Intergalactic Summit

Tribal Traditionalism can best be defined as communal living where the group strives to better the community and where the cult of personality is not tolerated. People are held to standards that, in a democratic society, would be less then tolerable. For example if a politician in a democratic society was to take a bribe or act in such a way as to disgrace his or her post it is perfectly acceptable to use and excuse such as "I am only Human". This person would most likely suffer a fine, removal from office and perhaps imprisonment. However in a Tribal community these same acts would be a betrayal to the very community and one would suffer perhaps the ultimate punishment. Discipline is perhaps the most valued asset in a Tribal society, and is instilled children from childhood, where anyone and everyone in that community is not only encouraged to discipline children for their infractions but it is also expected, whats more it is expected that children will submit themselves to the punishment of their community. This of course is perhaps one of the best examples of the differences between a Tribal community and a democratic one where a person within a democratic society asks "who are you to judge my way of life and why should I answer to you?" and in a tribal society we ask "Who am I to renounce the judgement of my people and what can I do to remain in their favor?

Our way of life is the absence of self, replaced with the sense of "for the greater good", we strive to better our people, and while it can be said that there are of course those in democratic societies that want for nothing more then to better humanity those people always seem to have an agenda. They wish to feed , cloth and nurture children in "Gods" name. They wish to change tax codes and reduce the the strain on the lower classes at the expense of the upper classes for reasons that usually seem to stem from those same peoples lack of joining the upper class. They wish to cherish and celebrate the societies of others, usually to either mock that societies "backwardness" or out of fear of a mightier Empire whom they wish to appease. In a Tribal Society if we feed, nurture and cloth a child it is because we do this out of duty not only to that child's own well being but because it is in our own good. If we change economic tactics it is because we have found the ones we have lacking to the overall health of our society and if we celebrate another society it is because they have earned our respect as either beloved allies or dangerous foes

In the Republic, as in the Federation, power blocks are created usually on a census basis where a district which has a larger population has a larger say in the affairs of the much larger community. In theory this is actually an admirable practice yet this same practice only ever actually encourages outsiders to migrate from district to district like a tumble weed on the wind, going where the wind is blowing at any given moment without regard to ever investing in the community. One example of this would be where industrial complexes will put down roots in a district that offers tax incentives to do so but then pull up roots when a better deal comes along. However in the Traditionalist held planets we weather the storms, stay put and come out the stronger because we have stuck by our communities and they have stuck by the company. I ill say that Tibus Heath could not have come into power in a Tribal Society because the treatment he received that inspired him would not have been tolerated by the community itself

In the final analyses the reason these two types of societies cannot co-exist is general vocabulary. In a Democratic society there is only "I" and "Me" where as in a Tribal society there is "We" and "Us". This is not a thing to be feared as so many in New Eden believe. We are not Sansha's Nation, mindless drones to a unified will. We are not enemies of the Federation who want a communal living with a small few doing the work whilst all others live in a welfare state and we are not the heretics the Amarrians believe us to be, set on destroying your churches and burning your holy tomes. We are simply people who live for our community, to serve, protect and to uphold the institutions of our ancestors.

Yes slaver, I did in fact say cults of personality are not tolerated. If you would like to refute that then please give us some facts rather then two very obscure and meaningless sentences in which you prove once more that those of your ilk will rage against anything and everything, even if they cannot formulate an actual argument.

I can agree with Verin. As a member of tribal culture and an advocate of tribal traditionalism, I know full well how things can and do go wrong. I've seen plenty of people let their hatred of anyone who isn't from the tribes consume them and turn them into monsters.

Its something we have to be constantly aware of. We need to see where our failings could arise from, so they can be dealt with before they become atrocities.

With respect, I think you're making a lot of assumptions about people's intentions within the Federal democratic system. It seems rather ludicrous that you spin the tribal traditionalism as the superior cultural form when nearly all other societies in New Eden have moved on to other forms of government. Other than the Minmatar, tribalism is seen as society at its most primitive level.

