Spiritualist Governments

[Solicitius]

Hello everyone,
As Stellaris launch date approaches us at ludicrous speed, I would like to know/discuss about the spiritualist form of governments we could choose.
At the moment, we know of:

1) Divine Mandate (transform in Trascendent Empire with enough research).
· Slavery Tolerance:+50%
· Resettlement Cost:-15%
· Can build a mausoleum, which grants-10% ethics divergence on the planet on which it is built.

This government is a spiritualistic form of autocracy, where the ruler is treated as a divine symbol. Organized religion is widely employed in support of the state apparatus.

Ruler: Archprophet

2) Theocratic Oligarchy
· Ethics Divergence: -10%

Ruler: Inquisitor

3) Theocratic Republic
· Ethics Divergence:-10%

Ruler: ?

***

We also know that psionics will be one possible focus of spiritualist form of government, as robotic/AI will be for materialist/scientific governments...
And that's it.

Personally, I find a little strange that we know so little about spiritualist governments (bar their specialized troops): psionics are interesting, of course, but we don't know much about the rest. For instance, from what we can gauge, it seems that the core of spiritualism (in stellaris at least) is to reduce social drifts. I find this very important and interesting: it would be the true reason why I would play a spiritualist empire. Not for telepathy/telekinesis, but for the possibility to have a united species to challenge the Galaxy.
But about this, we know very little of it: social drifts are something that we know about thanks to the different factions showed to us in the Blorg stream, but there wasn't really time or it wasn't the place yet, to know how less drifts impact an empire. Also, Theocratic Republic and Oligarchy share the same bonus, which is kind of strange considering how different they are in practice.

What I would like to know about and discuss are:

1) Are spiritualist form of governments still in need of balancing, and it is for this reason that we know only about psionics at the present time? - After some back and forth in this thread, It doesn't seem to be the case.

2) Do you think "Inquisitor" is the appropriate title for the ruler of a Theocratic Oligarchy? Again, we know very little about the kind of oligarchy we are talking about (and how Paradox pictures it): it will be like the Covenant in Halo? It will be more like the Grey Council of the Minbari from Babylon 5? Do you think the title of "Archbishop" is more apt for a Theocratic Oligarchy? A sort of spiritual overseer with the right to interfere with the secular matter of the rulers below him/her? Would be Patriarch/Matriarch more acceptable? - More apt titles suggested could be (In general): Hierophant, Patriarch/Matriarch, Pontiff

3) Theocratic Republic: how would you envision something like that? A republic with a widespread form of spiritual practices (Dunno, something like taoism, which is more of a philosophy, I know, but where priests were counselors of rulers? Do you think, High Councilor could be a good and viable title for a ruler of a Theocratic Republic? - Archbishop has been suggested as a viable possibility, leader of a form of government where priesthood could be an obligatory service (like military)

4) Because I think every form of government should have its own plus and minus, what do you think are the most striking features a spiritualist Oligarchy and Republic should need? I think a Theocratic Oligarchy should have a positive bonus to the maintenance costs in the name of self sacrifice (together with the minus to ethic divergence), while Theocratic Republic should have a bonus to happiness/ core planet. - For the moment it seems they are a placeholder, it would be nice to have more informations.


And with this out of my system, let's get to yours: what are your opinions about Spiritual form of Governments? (Also a Blorg Input would be very welcome

 

[Exemplar Voss]

I think you're delving to deep into details the game neither covers nor cares about (the specific forms of spirituality & practice) and also making assumptions about what forms that takes (self sacrifice).

The main difference between the two would be the council/ruling body would select a leader from amongst themselves (oligarchy) and the republic would have some manner of larger pool of voters and candidates, representing everyone involved in spiritual pursuits (which depending on the culture, would vary from clergy, to spiritual seekers to the whole population. Whatever). The details of those differences are best left to the individual player's head and how they want to RP it (or not).

There are thousands of belief systems, practices and hierarchies and bureaucracies attached to spirituality, and even more to religion, so diving into the nitty gritty details is really on a level that stellaris doesn't get into.

 

[Reno Lam]

For theocratic republic, personally I imagine it being rather similar to a usual representative democracy. However, the key difference is that each constituency is not based on geographic locations, but rather local churches or similar religious organisations. I think it is most likely that each of these churches have their followers vote for a leader among the priest class, who have both a spiritual and secular duty as the churches probably also double as a government hierarchy that tend to the daily needs of the citizenry. It is likely that these elected priests will then go onto generating a governing body and the leader, not unlike Papal elections but obviously occur much more often and regularly.

