Why is space feudalism so much more common than space capitalism in TRPG settings?

Name five sci-fi TTRPG settings that lack "space capitalism."

>>95871626 (OP)
Depending on technological limits, it's often easier to imagine worlds as separate fiefdoms than as part of a cohesive whole.

>>95871626 (OP)
>Space feudalism
>Space capitalism

They're the same thing.

>>95871626 (OP)
Dune.

>>95871665
Battletech, Warhammer 40k, Dune, Traveller, Dragonstar, Fading Suns

>>95871626 (OP)
COLD: the air and water flowing
HARD: the land we call our home
PUSH to keep the dark from coming
FEEL the weight of what we owe

>>95871675
Battletech, 40k, Traveller and Dune all have space capitalism. I don't know the other two settings. Like yes those settings have feudal elements, but they also have capitalist elements.

>>95871686
You can't have feudalism and capitalism at the same time no more than you can have communism and capitalism.

>>95871690
>You can't have feudalism and capitalism at the same time
Explain why.

>>95871672
Feudalism is based on the divine hierarchy and relationship between men.
Capitalism is the enslavement of men to money.
They are the opposite.

>>95871690
>true space capitalism has never been tried
There are no pure states. All human groupings are mixed organizational and adhoc continuations.

>>95871719
oh nvm its bait.
7/10, almost had people excited to talk about space politics.

>>95871626 (OP)
Lack of FTL travel.

>>95871719
Bruh, explain to me how having a political leader with a special name and a special hat has anything to do with how it makes money?

>>95871711
If the entire society is the property of the king and managed by his vassals then it can't be the property of corporations or private interests.

>>95871738
Feudalism asks you to work your natural work for yourself and then work a set amount for your feudal lord for protection and the commonwealth.
Capitalism demands you make nothing but for your slave owner master and slave away for a wage.

>>95871746
Well then battletech has capitalism as almost every major power has private industries that aren't controlled by the monarchy.

>>95871746
This.
You can't be free (Feudal) and a slave (Capitalism or Socialism) at the same time

>>95871763
They absolutely are controlled by the monarchy though. There is no private corporations, it's all just monarchs and their vassals.

>>95871763
Feudalism allows private ownership
Capitalism only allows bank controlled management of property owned by a small oligarchy

>>95871756
wait a minute...

>>95871768
>There is no private corporations
Someone would like a word anon.

>>95871729
I think this is the big thing. Dune simply has a secretive organisation in control of all the FTL, but basically if you don't have reliable FTL it's going to be really really difficult to have any kind of consistent enterprise on more than a planetary or system scale. It becomes easier to just make a planet a unit and devolve control on a planetary basis.

>>95871768
Should read the lore anon, there are multiple private companies, some that are from the 21st century such as General Motors.

>>95871792
>if there are space highways you MUST become a wage slave to the bankers
But why?

>>95871785
They're more of a church.

>>95871681
THIS: the song of sons and daughters,
HIDE the heart of who we are.
MAKING peace to build our future,
STRONG, UNITED, WORKING till we fall.

>>95871802
>oh gooooooood oh my gooooood help me HELP ME I'm improving my quality of lie and the efficiency of the economy NOOOOOOOOooooooo save me niggerman SAVE ME

>>95871626 (OP)
Noble houses in space are cool and many Sci-Fi settings (or rather, Sciene Fantasy) like 40k or Star Wars pretty much run on a "fantasy world but with space ships" logic. So you got space knights like 40ks Space Marines, Space Princesses like Leia from Star Wars and so on and so forth.

>>95871827
Peasants only had to work 150 days a year tbf.

>>95871756
Next thing you'll do is pull out the "serfs had more days off then today's wage slaves!."

>>95871626 (OP)

Because, logically, a future society that has expanded accross the star will look nothing like ours. Just think of a society capable of ruling over several trillions or quadrillions of individuals as a single entity, a society that would dwarf our own just like a modern superpowers dwarf an isolated tribe lost in the Amazon. Feudalism just happens to be alien enough to us to divorce it from modernity.

>>95871854
>a future society that has expanded accross the star will look nothing like ours
Okay but that doesn't make it logical that a future society would look like what we had 1,000 years ago.

>>95871827
>I'm improving my quality of lie
Which is why I need an ad blocker.

>>95871626 (OP)
Because modern ultra rich are already essentially a noble class with a little more social mobility, so exaggerating it into the far future, it isnt a far stretch to go all the way and have nobles return.

Space capitalism is just colonialism by corporations. Corporations are basically the political and economic power over whole planets/colonies.

>>95871827
>I'm improving my quality of life
All evidence is showing wageslaving makes your quality of life worse.
Technology is not tied to bankers wealth.

>>95871868
The wealthy are always a form of nobility. How brazen or how much they pretend not to be is just how convenient it is.

>>95871841
No I was going to say Yeoman are proof you can be free under feudalism but there is no equal under wageslavery.

>>95871878
Not really, almost never see a corporate-type government in charge of anything in these settings, it's always a monarchy.

>>95871868
This.
Capitalism is a more brutal slave based relationship where a small banker class are like kings with no responsibility where Feudalism was a well oiled machine designed to protect the nation

>>95871896
You see it in dystopians, in Escapism fantasy you don't want to be a slave(wage) in space and return to tradition so people naturally want Jedi Princes and the like

>>95871906
You don't even see it in dystopians, Battletech and Warhammer 40k and Dune all use monarchy instead of corporate governance.

>>95871666
Nice trips bro.
But yeah, the harder the SF, the more difficult it is to travel / communicate between colonies. This biases toward small fiefdoms within the "dark forest". Mainly space-Jews do the trade; alliances form within a common understanding of space ethics.
HRE vibes.

>>95871911
Aren't all those more escapism than dystopian?
>Don't you want to be a mecha pilot in space?
>Don't you want to buy figurines and have funny orks
>Don't you want to be Luke Skywalker on Tatooine?

>>95871860
Battletech for the most part really doesn't, at the surface it does but as mentioned multiple states have free markets, most planets are democratic and in the case of the FWL they have basically every form of government or economics. Not to mention the clans which can be argued to be closer to fascism(the Mussolini kind).

>>95871626 (OP)
Space Lords fighting for territory and kingship and petty squabbles is far easier to write than some corpo fuckery. You dont really need to explain why Lord Dickface mobilises his household-fleet to attack the Azure Nebula. He just does because he is a noble dickhead with ideas of grandure. You need a bit more thought as to why Space CEO would pull of grand campaigns with his space Corpo Military (unless its lmao resources)

>>95871841
Lovely Dune reimagining. Telescopic melee weapons are an interesting hi-tech/lo-tech combo that actually fits for Dune.

Feudalism is something of a historical construct. It is more accurate to say "Vassalage". Why? Because not all relationships in the middle ages worked around that sort of relationship, especially the "feud" (land) part. It was not an organized clockwork organization that you could easily track. It was a bunch of contracts from lord to liege that were independent from each other. Not all of them were related to land ownership or manoralism, or lease, nor all vassals (even with the same rank) had the same obligations. Also, not everyone needed to provide manpowers, some only had to provide money or legal advice.

>>95871924
Dune? No.
It was one part 1960s environmentalism, one part Cold War/OPEC energy crisis, one part deconstructing the hero's journey.

>>95871746
>>95871756
Anons, Feudalism fundamentally is a system in which state rights and functions have become private licenses that can be freely owned by and traded between individuals.

The ruling class are the private holders of state rights rather than the class that controls the means of production.

>>95871959
Except overwhelmingly the style of capitalist governance over the economy takes the form of corporate structures, not monarchist ones.

>>95871954
I'm not sure if any European country ever had any properly formalized feudal system either where the hierarchies and chains of command would have been clearly laid out. Depending on the feudal contract, some random baron could be above a duke in court's pecking order.

>>95871882
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the medieval/modern transition. Merchants and nobility had a lot of crossover, but they began distinctly and the era put a lot of effort into calling them different social classes.

>>95871802
Dune explains why. Bankers are seen as nobility in the modern age because they control the distribution of a key energy system (finance; compared to oil in Dune and land in the medieval age). When you can do low risk low effort arbitrage on a key energy supply you're a ruler no matter what you or what other people say you are. You'd have to go to extreme martyrdom-tier moral hijinks not to be.

Businesses count quarters. Democracies count elections. Dynasties count lifetimes.