One mistake you make is the intentions of those in democratic societies (of which the Federation has hegemony over). Though there are plenty of those that undertake charitable endeavours for religious purposes, there is perhaps a slight majority that do so for humanistic reasons; ie. for its own sake. You make the scathing assumption that no one out of the trillions in the Federation undertake humanitarian activities do so out of duty and for everyone's good. This is fallacy. In the Federation, we have a unique activist culture that does not exist to the same extent anywhere else. Do you think university students really have much of an agenda, considering their primary activities is academic study?

You also forget that tribal traditionalism exists within the Federation as well, since its constitutional structure allows all forms of government so long as they allow for regular elections under universal suffrage. One third of this nation is Minmatar, after all, and even those who are Gallenteanized still undertake practices such as the Voluval. We are the most diverse empire in existence; you cannot make the assumptions you have made so easily. Billions of citizens in the Federation are motivated to work for the greater good for its own sake.

There are no cultural pressures to serve the whole in the Federation. If someone does so on their own accord, and with no clear material benefit to themselves (say, a nun or monk), then perhaps it is more sincere than in societies where it is expected of them?

Exactly this. I've seen it argued that the Caldari Megacorporations are just profit-driven(*) tribes and I can see no strong reason to disagree with that assessment. A tribe just means a united group bonded over some commonality, be it a shared philosophy, a banner, a family lineage, whatever. Tribalism isn't a government form, let alone a primitive one; it's how humans work. It's just that different tribes operate under different rules and call those rules things like "Democracy" or "Theocracy". Or "Ishukone", or "The Federal Democrat Party", or "The Church of the Divine guidance", or "The Ida"... you get the picture.

(*)I was going to say "meritocratic, profit-driven" but that's a word I tend to use as a virtue, and I don't want to imply that it's an exclusively Caldari virtue.

I agree, and in some ways, I feel that the situation is the opposite -- that democracy is incompatible with tribal philosophies.

Democracy inevitably ends up being a contest of popularity, where the most charismatic speaker wins the day. Whoever can 'politic' his or her way to the top will get the power. Mudslinging, attack campaigns, and political jousting are the order of the day.

Among my clan, there's a saying: 'Together for the good of all'. Out on the ice, in the near-constant snowstorms, refusing to offer aid to a traveller means leaving them to die. Survival depends on the bonds forged between clans and tribes, so the contest of charisma that a democracy becomes is detrimental to the tribe as a whole.

Wishy-washy nothing, I'm describing a known social phenomenon here. you can call them "tribes", "groups", "subcultures", "Social networks" or whatever you like. don't let a narrow interpretation of the word I chose to use block your ability to see what I'm trying to say.

Some tribes define themselves by ethnic group, yes. Others define themselves politically, or by what music they listen to, or what clothes they wear. The word "nation" refers only to a specific type of tribe. And it's possible to belong to belong to multiple tribes at once, provided that their membership criteria aren't incompatible.

So, I'm a Caldari, a Civire, a Liberal, an Ishukone citizen, a Gariushite, an Uuskyountoist, a capsuleer, and an industrialist. All "tribes" by the loose definition I'm using, but I'm quite able to be all of those things at once.

It is in the nature of the human species to attach ourselves to groups, which for the purposes of this argument I am calling tribes. The specific terminology really doesn't matter, what matters is that it's what we naturally do, and that any given person belongs to a complex matrix of groups, sub-groups and factions. This is basic human psychology - we're a gregarious, social species so we instinctively attach ourselves to these social structures, and can get really quite fanatically passionate about our membership, and how our tribal identities relate to another tribe.

The point I'm trying to make here is that in fact Tribalism is NOT incompatible with Democracy, because Democracy is just the framework of rules a particular "tribe" has chosen to use to regulate itself.

