Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[orange]

"How do you enforce one planetary culture over multiple billion+ planets?" (esp. Caldari and Minmatar)

You don't enforce a single culture, not over a single planet, or even an entire city.

Governments, institutions, corporations, societies etc encourage & maintain common themes throughout its sphere of influence.

In the case of the Caldari, the society encourages and maintains Wayism and the shared history/origin forms a foundation for "Caldari culture."   An area that might be explored are the cultural differences between the families that left Caldari Prime as part of Luminaririan (Gallente+Caldari) colonization*, those that left Caldari Prime as part of the Caldari hidden corporate colonies, and those that were the last to leave.  This may even be tied to corporate philosophies.

*Vieve has written about Miesian Caldari as part of her characters' backgrounds.

Just like any company, the megacorporations will encourage a particular corporate culture.  In the case of the Caldari these may be displayed in popular culture as put forward in Masks of Authority.  Various divisions within these megacorporations will have their own cultures based on ethnic make-up, location, isolation, etc.

A way to normalize cultures is to move people around, either forced movement or "highly encouraged."  A corporation can force individuals to move so that a local culture does not depart significantly from a "metropolitan norm."  This can be done through skills training or higher-education, establishing a common culture among graduates of a particular institution or program.  Lastly, someone from one locale might be assigned/receive a job in another locale where only those arriving do not share the local culture, but do share the macro culture.

[Vikarion]

...

So how do you answer Seriphyn's question then?

In my model, there is no contradiction, as indeed there is no contradiction in the PF. Although there is the occasional reference to Caldari contemplative traditions, much more is made of violent sports (Mindclash, Splinterz) and the tendency of Caldari to be profuse gamblers. This is not, to say the least, an Asian motif. That's not to say that the more contemplative Caldari traditions do not draw from Asian and Native American themes, but those are not the dominant forms of recreation in the state, and almost every culture, no matter how violent or competitive, has more reflective activities.

Incidentally, all of my views are (or, at least, I would like to think they are) based on PF sources I have read. I'd be happy to link you to the supporting evidence for any part of my thesis you'd like confirmation of.

[Vieve]

You don't enforce a single culture, not over a single planet, or even an entire city.

Governments, institutions, corporations, societies etc encourage & maintain common themes throughout its sphere of influence.

In the case of the Caldari, the society encourages and maintains Wayism and the shared history/origin forms a foundation for "Caldari culture."   An area that might be explored are the cultural differences between the families that left Caldari Prime as part of Luminaririan (Gallente+Caldari) colonization*, those that left Caldari Prime as part of the Caldari hidden corporate colonies, and those that were the last to leave.  This may even be tied to corporate philosophies.

Funny.  My base "modern Caldari cultural origins template" looks something like:

the families that left Caldari Prime as part of Luminaririan (Gallente+Caldari) colonization

Practicals.

those that left Caldari Prime as part of the Caldari hidden corporate colonies

Patriots.

and those that were the last to leave.

Liberals.

Yes, I have rationalizations for all of these (and for what the "base cultures" splintered and mutated into during and after the Gallente-Caldari War), but I'd rather not make people's eyes bleed this early in the morning.

[Bastian Valoron]

In my model, there is no contradiction, as indeed there is no contradiction in the PF. Although there is the occasional reference to Caldari contemplative traditions, much more is made of violent sports (Mindclash, Splinterz) and the tendency of Caldari to be profuse gamblers. This is not, to say the least, an Asian motif. That's not to say that the more contemplative Caldari traditions do not draw from Asian and Native American themes, but those are not the dominant forms of recreation in the state, and almost every culture, no matter how violent or competitive, has more reflective activities.

Incidentally, all of my views are (or, at least, I would like to think they are) based on PF sources I have read. I'd be happy to link you to the supporting evidence for any part of my thesis you'd like confirmation of.

Let me state the contradiction more clearly: If Caldari are culturally and genetically modified to not have any of the cravings which we would consider usual in RL and they only live for competition, what makes them consume? You can't be hypercapitalistic if no one has need for your products.

Also, since EVE PF is as scattered as it it, linking the sources is always a good thing to do, that way people can better see where you are coming from and check whether they would arrive at the same conclusions.

[Gottii]

...

So how do you answer Seriphyn's question then?