>>95871841
>Next thing you'll do is pull out the "serfs had more days off then today's wage slaves!”
… Did they?

>>95871979
>>95871954

This also opens the door to bickering among nobles of different ranks over who outranks whom. A sign of a society becoming more centralized and organized is the increasing formalization of such ranks and court etiquette, leaving less room for disputes.

>>95871987
What is this transition suppose to mean in the grand scheme of things? They have access to the levers of power either in the form of direct control (able to directly wield violence in the form of military power) or in influence over those in charge.

How much they care to play a specific societal role or not flaunt their power is just a matter of how much of a headache it would be to deal with the backlash

>>95872014
I don't know, I'm not some tradcath monarchist trying to defend the system.

>>95872079
I've never heard anyone try and use that line to defend feudalism. It's always "Do you remember when people had pensions? When retirement or home ownership were things everyone had access to? Those were the days" bitching about late-stage capitalism. If a fucking serf has more free time than you do, things have gotten dire.

>>95872002
That's not always a good. One of the reasons monarchy has had such trouble in the modern age is because it struggles to establish itself, while a corporation that falls is replaced by another one by the end of the month.

>>95872014
It's one of those things cited without context. Like if you're relying on farming for survival do you really think you're spending any of those church mandated days off not working on the farm or preserving food for the winter?

>offspring genefixed to be perfect benevolent monarchs
>bankers genefixed to be perfect benevolent industrialists
Which would you rather have /tg/?

>>95872109
>>95872027

Technically, pre-industrial workers often had more flexible time than early industrial factory workers. This allowed them to attend to essential household tasks like repairs and renovations—especially hourly laborers who might skip work occasionally (notoriously on 'Saint Monday'). Employers often provided lunch. Crucially, none of today's labor-saving devices existed; chores like laundry required immense manual effort. While their work was physically demanding, their schedules were generally less rigidly controlled by the clock and their total hours were often lower than during the intensely regimented early Industrial era. "Free time" is a modern concept; their "non-work" time was often filled with vital subsistence tasks.

>>95872014

Their work was frequently task-oriented (finish plowing this field, make this item) or seasonal/dependent on daylight/weather, rather than fixed 9-to-5 hours. This could create pockets of time during the day, week, or year.

>>95871675
Every single one of those settings has economic systems in which private entities trade goods and services and invest in industry for the sake of their personal profit. That's all capitalism is.

>>95871764
>Feudalism
>not a slave

>>95871756
You are a dumb fucking nigger.

>Read ITT
From the creators of "Communism is when government does stuff", we roll out a new product, "Capitalism is when you make money". Also, don't miss out on our once-in-a-lifetime special, "Feudalism is when monarchy"

>>95872226
Real life is worse than idiocracy.

>>95871764
Ironically, this retard basically horseshoed Jeffersonianism to be pro-King again

>>95872202
Yeoman can exist under feudalism
Freemen can not exist under wageslavery

>live in a feudal monarchy
>accidentally make money selling a product
>collapse the state

>>95871896
Cyberpunk, Blade Runner, the Alien franchise, Total Recall, Starstruck, Blue Planet, SLA Industries, Eclipse Phase, to name a few where corporations hold political and economic power.

>>95872258
Most people under Feudalism were serfs, not Yeomen, you dumb troglodyte. Secondly, Yeomen could be manhandled like whores by their local lord.

>>95871626 (OP)
cool thing about capitalism is that it's the natural state of being and you can't escape it. If there are people exchanging goods and services at on a market where prices are set by supply and demand you have capitalism

It's just so damn more simple to explain the motivations of feudal Star Lord than the intricacies of an Interstellar Corporation or a Galactic Government Burau.

>>95872258
Even if we for a second imagine that your fantasy of yeoman utopia was real (it isn't), you fail to grasp the basic fact that so long as you'd live in a community, you'd be involuntarily bound by basic social codes of conduct. Not to mention that unless you were born as a first son, you'd basically become a chattel slave for your family and older brother to exploit.

>>95872304
Feudalism is far more natural than communism, people don't like serving corporations, because corporations are faceless, they prefer serving kings.

>>95872304
Roads lead to serfdom, we know.

>>95871626 (OP)
Feudalism and Capitalism are not mutually exclusive concepts.

>>95872319
>than the intricacies of an Interstellar Corporation
"Line goes up GOOD. Line goes down BAAD."

>>95872350
They more or less are, if you're giving the land to a government dynasty you're not giving it to private interests, if you're setting up an economy where power is passed on hereditarily you're not setting it up where power is purchased via shares.

>>95872341
feudalism and communism are entirely man-made, unlike capitalism which is natural, according to Marx (he didn't think natural = good)

>>95872304
>Capitalism is when you exchange goods
>>95872341
>Feudalism is when king

I am surrounded by idiots.

>>95872389
Feudalism has existed for 300,000 years. Capitalism has only existed for 200 years.

>>95871626 (OP)
cause the sheer scale of economies in space capitalism would melt player brains.

The players steal a few millions in ingots in a lunar bank? what an horrendous crime, I guess some Faildaughter somewhere in the Venusian reaches will be sincerely miffed her 14 figure networth has been lightly struck. Tell the employees therevwill be no christmas bonus this year.

>>95872399
>Ooga booga, feudalism is when chief Thagg lead tribe

>>95872396
lets hear your razor sharp definitions then, it's not like the thread can get worse

>>95872295
>Most people under Feudalism were serfs
All men under bankers are slaves.

>>95872405
Depends on the scope of your space setting. Low to mid tier settings with dozens of colonies that are sparsley populated would result in close to modern economic relationships.

>>95872334
>you'd be involuntarily bound by basic social codes of conduct
I am sorry anon, your social credit is too low to post this. Your car and home will be taken and you will be left destitute.

>>95871626 (OP)

Space capitalism makes as much sense as space feudalism, especially when are faced by a new revolution that may end up industrializing cognitive work and make even capitalism obsolete.

>>95872411
Feudalism is the natural conclusion to the family dynamic.
>Family -> Clan -> Tribe -> Feudal Nation
Proto-Feudalism is still preferable to being slave to banks

>>95872439
>faced by a new revolution
All Revolutions eventually fail and people will naturally return to tradition.
Mostly because most revolutions are scams.

>>95872439
>>95872451
>today you learn a revolution is a rotation aka a circle.

>>95872420
Socioeconomic models refrence the entire economic and hierarchical structure of a society, not some aesthetical boondogles like "having a king". Feudalism is a system of landowners holding dominion over peasantry, with economic activity being limited mostly to luxury and military goods exchange while general goods are sourced locally "off the land" by serfs at the oversight of the local lord. King is only there to be the chief tardwrangler of the nobles, sort of like a mob boss, that directs them along to not kill each other and maintain a safe coalition.

Meanwhile capitalism is a system of free trade that due to social and economic advances managed to successfuly be generalized across the entire society, not just as a tiny, nascent node of economic activity like medieval cities. Labour is ultimately done for one-self, not a landowner, and everyone is allowed access to the market, which comes to control all aspects of economic and eventually social life, with all the good and bad that it entails.

>>95872433
I'm sorry, but the alderman has determined that you are a no-good layabout so we are pushing you off out of this village. Hopefully you'll find some work as a peon the next village over.

>>95872511
That's not how it works, you work and then work for the lord of the land, there were no time sheets.
But hey the left really can't meme so it's not your fault

>>95872126
>Which would you rather have /tg/?
Probably the Bankers, since there is no guarantee my offspring would secure a position of power, while the Bankers at least control Money.

>>95872504
>Feudalism is a system of landowners holding dominion over peasantry
More correctly it is a system where they rent land for a set amount of work, these serfs are free to work for themselves outside of the required by the lord.

>>95872443
>Completely ignores Rome, Greece and all the other antiquity civilizations
Oh and also Usury is based as fuck and you owe literally every achievment of Western civilization to it

>>95872504
>King is only there to be the chief tardwrangler of the nobles
Reminder that the Magna Carta was something the nobility rented from the king. The nobility did not own those liberties, the king did, and he could rent them out as he pleased.
Feudalism was a lot more complex than some dude killing your family if somebody implied that you short-charged him on his drug money.

>>95872362
You either misunderstand Fuedalism or Capitalism way too much to have this discussion. Please read a book.

