Dystopian Monetary Systems

From the title of this post, you might think that we are going to discuss rapacious financial systems that leave bleak and shattered worlds in their wake. However, there are libraries full of critiques of every economic system under the sun, from Marx to Hayek to Piketty. If you want to understanding why the modern world looks, acts and even smells like it does, then a complete understanding of our economic system (neo-liberal capitalism) is a must.

What we are discussing is fictional governments and the economic systems that power them. In the same way you shouldn't trust a work of fiction that lacks a political view (post on that later), you should never trust a work of speculative fiction that fails to have a coherent economic model.

There are a number of hard science fiction stories that detail the economic model of the universe they inhabit. The anachro-capitlaism post-scarcity of The Culture universe, to the Techno-liberalism of Peter Hamilton's Nights Dawn and Pandora Star series and the Ur-libertarianism of Snow Crash.

With the increasing interest (some might say "peak interest") in YA anti-utopian fiction, care should be made to create plausible economic models that support the oppressive government systems in your work.

As an example of a partially detailed economic system, take the Hunger Games series. The economic model of Hunger Games is never explicitly described. However, we do know that it features both low and high-tech manufacturing (and presumably some form of higher and advanced education), as well as massive resource extraction (see districts 12, 4, 3, and 7). Most of these resources appear to be earmarked for the use by the citizens of the capital. While there is some form of income and wealth generation in the Capital, the mechanisms of distribution, both in terms of employment and luxury end-products is murky. Clearly, Panem operates on an authoritarian command economy (equal parts oppressive communist in the districts, and some form of open / limited market in the Capital), but there is no clearly identified private firms or companies. It is possible that everyone in the Capital works for the Capital, at which point it forms a closed economy independent from the rest of the districts, but receives tribute as a form of "Dividend on oppression".

What's the point you ask? The Hunger Games is about a contest (and thinly veiled allegory) of teenagers forced to kill one another for entertainment value, who cares about economic models? Well, arm chair economists for one, but authors and readers who appreciate detailed world building for another.

Economic systems influence political systems, and you can't world build without a political system. You can try, but your characters ( more so if they are plucky teens rebelling against authority) need to have a platform for their views. Why is the Authoritarian government bad? Because it controls people. In the Hunger Games, one of the reasons the Government is so terrible is that it appears to run forced labor facilities all over the country (See District 11, 12 - forced farming and forced shaft coal mining). Forced labor camps only make political sense in certain economic systems. If your economic system does not prize competition and liberty, your political system will reflect that, not vice versa. So in truth, the economic model (cheap labor and resources) informs the political system (massive authoritarian repression), not the other way around.

Conflict, the lifeblood of good characterization, often stems from disparities in economic standing. As another example, the Lannisters of Game of Thrones are wealthy (or so they say ) patrons of the crown based, not on their knowledge of science or mathematics, but their ability to extract gold from the land under their feet. In contrast, the Iron Bank of Bravos yields capital in the form of interest bearing loans on prior loaned capital and merchant marine services. In both instances, their wealth and resources allows them to take political positions that lesser equipped houses and organizations could not implement.

When constructing a world for your characters to inhabit, look to the economic model to explain motivations of not only the government (if there is a government) but the people rebelling against the government.  When conducting analysis or reviewing the work of others, look to the naturalness of the political and economic systems. Is the world resource constrained? If so, the political system will seek to control individuals. If the individuals rebel, what will that rebellion do to the availability of resources? Does the author address the economic rational of the villains, and the economic downside of the protagonists goals? Working through these issues will leave less gaps that must be hand-waived through exposition or ball-hiding, resulting in a tighter work that focuses on plot.

2014 Moorsgate Media (www.moorsgatemedia.blogspot.com)

Vampires are terrible

By the title of this post you can probably guess that that I am about to rant about sparkly vampires or loving vampires or generally any sort of vampire that would not feature predominantly as a villain in a Blade reboot (ed:  Blade Reboot? awesome sauce!). 

For the most part, you would be wrong. There is nothing wrong with twinkle vampires, sensitive vampires, or any other form of vampire-based fiction that explores wish fulfillment.  True, there is a lot of "my rich boyfriend is a secret badass", to a lot of modern vampire stories. As a result, people think the genera is over. "No more vampire stories!" people (namely book agents) cry!

There is nothing wrong with the genera. It might just be that the current story slate, ( i.e., rich boyfriend), needs to be investigated further. Economic theory says that if nothing else, most vampires should be at least affluent, if not down right uber-wealthy. Figure out a story that explains how your sexy vampire got his cash, and you might have a new angle on an old idea.

