Print

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

[Davlos]

I was meditating on the problems that my own country (Singapore) has with democratic change and figured some things out, and also on the hand realized that this may be useful for explaining and understanding the Caldari mentality and worldview of the society they live in. Most people who know me would have at least once heard from me that Singapore = RL Caldari State, and that attempting to understand Caldari society through the lenses of natives of the West (as most readers of this forum are) tends to be challenging and sometimes perplexing.

It's going to be impossible to expect democratic change and liberalization from the Caldari State's (Singapore's) middle and working classes that emerged from the growth-based mentality. Why?

Unlike conventional thought, there is no basis to claim that the middle classes are the historical bearers of political liberalization in the Caldari State (Singapore) because the middle classes are in fact the prime beneficiaries and supporters of authoritarianism. After all, the State's (Singapore's) economic success owes nothing to democracy, but instead owes much to the enlightened practices of the virtuous rulers of the State's (Singapore's) rulers who mobilized a disciplined and increasingly educated workforce towards developmental targets. The kind of middle classes that was produced by such a state is therefore grounded in a culture of dependence and anxiety. This middle class is not going to be a motor of change but instead is a mere managerial problem for the elites of the State (Singapore, Inc). The elite of the State (Singapore, Inc) achieves this via the Confucian values of consensus and harmony, hierachy and duty, and it is the psychology of the middle class that craves the certainty that virtuous rule provides.

Hopefully this lends a bit of understanding towards the Caldari worldview.

[Lyn Farel]

Interesting !

[Mithfindel]

Similar issues have been noticed in western countries too, when industrial patronism was fashionable. In Finnish, these executives would be known as patruuna, a loan word from the same root as "patron". They founded a factory, and built a small town around it, maintained the schools and the hospitals - probably everything but the local church (though they might've donated to the chapel, and most likely would have had a front-row seat anyway). The work force would work in the factory, shop from the company store, live in the company housing (the patron himself would live in a manor nearby, as well) and in general there would be considerably peer pressure over the generations to keep doing the family's traditional "honest job" and not to try to advance a single bit.

Most of this kind of societies have been closed in the 20th century, though. One of the last of its kind in Finland, Verla was shut down in the sixties, 30 years or so after it had become obsolete. As a final example of industrial patronage, shutting the factory down took 12 years as younger employees were transferred to a nearby modern factory and production was reduced as older employees little by little retired after working on the site for their whole lives. Some of the remaining employees were hired to keep care of the factory grounds, as the site was converted to a holiday site and a museum. Nowadays, the corporation is part of United Paper Machines, they act a bit quicker when kicking employees out.

And then there is Fiskars (ironworks established 1649, share majority of the modern Fiskars corporation is being owned by the descendants of the patron who bought it in 1822). Some other family-owned corporations also still kind of carry the culture on, even if there's no longer any company towns. You don't need to understand Finnish to know what this piece of news is about.

[Utsukushi Shi]

Pretty interesting. While there are I am sure many differences, where I work was originally a company town. It was founded in the mid to late 1800's and literally all the resources that ended up being owned by the State(roads, dams, railroads, power generation, etc..) were created by the company. In fact, even though now it is a tiny speck of a town, back then it was one of the only towns in America to have electricity due to the dam they built.

[Andreus Ixiris]

Davlos, you make an excellent point, but if I might offer a word of advice in presenting it - once you've established a parallel (i.e. the Caldari State and Singapore) you don't need to keep repeating it. It makes it easier to read if we don't have the brackets every time one or the other is mentioned.

[Makoto Priano]

So. Random aside? On the economic side, at least, what I tend to think:

When I think of Caldari Liberals, I don't think of them as social democrats in the European sense, or even Democrats in the American sense. Caldari culture, with its heavy draw on eastern themes, seems to have a bend of Confucian paternalism, and all political blocks seem to retain that to some degree. The Liberals seem to draw from '90s Western Neo-Liberalism in terms of their economic ideals: that globalization and increased economic ties will decrease the risk of war, that prosperity will serve the best interest of all in the society, and that the spread of Caldari ideals through free market imperialism will result in cultural dominance. They share the dream of bettering the State and reclaiming the homeworld, but desire to achieve it through non-military means when possible.

So. That's me?

[Shintoko Akahoshi]

I think you're spot on with this, Davlos. At the same time, I'd be curious to see some generational differences in viewpoints springing up, especially since there's a whole swath of young adults in the State who came of age with the current limited Fed-State war.