In my model, there is no contradiction, as indeed there is no contradiction in the PF. Although there is the occasional reference to Caldari contemplative traditions, much more is made of violent sports (Mindclash, Splinterz) and the tendency of Caldari to be profuse gamblers. This is not, to say the least, an Asian motif. That's not to say that the more contemplative Caldari traditions do not draw from Asian and Native American themes, but those are not the dominant forms of recreation in the state, and almost every culture, no matter how violent or competitive, has more reflective activities.

Incidentally, all of my views are (or, at least, I would like to think they are) based on PF sources I have read. I'd be happy to link you to the supporting evidence for any part of my thesis you'd like confirmation of.

I would actually argue that Asian cultures can have quite a bit of fixation on violence and gambling, just its easy to miss sometimes with Western eyes.  I mean, take the Japanese.  The Yakuza (who are a recognizable section of Japanese society, some even have marked offices) make a huge part of their revenue from majong parlors and other gambling dens.  MMA, in the form of shoot fighting, basically started in Japan, with the subsequent gambling on it.  Sumo is a highly ritualized but certainly violent sport that holds immense importance to Japanese culture and society.  Thats just one example.

That said, I strongly agree with the rest of your points regarding Caldari culture. 

I always viewed the average Caldari citizen's loyalty to Caldari culture meaning that he's not necessarily loyal to other Caldari, its that he or she is loyal to the Caldari way of life and way of doing things, which means a commitment to the constant competition and social Darwinism that their system recreates, as well as an acceptance of the consequences to the "losers". 

I would imagine that being a loyal Caldari means ignoring all of those homeless and outcast Caldari on the street (if indeed he even sees them)  as he walks to his high-powered corporate job "for the good of the Caldari people and State".  Caldari culture's genesis in a harsh environment could make for harsh rules.  If you cant help the tribal-group, if you're not productive and "one of us", then youre a threat to the tribal group, because you break up traditions designed to create viable individuals, and you eat food and take up resources that could be going to the betterment of "more meritorious" individuals, and thus you're a threat to the tribal-group as a whole, and thus expelled.

[Bastian Valoron]

In my opinion, we need to avoid getting too attached to the idea that the Caldari are self-sacrificing for the sake of collectivist ideals. Remember, the Caldari are hyper-capitalistic, meritocratic, and intensely competitive, traits which do not lend themselves to altruistic interpretations.

For starters, doesn't this view run into trouble with the PF about the self-sacrifice of the celebrated hero Tovil-Toba, the State first mentality of Caldari miners, the State executor waiting for his turn in line to see the doctor or people's calm compliance with the clearly anti-competitive scrip currency?

Rather, the Caldari understand that grouping together usually increases your chances of personally doing better. Therefore, you and your colleagues compete so that you, together, can get to the top of your Division. Divisions compete within a Megacorp to advance their own vision for the company. Megacorps compete with each other for market share and to implement their vision for the future of the State. And the State competes with every other Empire.
...
I personally see the Caldari approach best defined as "units of competition". You, personally, want to do well, better than everyone else around you, in fact. But outside of that immediate group, you also want your entire group to do better than other groups of similar nature (family, coworker groups, etc). And you want that group (company, Megacorp, The State, etc) to do better than others.

This idea does not really fly, you run into the tragedy of commons here. You can't prioritize both the groups interest and your personal interest in the same go without conflicts. The former usually implies group roles, the latter implies redundancy and winner-takes-it all rewards which decreases group cohesion.

The Caldari, as a people, built their civilization on a planet much harsher than Earth. This was a planet that killed the weak, and promoted the stronger leader, the stronger tribe, and the stronger nation. This explains much about the modern Caldari civilization: the strong social mores (social cohesion is important in dangerous conditions), the intensely competitive nature (resources are at a premium), the tendency to group (groups offer better chances for survival and specialization of labor), and xenophobia (the fewer resources there are, the more competition from outsiders to possess your land, livestock, etc).

I agree that under harsh conditions it is advantageous to stick together but cannot see how this could lead to people being competitive and pursuing their individual interests, as this would decrease the survivability of the group as a whole. Also, you're now introducing here the division between your own group and strangers, and I'm getting confused in what sense you are actually so uncomfortable with this idea.

Because of the national archetypes we have around us, it's easy to classify fictional civilizations as analogues of our own, but this is not the case. The Caldari are not, despite the names, either Asian or Finnish, and the Federation isn't the U.S. or E.U. So we need to be careful when reading a certain bit of PF to be sure to compare it with other PF.

If PF hands us an institution or a character which seems to have an intriguing pattern of behavior, acting against his own interest etc, I think it brings depth to try to understand what would motivate a similar RL entity to act like this. Dropping the assumption that the characters of New Eden are psychologically human would in my opinion create more problems than it would solve.

