PowerMonger
Electronic Arts, Inc. (Bullfrog Productions, Ltd.) UK 1990

seen from United States

seen from Maldives

seen from United States

seen from Libya

seen from Libya
seen from Argentina

seen from Maldives

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from China

seen from China

seen from Türkiye
seen from China
seen from China

seen from Italy

seen from Italy
PowerMonger
Electronic Arts, Inc. (Bullfrog Productions, Ltd.) UK 1990
Ad for Powermonger by Bullfrog Productions in Computer Gaming World Issue 91
♥90s Video Games, Episode 3: Powermonger [Amiga 1990]
https://retroconsole.xyz/powermonger-1990-amiga/
The Morning Commute
powermonger
when your mean-spirited hyperbolic jokes about...
Ross Douthat is a conservative, this post makes no sense
It makes sense outside the parochial confines of American politics.
In American politics, conservative is ordinarily thought of as “opposed to liberalism,” but that’s because well sorry but if Americans couldn’t be trusted to shift away from imperial to metric measurements for the sake of international consistency and scientific accuracy, you knew they were going to likewise take a shit on political discourse.
every other legate of the liberal tradition would understand Douthat’s American “conservatism” as Liberalism, like I can’t think of another bourgeois regime whose political discourse features an opposition between “liberals” and “conservatives” in the way America does. In fact, your reply makes way less sense to anyone acquainted with bourgeois party politics in Canada, Australia, or Japan, to think of three off the top of my head who feature what you would understand to be “conservative” political parties, yet they proudly wear the Liberal name.
okay random question: where would you place (1) Fulvia and (2) Clodius on the D&D alignment chart (good vs. evil, law vs. chaos). thanks!
1. Fulvia is kind of hard to classify but I would say true neutral bc her actions are always driven by her personal relationships and her motivations are not really “good” or “evil”- rather, she’s trying to increase the political status /power of her husbands (usually). She’s unshakably loyal to them- for example, after Clodius dies she devotes herself to continuing his policies, presenting herself as the inheritor of Clodius’s legacy, attaining the status and benefits associated w/ Clodius’s name but she didn’t push her own agenda (whatever it may be- mostly she seems to have supported clodius's causes). She married Curio and then Antony and used her influence to transform their politics into something much more populist, echoing clodius even a decade after his death. After Antony essentially abandoned her, she instigated the Perusine war to champion /his/ interests which he was neglecting. She has an active political role but champions the causes of her husbands. Plutarch says she manipulates Antony but even this characterization I wouldn’t consider “evil” because she manipulates him in order to alter his politics , to reflect and continue clodius’s legacy. It is out of self - interest somewhat but I think fulvia’s loyalty especially to clodius’s memory which comes through in her actions after his death (like in that Antony, fulvia, and the ghost of clodius in 47 bc paper) is one of her best qualities, & I think she’s motivated primarily by these personal relationships hence: true neutral 2. Clodius could be construed as chaotic good because the laws he passed did benefit Rome’s poorest substantially but I’d put him as chaotic neutral because he’s almost always primarily acting out of his own self interest- the good things he did are kind of balanced out by his exacting vengeance and using mob violence against personal/political enemies. Plus his actions substantially destabilized the already tenuous government of the Republic, it’s almost like he actively sought to increase the net chaos of the (political) world. Also his behavior as a young man- the bona dea scandal, the mutiny in lucullus’s army- often had no point /but/ to incite chaos (the latter in response to a perceived personal slight but the former was like…. jsut for the banter I guess. Real chaotic neutral hours).Plus I just looked it up and the DnD wiki page says the chaotic neutral alignment represents “freedom from society’s restrictions” when like flouting Roman tradition and convention in every way is Clodius’s entire thing he delights in scandal and notoriety.
USA 1990
UK 1991