Re: [FT universe]

At 13:21 18/09/98 -0400, you wrote:
> ---- Big Niall (old joke, sorry :-)) wrote: 

I remember.  My pun phase.  

>modern china is only nominally communist. it is really 
>just a vanilla totalitarian dictatorship.

Traditional soceity I suppose.	Hasn't changed much in thousands of
years
it would seem.	I'm no expert on China though so anyone who cares to
interject, fire away.

>> Entreprenuership is encouraged or at least tolerate so I believe.  So
in
>> the next 200 years wouldn't most communist countries have evolved
more
>> towards free trade rather than central planning?
>
>conversely, is there the possibility that, in a state 
>where the planets are seperated by week-long hyperspace 
>paths, and there is a huge disparity between the 
>populous/industrialised planets and the 
>sparse/agricultural planets, that free-market countries 
>like the NAC have introduced more central planning?

Or else rely on sector commanders or regional governors much more. 
We're
back to the 18th and 19th centuries here.

>> I'm intrigued as to how the ESU would differ from the NAC if we
eliminate
>> old communist economic  policies from the equation.	
>
>i bet they're both essentially the same. one is a 
>dictatorship of the supreme soviet in the name of the 
>people, the other is a dictatorship of the 
>eton-oxbridge-aristocracy-dominated civil service 
>("yes, admiral ...") under the cover of a powerless 
>parliament.

It would require a rather huge coup to allow this to happen in Britain
when
you think of it.  
I mean in terms of parliament being powerless.	Unless the monarchy
seizes
political power again.	Political appointees by the monarch?  Now it
sounds
like a Tsarist regime.	

>> Do the secret police
>> hold sway? Freedoms are more restricted?  The NAC being a more class
>> oriented soceity has it devolved back to the old ideal of an
aristocracy
>> and their cronies running things?  
>
>*back* to the old ideal? the way the rulers of the UK 
>and the USA are 75% from established 
>wealthy/educated/powerful families. :-)

Far be it for me to criticise from afar.  I think its the same
everywhere
and throughout history.  The rich and educated will always end up
running
things.  Now whether thats a good or bad thing is another argument
entirely.   Well except for the fact that most of the big ones are run
by
lawyers.

What I mean by aristocracy is the old thing of officers being the upper
class types who can either afford to buy their commision or know the
right
people to get them one.  The kind of setup where even the best
candidates
in the ranks will never rise up through them because of class
restrictions.
 In other words the nominal meritocracy in existence today has been
replaced by a reconstituted aristocracy.

Of course that all depends on what the NAC is really like.  As Jon has
said
before there aren't any good guys in this universe but then there aren't
that many bad ones either.

Well except for the Kra'Vak. Nasty bug eyed aliens.  With big nasty
ships.

>Tom
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com
--------------------
Niall Gilsenan,
DIT Cathal Brugha St,
Dublin 1,
Ireland.

ngilsena@indigo.ie
--------------------
The miscellany (Sci-Fi combat games)
http://members.tripod.com/~Cwintel/Scifi.html