On Wednesday 2003-12-24 06:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
If we want 1MY mean life-spans, then 11% clients and 5% patrons might
provide for interesting but not grossly inequitble politics consistent
with existing sources on the Uplift Universe.
Uh?
I picked 11%
I got the 11%. I didn't get the provide for interesting but not grossly
inequitble politics consistent with existing sources on the Uplift
Universe.
because there will be some mortality among uplift projects.
With current medical technology the replacement birthrate is
something like 2.1 births per couple. 1.1 is a convenient
(if not totally convincing) replacement rate for the
population of O-2 species
Ok, but I am not (yet) worried about this precision :-)
My other point is that if there are X uplift minors and X uplifters then
the system is egalitarian. The Uplift Universe is *VERY* fair. Even if
there are 10 uplift projects for 9 uplifters the system is still pretty
darn fair. We get what economists would call a flat wealth curve. The
implication is that there is little class warfare -- most (almost all)
races are middle class and equal. It implies that even powerful clans,
like the Soro or Thennanin are not too powerful. Democratic and
egalitarian socio-political dynamics keep them in check.
This is bad for literature.
No - the system may be fair, but some clans might twist it a little
bit. So, most of the 200k races would be egalitarian, except a small
minority of powerful clans.
If there are 10 clients being uplifted then we need fewer than 10
patrons. If there are 2 or 3 patrons per 10 clients things are ripe for
revolution.
But then things would be quite unstable. Most of the lines would quickly
extinguish - at the fast rate of 50% to 66% each generation!
There are two sorts of instability.
One level of instability is at the level of the lineage. The other is the
stablity of the inter-species political order. Moderate or serious
disparities in wealth curves mean that a lot of lineages die out. Having
lineages die out is not necessarily a problem for Galactic political
stability. In real life lineages are usually short lived--even in lineage
oriented societies like the middle east or in Samoa. Political instability
results when MAJOR lines die out. When the King dies without issues you get
wars of succession.
With enough repression *very* repressive regimes can last a long time--but
usually dont. Moderately unfair regimes can be very stable, look at the
wealth curve for the USA.
4 to 6 to 10 and things are noticibly unfair, but we can claim there is
equal opportunity. Social Darwinism is good say Dr. Pangloss. 7 or 8
and we have some sort of dialectic between fair distribution and rewards
to cummulative advantage.
The wealth curves that involve 4 to 8 patrons per 10 clients probably
make for good story backgrounds.
But it is _very_ unstable. I claim that the rate should be quite close to
1 client : 1 patron, so that _most_ lines would be mantained for long
periods of time.
Lets talk in terms of total clients uplifted during a patron's main sequence
existence. In that case a replacement rate of one under total fairness gives
this histogram.
0| 1
1| 1
2| 1
3| 1
4| 1
5| 1
6| 1
7| 1
8| 1
9| 1
With a replacement rate of 1.1 total fairness gives:
0| 1
1| 1
2| 1
3| 1
4| 1
5| 1
6| 1
7| 1
8| 1
9| #2
If 10% of species don't want to uplift clients then we get a totally fair
system with:
0| .
1| 1
2| 1
3| 1
4| 1
5| 1
6| 1
7| 1
8| #2
9| #2
With 10% opting not to have clients, 10% prevented from having clients and
some minimal unfairness we might have
0| .
1| .
2| 1
3| 1
4| 1
5| 1
6| 1
7| 1
8| #2
9| ##3
This doesn't prevent a few lines to usurp clients from extinguished
lines, and growing at the expense of others. These expansionist
lines should be just a few, otherwise the system would be too
unstable.
Literature is saved: the famous fanatical races of the Canon are those
expansionist clans, eager to expand by taking Terra's 3 unfinished races.
No. I dont like it. You are saying that the system is so fair only the
powerful would want to change it.
(These ratios assume that patrons are assigned their clients all at once,
instead of finishing a project and starting the next Still you see my
point.)
I propose:
00| .
01| .
02| .
03| .
04| .
05| .
06| .
07| .
08| .
09| .
10| .
11| .
12| .
13| .
14| .
15| .
16| .
17| .
18| .
19| .
20| .
21| .
22| .
23| .
24| .
25| .
26| .
27| .
28| .
29| .
30| .
31| .
32| .
33| .
34| .
35| 1
36| 1
37| 1
38| 1
39| 1
40| 1
41| 1
42| 1
43| 1
44| 1
45| 1
46| 1
47| 1
48| 1
49| 1
50| 1
51| 1
52| 1
53| 1
54| 1
55| 1
56| 1
57| 1
58| 1
59| 1
60| 1
61| 1
62| 1
63| 1
64| 1
65| 1
66| 1
67| 1
68| 1
69| 1
70| 1
71| 1
72| 1
73| 1
74| 1
75| 1
76| 1
77| 1
78| 1
79| 1
80| #2
81| #2
82| #2
83| #2
84| #2
85| #2
86| #2
87| #2
88| #2
89| #2
90| ##3
91| ##3
92| ##3
93| ##3
94| ##3
95| ###4
96| ###4