Defining the Caldari as a strictly self-sacrificial, collectivist culture ignores the PF defining them as often very individualistic, competitive, focused characters. And portraying them as strictly greedy and selfish in nature ignores the PF that shows them often having a good deal of patriotism and loyalty. And these are both, of course, gross generalities.

You don't seem to like the idea that Caldari in general actually might be self-sacrificial and collectivists, and competitive only because this is expected from them. I agree that a faction of trillions of people has to be multi-faceted, as anything else would be an oversimplification, but this general argument is not very helpful in understanding the culture any better.

[Publius Valerius]

Defining the Caldari as a strictly self-sacrificial, collectivist culture ignores the PF defining them as often very individualistic, competitive, focused characters. And portraying them as strictly greedy and selfish in nature ignores the PF that shows them often having a good deal of patriotism and loyalty. And these are both, of course, gross generalities.

You don't seem to like the idea that Caldari in general actually might be self-sacrificial and collectivists, and competitive only because this is expected from them. I agree that a faction of trillions of people has to be multi-faceted, as anything else would be an oversimplification, but this general argument is not very helpful in understanding the culture any better.

Ehm.... he said:
"Rather, the Caldari understand that grouping together usually increases your chances of personally doing better."

On the micro level he has as hypothesis:
"Individuals understand that grouping together usually increases their chances of personally doing better." or better as Wenn-dann.... When/IF Individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better.


So I think he already said they working together.... but it has a reason... and the reason isnt that they are self-sacrificial and collectivists, and competitive because this is expected from them.

The reason is because grouping together usually increases their chances of personally doing better. And you can add in the caldari society is it a little extremer because of the past: "The Caldari, as a people, built their civilization on a planet much harsher than Earth; that makes the "grouping together" more meaning full and more combative...."

The Caldari, as a people, built their civilization on a planet much harsher than Earth. This was a planet that killed the weak, and promoted the stronger leader, the stronger tribe, and the stronger nation. This explains much about the modern Caldari civilization: the strong social mores (social cohesion is important in dangerous conditions), the intensely competitive nature (resources are at a premium), the tendency to group (groups offer better chances for survival and specialization of labor), and xenophobia (the fewer resources there are, the more competition from outsiders to possess your land, livestock, etc).

I agree that under harsh conditions it is advantageous to stick together but cannot see how this could lead to people being competitive and pursuing their individual interests, as this would decrease the survivability of the group as a whole. Also, you're now introducing here the division between your own group and strangers, and I'm getting confused in what sense you are actually so uncomfortable with this idea.

About:
"I agree that under harsh conditions it is advantageous to stick together but cannot see how this could lead to people being competitive and pursuing their individual interests, as this would decrease the survivability of the group as a whole."

At this point I dont see the problem which you see.... they working together but... a huge but... you dont have always a garantie to have this outcome.... it means: Yes grouping together gives you the Pareto-Optimum and it is possible to get it.... as long the collectiv goods is small... and a small group can benefit from it... that gets the free rider problem out the way.. the problem starts when the collectiv good is in that form that everybody can consume form it. That is the start... you have than already two groups... one which trys to get the Pareto-Optimum (survival in Caldari case) and a second group which just free rides.

The Caldari have most likely just group together around small collectiv goods, with small groups to avoid this problem..... so the point that: "IF Individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better.." Isnt wrong it just needs an addition... "rational" so: "IF rational individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better..and it is more likely that  rational individuals are group together around controlable collectiv goods."

The Logic of Collective Action

Edit: Unter friedlichen Umständen fällt der kriegerische Mensch über sich selber her. Nietzsche "Jenseits von Gut und Böse". Under peaceful conditions the militant man attacks himself. He means their is never peace, their is always a war somewhere against some someone and isnt important if you win or lose aslong you are stand up and go for another competition. One point is nice... I dont know if "militant man" is plural and singular in english.... because in german "kriegerische Mensch" can mean the one militant/warlike or a characterisation of humans with the attribut being militant...

[Bastian Valoron]

Ehm.... he said:
"Rather, the Caldari understand that grouping together usually increases your chances of personally doing better."

On the micro level he has as hypothesis:
"Individuals understand that grouping together usually increases their chances of personally doing better." or better as Wenn-dann.... When/IF Individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better.


So I think he already said they working together.... but it has a reason... and the reason isnt that they are self-sacrificial and collectivists, and competitive because this is expected from them.

