Things move forward, though never as quickly as you’d like. The important thing is to make progress, as Jadav Payeng will doubtless tell you.
Meanwhile, Klaude has been posting some very interesting and thought-provoking pieces on the Facebook page, in particular the question about religion I mentioned last time.
A range of viewpoints presented themselves; we saw detailed explanations of how it could be modelled, while others were more concerned with asking why and if the subject should be included.
One comment that stood out was the notion that we didn’t need to include it, because we were already modelling political outlook. This chimed true: we can see throughout history that all religions have been capable of both enlightened and barbaric outlooks. What is important in game terms is to capture the political will of a culture: in the words of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, “Climate change is a people problem”.
In the original game, we had a single political slider, which described how Green or Consumerist a region was; Green regions disliked high emissions and short-sighted adaptive strategies like Sulphate Aerosols, while Consumerist regions were more focused on their quality of life.
This delivered good gameplay, but equally it was rather crude, and omitted large chunks of political discourse. To capture the nuance of human society, we need to dig a little deeper.
The Migration DLC for the original game introduced the notion of people fleeing poorer regions to richer ones in search of a better life – something we can see happen every day of the week on the Mediterranean in current times, amongst other places. The result in the game was increased political tension in the region that received the migrants.
Modelling the effect of migration that happens during the course of the game is all well and good — but what about migrations that happened before the period modelled by the game? The racial composition of the world’s nations reflects thousands of years of history, much of it unhappy. The consequences of our past affect political outlook now, and will continue to do so in future. We can use real world data to analyse and project possible outcomes for many of the world’s racial flashpoints. Should we do so?
Gender is another topic not previously covered in the game model. The role and status of women in society is possibly the longest-running civil rights issue in history, traceable right back to the origins of agriculture. Women’s calls for justice and equality will not cease until they are heard. As the leader of a nation in FOTWO, it will be your choice to acknowledge them, or try to suppress them.
Gender raises other issues too. For example, in China there will be 30 million more men of marrying age than women by 2020. What social effect will that have?
If we include gender and race, then how to model them? Key civil liberties such as the right to vote and access to education are obvious flags, but they do not capture all of the story. Perhaps the truest reflection of injustice is wealth: according to a 2011 World Bank report, women own only 1% of the world’s wealth. Some commenters take issue with this figure, but there is no doubt that men own at least 90% of the world’s assets. Similar disparities are typical of racial inequalities. That, in the age of internet education, is some powder keg.
Gender, race, and wealth inequality. Three of the most charged political debates of our day. They affect every aspect of our societies, which in turn affect every aspect of our environment. There are other key social issues that clamour for attention too, such as the rights of the gay and trans communities, or prejudices towards disability and mental health. It seems essential we include as many of them as we can.
What do you think? Come to the comments on the Facebook post, and join the debate.