• Sotuanduso@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I’ve never heard of this until now, so take it with several grains of salt.

    I’d imagine the complaints stem from the fact that she was never in charge of the country.
    But then they should have complained when Ben Franklin was announced.
    Or maybe they did complain when Ben Franklin was announced, but you can’t really go “look at these bigots hating on Benjamin Franklin,” so that wasn’t shared around as much.
    Of course even if that were the case, there would be people who draw the line at Tubman and not Franklin anyways, which could be a case of actual bigotry.
    Or maybe a significant subset of the audience wasn’t taught in school that Tubman was that influential, and sees this as blowing a historical figure out of proportion.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Ben Franklin could almost be considered something like a shadow leader, with very little direct power but a significant amount of political influence. I haven’t played newer Civ, if a Ben Franklin play purely buffs soft power, trade/research agreements, etc, I could see this working. He was still an actual statesman though, so even still he’s on paper a better choice. But he’s not a great choice if the build isn’t based on soft political influence. But Tubman just wasn’t that kind of leader, what she did was amazing, but it wasn’t really leadership of a civilization.