Why is the Corporate Dominion civic bound to egalitarian?

[The Founder]

It's really not a big deal as I'll probably mod this out but I'm curious to know the reasoning. I understand oligarchy as a requirement but unmodded, I can't create a mega Corp with wage slaves.

To be a Mega Corp with wage slaves, just make a Authoritarian Empire that is the Corporation.

Asuming this is the one we are talking about:
Corporate Dominion
*+10% Energy Credits
*Egalitarian, Oligarchic Authority

The things is that Energy was always a thing of Individualist/Egalitarian/Capitalist market:
Up to 1.4 they were the ones with teh Galactic Stock Exchange, Private Colony Ship and Hyper Entertainment Forum. All things that cost or produce a ton of Energy.
On top of the Pop modifiers, wich were a bit less consistent but generally tended to increase Energy production.

Either Authoritarian has another way to add a Energy Credit income bonus.
Or they can not get a Energy Credits income bonus on top of thier Mineral Income Bonus (from Slavery and lower living standarts even for free ones).

 

[nweismuller]

To be a Mega Corp with wage slaves, just make a Authoritarian Empire that is the Corporation.

I'd probably be more inclined to Dictatorship than Imperial authority for that case, but yes.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

To be a Mega Corp with wage slaves, just make a Authoritarian Empire that is the Corporation.

That's my point - you can't do this as authoritarian is opposed to egalitarian, so you can't do this.

 

[The Founder]

That's my point - you can't do this as authoritarian is opposed to egalitarian, so you can't do this.

You seem to be stuck on needing the "Corporate Dominion" Civic, to be a Corporate Dominion.
Rather then just being the "Zan'Muhr Corporate Council" as Empire name.

Corporate Dominion as a Civic has the effect of "+10% Energy Credits".
Adding such a buff to Authoritarian, would be a huge balance problem. They already get increased Mineral Income, both from Slaves and lower living standarts for the 'free' pops.

As was true with Invidiualist, Collectivist and Materialist a lot of people will put way to much weight on the name of something. As opposed to the description and it's effects.

 

[Cat_Fuzz]

You seem to be stuck on needing the "Corporate Dominion" Civic, to be a Corporate Dominion.
Rather then just being the "Zan'Muhr Corporate Council" as Empire name.

Corporate Dominion as a Civic has the effect of "+10% Energy Credits".
Adding such a buff to Authoritarian, would be a huge balance problem. They already get increased Mineral Income, both from Slaves and lower living standarts for the 'free' pops.

As was true with Invidiualist, Collectivist and Materialist a lot of people will put way to much weight on the name of something. As opposed to the description and it's effects.

I'm guessing you're not one for role playing then

But I guess I see your point - think I misunderstood your initial post. However as I mentioned previously I'll likely just mod it out as it's going to be as easy as removing one line of code.

Mainly was curious to see if others agreed whether it needed to be bound to ethics.

 

[cverghost]

It makes sense if we're talking about progressive or liberal globalism. But yeah unfortunately it's not possible to have a corporate autocracy purely through ethics. And Egalitarianism isn't exactly a perfect opposition to authoritarianism since communists are both authoritarian and egalitarian.

 

[-Marauder-]

It makes sense if we're talking about progressive or liberal globalism. But yeah unfortunately it's not possible to have a corporate autocracy purely through ethics. And Egalitarianism isn't exactly a perfect opposition to authoritarianism since communists are both authoritarian and egalitarian.

One of the issues of using "Egalitarian" as Antonym of Authoritan. Which by no definition you can find it is mentioned as such. Heck many "Egalitarian" societies tried to enforce it at the end of a gun turning extremely Authoritan in the process.

 

[Avian Overlord]

I think "Not-Authoritarian" would make more sense. In order to have meaningful corporations/free markets you need a large private sector outside of direct government control, protection of property rights, and a non-arbitrary method of contract enforcement/resolution. Governments with the Authoritarian ethic are unlikely to have those.

However, from a gameplay perspective, I can see the benefit of giving Egalitarian Oligarchies something special, and this probably fits best.