 

[Solicitius]

I think you're delving to deep into details the game neither covers nor cares about (the specific forms of spirituality & practice) and also making assumptions about what forms that takes (self sacrifice).

The main difference between the two would be the council/ruling body would select a leader from amongst themselves (oligarchy) and the republic would have some manner of larger pool of voters and candidates, representing everyone involved in spiritual pursuits (which depending on the culture, would vary from clergy, to spiritual seekers to the whole population. Whatever). The details of those differences are best left to the individual player's head and how they want to RP it (or not).

There are thousands of belief systems, practices and hierarchies and bureaucracies attached to spirituality, and even more to religion, so diving into the nitty gritty details is really on a level that stellaris doesn't get into.

Well, not having some factual data about how Paradox envisions a spiritual form of government, speculation is the only thing that we have at the moment. But while spiritual governments are vaguely defined for now, this is not true for the other form of governments, where the important peculiarities seem to be ready for the final version of the game. What I want to do is to acknowledge this difference and maybe knowing the reasons why they are as they are 10 days before launch. Personally I find this strange, but maybe it's just me.

Delving is the nitty gritty detail of everything is not my purpose here, I'm just asking questions: personally, I don't think Inquisitor fit the theme of the spiritual Oligarchy, so I was exploring other possibilities.

 

[pasglop]

Hello everyone,


2) Do you think "Inquisitor" is the appropriate title for the ruler of a Theocratic Oligarchy? Again, we know very little about the kind of oligarchy we are talking about (and how Paradox pictures it): it will be like the Covenant in Halo? It will be more like the Grey Council of the Minbari from Babylon 5? Do you think the title of "Archbishop" is more apt for a Theocratic Oligarchy? A sort of spiritual overseer with the right to interfere with the secular matter of the ruler below him/her? Would be Patriarch/Matriarch more acceptable?

TL;DR, but on this question, I agree with you. maybe High Inquisitor, in the sense that some sort of Inquisition is in charge, or maybe an Exarch? that's a pretty title: "Scallophead, Exarch of the Holy Seashell Worlds" or something along those lines

 

[Solicitius]

For theocratic republic, personally I imagine it being rather similar to a usual representative democracy. However, the key difference is that each constituency is not based on geographic locations, but rather local churches or similar religious organisations. I think it is most likely that each of these churches have their followers vote for a leader among the priest class, who have both a spiritual and secular duty as the churches probably also double as a government hierarchy that tend to the daily needs of the citizenry. It is likely that these elected priests will then go onto generating a governing body and the leader, not unlike Papal elections but obviously occur much more often and regularly.

Interesting picture: I admit that when I think about papal elections I think about oligarchy more than republic, but with your implement of "number of followers" as elective criteria it would work fairly well. Still, I'm a little undecided about a believable bonus for a Theocratic republic and also how it could evolve in a more advanced form of government....

 

[Solicitius]

TL;DR, but on this question, I agree with you. maybe High Inquisitor, in the sense that some sort of Inquisition is in charge, or maybe an Exarch? that's a pretty title: "Scallophead, Exarch of the Holy Seashell Worlds" or something along those lines

Well, Exarch hystorically were military leader (in Byzantine Empire) and than deputies of patriarchs in Eastern christianity... so at this point I would suggest and recognize Patriarch/Matriarch as a more palatable title for the ruler of an Spiritual Oligarchy (Lama and Sifu are possible alternatives, but I think a little more vague in this case).

 

[TheBeautifulVoid2]

Interesting picture: I admit that when I think about papal elections I think about oligarchy more than republic, but with your implement of "number of followers" as elective criteria it would work fairly well. Still, I'm a little undecided about a believable bonus for a Theocratic republic and also how it could evolve in a more advanced form of government....

Theocracy and democracy intersect in different ways in different modern-day societies.

In South Africa the various churches are extremely powerful politically, and are able to rally immense amounts of voters to one candidate or another. This is often used for power-brokerage. (I'm told that the same is true in America.)

In Iran, there's a democratically elected president but a council of senior priests has an effective veto over a lot of policy.

In Israel, many of the parties identify explicitly with various Jewish religious sects, and often try to push legislation which either helps their sect or enforces its morality onto society at large.

 

[TheDarkMaster]

As far as the game itself is concerned, the only difference between the two governments is that one has elections every 20 years using only governors as candidates and the other every 5 years with random characters and faction leaders as candidates.

This feels a bit underwhelming and I hope that it gets changed.

As for the discussion, I believe that the oligarchy is closer to what real earth examples are being posted while a republic would have something like a religious constitution and have the head of state be also the head of the church. People elect who they want to be that ruler, but only those that follow the true faith have the right to vote and all laws must be made in accordance with the true faith's teachings.