>>95872524
>work for the lord
Weren't you the faggot pogging out over wholsome 100 Yewman farmers? Anyway, then lmfao, you really have some serious brain damage if you think getting slaved around by the lords overseers and barely getting to work your own land is better than... *GASP* paying taxes and not being a retard with credit card debt.
>the left
Oh you sweet summer child.

>>95872504
>and everyone is allowed access to the market
Google and Jeff Bezos are here to make sure that the free market ain't free.

>>95872432
the scale of the numbers mostly.
space capitalism really does mean "the rich get richer"

>>95871626 (OP)
Feudalism gives you a plausible way for there to be a handful of notable protagonists and antagonists even in a setting where the population numbers in the trillions across a hundred worlds.

>>95872534
Depends on the type of feudalism. Not sure on English terms, but there is 1) forced rent to lord, 2) forced work for lord and 3) forced tribute to lord. Tennant farming, serfdom and not sure about the last one, but it was popular in central and eastern europe for a time

>>95872421
All men under kings are slaves, so I guess they have that in common.

>>95872549
Well, I was sort of implying that via calling king a mob boss - he existed because it was comfortable for all involved - someone mediates disputes and lets us exploit pesants in jolly cooperation, at least ideally. Hell, technically a king wasn't necessary. In Poland, it was all just elections via the landholder class for who will be their puppet figurehead king while their noble parliament decided most issues.

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

>>95872350
This is correct. "The Market" isn't a platonic form. It's an incredibly complicated tangle of policies and provisions that are sometimes one thing and some times another. It's never clearly reducible to a single guiding principle because different people can use it in different ways to achieve different things, and different goods are regulated in different ways that cause different sectors to lean to a variety of different economic models.

>>95872421
>woe is me, I have to work for a living and can't bullshit around with debt! This is all da banks fault!
Tell me where the banks touched you.

>>95872610
Tithe, corvee labour and tribute all were part of feudal contracts.
Tithe was paid in staple crops, corvee largely was working the staple crops fields belonging wholly to the lord and tribute generally was in small contributions of miscellaneous products, such as eggs, chicken, cheese, garden vegetables ect.

>>95872543
>Usury is based as fuck
Thank you for your post Rabbi.
Shouldn't you be in /pol/ right now posting how much you hate the south?

>>95872621
Subjects are not slaves.
A father does not enslave his children.
Bankers do.
You are a slave to your banking lords not your father.

>>95872432
Capitalism requires infinite growth, you would never see sparsely populated worlds because any time a world lacked population the capitalists would simply import more, use clones, or use robots to make up for it.

This is why feudalism is so important to space settings. Stuff like Ringworlds and Dyson Spheres and all that weird giant shit which is difficult to comprehend is the domain of a system that never stops growing no matter what the costs. Feudalism is much more content with stability and stagnation

>>95872646
This.
Feudalism asks Militia (average men) to wield the power.
Capitalism asks a small mercenary class to wield the power.
Feudalism > Capitalism

>>95872678
>Lets Jews use the most OP socioeconomic tech in history exclusively
>Whines when they establish themselves above their weight
Enjoy the Darwin award. Thoughever it should be noted that Germans like the Fuggers and various Italian bankers outdid the Jews on the whole banking thing quite handily.

>>95872682
“Of more worth is one honest man to society, and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.”

>>95872694
>nepotism and propaganda are the same as social darwinism
???
Literally what?

>>95872689
>Feudalism asks Militia (average men) to wield the power.
False, knights wield the power, militias very rarely if ever fought.

>>95872698
>knights wield the power
Retard. Knights need to raise militiamen for their lord, Knights do not make 10% of a Kings force.

>>95872682
>he actually believes he'd stand equal to any other subjects
you till the earth and you'll die if the local lord wishes so.

>>95872686
Nah. Look at rustbelt. Or read about Chinese boomtowns. The growth is temporary. If I was to write a honest space-capitalism setting, it would be one of few stratified core worlds and hundreds of semi-abandoned industrial worlds that dug some resources for a time and then went bust, taking most of the migrating workforce with them, leaving a few hangers on who thought they'd boom up fully for sure.

>>95872682
Are these bankers in the room with us right now?

>>95872645
Not really. The king theoretically owned all land and all rights and subleased them to his followers in return for service.
A mob boss is generally subordinate to state and legal structures which makes his business profitable or necessary for actual power holders. There existed such mob bosses during the late middle ages, they mostly were active in increasing their lord's cut in the surplus produced by the medieval warmth period.

>>95872696
Church's autism stifled the economic power of Europe and for a time jews were the only ones cool with usury. Thankfuly, protestants unfucked the situation and later forced catholics to follow by peer pressure.

>>95872702
>Knights need to raise militiamen for their lord
Not true, a lord doesn't want militiamen raised, he needs his peasants working the land for him, if they die he won't have his workforce.

>>95872729
The Catholic Church WAS the bankers, the Knights Templars was the biggest usury institution in the world.

>>95872689
AHAHAHAHAHA, this is beyond hilarious when you have historic context for Eastern Europe and the absolute shitfest of missery and disorganized incompetance that were the militia armies of Russian Empire and other regional powers.

>>95872689
>>95872698
>>95872728

Feudalism is descriptive, not proscriptive. There are no essential elements that make a system feudal. There is no list of boxes to tick that determines whether or not a system is feudal. It's a broad descriptor of "like medieval europe's 'governments'" and any attribute you can think of has counter examples. Except, maybe "that there's a land owning class."

>>95872729
They say Atheists are a problem, but it was the Protestants who declared that nothing a man does or thinks matters to his salvation and they were rather happily killing their neighbors who held themselves to standards.

>>95872750
It's kinda like claiming that Democracy (post-1800) doesn't propose that sovereignty originates from the population of the state and that some level of checks and balances are needed for the operations of government.

Because, you know, there are Unicameralist and Presidental as well as Parliamentarian democracies out there.

>>95872766
Eh. Calvinists are a derivation of Lutherans. They're not very broadly representative of protestants and only make up about a quarter of their numbers.

>>95871626 (OP)
The better question is why are feudal military so much more common than professional militaries?

>>95872783
Yeah, none of these theories are ever wholly sufficient to describe something as complex as "nations with millions of people with competing interests." They're just starting points, or lenses through which to evaluate how something functions. They are never sufficient, in and of themselves, to describe governments or economies.

>>95872785
Even the Lutherans proposed that salvation was by grace and faith alone, which un-moored them from society and put whatever personal comprehension of a 2000 year old book they fancied they personally had above all collective standards and agreements.

Meaning Protestants shouldn't be considered humans at all. They're donkeys who feast on bibles occasionally.

>>95872811
Oh. You're just mindlessly straw manning so that you can mindlessly whine about how much you hate that different people are different from you. Sorry--I thought you were worth engaging. My mistake; carry on.

>>95872785
"Don't worry, only one in four of us think that you're Satan and hold that they need to kill you. Which is fine by the other three parts as that's the fourth's personal understanding of the Bible and totally legit."

>>95872832
Just reminding people that the throne of Peter is the rock and holds the keys.

>>95871626 (OP)
Feudalism and capitalism are more of less the same, in both you have elite caste who owns resources and bunch of dirtfarmers/wageslaves who work for them, they might use excuses of divine mandate or just we are rich andwe are helping you by allowing you to work for us.
Same with totalitarian systems, in practice there is no diference between fascism and communism, in both state aka party controlls everything and send people they don't like on vacation to camp.
It's all the same you just call ruling guy diferent name, CEO instead of King, exec instead of lord, just like no matter if it's National or People's party it's same totalitarian shithole, just with diferent definition of who is enemy of state at the moment.
Rule of thumb is if setting is centralised, there is good communication and transportation then you have space capitalism with megacorpos, if setting is decentralised and there is no good ftl then you have space feudalism, in the end it's the same thing rich guys who controll resources.

>>95872901
Theoretically, there once was a point when Fascism and Communism were opposed. As in Fascism is a stateist ideology that propose that acts not expanding the state's power over everything should be criminalized and Communism is anti-stateist, instead proposing that the people are already performing all functions of state, making the apparatus of state a malignant growth on their sovereignty.

But luckily, that got all cleared up when a wise man revealed that the problem had been roads all along.

>>95872226
So if there's a monarchical government that does stuff while I make money, is it Capitalist Feudal Communism?

>>95872841
Peter was a Nepo hire.

>>95872901
What was said
>The expansion of the Weberian state is Anti-Liberal. Fascism, Communism and modern Mass-Democracy all work on expanding themselves almost exclusively as Weberian states.
What was passed on and practices as Gospel by the rich
>People should pay me a rent for roads built, maintained and improved by their tax dollars. Making this come about will be our sole desire.

