WI/AHC: Neo-Inca state Survival?

[Vahktang]

Well, I'm not the OP but my definition of the Neo-Inca state is what existed after the fall of the empire and the death of Atahualpa.

Oh, thank goodness.
I thought you were going to say until modern times.
Until the end of the century should not be that hard.
Close the borders to outsiders, reinforce and upgrade the passes, abandon the coast.
The Inca Empire is a tiny, sick country by the end, an easy push over, but, conditions have been met.

 

[garfieldleifrag]

The major problem with this is that the Inca have a pure command economy. This is fine in the Andes, where the local climate and ecology make this the only viable system until the Industrial Revolution, but it's not good for the Chaco. Thus, I imagine the Inca will set up colonies in those areas, which will run their economy autonomously but still provide tribute for the government at Qosqo. ​

Is this really too much of an issue in terms of their survival? The Soviet Union had one of the fastest growing economies in human history during the 1930's (although it did come at the cost of a few million Ukrainians, which was extremely bad from a moral standpoint but didn't threaten the survival of the state) and iirc even today most of China's economy is under state control and their economy is one of the few that still experienced any growth in 2020.

 

[Sapa Inka Wiraqucha]

@Sapa Inka Wiraqucha

Did you do it because of his name?

If I had named myself JuJu Yehudovich Binks, would he have asked me about Star Wars or Star Trek?

 

[Goldensilver81]

If I had named myself JuJu Yehudovich Binks, would he have asked me about Star Wars or Star Trek?

I would have

 

[Sapa Inka Wiraqucha]

Is this really too much of an issue in terms of their survival? The Soviet Union had one of the fastest growing economies in human history during the 1930's (although it did come at the cost of a few million Ukrainians, which was extremely bad from a moral standpoint but didn't threaten the survival of the state) and iirc even today most of China's economy is under state control and their economy is one of the few that still experienced any growth in 2020.

Oh nooooo..... so... much... wrong!!! RANT INCOMING!!!​

​

Don't have time to shit it out right now, will do soon. But rest assured, you'll be getting a big bag of it delivered soon.​

 

[Sārthākā]

Is this really too much of an issue in terms of their survival? The Soviet Union had one of the fastest growing economies in human history during the 1930's (although it did come at the cost of a few million Ukrainians, which was extremely bad from a moral standpoint but didn't threaten the survival of the state) and iirc even today most of China's economy is under state control and their economy is one of the few that still experienced any growth in 2020.

Oh nooooo..... so... much... wrong!!! RANT INCOMING!!!​

​

Don't have time to shit it out right now, will do soon. But rest assured, you'll be getting a big bag of it delivered soon.​

pure command economies are not sustainable. Command economy mixed with market economics is. However despite command economies not being sustainable on the long run, command economies have been known to be exceptionally useful in poor areas of the world before industrialization, so the neo-incan state could use command economics to survive. For places with extremely small populations, like for example the Tibetan Empire used a brand of command economy based on trade and that worked fine for them, and so on and so forth. It is a matter of how well managed it can be that affects the economy. It depends on the theory of the monopoly charter theory of command economics