8
$\begingroup$

Species X is unique in several ways.

They were (the history lost to their people) genetically engineered originally, and appear as hairless humans of (intentionally) non-human looking skin of various grays, blues, and purples. They cannot reproduce, and depend on growing new members of their species artificially in a process similar to cloning (through combining multiple genetic bases in a way that leaves members being genetic copies nearly statistically impossible). Their species can be engineered to exaggerate some aspects at the costs of others; certain areas of the brain could be stimulated at the risk of mental deficiencies in others, or muscular growth could be set on the genetic level and sacrificing some other aspect. The most healthy (mentally and physically) members of their species tend to be the ones who are not guided genetically. Thus this allows them to somewhat create specialists, but not a 'master race.' Baseline they're roughly comparable to humans, but have shorter lifespans by a couple of decades. Growing a member of the species takes 2-3 years, and once the member emerges they do so with the reasoning, motor skills, and speech capabilities associated with early grade school, and are physically similar to humans in their early 20s. They lack reproductive organs, and do not look distinctly male or female.

The facilities that grow them have fallen into disrepair, and knowledge sharing about the growing process is almost non existent. The process of growing and modifying the genetics has devolved into superstition, and baring an academic revolution no meaningful advancement of the field will be seen. In fact, any attempts to make new facilities have ended in disaster, and this too has worked its way into their abstract superstition. Individuals have been flogged and hung who suggested tampering with the facilities to improve them.

Species X is also unique mentally from humans; they lack humanity's biological drive for tribalism and are biologically distrusting of others. They are very defensive (very wary of threats and find it difficult to form relations of trust), and readily separate and distance themselves. They do, however, biologically value recognition of others more than humans, and very much respond to a desire for a sense of power or authority.

Those who control the growing facilities control the power, but due to the nature of the species/culture, those who control the facilities aren't promised to remain in power long before an inevitable overthrow is attempted.

This mental biology would drive them to disperse, except the other species of the galaxy are extremely racist towards them, viewing them as a thieving, warlike culture (a reputation they have somewhat earned). Most organized groups of the galaxy are only a stone's throw away from endorsing their genocide.

To avoid extermination, they realize the need to band together, even if they are biologically repulsed by the idea. They need to come together and craft a government that:

  • The facility owners can agree upon, and will support
  • Will endure change of power of the facility owners
  • Will endure the general lack of trust and strong sense of individualism of the species
  • Will allow them to mass a military quickly if a threat arises
  • Will resist internal forces that might attempt to tear it apart
  • Will provide a unified movement to direct them in war
  • Will show the external galaxy that they are a unified force

To clarify: the primary reason for the government is simple survival, not embetterment of the species, or trade, etc, although they would probably welcome that. Further, the government isn't attempting to achieve a moral highground; the growing facility owners are fine with forming a government under force if need be.

What government would support Species X, and best achieve these goals?

Additional Information Per Request(s)

There's around 100 facilities scattered around a single planet on the various continents of the planet. The facilities vary in size, with about a dozen or so being clearly the largest.

The current leadership of the facilities tend to have acquired their power through coercing others (including, but certainly not limited to violence) or making deals. Others might have used industries they lead, or simple wealth to provide leverage to make their way on top.

Power than is typically maintained since in <8 years those commanding the facility can begin to produce members of their species who are indoctrinated (as best as they can be) for loyalty. This isn't a guarantee by any means, however.

Lacking the draw of tribalism has significantly impacted their record keeping as they don't see the value of preserving the history of their ancestors. However as best as they know they escaped their masters 1000 - 3000 years ago (a period that, during which, they rediscovered a variety of technologies including spaceflight and later intersystem travel).

The facilities have undergone a process over those years similar to ship of Theseus; none of their parts are original, but they still serve (after a fashion) the original purpose. Slowly, crudely, they're repaired and parts are replaced to keep them functioning.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What is the governance policy for controlling the facilities right now? Creation of a stable government is a tricky business, so typically we find it rises out of existing systems. Also, how many of these facilities are there, how diffuse are they (are they all on one planet, or scattered), and how long have they been operating. Given that those facilities are the reproductive capacity of the entire race, and the facilities themselves are not reproducing, they will basically dictate the government. $\endgroup$ – Cort Ammon Aug 30 '16 at 18:22
  • $\begingroup$ @CortAmmon I thought it was too wordy for a comment, so I edited the question to include additional information. If you feel anything else is needed, don't hesitate to ask. $\endgroup$ – Nex Terren Aug 30 '16 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ Do individuals feel an obligation to act for the good of the species? It seems to me that an overseer of one of these facilities would engineer the future generations to be more accepting of his (its?) autocratic rule. This would serve to ease his wariness of others and feed his desire for power. What's stopping him from doing this? $\endgroup$ – Kys Aug 30 '16 at 19:53
  • $\begingroup$ @Kys To the first: nationalism or other senses of tribalism are very foreign to them, but certainly not impossible. Naturally they do not embrace tribalism. To the second part: They know how to engineer mental capabilities (Such as increasing spatial intelligence, for example) but not personality traits. Their books on how to make it all work read more like books on alchemy than actual science, as superstition and lore have embedded themselves into the process. $\endgroup$ – Nex Terren Aug 30 '16 at 19:56
  • $\begingroup$ Why do they think that banding together will help them avoid extermination? $\endgroup$ – DSKekaha May 17 '17 at 20:26
4
$\begingroup$

It’s not a perfect fit, but I’m inclined to suggest a dictatorship.

Here are a few reasons I think this might work:

  • Lack of willingness to work together. Most governments require some kind of voluntary desire or mutual need to work together. If that’s thrown out the window, then threat of force, death, torture, or other punishment has been shown to be very effective at keeping people in line.

  • Distrust of others. This is practically baked into a dictatorship. Purges of top brass are common and the creature on top inherently needs some level of distrust to survive. Fear and a well-established chain of command can make successful coups less likely.

  • Genetic engineering can facilitate powerful, but less thoughtful armed forces. With their form of reproduction, building an army both propagates the species and enables the iron-fisted ruler to emphasize combat prowess at the expense of thought-centers that might foment insurrection. This kind of manipulation could make a ruler a very powerful force.

  • Clear appearance of unified force. With one man in command who answers only to himself, neighbors will know very clearly that he can carry through on threats. Strong control over internal reporting can hide potential weaknesses in the leadership structure or mask power struggles to the outside world.

This could even form somewhat naturally. If a particularly driven individual (driven by their interest in power / authority) were to gain control of a growing facility then they have the tool they need to engineer a physically strong force. With enough maneuvering, this one individual, slowly surrounding itself with “loyal” lieutenants (out of fear for their lives), could gain more and more facilities until they become very difficult to stop. If this is the case, facility owner agreement is no longer required — it’s forced.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Oligarchy - each facility leader would be a member of the group of leaders (would they call it a board?) If the facility gets a new leader, that leader takes this place on the board.

The larger facilities would have tie breaker powers.

Since there is a lack of trust, "meetings" would not be in person and there would have to be a physical, remotely verifiable security procedure to ensure each member on the board is who they say they are. Perhaps there is a place (a chair, a chamber, whatever) that only one person can reside inside each facility. The person physically located in that place is the leader of that facility.

There would be a voting system where some percentage of votes are required. At least 50% for the typical vote or at least 75% for important votes.

Each facility is required to send a percentage of their citizens to the military force in a time of war.

This rule is definitely tyrannical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Something like the EU with a regularly rotating Presidency with terms measured in months, a highly federal system of administration, and lots of side deals between members might be a good model.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.