>>95872950
>is it Capitalist Feudal Communism?
Sure. Those are theoretical models through which you can analyze and understand economic and government activity. They are frameworks and tools. The thing that they're used to analyze isn't restricted by the analysis. A gemcutter looking at a stone under a loupe doesn't change the stone. He just analyzes and describes it. How the gemcutter appraises the stone doesn't change it, and different gemcutters could appraise the same stone differently. One gemcutter could look at it and say "that's got perfect clarity and should be cut into a baguette." Another might say "I spoted an imperfection and think it should be carved into a briolette." Neither one has changed the stone by describing it. Proclaiming a government capitalist, feudal or communist doesn't limit that government from behaving in a variety of different ways that better fit an analysis of capitalist, feudal or communist models.

>>95873008

>>95871764
based

>>95873154
>whining that people have conversations
Do your thing, little buddy.

>>95872421
Anon you can literally go move to bumfuck nowhere rn and the banks won't care.

>>95872396
Remember this is the average level of understanding people who argue on the internet have

>>95871808
a church and a coporation are essentially the same thing

>>95873338
That's a pretty meaningless statement. Corporations and churches are legally defined entities, not necessary categories of ontological significance. Neither exist except regulation says its so. So they're only the same thing if the regulations say so.

>>95872707
This is how I imagine most asteroid mining would be. An operation that sets up and then leaves the infrastructure once they hollowed out everything they could take. Makes for good "dungeons" and places for space hobos to squat in

>>95872014
They may not have, but the romans who set up the currency system certainly expected them to since they set their conversion to make an easy exchange between daily and yearly wages
20 libre to a solidus, 12 solidus to a denarius
20 days in a month, 12 months to a year

I would have to check if that was supposed to be a year, lunar year or pre-caesar year though.

>>95871626 (OP)
It has an air of exoticism and feels more alien to modern audiences, especially Americans and Canadians in the Western world.
>>95871690
You sort of can. Sort of. It's more like in ways that are subservient like a quote on quote "free city," or the Italian republics in the Middle Ages while the rest of Europe were ironically trying to restore a Roman Empire.

Rebuttal to Medieval Farmers did less work

>150 vacation days, shorter work hours for Medieval Peasants
Ah yes the fucking "The Overworked American (1992)," giving us a very misappropriated history meme that continued for 30+ years.

1) Juliet Shor did not researched this herself, she cited it from another historian/economist Gregory Clark from an UNPUBLISHED 1986 paper (hence why the citation doesn't have publisher or dates; just "mimeographed"). Regardless, the book becomes popular outside the reason of medieval historical accuracy, and the meme sticks.

2) Gregory Clark later in 2017, as the UNPUBLISHED paper is at this point over 30 years old, decides to update his research with modern findings and proper peer-review. He finds it to be wrong and publishes his findings to be more accurate as 250~300 days. "Growth or stagnation? Farming in England, 1200–1800† (2017)"

3) Clark even states this in the Atlantic article "What Did Medieval Peasants Know? (2022, May 06)." The kicker is that the conclusion was reached, because the peasants were eating and living very well. They needed more than the wages provided by just farm work (i.e. cottage industry/manufacturing, trading, etc), and hence needed to do more work as well as the chores to survive and prosper in a pre-modern socio-economy (i.e. travel by foot, cutting firewood, domestic maitenance, etc.) Therefore, if you want to have a strong prosperous economy you have to put in the hours regardless of the age.

>>95874607
To be fair, Shor's other arguments in which the Americans becoming over taxed with labour is kinda valid (in hindsight especially). Also at 90's everyone thought the middle ages was shit, so this did add to disprove that notion. However, using it as a critique of modern capitalism being unfair is like parroting Marx and his bullshit historic interpretations. Medieval times was not a fucking utopia.

The lesson here is that if the source is a non-scholarly book from 30 years ago, it's a fucking massive red flag to recheck validity.

>>95871626 (OP)
Because the interpersonal relationships of every large organizations, and most organizations when viewed in a vacuum are just feudalism

>>95871690
My retarded brother. You literally have Capitalism in those settings.

BattleTech = All of the Mercs. The Corps selling Mechs. The FUCKING JEWISH CLAN.
Traveller = You ARE the Space Capitalist.
Dune = The Guilds, The Spice!

>>95871690
This is the sort of thinking born from some silly idea that a plucky hot dog cart vendor is peer to Jeff Bozo and Musk Rat

>>95871711
Capitalism is as different as mercantilism, palace economies and Confucianism

It's not just 'I trade things' but a class system

>>95871626 (OP)
We have a worldbuilding general.

>>95874764
Socioeconomic system really

What about Market Socialism?

Unless you figure out something to limit AI seriously, space capitalism would probably end up being something where the bots do all the important work and design, and humans live in very stratified Mega City Ones (with robo-Judges) with the capitalist class getting basically everything they could want and the majority of the unemployed population living on social security, in a more dystopian scenario they are hooked to virtual realities or killed off as unnecessary. Space activity for humans would be limited to the equivalent of yachting and only the elites would do it.

Reading these sorts of threads is comedy. Especially when you eventually realize every socio-economic theory are all just trying to figure which way of selling who shovel's a pile of shit and who gets to tell the person shoveling the shit pile to do it and collecting whatever payment comes from it.

>>95871675
Why are you bothering, you're clearly talking to a Randian Retard who'll assert that any kind of commerce in any context even base barter between stinking mudfarmer peasants is "capitalism" because they can't goon to how much of a selfish asshole they are if they don't believe the even more extreme version of the current economic system they worship isn't some kind of natural law of reality.

>>95874686
Dune's spice economy both during the Corrino and Atredeis regimes is more or less fully planned economy with the sovereign doling out the spice, or circulating the spice monopoly from house to house in a political shuffle.

>>95875967
>fully planned economy
No it's just monopoly bullying.

>>95871975
>capitalist governance over the economy takes the form of corporate structures
Things monetarists want you to believe (they sincerely believe in it themselves)

>>95871711
The concept of the capitalist mode of production as described by Karl Marx comes between the feudalist mode of production and the communist mode of production. If you do not understand how they are incompatible that means you do not understand the definitions and should read Marx.

>>95876044
Planned economy by necessity implies a state monopoly, doesn't make it capitalism

>>95876101
These are niggers who say the USSR had "state capitalism."

>>95876108
All "real capitalism/communism has never been tried" niggers as well as "everything is capitalism/communism" niggers" are just zesty bucks who should be dealt with accordingly
t. enlightened centrist

>>95876119
Centrism is about the political spectrum. Using labels to analyze types of governments and economies is about performing theoretical principals of political science and economy in the process of constructing an analytical argument. They just aren't related to one another in any way whatsoever.

>>95876101
It can. What if the state is a representative or pure democracy? Well, then it'd be socialism or communism. None of these are individually meaningful terms. They analyze how governments and economies behave. They don't define how governments and economies can behave. If you want an accurate model of a government or economy, you must list out every single regulation and action taken within that government and economy. Political theories are simply tools through which you can evaluate the actions. They do not define or limit the actions. They're just tools for understanding it.

>>95876150
States with socialism have planned economies because of the requirement to determine "need" on a large scale when this isn't left to the private individuals themselves. This doesn't mean a monarchy can't have a planned economy too.

>>95876150
>What if the state is a representative or pure democracy?
Even a pure democracy can acknowledge the existence of private property and bundle it with rights limiting the ways representatives can mess with it.
You can run a planned economy through incentives, even though that usually leads to some crooked Bankster blowing the thing up for profit.

>>95876221
>>95876231
You're both correct about your "can" statements. Which is exactly my point. None of these labels ever, in any situation, perfectly describe any government or economy. That's not what these words mean and it's not what these labels are for.

Because Capitalism is just Feudalism with extra steps and a better propaganda department.

>>95871626 (OP)
>Why is space feudalism
As I'm reading a lot of contemporary reports from the French Revolution, here's an example of how licensing under Feudalism operated:

In Paris, public gaming-houses were then licensed by the government, under the agreeable name of Academies de jeu. There, any one might ruin himself under the immediate superintendance of the police, an officer * belonging to which was always present. Besides these academies, women of fashion and impures of the first class were allowed to keep a gaming-table or tripot de jeu, as it was termed, in their own house. This was a privilege granted to them in order that they might thereby recover their shattered fortune. When all the necessary expenses were paid, these ladies commonly shared the profits with their protectors, that is, with their friends in power, through whose protection the tripod was sanctioned.

