[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

One big reason is because Marxism is theoretically oriented toward giving the workers an equal share in the bounty produced by the industrial revolution. Centrum would reject that out of hand.

Not actually true on that first sentence.

Marxism, whether "ideal" or real-world, has always been about giving to workers according to their need, not according to equal shares. If communism is "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need", then Centrum is "From each according to their ability, to each according to their merit".

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

... And an ideology that extols revolution is anathema to Centrum.

People focus so much on the revolutionary aspects of communism primarily because as an outside (to our daily lives) ideology, that is the side that it will of necessity present to us foremost. But it is in fact no more revolutionary than Centrum's own ideology. Which is to say that both ideologies are quite revolutionary, and see nothing wrong in overthrowing a socio-economic structure that is at odds with their own. And further, both have clear theories on how a post-revolution society should function.

The ONLY thing that tempers Centrum's own revolutionary aspect is that uncontrolled revolutions may have a tendency to shift timelines in ways undesirable to Centrum's long-term goals, or worse, cause a timeline to drift away from Centrum along the quanta. But make no mistake: in the one timeline in which this was never a concern (their home timeline), they had zero qualms about staging revolutions or anything else to overthrow local power structures in order to emplace their own socio-economic model.

-----------------------------

It may be worth examining the differences between capitalism, communism, and Centrum in a bit more detail (and noting where appropriate that capitalism has both social-democrat and laissez-faire flavours, communism has ideal and OTL real-world flavours, and Centrum has dark and light flavours).


Welfare State? Vulnerable Adults? How does society treat its weakest?

This may further divide to the following groups:

• Elderly/pensioners
• Unemployed/underemployed
• Disabled/handicapped
• Work-shy/lazy/wilfully idle

Cap.: There may or may not be a welfare state sufficient to meet basic needs. Even if there is, the work-shy need not apply. Pensioners aren't likely to have more than basic needs met unless they planned for it (which in turn requires a decent job during their prime years). In highly specific circumstances, you might hope for a big insurance/lawsuit payout if you become disabled through corporate malpractice or employer negligence.

Com.: Basic needs for everyone will be met, subject to available resources. The work-shy may find that being too work-shy is a crime punishable by forced labour. Highly-successful party officials can hope to enjoy a comfortable retirement.

Cent: Basic needs for everyone will be met, subject to available resources. The work-shy may find that being too work-shy is a crime punishable by forced labour. Highly-successful workers (as defined by merit and promotions) can hope to enjoy a comfortable retirement.

How do you get a job? Or a promotion? What is job security like?

Cap.: Employers typically advertise their jobs, or pay an agency to advertise for them. You can last and/or get promoted as long as you are useful to your employer. Promotions tend to be by switching employer as often as not.

Com.: If you demonstrate no initiative in getting a job, a menial one will probably be assigned to you. Once you have a job, you are unlikely to lose it unless you demonstrate gross incompetence. Promotion is by a mix of competence, seniority, and/or party loyalty. Promotions tend to be towards the capital if they require relocation at all.

Cent.: If you demonstrate no initiative in getting a job, a menial one will probably be assigned to you. Promotion (and demotion) are both based on merit. It is quite conceivable that a promotion (even from burger-flipper to burger-flip supervisor) may entail a required relocation to another city on the other end of the continent, in which case a billet in a worker barracks would be provided.

What happens if you invent something?

Cap.: It's yours to profit from as you please, unless you signed away your rights as part of an employment contract, in which case you get your usual salary and nothing more.

Com.: It belongs to the state. You can probably gain a promotion or a gold star in the party's eyes if you play your cards right.

Cent.: It belongs to the state. You'll almost certainly gain merit and probably a promotion though.

What can I buy?

Cap.: Anything, if you have the money for it!

Com.: Generally, only the basics are available, although party members in good standing may have access to luxury goods. In more "ideal" forms of communism, a wider variety of goods will be available.

Cent.: It's a command economy. You don't buy stuff so much as requisition it. And how much you can requisition is largely a function of your rank in society.

So while there are differences between Centrum and communism, it does to my mind resemble communism more than it does capitalism, at least from the citizen's-eye perspective.