Conquer Club

Image 1:



Image 2:




Issues kind of came up about whether this kind of map was just serving a political point. States that went to Obama ending up communist, socialist, Islamic, surrounding Republican and Bible belt states.

There's an extreme global warming map, which I guess reflects liberal values in a way, and there's USApocalyspse, which is kind of an equal opportunities offender. Any opinions? Is a fractured America map based on economic meltdown kind of factional at the moment? Or is it just satire?

Update: the map has now been temporarily locked

A lot of stink over an unfinished ongoing project.

True indeed- I kind of felt bad that it was getting dumped in the foundry and cheating and abuse forums. It's better off here where we're having these debates regularly. I actually sort of regret starting this topic now, but the map was locked as I was typing it.

I'll keep it here for people to dump in so that there's a place for the political debates outside of the other forums.

f'ing awesome

first of all that isn't the map getting dumped on.. nice bait and switch. i have posted the map in question. if you are going to have an open debate in off topics about a map thread that is locked and presently in C&A, be honest with the representation of the map in question, not an earlier version.

secondly, to you it is ok to paint liberal areas of america that carried obama into office as COMMUNIST, MUSLIM and SOCIALIST, while the heartland is adorned with the american flag and painted in a loving light? you are kidding right? this map is bigoted and one huge flame and bait! it is playing on hatred, political division, inaccuracies and fears that are unfounded. hell, he even threw the italians (oops, i mean MOB) into the mix! this is so bigoted and racist it is unbelievable. there is nothing subjective about it, the map is offensive and crosses a line that is very dangerous. mr benn stepped up and locked the map thread for now, until it can be closely looked over, which is the right and fair decision. if it is deemed non-offensive, more power to you...-0

I think the map that Symmetry posted is the most up-to-date version; I remember seeing the one you posted owenshooter before the one at the top of this thread.

Tupence wrote:I think the map that Symmetry posted is the most up-to-date version; I remember seeing the one you posted owenshooter before the one at the top of this thread.

Difficult to tell, I've posted both now for fairness.

There's a couple problems with your theory. One, Iowa went to Obama and it is in the Republican Party continent. I'm pretty sure the Dakotas went to McCain and Minnesota went to Obama, but they both are on the same continent. Colorado went to Obama and it is in a continent that is completely Republican. Okay, one problem I do have is the Islamic states, where did that come from? I may be wrong, but I think the largest Muslim population in America is somewhere in Michigan.

Honestly, I don't see a problem with this map. I've thought many times that if the U.S. broke apart, where would the new political boundaries would be drawn. And for the most part, besides the invasions from Canada, Mexico, and Cuba, I've agreed with the map creator.

owenshooter wrote:first of all that isn't the map getting dumped on.. nice bait and switch. i have posted the map in question. if you are going to have an open debate in off topics about a map thread that is locked and presently in C&A, be honest with the representation of the map in question, not an earlier version.

secondly, to you it is ok to paint liberal areas of america that carried obama into office as COMMUNIST, MUSLIM and SOCIALIST, while the heartland is adorned with the american flag and painted in a loving light? you are kidding right? this map is bigoted and one huge flame and bait! it is playing on hatred, political division, inaccuracies and fears that are unfounded. hell, he even threw the italians (oops, i mean MOB) into the mix! this is so bigoted and racist it is unbelievable. there is nothing subjective about it, the map is offensive and crosses a line that is very dangerous. mr benn stepped up and locked the map thread for now, until it can be closely looked over, which is the right and fair decision. if it is deemed non-offensive, more power to you...-0

OWEN. The map you are flaunting is an old old version. The newest is up top (The one with the hammer & sickle). If ya take the time to read the suggs in the thread you will see that Isaiah is contemplating changing the muslim to Sierra Club. Among some other changes.

Looks like a cool map. A couple name changes so no one is "offended" and it's good to go.

A lot of stink over little of nothing.

jsholty4690 wrote:There's a couple problems with your theory. One, Iowa went to Obama and it is in the Republican Party continent. I'm pretty sure the Dakotas went to McCain and Minnesota went to Obama, but they both are on the same continent. Colorado went to Obama and it is in a continent that is completely Republican. Okay, one problem I do have is the Islamic states, where did that come from? I may be wrong, but I think the largest Muslim population in America is somewhere in Michigan.

Honestly, I don't see a problem with this map. I've thought many times that if the U.S. broke apart, where would the new political boundaries would be drawn. And for the most part, besides the invasions from Canada, Mexico, and Cuba, I've agreed with the map creator.

Hmm- a few points. First, the whole ideas of the economy dividing the nation has very much been on the agenda of certain elements of society. Texan independence, Muslim invasion, Democrats as secret socialists, communism? It's all a bit dodgy really.

hmmmmm...the original topic locked.......and this does not belong in off topics ....

latest version looks fine to me

the map is perfect, if the usa collapsed one day we can all imagine scenario of what it would become, who is complaining ? and why are they complaining after all it's just a map ( great map by the way )

Why is this here

Looks like map's normal thread got locked as everyone got into a heated debate - so the debating society moved to this forum to carry on.

Interesting.

Maybe this debate shouldn't be in this forum but it maybe should go somewhere. Then I can put my two-penneth in

Someone, please find a home for this left v right war.

