Or how about a 'clanocracy' where representation isn't based on population concentration (state, province, city) but on families. Gives marrying for political clout a whole new angle.
An Examination of Extra-Universal Systems of Government
- Thread starter Ephraim Ben Raphael
- Start date
- Status
Republic of Paraguay
For a nation at war, Paraguay seems very peaceful. The countryside looks sensibly managed, not stripped of everything edible to feed a war machine that has been in operation for over a century. I remember the farms of Paraguay from the days before my escape into the Nutshell, and those were desolate patches of earth compared to what I was seeing as I drove down the streets of this Paraguay. I was on my way to see what I was promised is the most rational form of managing a nation.
I made my turn into the farm I was here to visit. I knew I made the proper turn because of a sign informing me that I was on military property, land proudly worked by the men of the 117th Infantry. There were no checkpoints, guards, or barbed wire; were it not for the sign, I couldn't tell this farm from the civilian-owned one I passed by down the road.
I was greeted by a man who introduced himself as Colonel Alfonso Reyes. Colonel Reyes' appearance surprised me: I expected an officer bedazzled in tacky medals, but Colonel Reyes was dressed in a farmer's shirt and camo pants. The dirt on his hands, shirt and face told me volumes. He firmly shook my hand and gestured to the farm buildings around us.
"Mr. Chana, look around you! This is true socialism at work!"
The buildings themselves looked to be in good shape, very good for military work. I commended the colonel; I had certainly seen worse from military management.
"You misunderstand, Mr. Chana. This farm is owned by civilians," Colonel Reyes told me. "My men work the fields, but civilians maintain ownership of their property. Put out of your mind any Marxian ideas of seizing property, which is not what true socialism is about. Come, my friend, I will show you the fields."
Colonel Reyes took me to a tractor, where one of his men was waiting to drive us through the fields. This farm, I immediately noticed, produced tobacco. Men and women, dressed in farm clothes with bits of military gear, were hunched over the plants, hacking away with machetes. I had mixed feelings about watching men do work I had risked everything to abandon. I informed Colonel Reyes of my concerns; I have a strong personal revulsion to slavery.
"These men are not slaves, Mr. Chana. They are conscripts, yes, here to serve their tour of duty, but they are paid for their labor. Military pay is actually better than what the market can provide, and that is not including guaranteed benefits that will assist them for a lifetime."
I tabled my concerns, and we sat on the back of the tractor. The machine drove through the fields, and I saw hundreds of farmers working the land. There were no armed overseers, guard towers or fences; it seems that Reyes was telling the truth.
"You see, Mr. Chana, these men are not here against their will. We need no guards, these men are proud to serve their country."
So these men are doing military service? Colonel Reyes nodded, gesturing to the laborers.
"Of course. These young men and women, they are all soldiers in the Paraguayan Army. They are helping their country through labor, for these products will be sold on and enrich the nation. Better than dying in the mud of a foreign land, no?"
The colonel had a point. Was this what he meant by true socialism? I asked him to explain what the term means to him.
"True socialism is socialism of the Prussian model, as opposed to the one advanced by the Marxists. It is the cooperation of the nation under the guidance of the state, rather than envy-fueled theft from one's fellow man."
What did he mean by the Prussian model?
"It is the model that was present in Prussia and Germany, before their leadership became corrupted by English lucre. Paraguay is the last bastion of true socialism."
That answered one question, but I still didn't understand the basic underpinnings of the system.
"Prussian socialism is most readily identified as having formed during the first years of the Great War, but in truth, its roots date back to the days of Napoleon. In times of modern war, total war, people understand that cooperation and sacrifice of their individual and class interests is the only way forward. We here in Paraguay believe that this positive, communal outlook should not be restricted to war. And if it must, then the war itself must continue."
The Republic of Paraguay gained its independence from the Spanish Empire in 1811, where an initial attempt to create a Rousseauean utopia were replaced by a period of military dictatorship. After the death of Paraguay’s second leader, Carlos Antonio Lopez, leadership of the country fell to his son, Francisco Solano Lopez. Like many developing countries in the late 19th century, Paraguay looked to Europe for a model for its society. It decided on the newest European state at the time, the German Empire. Lopez sought to emulate the German Empire in almost every way, particularly in the military. The Paraguayan military proved very capable in learning from the Germans, earning the country the moniker of the “Prussia of South America.” Paraguay would sign a treaty of alliance with Germany, protecting it from its more powerful neighbors, Brazil and Argentina.
The tractor passed by the tobacco plants, and now I saw that Reyes’ men were also growing potatoes. I asked the colonel what distinguished Prussian socialism from the Marxist variant.
