Collectivism increases chance of 'Social Welfare Programs' edict tech?

[Red Rook]

Okay, so I believed Wiz when he said that Collectivism vs Individualism wasn't supposed to be left wing vs right wing, despite the reference to freedom of trade in the description of Individualism and the previous, now removed reference to equality in the description of Collectivism.

But according to the wiki http://www.stellariswiki.com/Technology

The technology 'The Living State' which unlocks the Edict 'Social Welfare Programs' is more likely to be available if you have a Collectivist ethos.

So according to the game, an ethos which favours slavery and dictatorship is more likely to introduce social welfare programs than an ethos which favours democracy?

Furthermore, the technology 'Selected Lineages' which, through its description, is implied to be eugenics, gets a bonus to appear with Individualism, and a very low chance of appearing under Collectivism. So, according to the game, policies of selective breeding are more likely to be favoured by an ethos which prefers democracy to one which prefers dictatorships?

None of this makes any sense to me.

If the ethos system can be modded, would anyone else be interested in an overhaul of Collectivism and Individualism to bring some consistency here?

 

[GrayCarlyle]

So according to the game, an ethos which favours slavery and dictatorship is more likely to introduce social welfare programs than an ethos which favours democracy?

Ask libertarians what they think about social welfare programs...
(Hint: "Thats Robbery!")

 

[ozmono2005]

Fanatic Collectivist
The purpose of the individual is simple; strengthen the collective. To enter the blackness of space we move as one, and we shall not be weakened by wanton separatism.
Collectivist
Society has long since evolved past the insignificant rivalries and concerns of individuals. We are numerous but one, and the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Individualist
Community is a means to an end, not the end itself. Only by empowering the individual to reach their maximum potential do we achieve true freedom. Freedom of thought, of speech, of movement, of trade.
Fanatic Individualist
We must recognize that "society" is but a convenient fiction, the by-product of individuals working toward parallel, overlapping, and contradictory goals. As it should be.

To answer your question it appears left vs right to me and it makes sense, for a left ethos (not necessarily government) to be more inclined than the right, to be concerned with social programs.

 

[Red Rook]

Ask libertarians what they think about social welfare programs...
(Hint: "Thats Robbery!")

Yes, and the vast majority of people, including the vast majority of Paradox customers I'm sure, support some measure of social welfare and yet also manage to believe in democracy, freedom and even property rights at the same time.

 

[BrokenSky]

Okay, so I believed Wiz when he said that Collectivism vs Individualism wasn't supposed to be left wing vs right wing, despite the reference to freedom of trade in the description of Individualism and the previous, now removed reference to equality in the description of Collectivism.

But according to the wiki http://www.stellariswiki.com/Technology

The technology 'The Living State' which unlocks the Edict 'Social Welfare Programs' is more likely to be available if you have a Collectivist ethos.

So according to the game, an ethos which favours slavery and dictatorship is more likely to introduce social welfare programs than an ethos which favours democracy?

Furthermore, the technology 'Selected Lineages' which, through its description, is implied to be eugenics, gets a bonus to appear with Individualism, and a very low chance of appearing under Collectivism. So, according to the game, policies of selective breeding are more likely to be favoured by an ethos which prefers democracy to one which prefers dictatorships?

None of this makes any sense to me.

If the ethos system can be modded, would anyone else be interested in an overhaul of Collectivism and Individualism to bring some consistency here?

I think there's more than one thing wrong with the wiki atm, though health care does make sense for collectivist (the "healthy" pops pay taxes, which support the unhealthy ones for the good of the state - healthy workers = better workers.) but individualists shouldn't be penalized.

 

[GrayCarlyle]

Yes, and the vast majority of people, including the vast majority of Paradox customers I'm sure, support some measure of social welfare and yet also manage to believe in democracy, freedom and even property rights at the same time.

Never said otherwise.

 

[CarbrBard]

It's not so much 'Left and Right', or 'Liberty of Authoritarian', but of a focus on the Individual, or the State. Collectivists, as focusing on the State, has Social Welfare because it's the State taking care of its people, instead of people taking care of themselves (like individualists would).

 

[ozmono2005]

Yes, and the vast majority of people, including the vast majority of Paradox customers I'm sure, support some measure of social welfare and yet also manage to believe in democracy, freedom and even property rights at the same time.

If you are wondering where that would put you in stellaris my guess is the centre, you'd neither be a collectivist or individualist or atleast certainly not fanatical about it.

 

[Damedius]

How does that not make sense?

Collectivism favors social welfare. Social welfare leads to dysgenics. As you have people that would not survive having their genes continue on. This usually comes at the expense of those that have superior genes as it takes their resources to provide for the others.