I warned this would happen somewhere on one of the first pages. Personally I could care less about how you divide the US, but it was clear some people actually would feel offended and they have every right to.
You either spice up the satire so everything is magnified to the most rotten state you can think of, or you leave it for what it is.

And for the record:
In European terms, your Democrats are a central party, nowhere near left-minded. Socialism also isn't an insult, nor should it be.
(The problem with socialism is that a lot are utopic socialists, and thus impossible to work with.)

iceco wrote:And for the record:
In European terms, your Democrats are a central party, nowhere near left-minded. Socialism also isn't an insult, nor should it be.
(The problem with socialism is that a lot are utopic socialists, and thus impossible to work with.)

This.

I also put it to you that for many people, "Mormons," "Bible Belt," and (especially) "Republic of Texas" don't sound like peachy dreamlands by any means.

You can find the debate in the C&A forum topic:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=97015
Please post there.
Thanks.

colors are bad, liked it way better before

There is nothing wrong with it. It is like the senate map, sort of. To me, it represents more of a funny outlook on the future of america and not really an actual prediction ment to be taken seriously. Perhaps balance it out a bit by making it the republican-anarchists or something to balance the democrat-socalists, but to me there is nothing wrong with being socalist, or anarchist. I think people are over reacting.

I'd say there's a fair amount of over-reaction, and I made this thread. 'Course, I put in Turtle Soup as I didn't really think it was serious enough for other forums.

Basically, the map is kind of political as it stands, and the politics it employs are controversial at the moment. Portraying the US as being under attack from Muslim invasion, communist Democrats, and immigrants from Cuba and Mexico following an economic collapse- yeah, those are all visions of the apocalypse at the forefront of a certain political agenda at the moment. Especially when you suggest that the true Americans are in the heartlands and need to fight back.

As I see it though, the map has received some fair criticism now, and the mapmaker has offered to make changes. He's also acknowledged that he didn't expect this level of vitriol. I think that's fair of him, and I don't believe he set out to offend anyone.

Personally, I don't think another map of North America is necessary, there's a standard map, and a couple with unique features. Still, this map has been fairly well designed. If the designer is willing to make it a better map and less of a political point, then we should see how it goes.

Symmetry wrote:Portraying the US as being under attack from Muslim invasion, communist Democrats, and immigrants from Cuba and Mexico following an economic collapse- yeah, those are all visions of the apocalypse at the forefront of a certain political agenda at the moment.

right, but more than just being the result of a specific political outlook, this map is also offensive. It is offensive to anyone who is Muslim to suggest that the US is under attack from Muslims. And why are the Dems "Socialists" yet the Republicans are simply called "Republicans?"

A map should either offend nobody, or go balls out and do its best to offend absolutely everybody to avoid any stink of bias. Change Republicans to "Ku Klux RepubliKans." Change Bible Belt to "Trailer Trash Jesus Freaks." Change Mormons to "Quasi-Christian Polygamists." Change Republic of Texas to "Fascist Militias."

Of course, I know that the vast majority of Republicans have nothing to do with the Klan, or that most Mormons aren't polygamists, but 99.999% of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims aren't crazed fundamentalists bent on binging down America either. If the makers of this map are willing to insult the world's second largest faith, they should be willing to insult everybody else.

It could be argued that the Global Warming map pushes a view of the future that is based on science, not politics, but I don't intend to post here again so I will not try to make that argument. What's more important is that the Global Warming map does not explicitly name and offend any one group of people. This map does, and as a result it was right for the plug to be pulled.

The biggest complaint i would have of this map would be that there is no realistic possibility of a Islamic theocracy taking over the west coast. Name it the Republic of California and put Arnold in as dictator for life.

Another possibility would be to change the Socialist Democratic party to just democrat party, the Repubs don't have an adjective in there, why should the dems?

Symmetry wrote:I'd say there's a fair amount of over-reaction, and I made this thread. 'Course, I put in Turtle Soup as I didn't really think it was serious enough for other forums.

Basically, the map is kind of political as it stands, and the politics it employs are controversial at the moment. Portraying the US as being under attack from Muslim invasion, communist Democrats, and immigrants from Cuba and Mexico following an economic collapse- yeah, those are all visions of the apocalypse at the forefront of a certain political agenda at the moment. Especially when you suggest that the true Americans are in the heartlands and need to fight back.

As I see it though, the map has received some fair criticism now, and the mapmaker has offered to make changes. He's also acknowledged that he didn't expect this level of vitriol. I think that's fair of him, and I don't believe he set out to offend anyone.

Personally, I don't think another map of North America is necessary, there's a standard map, and a couple with unique features. Still, this map has been fairly well designed. If the designer is willing to make it a better map and less of a political point, then we should see how it goes.

Thank you symmetry. And yes I am willing to make a better map that has less of a political point. And as I just learned today (I guess I should have done a little more homework) there is a Democratic Socialists of America Party/Group. I found their web site at http://dsausa.org/dsa.html So really I wasn't far off with the name, just the redone Democratic donkey. But I would like to stay with the same theme, but with no modern day political overtones to it. I could make up some weird party names to put on it. So now would people be willing to help me through it? This would not have gotten this far if certain people had just said it offended them and some of the names needed to change, and I would have done it. Instead certain people attacked me and left it at that. So now I have a new revision that I can't post with out those party/religious names on it. No Problem, taken care of.