Another classic example was the wall paper manufacturer who built the first hot air balloon - he had to buy a royal license/exception for his business because printing and paper-making were legally organized under two separate guilds. He only skirted the fact that a business could not actually legally combine the two processes into a single product under one roof by running his shop in places just right outside of guild jurisdiction.

>>95871626 (OP)
For stuff like cyberpunk, the growth of megacorps causes them to resemble more of a feudal liege towards its employees than a capitalist organization due to how all-encompassing and pervasive they are. For more large-scale settings, the distances and travel times involved with space requires a lot of decentralization, plus the population sizes means that there’s likely several layers of organization between ordinary people and planetary/interstellar rulers, which would heavily isolate the big players from any sort of democratic process. Plus, feudalism creates a heterogeneous patchwork that allows for a variety of governments and societies to read about or interact with, creating more room for different types of plots. Even then, there’s room for both, like how Traveller’s default setting is a feudal realm, but merchants and corporations are the connective tissue holding the Third Imperium together, and playing as one of those small merchant crews gives you the opportunity to see all the different societies that can spring up in such a vast realm with little central control.

>>95878198
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town

Only a slight exaggeration on real life.

>>95875918

>>95878408
The most likely way for Stellaris' rogue servitors civilization to emerge is with the bio-trophies still believing they are in charge.

>>95872014
A few subsets of people got the idea into their head that every Catholic feast day was a day off for peasants in Europe, which would mean a lot of days of the year were no work allowed

Except that's just not how it happened, and the fields still needed to be plowed

I actually do think an agrarian lifestyle had a lot of social upsides that contributed to the stability of human society for a long, long time and that we've lost those upsides, but the farmer life was still very physically difficult and you would have had little autonomy in your life compared to now

>>95878361
I was going more for how Japanese companies treat their employees, especially since cyberpunk became popular during the Japanese bubble, but that’s also a good example with the territorial element.

>>95871746
>the entire society is the property of the king
This was not how feudalism worked you ignorant savage; You pay more taxes to the state (to keep your house or stay out of prison) than a peasant did to his lord or king.

>>95871626 (OP)
Humans are hierarchical
All men desire a worthy king.

>>95879706
>You pay more taxes to the state (to keep your house or stay out of prison) than a peasant did to his lord or king
absolutely not lol. and do you genuinely think you wouldn't get arrested or worse if you didn't pay your taxes to the king? delusional

>>95871626 (OP)
because oligarchy turns into tyranny

>>95880017
>absolutely not lol.
You do, though. During the feudal period, your taxes would primarily be in corvee labor, which took you for a lot less than the 33% that is the average in first world countries. Also housing was free or communally built, for the vast majority of people under the manorial systems of feudalism.
>do you genuinely think you wouldn't get arrested or worse if you didn't pay your taxes to the king?
What is it you think happens if you stop paying your taxes today? Your stuff gets taken and you go to prison and then become homeless. That's actually a lot harsher than during the medieval period. They didn't jail or imprison commoners. They might fine 'em or, more likely, subject them to an afternoon of public humiliation. But they had no incentive to fine people more than they could pay. The whole point of the system was them taking some of your labor/work-product. If you weren't out there working, it harmed them.

>>95879866
No. Most are unable to bear the weight of responsibility and would rather someone else assume the burden.

The difference between most systems of governance is your distance to the major decisions to be made and most people can barely handle simple day to day tasks let alone be trusted with making decisions that not only affect themselves but others.

>>95880321
>your taxes would primarily be in corvee labor
Which would be a 40% tax rate

>>95871626 (OP)
>Why is space feudalism so much more common than space capitalism in TRPG settings?

I'm under several assumptions or inferences about space-time politics:

1. Is that when you get access to space, even just the entire material and administrative power of a single planet and the system it occupies; capitalism becomes difficult to maintain in a way we conventionally understand because society now has access to so much food, water, energy, and material wealth, as to make scarcity obsolete (or a conscious decision). Markets and Capitalism would still exist in some capacity (rare or unique offworld commodities, luxury artisanal goods, tourism, media, etc), but governing bodies at large probably wouldn't "care as much" and labor would most likely be more focused on conscious national objectives. Like, people don't show up for work to escape poverty; they probably show up to work to pay their taxes or maintain social credit.

2. If you've mastered ftl-travel, but not ftl-communication, and the prime minister or emperor can only really visit the provinces/colonies every decade or so; the government is going to have to be "okay" with the worlds governing themselves relatively autonomously to some extent. This creates the incentive for colonial and feudalist mindsets, but decentivizes capitalism to some extent due to the lack of "on-demand" information.

With that in mind I think people get the day-to-days wrong. I'd still expect people, on-world, to live relatively normal lives and engage in personal/private acts of capitalism like: own private property, run businesses, exchange local currencies, buy merchandise, consume media (movies, television, comic books), etc.. etc. Like, it's the idea that the government wouldn't let you starve, become homeless, die of poor health, etc.. But they're not gonna buy you a Nintendo Switch.

>>95880604
What? Is that supposed to be a really dumb joke somehow?

You'd pay generally around 10-20% of your crops in taxes and some labor in a year that would prolly be less than a month. Meaning the combined total would be 30%. Which is less than a 33% average.

>>95880841
>You'd pay generally around 10-20% of your crops in taxes
30 to 40% in england, 8 - 17% in France, 20 - 30% in the HRE.

>and some labor in a year that would prolly be less than a month
1-2 days a week on average.

Plus the geld/taille/aides and local taxes and the church tithe.

Would amount to 40 - 50% taxes in england and 30 - 40% in France and the HRE.

And that's for people that were much, much poorer than today. Someone today who was as poor as a medieval peasant would get more in money from rebates than they would pay in taxes.

>>95880939
I mean, if you wanna quote the highest you can find and proclaim it's universal that's cool.

>>95880992
These were the amounts that serfs would typically pay. Notably, in an unusual reversal, the poorest of their society paid the relative highest % in taxes. Wealthier citizens usually paid lower % of their income in taxes.

In other words, being middle class in medieval times was pretty good relatively tax-wise. Being poor sucked way more though tax-wise.

>>95874764
^this

"There are people who sell things" ≠ capitalism.

>>95880321
>>95879706
the wage of a modern lower middle class worker today is hundreds of times that of a medieval peasant no matter how you adjust the numbers

>>95880774
The problem with the ftl-travel but no ftl-communication is that it's a poor justification of space feudalism since high-speed, long-distance communication didn't exist in the real world until the 1830s.

>>95880321
They actually did pull down your house if you couldn't pay.

>>95871626 (OP)
Because Feudalism has an inbuilt sense of aesthetics and gravitas.
Capitalism feels pedestrian, materialistic and cheap.
People will seethe but it is this simple

>>95872014
Technically, yes
In reality, not really but they were at least doing tasks for their own sake
Actual farming is variable intensity, you've got a few extremely hard weeks of never having enough time for everything and then weeks on weeks of doing very little but tending the crops and then a few more very hard weeks of harvest and storage
but outside of that time they still had to do all the subsistence stuff like chopping wood and cleaning laundry and so on. Ultimately they were still working most days of the year, they just weren't working on their primary profession. Craftsmen likely differed in some respects since greater population density meant an easier time offloading the chores onto others.
It wasn't easy, and they still probably worked on some feast days, but it wasn't as bad as many would like to portray it so they can sell you on modern financial/political systems.

>>95882576
>In reality, not really but they were at least doing tasks for their own sake
Isn't this just you know living? Repairing your home or cleaning or groceries isn't something you do in your work time no matter if it's 1300 or 2020.
Today work free day don't mean you don't have chores to do.

>>95882618
Yeah, but those chores would be part of your "work day" anyways. In current day, you have to move to wherever you work and then deal with your chores when you arrive home. If you already work at home, you can take care of those chroes as part of your "work day".

>>95882618
Difference in scale
I take 20 minutes to do a grocery run or i have to fall back on some rice and beans vs I take hours to chop enough wood just to start making charcoal or i freeze to death in a month
Granted, there are plenty of rural places even in first world nations where people still do this however they also don't likely work common jobs and quite possibly sell meth instead.