 

[Avian Overlord]

I think "Not-Authoritarian" would make more sense. In order to have meaningful corporations/free markets you need a large private sector outside of direct government control, protection of property rights, and a non-arbitrary method of contract enforcement/resolution. Governments with the Authoritarian ethic are unlikely to have those.

However, from a gameplay perspective, I can see the benefit of giving Egalitarian Oligarchies something special, and this probably fits best.

 

[-Marauder-]

I think "Not-Authoritarian" would make more sense. In order to have meaningful corporations/free markets you need a large private sector outside of direct government control, protection of property rights, and a non-arbitrary method of contract enforcement/resolution. Governments with the Authoritarian ethic are unlikely to have those.

Not necessarily, look at China. Authoritan does not mean no property rights, hell looking at China even supposedly being Communist does not mean this. Large companies flourished even in countries such as the Third Reich as they were given far reaching control over their workers and even funneled "slave workers" to boost their production.

People look at countries like Venezuela and assume all of them have central planning because they are Authoritan, this is simply not true. Quite often the large corporations are pretty much in bed with the ones in power. A lot of them tend to praise China and certain other authoritan governments because it is easy for them to get the papers they need and do things on the quick.

 

[Avian Overlord]

Not necessarily, look at China. Authoritan does not mean no property rights, hell looking at China even supposedly being Communist does not mean this. Large companies flourished even in countries such as the Third Reich as they were given far reaching control over their workers and even funneled "slave workers" to boost their production

Nazi Germany's companies were allowed to exist as a matter of convenience. The state set their polices and they were intended to be shut down and nationalized after the war. And a look at their efficiency should dispel the idea that private enterprise flourished under the Nazi regime.

People look at countries like Venezuela and assume all of them have central planning because they are Authoritan, this is simply not true. Quite often the large corporations are pretty much in bed with the ones in power. A lot of them tend to praise China and certain other authoritan governments because it is easy for them to get the papers they need and do things on the quick.

Stellaris's definition of authoritarian is slightly odd. It's associated with dictatorship, but you can be a dictatorship without having it. This means that the authoritarian ethic represents a level of state control beyond "normal" dictatorship, which points to totalitarian regimes which seek to put the economy and civil society under direct state control. I would represent regimes such as post-reform China in Stellaris as a dictatorship or oligarchy neutral on the Auth-Egal axis.

 

[eon47]

Probably because Authoritarians tend to screw up the Corporates (as their word is law and they can do whatever they please), whereas Democracies and Oligarchies are easier to influence by the corporations. If an Autocracy tried to have such a system, either the Autocrat would eventually crush them to get their riches, or if a capitalist is the autocrat, he would transform himself into an Imperialist and just crush the other Corporates.

Not necessarily. As has already been mentioned, corporations played a major role in Nazi Germany. An even better example is Imperial Japan. The zaibatsu--a tiny number of large, frequently family-owned corporations--held extreme power and influence in the empire.

 

[Zavaleta]

Nazi Germany's companies were allowed to exist as a matter of convenience. The state set their polices and they were intended to be shut down and nationalized after the war. And a look at their efficiency should dispel the idea that private enterprise flourished under the Nazi regime.

Fascism was explicitly about supporting corporate power through state backing. Mussolini made the merging of state and corporate power the cornerstone of his political theory of fascism. It seems silly that corporate dominion should be excluded for authoritarian empires. Stellaris' model is that dictatorship is possible in a society where authoritarian values are not the norm. Ethics in Stellaris are about the social values and norms of a society, whereas authority and civics determine the type of government.

 

[Rip Off Productions]

I think "Not-Authoritarian" would make more sense.

I think the word you're looking for is "Libertarian", I'm honestly surprised that PDX didn't use that for the name change.

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

Or they can not get a Energy Credits income bonus on top of thier Mineral Income Bonus (from Slavery and lower living standarts even for free ones).

Basically the post I was going to make. Mechanics and game balance come first, flavor comes second. I'm sorry if this means your recreation of Fascist Italy will have energy merchants that are less successful than the freer operating egalitarian oligarchy across the nebulae, but that doesn't exactly strain believability. And you can dry your eyes with all those extra minerals your wage slaves are pumping out.