 

[Solicitius]

Theocracy and democracy intersect in different ways in different modern-day societies.

In South Africa the various churches are extremely powerful politically, and are able to rally immense amounts of voters to one candidate or another. This is often used for power-brokerage. (I'm told that the same is true in America.)

In Iran, there's a democratically elected president but a council of senior priests has an effective veto over a lot of policy.

In Israel, many of the parties identify explicitly with various Jewish religious sects, and often try to push legislation which either helps their sect or enforces its morality onto society at large.

Yes, all true.

But spiritualism strictly speaking isn't a church or the organizations of its priests. Spiritualism comes before the temples (technicality, I know overshadowed more often than not). My question would be, how a spiritualist form of government could evolve from one form to the others (especially a Theocratic Republic)? Achieving a more complex form for the ruling caste seems... counterintuitive: in all of the other form of advanced government, the step goes for a simpler, more direct approach.
Prophet -> God Emperor

With an Archbishop/ Patriarch-Matriarch a possible evolution could be "Saint" or "Holy Mother/Father"

For a Theocratic Republic, I'm all out of ideas and interpretations...

 

[Milten]

We also know that psionics will be one possible focus of spiritualist form of government

It's more of an ethos thing actually, nothing stops Indirect Democrasy from developing same tech if they are just as spiritual.

Do you think "Inquisitor" is the appropriate title for the ruler of a Theocratic Oligarchy?

PD is trying to avoid direct religion stuff for spiritualists. Inquisitor despite common associations is actually neutral enough

Word Origin and History for inquisitor Expand
n.
c.1400, from Old French inquisiteur (c.1400) or directly from Latin inquisitor "searcher, examiner," ....

so PD probably just liked the sound of it more than other options.

Also, Theocratic Republic and Oligarchy share the same bonus, which is kind of strange considering how different they are in practice.

I still feel like I'm missing something myself. Oligarchy gives more room for experience growth, and it doesn't have EU4 "stuck with 0/1/0" problem because we can influence election. So right now I don't see any point where TD is better than TO.

 

[Solicitius]

As far as the game itself is concerned, the only difference between the two governments is that one has elections every 20 years using only governors as candidates and the other every 5 years with random characters and faction leaders as candidates.

This feels a bit underwhelming and I hope that it gets changed.

As for the discussion, I believe that the oligarchy is closer to what real earth examples are being posted while a republic would have something like a religious constitution and have the head of state be also the head of the church. People elect who they want to be that ruler, but only those that follow the true faith have the right to vote and all laws must be made in accordance with the true faith's teachings.

I've noticed this too, and I really hope it will be changed: after all, why choose a Theocratic Republic, if you don't have any advantage over the Oligarchy?
I really hope it's just a matter of too little information until now to update the wiki...

 

[Jarac Rassen]

I actually plan on my first species being under a Theocratic Oligarchy or Theocratic Republic. The hard part is that it's obvious that these two have either not been fleshed out or the wiki hasn't been updated. There's no way these two have the same effects. Especially since every government gets something different. They don't even have descriptions and the Theocratic Republic doesn't even have a leader title!

I like the title of Inquisitor, but I would change it to something like the Grand or High Inquisitor. Not sure what the Theocratic Republic's leader would be. Maybe Exalt? High Priest? Grand Cleric?

 

[Reno Lam]

Interesting picture: I admit that when I think about papal elections I think about oligarchy more than republic, but with your implement of "number of followers" as elective criteria it would work fairly well. Still, I'm a little undecided about a believable bonus for a Theocratic republic and also how it could evolve in a more advanced form of government....

That is because the Papacy is an oligarchy: the Pope is elected for life, and all electors are appointed by a small group of people with no input from the vast majority of believers. For the more democratic model I envisioned, at the very least all believers - at least ones officially affiliated with one of the recognised churches, not unlike how US citizens have a "home state" for electoral purposes - will be able to vote for someone, such as the local leader(ship) of their own church, and probably on a regular basis like usual democracies. Outside that, whether they can also directly vote for the ruling body and/or the leader, or if their elected priests do that for them probably will differ depending on how you want to roleplay it.

 

[Solicitius]

It's more of an ethos thing actually, nothing stops Indirect Democrasy from developing same tech if they are just as spiritual.

It has been also confirmed that non spiritualist factions can research psionics: a scientist with a "spiritualist" trait is needed for it to happen, though.

PD is trying to avoid direct religion stuff for spiritualists. Inquisitor despite common associations is actually neutral enough

so PD probably just liked the sound of it more than other options.