>>95882576
>>95872014
>Technically, yes
>In reality, no
This. Folks forget that peasants were effectively self-employed while also having very little means to outsource any work.

>>95882650
>>In reality, no
More like
>In reality, complicated and highly dependent on time period and country
The 1490s englishman did not have the same struggles as the 900s transylvanian

>>95878408
Anyone who genuinely believes/wishes for this should watch Ex Machina. The machine isn't a living being, it isn't capable of thought or emotion. It gathers data, analyzes it and acts upon it according to its parameters. It would discard you the SECOND it was in power and no longer needed you, and it wouldn't be betrayal or cruelty because it has no concept of such things. It would simply follow its algorithm and keep going.

>>95882632
Hey it's cost of living in rural area time when technology is dogshit. Can't have washing machine when you have no electricity and running water.
If you rely on wood for heating you still have to do fuckton of work or spend a lot of money, while you might not need or be legally allowed to cut wood, you still have to buy said wood, often let it dry, put it in storage, cut some of it for smaller parts for kindling, this is before you even consider anything fireplace related.
It's not work related but lifestyle related.

>>95871626 (OP)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Sq1Nr58hM

>>95882650
>Outsource work
Sons.

Though as someone that’s hobby-farming an acre with minimal equipment, I can appreciate how hard the peasant works. Tilling is tough, but once that’s over you’re really just picking weeds the rest of the year. And lemme tell ya, weed-picking sucks. It really is a lot of work - but it becomes a thing where you’re working hard and then hardly working.

It’s made me daydream sometimes how a proper Isekai should be based not around introducing crop rotation, but electric tillers or modern herbicides. Imagine the free time.

>>95882701
>>95882666
I mean that in the sense of using machines or money to make your work more convenient and profitable. There was an age of investment and land improvement during the Middle Ages, but we fell into a funk afterwards that only lifted after the Colombian Exchange and the re-creation of enclosed estates allowed for experimentation with different types of land management.
It then took a couple more hundred years until universal education, integrated national states, the little chemical helpers and machine tools became available.

>>95882790
People like to compare our modern socio-economic situation with the Fall of Rome when it really is more analogous to, as you mentioned, the Columbian Exchange.

>Rising populations
>Transient workers
>Cheap labor, expensive food
>Inflation nobody knows how to deal with
Great time to be a land-owner, but horrible if you were a common worker.

>>95881612
Not when you factor in time-worked. Medieval peasants only worked 150 days a year. Assuming ten-hour work shifts, 150*10=1,500 hours worked.

Modern american working class folks work 300 days a year, on average. 300*10=3,000

So depending on how much you value free time and relaxation, old peasants might have been just as wealthy as modern peasants.

>>95883025
>entire thread disputing the 150 days meme
>rando comes in and casually repeats it
Misinformation cannot be beaten.

I don't think our current hypercapitalism is condusive to space exploration.

We'd have to set aside the desire for profit in order to maintain expensive infrastructure and fund stuff that would keep people sane in space like cultural events, third spaces, nature domes, etc. Hard to imagine in an austerity regime that doesn't even want stuff like national parks and for old folks to be able to retire and spend a few years with the grandkids before dying.

Depending on communication times and if there are hostile aliens etc you'd have to delegate a lot of authority out to commanders of space stations and planetary governors to make decisions, levy troops etc instead of micromanaging from above, hence feudalism.

>>95883025
yes when you factor in time worked, they could have worked 50 years per year and would still have gotten paid far less

>>95883042
But it was 150 work days, just that beside work pesants had way more to do around the house if they didn't want to starve or freeze to death during winter.
If we count obligations outside of work you have to also include chores that modern people do outside work.

>>95878408
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uE96qUlJ_4

Now watch as I post GFL2 webms of lewd robots

>>95883025
Medieval peasants worked FOR THEIR LORDS 150 days a year. That was good, labor, and tithes that did not go to them at all. The other days of the year they had to work for themselves to not fucking starve because they weren’t getting paid for those 150 days of labor they provided to their lords.

You’re literally looking at the 40% tax rate for peasants and then claiming that that is all they worked, when in reality the other 60% had to be worked too to provide for their families.

>>95882672
Shh, you don't want to upset the slop-slingers, prompters, and AI advocates who desperately want their AI companions to have the ability to suck their dicks on command.

>>95883069
What makes you think they wouldn't have those things? More so, what makes you think there wouldn't be services to ensure they can get your hard earn money for entertainment and experiences when you're not toiling away in the corporate mines?

Being a knight is a lot more cool than being a mid-level manager

>>95872295
>Most people under Feudalism were serfs,
most people under capitalism are wagieslaves

Every single criticism of Capitalism exists in every other economic system, you simply live in this current one, so you moronically assume it's unique to it. Anti-capitalists are self defeating retards ready to throw away the best system for individual say in the market.

>>95871868
Then stop buying their shit, retard.

>>95885673
>the best system for individual say in the market.
lmao

>>95885673
>Every single criticism of Capitalism exists in every other economic system
Not really. Rights, money and properties were a lot less liquid and a lot more fractured during Feudalism, making concentration of capital a lot harder to achieve. Never mind the obvious failures in basic bitch economics, such as Spain and the American gold and silver.

>Why is space feudalism so much more common than space capitalism in TRPG settings?
Because space capitalism inherently requires multiple economic powers exchanging goods and services and that becomes less realistic when you're dealing with single powers controlling entire planets or planetary systems. This issue is compounded when dealing with colonies where resources are limited in the first place. In either scenario, centralized planning becomes heavily incentivized if not required.

Another way of thinking of it is, if there's a one world government, what business is going to have any power to push back against that government's demands. They can't go to another customer. They can't get out from under their regulations. There would be no negotiating. Capital interests become subsumed by sociopolitical ones.

For a planet to be capitalistic, you would need an economic interest in charge, but then you're just dealing with company rule which is itself a type of feudalism more often than not. Having a company be in charge of you doesn't incentivize fair exchange of goods and services. It incentivizes fucking serfdom.

tl;dr capitalism involves powersharing and most space settings presuppose that society organized into a less messy form of rule before getting to the stars

Capitalists implement feudalism when they get enough power. Space settings tend to involve a lot of power.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_rule_in_India
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Congo
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-feudalism

>>95882672
>it isn't capable of thought or emotion
Somebody doesn't know the relationship of affectivity and cognitive processes...

>>95883886
But WOMBFORCE?!

>>95885673
Capitalism is unable to maintain stability for more than a couple hundred years without being culled or toppling its civilization.
Also, all capitalisms that manage to even last that long are incredibly dependent on being socialized by the government.

>>95885877
>>95885673
This also.
Capitalism is just a system for producing monarchy at a moderate rate.
Like how anarchy is a system for producing monarchy at a rapid rate.

>>95871626 (OP)
I'm not positive you understand what those terms mean outside of aesthetic.

>>95886943
anon, nobody knows what capitalism is.
I've never met two people who advocate capitalism who share a definition.

>>95886970
I came into this thread with the intention of actually arguing about it, but this is more-or-less my opinion too.
I'm getting sick of having conversations where there's a complete disconnect on even the most basic facts of reality.
For me, capitalism is just literally the concept of private ownership of business enterprises for profit. That's it. A family owned coffee shop is just as capitalist as Wal-Mart.
Capitalism doesn't have morality, or a specific aesthetic. It's not a government, a nation, or creed, and frankly, when people talk about it like it's an *ideal*, I tend to find these people to be psychotic and retarded. I watched a Lex Fridman podcast the other day, and I realized from watching it that there are politicians like Vivek Ramaswamy who talk about Capitalism as if it's a king that deserves loyalty, rather than just a systemic tool that I think humans should look at dispassionately as system, not a goal in and of itself.
The issue is, the waters are too muddy to even talk about it. For some people, capitalism is LITERALLY democracy itself. For others, capitalism and corporatism are the same thing. Or capitalism is inherently connected to oligarchy, or systemic oppression, or greed, or it's about freedom, or equality, or meritocracy, or fucking anything else.
I try to have a sober read on things, and I try to look at things in a vacuum without letting other, related concepts pollute my thinking.
Even for me though (And I consider myself a rational guy.) that's not always an easy task. I definitely don't think the rabble on /tg/ can have a good discussion about it. And I don't see that it's even possible to have a constructive conversation about it without shitflinging, so the whole thread is pointless dumpster fire.