ISSUE 1: Vampires are (or should be) rich.

Vampires, without direct violence, can be expected to live anywhere from "A Very Long Time" to "Infinity." While that sounds great in and of itself, it is really great from an economic stand point. Compound interest is wonderful, as is, the stock market. Most vampires lack the need of actual economic inputs (read: food, clothing, shelter, sleep...air). As such, their actual cash outlays are minimal to non-existent. If they possess special powers, such as super speed or flight, then generally they have zero to minimal transportation costs. Think about the cost of an average transatlantic flight. Vampires pocket that for fancy hotels and ebony-wood coffins.

However, most vampires lack a normal occupation (with the exception of the one that was a rock star and that other one that ran a medical clinic in Washington State) and hence a steady income. However, one assumes if you rob your food source (i.e. people); you can make do. In fact, after a few years you probably have acquired some sizable assets.

Now, let's assume that your vampire boyfriend is nice and does not commit regular robbery/homicides every other lunch period. However, lets also not assume that he hails from some degenerate landed gentry or b) employs some sort of glamer on people, thereby hypnotizing them into giving them money.  Assuming he was, in his mortal incarnation, middle class; then by investing some portion of his money (which he really does not need)  in the sock market (say in General Electric stock in 1915) and living solely off the dividends (or reinvestment or diversifying in times of economic struggle), then by the time he hit the 90's tech bubble he would be a millionaire several times over. By not touching the principal, each vampire more than 50 or 60 years old should have a sizable amount of the worlds money locked up in various modern, well-appointed, seaside homes.

So any story that I encounter that does not explain why a) the vampire is or isn't rich; or b) lacks the assistance of a good financial adviser; should be suspect to the tiny Alan Greenspan that lurks within us. Money is part of the world, an essential part. Relative wealth, and how it was acquired, is a necessary component of any fleshed out character.

ISSUE 2: Vampires Are Bad at Science.

Vampires, as stated above, are considerably long lived. Generally, society mourns the loss of great intellects, from Newton to Einstein. One would think that vampires would scoop up these top notch scientist at the bargain basement price of "almost dead".  Why stop there? Why not selectively "convert" the top graduate(s) of  highly prestigious technical universities.

Truth be told, there should be vampire covens of geniuses. Each one, a collection of immortals sitting around creating fantastic works of art, literature, and science. One should assume that the internally produced vampire literature is significantly superior to human literature. Most vampire stories take the position that only good looking people, of an artistic bent, become vampires (see rock star). However, rarely do we get a story about the great and fabulous vampire museums featuring the "post-turned" works of Picasso, Muro et. al.

Most vampires stories paint the species at a significant technological and ecological disadvantage relative to humans. Vampires rely on a slowly reproducing natural resource that is subject to plagues, pandemics, endemic violence, and natural or cosmic disasters. Farmers wouldn't tolerate the level of uncertainty in the long term viability of their stock. Likewise, surveillance technology, networked infrastructure, high-capacity ammunition, and directed energy weapons all level the playing field against the natural gifts of the supernatural. Vampires should be concerned about the technological prowess of their food-stuff in the same way we would be worried if we started seeing pigs collaborating with cows to build catapults.

ISSUE 3: Vampires lack vision.

With unlimited life spans and budgets, individual vampires should be able to privately fund all manner of Manhattan Project-style endeavors.

For example, given their superhuman abilities, vampires are almost specifically designed for Deep Ocean and Deep Space exploration.

A round trip to Proxima Centuri, at 1/10 the speed of light (which is all we could ever be capable of with modern technology) would take 80 years. This is seen as a barrier for humans, but with a steady supply of cryogenically frozen blood (not to mention "Deep Vampire Sleep", it would be a cake walk for vampires.

Assuming ambitions closer to home, one would expect that at least some vampires use their vast wealth and time horizons to devise counter-measures to human extinction (since one prefaces the other), and are ready to deploy them at a moment's notice.

At the very least, you would assume that Vampires operate technology that is several generations ahead of our own. Faster computers, smaller devices, robots . (ed - see Vampire Hunter D series for technologically advanced vampires).

The point here is to note that "Vampire" as a genera, just like any other genera, has room for interpretation or reinvention. Just because there have been a spate of successful, "Vampires are my Boyfriend", books doesn't mean that every story that could be written about them has been written. Now, a book on Vampire Economics might not get turned into a best selling novel series, but it would definitely set the author apart.

@Moorsgate
www.moorsgatemedia.blogspot.com