I was in South Korea last year during the presidential elections, and it was interesting to see how people split in their support for Park or Moon - it was pretty clearly a generational issue, and it seemed pretty obvious to me at the time that a lot of Park's support among older Koreans was due to their feelings that their work during the industrialization of the 60's and 70's being marginalized by Moon. What would this sort of thing look like in the State, I wonder.

[orange]

Do you think the middle/working classes of 13th Century England and 18th Century United States or even 18th Century France were really behind the liberalization of the west?

I bring this all up to argue that it is impossible to expect democratic change and liberalization from any middle/working class.   In all the above "classic western" cases, those leading the effort for liberal change already held actual power of some kind within the larger society.

[Creep]

Do you think the middle/working classes of 13th Century England and 18th Century United States or even 18th Century France were really behind the liberalization of the west?

I bring this all up to argue that it is impossible to expect democratic change and liberalization from any middle/working class.   In all the above "classic western" cases, those leading the effort for liberal change already held actual power of some kind within the larger society.

And usually they are in danger of losing it unless they liberalize, though there are the odd few who are genuinely driven by ideologue and in fact lose power as a result of democratization.

That being said, the middle class is usually involved at the ground floor of democratization, based on their financial stability and their educated status. The working class historically is relegated to "seething mob stirred up by middle/upper class rabble rouser".

[Ciarente]

I think that it's possible to cherry-pick examples where any class is the driving force behind 'liberalization' or, alternately, where any class is the main obstacle. In Australia, the working class was quite definitely the driving force behind reforms that might be described as 'liberalization' (universal suffrage, free school education) - and not as a seething mob putting pressure on the elite, either, the first Labor prime minister started his working life shoveling shit and the second went down the mines aged ten. In other countries, at other times, oligarchic ruling classes have stayed in power with the support of the poorest and most disenfranchised, forming a contingent alliance between those with the most to lose and those who can least afford to lose anything to resist change.

I think Davlos's perception of the Caldari state is a keen one. it's worth remembering that even for the poorest corporate citizen on the bottom rung of the ladder, there's always the fear of disassociation, always somewhere further to fall.  If CCP asked me to sketch out an arc for a revolution in the state, that's where I'd start: with the people who have nothing at all to lose.

[Vikarion]

Also keep in mind that while the State may not treat everyone in it as a precious individual, it is still one of the best places to be born, in the PF. Yes, they tend to live communally in dormitories, and get a lot of biased news and information. But they also have strong social connections and support, well-defined goals, and an emotional attachment to the success and stability of their nation and corporation. All of these things tend - as the PF notes - to make life "fairly pleasant and productive", as long as you don't end up outside of the system.

Thus, we can expect (contra-Tony G), that the majority of Caldari citizens do not want to mess up the established order all that much, because even your average Caldari citizen does indeed have a lot to lose, and if you are not one of the truly outcast, you probably don't live in that much poverty. Of course, if you do, you're fucked. But if you do, you also almost certainly did something to get there (Edit: from the perspective of the Caldari).

[Aria Jenneth]

Thus, we can expect (contra-Tony G), that the majority of Caldari citizens do not want to mess up the established order all that much, because even your average Caldari citizen does indeed have a lot to lose, and if you are not one of the truly outcast, you probably don't live in that much poverty.

Agree, mostly, so long as the corps aren't operating in "wage slavery" mode. It's pretty easy for industrial elites to get to the point of abusing their work force. Hence the Brothers of Freedom, etc.

Of course, if you do, you're fucked. But if you do, you also almost certainly did something to get there.

Um.

Such as being sacked during a rough economic patch and consequently unable to find work. Such as being born to nonentities, thus having no presence in the system-- thus having no legal rights. (Thus being, yourself, a nonentity.)

It's a recognized criticism of the Caldari system that nonentity-dom is a little too easy to fall into through no fault of your own. Every empire's got areas where the system frays or becomes cruel, and this is the most obvious of the State's.

[Vikarion]

Of course, if you do, you're fucked. But if you do, you also almost certainly did something to get there.

Um.

Such as being sacked during a rough economic patch and consequently unable to find work. Such as being born to nonentities, thus having no presence in the system-- thus having no legal rights. (Thus being, yourself, a nonentity.)

It's a recognized criticism of the Caldari system that nonentity-dom is a little too easy to fall into through no fault of your own. Every empire's got areas where the system frays or becomes cruel, and this is the most obvious of the State's.

I'm sorry, I should have been more clear. It is likely the view of the Caldari that if you drop into the outcast of society, you did something to get there.

Although it must be noted that there does seem to be a bit of a differentiating in some minor ways amongst the PF between those who are in economic difficulty through no fault of their own, and those who don't fit in. There was a lot of support for Heth's retraining programs, for example.