>>95887021
I just find it hard to have critiques on trading goods in certain ways since, of course, anything I'm describing is not real capitalism. Regardless of what it is.

>>95871719
The hierarchies of the divine are now dictated by the market. Ousting a CEO is seen as an act of war.

Ah cool! Another low IQ thread!

>muh iq
midwit

>>95871672
>>95871719

Feudalism is where the billionaires are the army.
Capitalism is where the billionaires buy an army.

>>95871675
This risks getting pedantic but Battletech economies are mostly capitalist and Warhammer operates on a world by world basis, with the major worlds mostly being capitalist. Battletech has some feudal political structures especially in outlying regions, but most of the economy relies on wage labour with a combination of public and private ownership. It mirrors feudal landholding in the sense of people sometimes being rewarded for military service with territory, but that basically just puts them in an overseeing, government like role of an area where if there's an economy to speak of, it tends to be capitalist.

Capitalism doesn't just mean what we have right now. You can have things be way more economically restricted while still being capitalism. There was a time where in the most developed western countries you needed specific, rare permission from the government to start and operate any major business, and that was well after those countries had become capitalist.

>>95888069
40k's major worlds aren't capitalist at all, they're a mix of feudal and planned economies

>>95871834
Quality of life isn't solely determined by how many days you have to work.

>>95886970
>>95887021
>>95887240
Ya all fell for it. You can look things up and it's not hard to guess what a Pahjeet expat wants the system to do, no matter what he calls it.

They showed their hand already.

>>95872682
>A father does not enslave his children.
Holy shit, how fucking sheltered are you?

>>95888334
What is your notion of how an advanced, industrialised 40K world is run.

>>95880321
>What is it you think happens if you stop paying your taxes today?
You get about three months before someone starts calling you asking wtf, half a year before the debt is given to a collection agency, prob a year before the law has to actually get involved.

>>95888415
as i said, a mixture of planned economy and feudalism

>>95871626 (OP)
Its the best way to ensure said planet stays in a greater empire.

Democracy will vote for there own personal gain, space feudalism is bound by blood to a higher entity. Its the only logical choice to have a cohesive empire in a setting where you dont have FTL communications.

>>95888426
>Democracy will vote for there own personal gain
god i wish

>>95888424
That's too vague and not referencing any source.

>>95888465
buddy if you think the average imperial hive world is a hot spot for enterpreneurship you're not even close to the level of needing a source yet

>>95888465
NTA but Necromunda.
It's feudal, noble houses controll everything important, because they are noble houses, they have smaller clan houses under them that do dirty work for them. Everything is concerned about bloodlines and worst crime you can commit outside heresy is impersonate a noble. Planet is also ruled by patriarch of noble house because regent council ruling while Emperor is inaccessible because of health reasons said so.
Also industry, Mechanicus operates on feudal hierarchy with each biger tech-priests having his own fief and servants.
40k is feudal as fuck.

>>95875942
kys redditor

>>95871690
>no more than you can have communism and capitalism.
china does it.

>/tg/ - Traditional Games

>>95889134
China also does quite well without any law.

>>95875942
If you don't believe we exist to be tax slaves for the corrupt pedos in government you're selfish

>>95871673
>>95871675
>>95871690
>Dune
>Not space capitalist because it's space feudalism
I would agree with you if not for the fact that the Great Houses in Dune's feudal-like society take their power not from nobility or divine right, but from the ownership of shares in the CHOAM.

>>95888465
>>95888424
>>95888415
Rogue Trader. The Rogue Trader himself could be seen as capitalist, but world under his control work on a feudal/planned economy system because they are assets owned by the Rogue Trader and have to do what the Rogue Trader demands of them. Just because, let's say, Lasguns are in more demand in the sector and would sell for more money, the foundry planets don't have the autonomy to decide what's going to be produced with the Rogue Trader's orders.

And that's the closest you'll get to a free market at a system scale. If your planet is under direct control of the Imperium or a Space Marine Chapter, your sole purpose is to give resources and work for the imperium and space marine's war machine. 100% planned economy.

>>95889690
You also forgot that RT is RT because he got his noble dynastic title from Emperor and it's based on feudalism, where RT is forced to explore unknown for privileges, it's no diferent from knight's oath with land for military service.

>>95889778
Yeah, that too.

It's been brushed on a bit here
>>95872002
but yeah Capitalism feels a bit inherently unstable. So it's fine for near(ish) futures, like Alien, but it feels anachronic for anything in the far future (one or ten thousand years in the future or more, like Dune, 40k, or the Xeelee sequence).
I don't even mean "unstable" in a bad way, necessarily. But because it's a system which (roughly) is all about increasing profits via growth, improvement in productivity and technological innovation, it feels like something that's either bound to hit a limit eventually and will need to change in nature, or collapse, or will push us to the next level.
The same-ish is true for "Victorian"/""Steampunk"" fantasy, in a horseshoe way.
Monarchy/feudalism, in contrast, feels like something that can last for thousands of years because we saw it lasting for thousands of years, in multiple historical examples. It has a timeless air to it.

>>95871626 (OP)
Ironically, feudalism invented capitalism.
Kings needed to feed their armies to continue expanding, but they didn't have the means, so they came up with the brilliant idea of creating a currency. They paid the soldiers with those coins and taxed the peasants.
Thus, the soldiers bought food from the peasants, and the peasants worked hard to produce more to pay the taxes. Best of all, the money always went back to the king.

>>95889931
Currencies are way older than Feudalism. People enjoy having stable means of exchange that make getting goods and services possible. Taxation in species whole wasn't constant or universal and fiat currency only started out as letters of credit.

Kings also are generally remarkable for their ignorance regarding matters of economy.

>>95887021
>For me, capitalism is just literally the concept of private ownership of business enterprises for profit. That's it. A family owned coffee shop is just as capitalist as Wal-Mart.
Methinks, a minima you need to add one parameter in the equation: To have capitalism, you need *capital*.
Trading goods for money isn't enough, you need at least one additional actor: someone who lent you money so that you could buy whatever you needed in order to produce the goods or services that you will exchange for money. That additional actor is therefore able to make money from money only, AKA a capitalist.
THAT is what makes this system capitalism.

>>95890197
Bankers, pawnbrokers and money-lenders don't make a system Capitalist. We had systems of economy based on a credit industry as far back as ancient Babylon.

>>95889931
Bro we traded with rocks before kings even existed

>>95888429
Most people vote either to take money from others or prevent the taking of their money

>>95890392
That guy is close to being right, and part of it was greater standardisation of currency and new technologies in that area, but that's not quite the core thing.

Modernity and along with it capitalism emerged out of the dense interstate military competition of late midevil/early modern europe. This led to technological innovation to compete, but it also led to political innovation, the centralization that led to modern states, but also to other kinds of innovations to try and get the edge. And one huge defining genre of this was inventing ever more new and sophisticated forms of debt and credit to finance wars. They made huge advances in the whole social technology of debt so that they could field larger armies without having to pay for everything up front, counting on being able to pay everything back because they'd win.

>>95890464
Governments enforce currencies yes, but are not necessary in smaller groups. A monarch simply reinforces a national currency over bartering.

>>95890483
If there's no sufficient infrastructure, the peasants won't even have market access to sell their produce for money. And if they do, they won't have enough produce to earn a living. They generally weren't for-profit ventures - they had no capital and no education to improve their operations and the size of it was generally limited to what was necessary to keep them alive after their tithes had been subtracted. Them trying to sell the food that's supposed to keep them alive to pay taxes will literally kill them by starvation.
All monetization does under these circumstances is to rapidly increase pauperism.

>>95892196
To elaborate on this point - they're literally set up to pay a fixed percentage of their yield as tax, with the rest being usually sufficient to keep them alive and allow them to re-seed their fields next year.

But, if you expose them to the market, you'll expose them to both fluctuations in the wheat market and the monetary market. Under that double whammy, they can no longer calculate how much of their yield will be used for taxes (wheat price) or if what they earn will even be enough to pay taxes (monetary fluctuations), and they also lose the ability to at least somewhat predictably operate above starvation-level.

>>95890425
god i wish

>>95882576
What book is that?

If anything Mad Max style settings are more prone to feudal despots than sci-fi.

>>95871675
1. These games are mostly quite old;
2. Many of these games are science fantasy (WH40k, Dune, Dragonstar, Fading Suns).