The reason is because grouping together usually increases their chances of personally doing better. And you can add in the caldari society is it a little extremer because of the past: "The Caldari, as a people, built their civilization on a planet much harsher than Earth; that makes the "grouping together" more meaning full and more combative...."

...

About:
"I agree that under harsh conditions it is advantageous to stick together but cannot see how this could lead to people being competitive and pursuing their individual interests, as this would decrease the survivability of the group as a whole."

At this point I dont see the problem which you see.... they working together but... a huge but... you dont have always a garantie to have this outcome.... it means: Yes grouping together gives you the Pareto-Optimum and it is possible to get it.... as long the collectiv goods is small... and a small group can benefit from it... that gets the free rider problem out the way.. the problem starts when the collectiv good is in that form that everybody can consume form it. That is the start... you have than already two groups... one which trys to get the Pareto-Optimum (survival in Caldari case) and a second group which just free rides.

The Caldari have most likely just group together around small collectiv goods, with small groups to avoid this problem..... so the point that: "IF Individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better.." Isnt wrong it just needs an addition... "rational" so: "IF rational individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better..and it is more likely that  rational individuals are group together around controlable collectiv goods."

Yes and this is just simply wrong. When Tovil-Toba crashes to the ground, he does not personally gain anything. When Caldari megacorps are controlling the markets with scrip, the megacorp gains, the consumers don't but no one complains. If you have more meat than the average clan member, there will be more food for yourself if you don't share. Like said, the average survivability of the community can be higher if the members don't act selfishly, but then some of them are going to have to sacrifice from their personal gain and there needs to be some kind of social order. This is not individualism or competitiveness like you claim, this is collectivism.

The book you linked also disagrees with what you are saying, here's a quote:

But it is not in fact true that the idea that groups will act in their self-interest follows logically from the premise of rational and self-interested behavior. It does not follow, because all of the individuals in a group would gain if they achieved their group objective, that they would act to achieve that objective, even if they were all rational and self-interested. Indeed unless the number of individuals in a group is quite small, or unless there is coercion or some other special device to make individuals act in their common interest, rational, self-interested individuals will not act to achieve their common or group interests. (pg. 2)

[Publius Valerius]

Ehm.... he said:
"Rather, the Caldari understand that grouping together usually increases your chances of personally doing better."

On the micro level he has as hypothesis:
"Individuals understand that grouping together usually increases their chances of personally doing better." or better as Wenn-dann.... When/IF Individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better.


So I think he already said they working together.... but it has a reason... and the reason isnt that they are self-sacrificial and collectivists, and competitive because this is expected from them.

The reason is because grouping together usually increases their chances of personally doing better. And you can add in the caldari society is it a little extremer because of the past: "The Caldari, as a people, built their civilization on a planet much harsher than Earth; that makes the "grouping together" more meaning full and more combative...."

...

About:
"I agree that under harsh conditions it is advantageous to stick together but cannot see how this could lead to people being competitive and pursuing their individual interests, as this would decrease the survivability of the group as a whole."

At this point I dont see the problem which you see.... they working together but... a huge but... you dont have always a garantie to have this outcome.... it means: Yes grouping together gives you the Pareto-Optimum and it is possible to get it.... as long the collectiv goods is small... and a small group can benefit from it... that gets the free rider problem out the way.. the problem starts when the collectiv good is in that form that everybody can consume form it. That is the start... you have than already two groups... one which trys to get the Pareto-Optimum (survival in Caldari case) and a second group which just free rides.

The Caldari have most likely just group together around small collectiv goods, with small groups to avoid this problem..... so the point that: "IF Individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better.." Isnt wrong it just needs an addition... "rational" so: "IF rational individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better..and it is more likely that  rational individuals are group together around controlable collectiv goods."

Yes and this is just simply wrong. When Tovil-Toba crashes to the ground, he does not personally gain anything. When Caldari megacorps are controlling the markets with scrip, the megacorp gains, the consumers don't but no one complains. If you have more meat than the average clan member, there will be more food for yourself if you don't share. Like said, the average survivability of the community can be higher if the members don't act selfishly, but then some of them are going to have to sacrifice from their personal gain and there needs to be some kind of social order. This is not individualism or competitiveness like you claim, this is collectivism.

