decision - even at a local level - requires involvement of a jrisdication and executive branch, and gets you into the ugly mess of power. I experienced what you'd call "gross censorship" myself - it was a "normal" part of my first ca. 16 years of life. (Tom Sawyer & Huck Finn were allowed, though ;) ) - so my perspective may be jaded as well. In my own experience: the way censorship works is not "make noone get this material" (although this is often attempted), but to show clearly: "There be dragons - don't burn yourself going there." Amazingly, humans get over this, until other problems pile up high, the "desire to explore", on a large group level, exceeds the desire to get on with life, or the censorship is too random to be predictable. And I dare to say an "free spirit" education can tweak the tolerance level a bit, but doesn't make a qualitative difference. And, to add another personal experience: Higher levels of censorship made people think before talking ("how can I say what I want without hurting my self") and listen when someone's talking ("Is there more than his words he's trying to say?") How was it for you, as a child, to have the books banned? For me, Iranian movies are a good example for that: I _feel_ there's a subtext (because I'm used to reading "between the lines"), but it evades me (because I don't have enough context).

Italian is a beautiful language. amare means to love, and amara bitter.
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen

Michael P Butler

Chris Austin wrote: In that case they should censor Tom Clancy books. Not a bad idea. I blame Tom Clancy for the way the media have covered this war. In his books, the Americans win their wars cleanly, without loss of life and the weapons work all the time. This has given certain media organisations and armchair generals the impression that war is easy and people don't get killed. Michael 'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879