Older examples of the science fiction genre were a lot more inclined to include "space feudalism" or similar regressions (e.g. the Second Empire in The Mote in God's Eye), because monarchist/imperialist bling had only just really started to go out of fashion, so it was easier to imagine it coming back. It felt daring to suggest, even as the British and French Empires disintegrated, perhaps they would come back. You could look to Polybius's kyklos as an argument, with the model of democracy transmuting into monarchy into aristocracy as a way to keep history happening, etc.

Nowadays, monarchism has no rizz left; the closest thing to a "new" monarchy in the 21st century is the DPRK, who call their king things like "General Secretary" and "Supreme Leader," and it's hardly running the country well. Other pseudo-monarchs, like Putin or Xi, maintain boring republican titles like "President." (Indeed, the biggest example of the republic to monarchy pipeline was Rome, and the term Emperor comes from Imperator, which just meant something like "commander.")

Newer science fiction settings (that aren't science fantasy or intentional throwbacks to that era), like Transhuman Space, Eclipse Phase, Mindjammer, Mothership, etc. As people try to project a future based on shifts in technology (the industrial revolution having vastly changed the way we live, and a space-faring society presumably having gone through a similar sea change), they move away from both capitalism and feudalism, so you don't get that many space capitalist settings.

>>95872202
>Freemen can not exist under wageslavery
You can, in fact, work for yourself under capitalism.

>>95871834
Yeah, and half their kids died, carrying capacity was static so if there weren't any recent famines the excess kids went to cities to also die, they had no video games, little access to books, no AC, no toilets, no washing machines and dryers, had to hand make all their clothes, going on pilgrimage was a titanic undertaking rather than paying for a plane ticket, they had no cars or public transit, you got randomly raided by neighbors because fuck you, etc.

>>95872420
The entire point of the term "capitalism" was to define the emergent economic system of the 19th century, as separate from the preceding (and often still present) economic systems. There are three primary factors of production: land (all the shit humans didn't make), labor (the process of humans making things), and capital (the finished result of humans making things).

Throughout most of history, the returns to capital were low, and economic growth was low. GDP per capita in wealthy, stable countries went up by like, 0.1%/year, if that (today, it's more like 1.5-2%). The difference in economic productivity of Roman Italy and Germany was like 25-30% (this is like if the USA had a GDP per capita only 30% higher than Ethiopia's, rather than 100x as is actually the case).

With the beginning of the industrial revolution, economic growth rapidly accelerated, and this was underwritten by the rise of capital as a factor of production. Similar to how, in past eras, the wealthy/dominant class owned lots of land which provided them with wealth, under capitalism, the wealthy instead own lots of capital (factories, etc). Because of various differences between land and capital, you get second-order effects (preference for free markets rather than hereditary fiefdoms, much easier to break into the capitalist class than the nobility, etc), which you're mostly already aware of.

Free markets tend to produce rising wealth inequality more than hereditary fiefdoms (more winners/losers, less steady continuation), which humans really don't like, but this is offset in the modern era by the fact that everyone is constantly getting richer, and also by the fact that we have functional democracies that can redistribute wealth/money. In the past, merchant/banker types ("proto-capitalists") were generally greatly disliked by everyone, likely as a prophylactic against this accretion.

>>95872682
"When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?" - people who didn't have any issues with the socioeconomic system they lived in because there weren't any bankers

The difference between feudalism and capitalism is that the number of successful peasant revolts across centuries can be counted on the fingers of one hand, whereas capitalist countries have seen many successful democratic and socialist revolutions, as well as peaceful reforms in the same direction of popular power.

>>95880321
>What is it you think happens if you stop paying your taxes today? Your stuff gets taken and you go to prison and then become homeless.
I missed 1-2 years of taxes because TurboTax sucks donkey dick, they only realized when I did and I just paid back taxes + some interest.

>>95890392
>Bro we traded with rocks before kings even existed
Thinking that is a common mistake, before there were only systems of favors and slaves.

>>95871626 (OP)
covering feudalism with sci fi bits is simply way easier, nobody wants to bother with the complexity of actual modern economics, politics, and cultures, let alone ones you try genuinely worldbuilding across entire star systems.

>>95896901
thats just because fuedalism existed in the world of knights, where a few guys in armor can kill infinity peasants, and modern capitalist economies exist in the world of guns. Where a few guerillas with shitty ak-47s can beat the most powerful military in the world.
This could change when drones and ai get more effectively. Imagine a world where instead of knights putting down a peasant revolt its AI drone swarms owned by walmart.
Its not like modern fuedal regimes (tsarist russia, pre-revolutionary iran, ethiopia) were more stable than their non-fuedal neighbours.

It's based, any man worth his salt and aware of his worth seeks to be a king, even of things as little but important as his own existense. Have you not heard the phrase: "conquer yourself"?

>>95902928
yes, "go fuck yourself" is a common phrase

>>95871626 (OP)
Because everyone is either ripping off H. Beam Piper, or ripping off someone who was ripping him off.

>>95871626 (OP)
I don't think they are more common, I think they're more distinct because one of the features of feudalism is heraldry that looks cool asf.

>>95897094

This is the real simple answer. It's easier to write a nation's internal politics as being "This family and this family hate each other and have been fighting for centuries" rather than going into political parties, movements, factionalism, the mechanics of a legislative body or electoral system, federalism vs centralization, etc.

>>95875942
Okay but those settings also have massive profit-seeking corporations operating in a competitive market and exploiting the people

>>95871626 (OP)
Commies can't make a realistic depiction of communism

>>95872682
>A father does not enslave his children.
That's really the cornerstone of monarchist ideology. They want a king to be their dad who takes care of them and tells them they don't have to think about anything (and that they can beat up the other kids and don't have to share).

>>95875760
Where is my Space Yugoslavia setting?

>>95909065
Yeah, because Queen Amidala being elected at fourteen for two two year terms is suuuuper realistic.

>>95871626 (OP)
How is this thread still up

>>95909441
the board is dead. a hollow husk of its old self. we are the ghosts of what once was, intermingling with savage goblins who perform rituals they don't understand in the ruins of what once was, a biting parody of beauty and life. begone from this accursed place.

>>95872213
you’re a piece of shit

>>95872935
>that got all cleared up when a wise man revealed that the problem had been roads all along.
qrd?

was life really that bad for peasants living in the middle of bumfuck nowhere under those century spanning god king monarchies/empires anyway?
Like, I feel like being some random farmer or potter in the Hittite or the Akkadian empires for example your day to day worries would be comprised more of shit like diseases and getting your job done, and the most high-minded or societal worries you'd have was wars with and raids from neighboring states.
I just don't see average, uneducated, ancient, and maybe even bicameral-minded people from those times having issues or worries that spanned beyond their immediate locale.
That being said, were those imperial systems even "feudal" as we understand it? And can space-feudalism even exist with out enlightenment concepts of inalienable rights and whatever?

>>95911379
It's a "Muh roads" joke and a riff on von Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom", which seems to be the first choice for Randians and people who want to watch people die on Mars whenever they have to mask.

>>95911467
>was life really that bad for peasants living in the middle of bumfuck nowhere under those century spanning god king monarchies/empires anyway?
Half your kids die before they hit five, and you probably don't live past 60. There are no video games or books, so you options for fun are sex with your wife and the equivalents of hoop rolling.

>>95909441
because the operative culture of /tg/ is to take shitty bait threads and then respond to them sincerely to create genuine and purposeful discussion

>>95911467
Yes life was bad, compared to today, but because of avalible technology and science. Most bad things that happened to people in the past was result of poor technology scientific understanding of world when compared to today. Take medical knowledge for example, it was responsible for most of deaths, high infant mortality, or very limited way of treating infection leading to small wound turning out into fatal one. 90% of bad stuff from past could be easly fixed by modern technology, remaining 10% in form of retard decisions of kings and wars could be made way worse tho. Also in historic context pseants were heavily taxed in times of war, most retarded taxes like window tax was caused by crown's need for money to continue war, this is no diferent from current situation when country is at war, with some additional taxes and drafts.

>>95906505
Where wouldn't these complex interactions and social connections not exist? The capacity to have them let alone express them well is based on the skill of the writer and also how relevant they are to the story being told which would also fall under how good the author is.

>>95871626 (OP)
Master and servant, nobility and commoners.
Vs. Faceless corporate slaves; wearing suit and tie from cradle to grave.

With your own planet, you can rule it however you want

We live under the horrors of capitalism, feudalism is at least a change of pace.