 

[Avian Overlord]

I think the word you're looking for is "Libertarian", I'm honestly surprised that PDX didn't use that for the name change.

I meant the state of not having the authoritarian ethic, rather than having the opposite of authoritarian (which is what the requirement is currently.)

As for libertarian/egalitarian I think it's important to remember that Paradox are from Sweden, a country which has the "Free Market" and "Welfare State" metaphorical sliders both cranked up to full. It's not unreasonable to assume they decided to join those concepts together in one ethic, given the broad nature of Stellaris ethics.

Not necessarily. As has already been mentioned, corporations played a major role in Nazi Germany. An even better example is Imperial Japan. The zaibatsu--a tiny number of large, frequently family-owned corporations--held extreme power and influence in the empire.

"The race does not exist for the economy ... but finance and economy, economic theories and leaders have to serve exclusively our people's struggle for existence." - Adolf Hitler

"I shall not show weakness in placing the interests of the Volk above the interests of indivudal businesses." - Hermann Goering
A corporate dominated state Nazi Germany was decidedly not. Absolute state control requires the economy to serve the state not the profit seeking Corporate Dominion represents.

 

[Sheriff Godwin Law]

"The race does not exist for the economy ... but finance and economy, economic theories and leaders have to serve exclusively our people's struggle for existence." - Adolf Hitler

"I shall not show weakness in placing the interests of the Volk above the interests of indivudal businesses." - Hermann Goering
A corporate dominated state Nazi Germany was decidedly not. Absolute state control requires the economy to serve the state not the profit seeking Corporate Dominion represents.

"Mission Accomplished" George W Bush.

"We will seek no wider war." Lyndon Johnson just before escalating the war in Vietnam.

"Read my lips, no new taxes." George Bush, two years before passing into law 42 new taxes.

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Bill Clinton, before the DNA test came back.

"The ladies love me because I have a two foot long shlong, and can go at it for 50 hours straight, baby!" Kim Jong-Un

"Under socialism all will govern in turn and will soon become accustomed to no one governing." Vladmir Lenin.

Words are wind. Especially the words uttered by Hitler and Goering while they were still feuding with famed German industrialist Hindenberg.

 

[ringhloth]

But what if your baseline class are so poor that they effectively become assets? At that point you're talking slavery, buying and selling the best tool to complete the tasks at hand. The elite stay at the top and use wealth and influence to keep it that way. That sounds pretty authoritarian.

Some wages are still better than being a chattel slave.

 

[Zavaleta]

Reading some of these comments we should probably go over the basics of what actually is a corporation. Corporations exert a lot of political and cultural influence in the contemporary world, misleading people's basic conceptions, like believing corporations are libertarian. It has gotten to the ridiculous point where in the US corporations are considered rights bearing persons.

At the most basic, corporations are legally recognized business associations dedicated to making a profit. Corporations can be organized in very different ways, from a rigid hierarchy to an egalitarian commune. There exist both rightwing and leftwing theories of corporate power: from fascism, to liberalism, to anarchical syndicalism. The origins of modern corporations were merchant charters, signed by the sovereign king, to make a profit in some part of the world by exploration, conquest, pillaging, or slavery. Whatever the case, the basic proposition is an association of people dedicated to making a profit. That is why commentators are suggesting that limiting Corporate Domain civic to materialist empires makes the most sense.

I agree that game balance trumps these concerns. Edit: but maybe renaming the Civic to something else with the same +10% energy would be appropriate.

 

[-Marauder-]

The issue here is once again the Authoritan - Egalitarian axis. Ignoring how those two are not antonyms by any means and are never mentioned to be as often they even come together. What is attributed to them feels "odd".

A "corporation" innherently is not egalitarian unless it is owned by the employes themselves. It has a very clear top down hierarchy and command structures and while people up to a certain rank might be promoted on merit at the top you often find people with connection, those who own the company etc. It simply does not fit.