“Firstly, Prussian socialism does not involve the seizure of the means of production. We believe in the individual initiative’s value in the economy, just as on the battlefield. Seizing property without recompense, and for the supposed crime of ownership? That is absurd. The military enters into the marketplace for its needs, or if it must, exercise eminent domain and pay fair market value. During the height of the Great War, the military did seize control of property, on occasion, but only when the state of war required it. It is a last resort, and those lands have since been returned to their rightful owners.”
During the Great War, Paraguay would honor its alliance with Germany, joining with Germany’s other allies: Russia, Austria, and Italy, against the British, French, and Ottoman empires. Paraguayan soldiers would see little combat, as the landlocked country had few ways to move troops past the British-friendly Brazilians and the Royal Navy itself. Paraguay was invaded by Brazil during the war, where it fought a brutal defensive war which eventually saw Brazil withdrawing at the close of the active phase of the Great War. Paraguay would sign a separate peace with Brazil, but remain in a de jure state of war with the rest of the Entente.
The Great War took its toll on Paraguayan society. The entire country mobilized to fight the Brazilians, and when some business owners refused to help the war effort on the grounds that they could make no money doing so, they and their employees were conscripted into the Paraguayan Army and ordered to work. This began a pattern of universal conscription, where workers would be conscripted, but not sent to the front. Rather, they were moved to important war industries.
“You see, Mr. Chana, socialism allows us to fill necessary gaps in the labor market with military labor. In this way, we can provide some products much more cheaply than we could under a total market economy, or even by trading abroad.”
I nodded. How far does the military go in “filling gaps?”
“As I mentioned before, the military sometimes takes control of property, but not without recompense. If an industry is required for the defense of the nation, but private owners cannot meet the demand, the military takes control. During the beginning of the Great War, this was the case for the munitions industry. We could not import enough ammunition from abroad, so we had to make our own. Today, Paraguay is a net exporter of munitions and arms. Sometimes, property owners ask the military to manage their land, because it would be unprofitable for them to do so. This farm is one such example. The owners were deep in debt, and so they could not hire laborers. They asked the military to staff it and take control of operations, and we pay them a percentage because we are using their land.”
What other differences were there between the Prussian and Marxist models?
“The second difference is we believe in the importance of nation and tradition. The English lie of cosmopolitanism and internationalism is at the heart of Marxian socialism. But a socialist system can only work when brothers, in blood and soul, are working for the good of one another. The nation is like a family, and like a family, everyone contributes.”
I asked Colonel Reyes to elaborate on his idea of everyone contributing.
“Every citizen is required to serve in the military, from his sixteenth birthday to his twenty-sixth. For a decade, every Paraguayan does his duty. Women, too, must serve, as do the disabled. This is because the Paraguayan military does more than fight wars. We build roads and bridges, work in farms and factories, act as police officers and doctors, we have jobs for everybody. And they are paid well, and afterwards, they are eligible for veteran social assistance.”
And since everyone is a veteran, that meant everyone was eligible? Colonel Reyes nodded.
“Yes, the children of veterans get an education as well. Everyone contributes. This is the third difference between Prussian socialism and Marxist socialism: we reject redistributionism completely. We believe socialism can only work when every man has something to contribute. The idea that we can take from some and give to others is not only unjust, it is unsustainable. It destroys the productive spirit. It appeals to the worst of man. Prussian socialism appeals to the best aspects of man. Duty, and pride in that duty.”
But surely everyone could be taxed? Then everyone is contributing.
“Not everyone has capital to tax, or a wage to take from. But everyone has labor, and if need be, their lives to give. Even a man who has nothing can still give his life, Mr. Chana. Only through the idea of universal service can this be achieved.”
Then how does the military pay for itself?
"We do have taxes, of course, but nobody can avoid their personal service through pay, like they can in some countries. We take universal service seriously. Our military also produces enough that it can sell goods in the international markets. The produce that is growing around us, for example. This helps pay the bills. Other industries, the military has a monopoly over. The manufacture of weapons, military equipment, military vehicles, that is all managed by the armed forces.”
But who decides where the money is spent? Colonel Reyes smiled.
“Ah, you are asking about our government. We do have an elected body of legislators, and a president, but they are, how you say, ‘ceremonial.’ The military has wide discretion in making decisions with its assets.”
But with so much of Paraguay under military control, wasn’t the country a military dictatorship? The colonel shook his head.
“Ultimately, the Chief of Staff of the Paraguayan Armed Forces is selected by the President. Through him, the people can have their voices heard. A poor Chief of Staff will be removed by the President, and his men will not support him.”
The potato fields made way to barns, which I recognized by smell before I saw them. There, I saw soldiers milking cows. I asked if the military owned the cows.
“We do not own these cattle. They are loaned from another farm. However, we do own the milk that is produced. Most of this will go out to market, but a portion will go to barracks, military academies and veteran care facilities. The military takes care of its own.”