 

[Red Rook]

It's not so much 'Left and Right', or 'Liberty of Authoritarian', but of a focus on the Individual, or the State. Collectivists, as focusing on the State, has Social Welfare because it's the State taking care of its people, instead of people taking care of themselves (like individualists would).

Okay, that makes some sense to me.

However, why then are Collectivists barred from Democracies and Individualists barred from Dictatorships? There are plenty of Democracies with powerful states and Dictatorships which leave the individual to fend for themselves.

 

[Koplin]

Oh god here we go again...

 

[GrayCarlyle]

How does that not make sense?

Collectivism favors social welfare. Social welfare leads to dysgenics. As you have people that would not survive having their genes continue on. This usually comes at the expense of those that have superior genes as it takes their resources to provide for the others.

That is a pretty extreme standpoint, if you ask me...

 

[Sernista]

How does that not make sense?

Collectivism favors social welfare. Social welfare leads to dysgenics. As you have people that would not survive having their genes continue on. This usually comes at the expense of those that have superior genes as it takes their resources to provide for the others.

Setting aside the moral objections, this only applies if you assume a 1:1 relationship between social standing and desirable genetic traits, which is a woefully oversimplified view of the world. There are plenty of smart people who for historical reasons start off with a really nasty hand in life, and dull people who for the aforesaid have it all. I mean, look at the Haemophilia endemic to the European nobility of the late 19th century. That's not a positive genetic legacy to have at all, but they are exactly the people most advantaged by a 'let the chips fall as they may' system, because they have the institutionalized power.

 

[anomalacaris]

Okay, so I believed Wiz when he said that Collectivism vs Individualism wasn't supposed to be left wing vs right wing, despite the reference to freedom of trade in the description of Individualism and the previous, now removed reference to equality in the description of Collectivism.

Wasn't supposed to, but highly inspired.

As far as I know:
social welfare is a pretty left thing
the most famous eugenics country is ww2 germany, on the far right

So where is the inconsistency?

 

[BrokenSky]

I would like to point out that individualists get a happiness penalty if selected lineages is used, according to the policy page, so either individualists are more likely to research it but also dislike it (possible?) or the wiki is wrong (probable)

 

[exewon]

However, why then are Collectivists barred from Democracies and Individualists barred from Dictatorships? There are plenty of Democracies with powerful states and Dictatorships which leave the individual to fend for themselves.

Because collectivists find the idea that everybody has a say in the decision making process disturbing. Why should the state care about the opinion of the individual? They have trained experts for this. Listening and giving attention to every single voice of discontent is just wasted effort.

While individualists on the other hand would get quite pissed at the fact that a single person is raised above everybody else.

 

[AddMinus]

So according to the game, an ethos which favours slavery and dictatorship is more likely to introduce social welfare programs than an ethos which favours democracy?

Well collectivism to me sounds like communism and socialism. Therefore social welfare.

Species with the collectivist ethos see themselves as a group, everything they do is for the whole not the individual. It makes perfect sense to me they are more likely to enact social welfare programes that are designed to help the group not just the rich individuals.

'Selected Lineages' in a society where everyone looks to help the group. They would not select individuals ahead of the group. How can you select a lineage when everyone is already a vital cog in the machine?

I admit 'Selected Lineages' is more ambiguous, I would lean towards collectivist. Collectivist may seek out the perfect worker for future generations for example. Individualist would of course decide their own mates. Although that is by it's nature, selective.

Remember in a true collectivist society their is no dictator or slaves. There may be a leader/figurehead but a lowly workers role would be considered just as important. The lowly worker is not a slave, he is a worker doing his part for the group. Don't think Communist China/Soviet Union, think Ants/Bees.

 

[BrokenSky]

the most famous eugenics country is ww2 germany, on the far right

Nazi Germany wasn't far right. They're actually a pretty good example of why left vs right doesn't work as a complete description, even as a simplification. Nazis were center, up. (Authoritarian).

In game they would probably be a xenophobe, collectivist, militarist military dictatorship if I had to guess.

My point is its not generally a good example for government comparisons.

 

[GrayCarlyle]

Wasn't supposed to, but highly inspired.

As far as I know:
social welfare is a pretty left thing
the most famous eugenics country is ww2 germany, on the far right

So where is the inconsistency?

And guess what...germany got social welfare still! without being the most famous eugenics country. Eugenics btw, wasnt a strictly german or european thing.

 

[Red Rook]

Wasn't supposed to, but highly inspired.

As far as I know:
social welfare is a pretty left thing
the most famous eugenics country is ww2 germany, on the far right

So where is the inconsistency?

If Eugenics = Far Right
Then Individualism = Far Right
But if Individualism =/= Dictatorship
Then Dictatorship =/= Far Right
But Nazi Germany = Far Right
And Nazi Germany = Eugenics
And Nazi Germany = Dictatorship
Therefore Individualism = ???