The book you linked also disagrees with what you are saying, here's a quote:

But it is not in fact true that the idea that groups will act in their self-interest follows logically from the premise of rational and self-interested behavior. It does not follow, because all of the individuals in a group would gain if they achieved their group objective, that they would act to achieve that objective, even if they were all rational and self-interested. Indeed unless the number of individuals in a group is quite small, or unless there is coercion or some other special device to make individuals act in their common interest, rational, self-interested individuals will not act to achieve their common or group interests. (pg. 2)

You are like than a RL friend. He also likes to have a whole book in one line (he is such a lazy fuck ;P).... It is even just the intro (the link are just the first pages... from a big book)..... and yes.... you willl love it: he starts with like you say, but he goes further (P.S. I know the article were you have copy past it  )

he will come later how it works.... I know, I know, I know: "Listen Dude... but page two man"..... it is just the start for a long argumentionline..... which goes from small collectiv goods over group size - over big groups and big collectiv goods - to a group theory as whole. And that is what I take out of it..... see as a tool.... like your Mercedes-Benz mechanic.... he has most of the time a laptop and a special tool for a special problem (I know, I know so german to not see the ideology behind and work with as was it a tool to solve problems ) ....

So our special problem was .... "IF Individuals grouping together, then they increases their chances of personally doing better.." it doesnt explains logical and detuctiv what was happening. So we need a group theory (and there are more than olson out there).... so I have just add his group theory toi solve the problem which we had on the start.

[Hamish Grayson]

Let me state the contradiction more clearly: If Caldari are culturally and genetically modified to not have any of the cravings which we would consider usual in RL and they only live for competition, what makes them consume? You can't be hypercapitalistic if no one has need for your products.

There is not  one shred of PF that supports genetic manipulation or modification  of tube children.     Eggs are harvested, fertilized and placed into artificial wombs.     This allows a Deteis woman to give birth to many children in a nine month span instead of one.   

[Silver Night]

Let me state the contradiction more clearly: If Caldari are culturally and genetically modified to not have any of the cravings which we would consider usual in RL and they only live for competition, what makes them consume? You can't be hypercapitalistic if no one has need for your products.

There is not  one shred of PF that supports genetic manipulation or modification  of tube children.     Eggs are harvested, fertilized and placed into artificial wombs.     This allows a Deteis woman to give birth to many children in a nine month span instead of one.   

There is actually a pretty explicit cluster-wide taboo on that kind of genetic manipulation - particularly when it comes to tinkering with basic drives - because of what happened to the Jovians.

[Matariki Rain]

Let me state the contradiction more clearly: If Caldari are culturally and genetically modified to not have any of the cravings which we would consider usual in RL and they only live for competition, what makes them consume? You can't be hypercapitalistic if no one has need for your products.

There is not  one shred of PF that supports genetic manipulation or modification  of tube children.     Eggs are harvested, fertilized and placed into artificial wombs.     This allows a Deteis woman to give birth to many children in a nine month span instead of one.   

There is actually a pretty explicit cluster-wide taboo on that kind of genetic manipulation - particularly when it comes to tinkering with basic drives - because of what happened to the Jovians.

This.

I'm not sure where the idea of being culturally and genetically modified to not have the usual RL cravings [drives?] comes from, but my impression of Caldari is that they have their share of such drives and a decent part of the culture is about how they channel them and what outlets are acceptable.

[Bastian Valoron]

There is not  one shred of PF that supports genetic manipulation or modification  of tube children. Eggs are harvested, fertilized and placed into artificial wombs.  This allows a Deteis woman to give birth to many children in a nine month span instead of one.   

Yeah, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with what you are saying. I was referring to the following part in Vikarion's post:

The Caldari, as a people, built their civilization on a planet much harsher than Earth. This was a planet that killed the weak, and promoted the stronger leader, the stronger tribe, and the stronger nation. This explains much about the modern Caldari civilization: the strong social mores (social cohesion is important in dangerous conditions), the intensely competitive nature (resources are at a premium), the tendency to group (groups offer better chances for survival and specialization of labor), and xenophobia (the fewer resources there are, the more competition from outsiders to possess your land, livestock, etc).

I'm not sure where the idea of being culturally and genetically modified to not have the usual RL cravings [drives?] comes from, but my impression of Caldari is that they have their share of such drives and a decent part of the culture is about how they channel them and what outlets are acceptable.

This is my impression as well. Suggesting that we should "get past" themes like "what outlets are acceptable", "channeling one's cravings" and other social control or collectivist concepts which are clearly all over the Caldari lore simply sounds like an OOC motivated PF contradiction to me. Of course, it's a big cluster and there must be hyper-individualistic Caldari people as well, somewhere, nothing wrong with that.