But the military encompassed almost every adult in Paraguay? Colonel Reyes nodded. I asked if the people would ever tire of this system, and the war that allowed it to happen. The colonel seemed genuinely surprised at the question.
“The armed services provide for the indigent, the sick and disabled, and the elderly. The Paraguayan people rely on the armed services, without it our economy would stop working. If the war did not continue, if conscription were to ever stop, so many of our society’s most vulnerable will fall through the cracks. The last presidential candidate to propose signing peace with the Entente lost by an electoral landslide.”
I asked if those services could not instead be provided by civilians, for civilians. Colonel Reyes seemed even more shocked at the proposal.
“That could never be sustainable! Military service is a necessary component of the system, because it provides people with the character and skills necessary. In the military, people have a duty to provide for others. Civilians only take. The poorest, if they do not have a duty to contribute, will take from the rich, then the middle class. Eventually, the state will have no more to give, and the system falls to pieces.”
The tractor made its way back to the farm entrance. Colonel Reyes and I hopped off, and he once again pointed to the area surrounding him.
“Everything you see here is made possible by the war. I see prosperity, I see hard work, I see people happily serving their country and their people. I do not see craters and bombs and corpses. This war is the best thing to happen to Paraguay in its history. We can never let it end.”
How come you didn't offer a counterpoint this time?
Also, I'm reminded of an idea I had once. Take the whole Starship Troopers "service equals citizenship" concept, but rather than the military, the service in question is sex work, on the grounds that either A: sex work is a practical business with no place for idealism or ideology, that gives one an intimate knowledge of what people actually are rather than what they pretend, and/or B: politicians basically whore themselves out to special interests and whatnot anyways, they might as well do so for the people first.
I admit I have no idea how such a thing could come about though. Perhaps following a Third-Wave Feminist uprising against a SWERF-y Second-Wave Feminist Matriarchy? Granted, I can't imagine how THAT would happen either.
Also, I'm reminded of an idea I had once. Take the whole Starship Troopers "service equals citizenship" concept, but rather than the military, the service in question is sex work, on the grounds that either A: sex work is a practical business with no place for idealism or ideology, that gives one an intimate knowledge of what people actually are rather than what they pretend, and/or B: politicians basically whore themselves out to special interests and whatnot anyways, they might as well do so for the people first.
I admit I have no idea how such a thing could come about though. Perhaps following a Third-Wave Feminist uprising against a SWERF-y Second-Wave Feminist Matriarchy? Granted, I can't imagine how THAT would happen either.
Last edited:
This sounds like the logical conclusion of the "WWII got us out of the Great Depression" theory.
It was getting a bit long and I didn't feel like writing someone saying "yeah this system kinda works but there are flaws with it."
Who are they at war with?
This is like 1984 except the eternal war was created to solve unemployment, rather than maintain power
So...a more successful Eritrea? Where does this Paraguay compare with OTL's, in terms of GDP and HDI?
Well wasn't this hard to pin down. I'm gonna go with a pseudo-socialist benevolent military semi-dictatorship.
I am also reminded of this:
"The Patriots - they knew war was good for the economy. [...]The Patriots planted the seed - we don't need them around to filter and foster their memes any longer. We're spreading them just fine ourselves. Every Paraguayan man, woman and child... We're all Sons of the Patriots now!"
Well the Entente of course in honouring their alliance with German Empire. Entendre consisting of France, Ottoman Empire and the British Empire. But apparently the Brits had a Marxist revolution somewhere along the line and the Germans had a "true socialist" one. Then from what I can gather from the colonel Germans became corrupted by English Marxism. Paraguay might be at war with currently non-existent countries for all I know since they fell apart in revolutions. After signing peace with Brazil Paraguay was only legally at war with the Entente anyway.
Has there ever been a country which labels itself as a radical meritocracy? In the sense that it requires merit (defined by academic success and/or special contributions to the state, e.g. large donations or exemplary military service) for citizenship, which leads to a small and mostly wealthy citizenry (in contrast to the lower and middle class legal citizens).
I'm asking because I got inspired today after learning about The Rise of the Meritocracy.
I'm asking because I got inspired today after learning about The Rise of the Meritocracy.
I considered a democracy that uses civics aptitude tests and other means to restrict voting to the “intelligentsia.” Conrary to how it is usually portrayed, it doesn’t actually cement one side in perpetual power, but rather it keeps the elites on both sides fighting against one another while each conspiring to expand the franchise to ensure only *their* “useful idiots” get the vote.
I wonder if "world governments" can count as entries for this? I have this idea about "one" formed from a more "united" league of nations (mainly consisting of the European countries plus the British commonwealth) that is at odds with a Russian Empire and the USA in the early 21st century.
Technically there was one, but it was less about that and more one of the nations that weren't apart of it, namely North Korea
- Status