The Warring States of NPF

The Warring States of NPF (http://www.nuklearforums.com/index.php)
-   Dead threads (http://www.nuklearforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=91)
-   -   International conquest and language (http://www.nuklearforums.com/showthread.php?t=14629)

[ray.z] 07-06-2006 09:22 AM

International conquest and language
 
Would it be easier to conquer the world with an international language or with a whole mix of them?

After reading the thread Changing how we spell. spel wurdz the wae thae sound?, I began to think of international languages, and this led to my above question.

I personally think that controlling the world would be a task that would be accomplished much easier if the world did have a multitude of languages. Reason being that if everyone spoke the same language, then it would be significantly easier to plot and gain power against your tyrant of a leader.

God himself knew this, and hence created different languages so that the people would not gain power (read the Tower of Bable biblical story).

But then again, with different languages come different cultures, and I think the ruler of the world would have to understand them to gain control of the world - unless he/she plans to abolish them for their own purposes.

However, one could rule the world by democratic means ... right?

MuMu 07-06-2006 11:00 AM

A nation without culture is a nation that can be easily conquested. You just have to spread a little seeds there, in no time they will be speaking you language, eating you foods and praising your gods. Easy really.

Muffin Mage 07-06-2006 01:48 PM

The trick is to create an entirely new language. Then you can control the words that go into it and the ideas that can be expressed through it.

Here's an article I should have had up in the other thread.

Regulus Tera 07-06-2006 01:52 PM

You mean, something like Esperanto? Because it has been done and it didn't work.

MuMu 07-06-2006 04:05 PM

Esperanto was meant to be the World languange. Then US shoved english down or throaths...

Myst Warrior 07-06-2006 04:45 PM

I would rather rule with just one language. Propaganda would be so much easier to organize and distribute, especially because I wouldn't trust all those translators. You never know what they might be plotting in their subcultures. Also, after you've conquered the world, what's the point of working at translating languages? Didn't you do it to relax?

[ray.z] 07-06-2006 07:16 PM

You know I think in early 20th century, the French Language was then English language of today. By that I mean that all scholary articles and so on were written in french.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia
From the 17th to the 19th centuries, France was the leading power of Europe; thanks to this, together with the influence of the Enlightenment, French was the lingua franca of educated Europe, especially with regards to the arts, literature, and diplomacy; monarchs like Frederick II of Prussia and Catherine the Great of Russia could both speak and write in French.


MuMu 07-06-2006 07:43 PM

German was also world language for some time. We need a language that isn't binded to a country. For example, when US fall we will need to change again.

[ray.z] 07-06-2006 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zicquall
For example, when US fall we will need to change again.

hehehehe.

Now I ain't American, but isn't the US government really worried about that? My history teacher has told me that there has been heaps of focus from America on the Golden Age of Athens, which only lasted 50 years or so. Is that correct?

Muffin Mage 07-06-2006 07:50 PM

Well, thanks to the crappy education system, the only part of Greek history 90% of the country gets is Socrates and Pericles. Or the Golden Age of Athens.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:02 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.