Whether or not Democracy is incompatible with the way the Minmatar want to do things, however, is a completely different discussion altogether, and if they're going to reject it in favour of a different system, then there needs to be a clear understanding of the upshots and downsides to all the systems they could use, and a definite reason why the system they have chosen instead is better for them than, say, Gallentean democracy, or State capitalist meritocracy.

I see a lot of talk here about being unpatriotic in my views and thus I would like to say that I am Thukker and thus have never been a socially approved member of the Republic, after all In the the Republic there is no penalty for Minmatar slaves being traded from stations in Barkrik for example, but there are penalties for openly engaging those slavers. The Thukker tribe has long been considered a "pirate" nation as if we had anything in common with the Cartel as was Ursha'Khan when Midular was president all because we would not stand for this political wrangling to placate those who said we should simply accept slavery as a common practice

And as to the argument that the Republic was a choice "we the tribes made" I think this is a very over romantic notion of history that never happened. Four tribes choose that form of society at gun point for all intents and purposes. Nefantar, Starkmanir and Thukker were never a party to this demand by the Federation to be more like them and in return be protected from Amarr. The Nefantar traitors, and yes no matter what the Diplomats tell me they are traitors, choose the Amarrian society, the Starkmanir choose nothing save to forget that they were themselves and the Thukker choose only to fight on for their people even if that meant that sometimes they must fight their own people. Make no mistake that had it not been for the Federations insistence on the current form of society in exchange for economic and military assistance it is not a form we would have chosen

Make no mistake, the Federation is the best friend the Tribes have ever had, and to those I have offended in that Nation I do apologize. If not for your endeavors our people would almost to the last man, woman and child be in bondage now. No one should ever discount that save to say that the Republic was the price we paid for friendship and your goals where less noble then they are now portrayed. In the time when the Federation was bolstering the Minmatar, lets not forget that Amarr was doing the same with the Caldari and we (the Minmatar and Caldari) were to be proxy nations that you used against one another to a avoid direct conflict reigniting that your nations had just ended. Also the reason you gave us the "gift of democracy" was less based on its benefits to our people but more because the one tribe you had in your borders, the Intaki, were bothersome and you didn't want another wild card in your midst

Finally to Elsebeth Rhiannon, I am very sorry to have offended you in anyway. I have the deepest respect for EM, and I proudly fly with them whenever possible. EM and UK are the pinnacle of what Matar should be, the night and day. I would simply say to you and yours , "your views are the Sun of Minmatar, and mine are the Moon."

Mm, I have watched this thread with some interest and it isa fascinating discussion. I want to thank the author for posting it.

My reason for commenting is to introduce the issue of the distinction between a Democracy and a Constitutional Republic and why that distinction is vital for the issue of tribal community within a larger society.

Tribalism is incompatible with pure democracy, true. However in a society where there are multiple tribal communities in cooperation for survival, a constitutional republic is probably the very best governmental solution, albeit not perfect.

A Republic and A Democracy are dissimilar forms of government.

Pure Democracy: Majority unlimited! In a democracy, majority rules is a sort of political omnipotence. The single man or woman or child, or groups of Individuals, tribes, communities, etc composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Minority.

Constitutional Republic: Majority limited! Control of the Majority strictly via constitution and separation of powers, primarily to protect The Individual’s unalienable rights and so by extension the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, is what distinguishes the Republic from the Democracy. The liberties of all people and people groups (societies within the broader society) are better protected in a Republic. A Republic is a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, controlled by a written Constitution. This constitution is changeable (from its original meaning) only by the people via representation and only by its amendment. Furthermore, the powers of government are divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial.

Tribalism is compatible with a well designed Constitutional Republic. The real question is, "is the Minmatar Republic designed in such a way to best protect the liberty of individuals and the tribal societies that compose it?"

Did you actually understand what my issue with your words was, or did you apologize simply because you saw the "Electus Matari" after my name?

Not that the latter would be unappreciated. Murientor's contributions to the defense of (yes) the Republic are somethinghas always made us value you as allies. But still wondering.