Well... I respectfully disagree about it: we joke and jest about the inquisition 1000 year later, but it was a bloody affair at the time. Being an Inquisitor I believe had more in common with brutal interrogations, PTSD and zealotry, than with spiritual enlightment.
I'm not sure it would fit with a spiritual government: not in the "government" part of it. The hystorical inquisition was the military arm of a faith, with the purpose of not simply killing opposing factions and creeds, but to murders ideas, convictions and belief.
We saw what kind of aberrations spawned from it.

I still feel like I'm missing something myself. Oligarchy gives more room for experience growth, and it doesn't have EU4 "stuck with 0/1/0" problem because we can influence election. So right now I don't see any point where TD is better than TO.

I believe it's a matter of too few information. For now, at least (and again I find it strange, considering it's the only form of government we know so little about it)

 

[Surimi]

1) Generally, I maintain my previous opinion that the spiritualist governments look extremely powerful if you want to keep a high-population empire stable or ensure that a particular ethos remains dominant in the population (for example, if you rely heavily on slavery you probably don't want your slaves to drift towards being individualists). I believe my first playthrough will be a slavery-oriented divine mandate for this reason.

However, I can increasingly see drawbacks to this. In particular, it seems like it will be very easy for a giant, blobbed out spiritualist empire to fall behind in tech due to the number of pops slowing down tech speed, while a smaller, highly efficient empire can tech ahead very fast and become the high-tech strikeforce within a powerful federation. In short, the advantages of spiritualist seem to suit the way I like to play grand strategy games, but I don't have many concerns about them being overpowered any more.

2) Inquisitor sounds fine to me. The general theme of spiritualism seems to be both religion and a more general ethos of mind over matter, an inquisitor is a person responsible for.. well.. uncovering the truth of people's thoughts and judging them, they therefore work well as the questionably benevolent possibly religious or possibly not guardian overseeing the masses for the greater good. Oligarchies are not democracies, so there is always likely to be something quite paternalistic and authoritarian about them, even the peaceful bureaucracy ("a gram is better than a damn!")

3) Theocratic republic could be a whole range of things. Possibly something like the Iranian "guardianship" system where you have an elected lower house and then one or more upper houses composed of religious or spiritual leaders, or maybe only religious leaders are allowed to run for office. It seems like the vagueness is deliberate, and you can kind of put whatever spin on it you think is most appropriate.

4) I think the current system works fine. You're missing out on a few bonuses from having ethically diverse pops, as well as the very powerful bonuses other governments give, in exchange for more stability. That seems a reasonable plus/minus situation already for me, no need for additional features.

 

[Milten]

It has been also confirmed that non spiritualist factions can research psionics: a scientist with a "spiritualist" trait is needed for it to happen, though.

Uhm, did I say something different? Or you suggest that Theocracies influence traits more than Spiritualist ethos?

it's the only form of government we know so little about it

Well, Enlightened Monarchy is not far from it. But it's not on my playthrough plans right now, so I don't really care personally.

 

[Jarac Rassen]

I mean, I can see a Theocratic Republic working like how a few Protestant churches here in the US works. When a Pastor decides to step down or passes away, the congregation can vote on who is to replace him/her.

In this case, the believers, through their churches, temples, etc. vote on the head of their government. Usually this person will come from the priesthood (but also has a great knowledge of the government and its fubctions) and will serve as the leader until their term is up (5-10 years?), instead of life.

Just speculating right now.

 

[Solicitius]

More about the Inquisitor title (which isn't really the focus here, but it's food for thoughts):
In May 15th 1252, Pope Innocent IV published "Ad Extirpanda" a papal bull which limited the use of tortures in interrogation of suspects of heresy (before it was a free for all).
Even then, "Ad Extirpanda" prohibited methods of tortures:
- that caused the loss of limbs and put the suspect in mortal peril
- that were used more than once (often separated in two different interrogations)
- when the Inquisitor was virtually certain of the guiltiness of the suspect.

So basically, everything from fire, quicklime, whips, cords and removal of lesser parts of the body (teeth, nails, skin... eyes), was fair game... and if the Inquisitor was convinced that you were guilty, even without a confession, you were food for worms. Yeah... I don't think being an Inquisitor was such a good job for a spiritual seeker.

 

[barny]

And that's it.

Personally, I find a little strange that we know so little about spiritualist governments

Uhm...didn't we had the exact same thread like two days or so ago?

BTW: That info might very well be outdated. I presume it comes from the wiki, that in turn has its informations from the first Blorg stream and the old video with quill18 I think and those were months ago.