Control and arbitration of social mores and customs in Illuminatia

The control, arbitration, and negotiation of social mores, cultural customs, and other societal expectations upon and among people in Illuminatia is in general a non-prescriptive, non-reactionary, informal process that strives to balance individual liberties with the greater good, the welfare of the community, and the maximization of the probability of survival of the Illuminatian branch of the human race.

Formal and codified

The government in Illuminatia inclines heavily toward a hands-off, non-interventionist approach to social control. Nonetheless, the democratic process has endowed the government with various authorities to encourage certain behaviors among individuals and corporate entities through the utilization of taxation, non-taxation, and incentivization. These mechanisms are largely successful. The criminal justice system, while it exists, plays a very minor role in these dynamics.

The karmic system is a highly effective formalized non-governmental social credit structure that utilizes further incentivization measures to reward individuals for desirable behavior and dissuade individuals from conduct that upsets or offends others.

Informal and negotiable structures

Commonly, social norms are informally enforced through interpersonal means among individuals, groups of people, or by private entities by way of their freedom of choice as to which behaviors and expressions they might choose to accept or tolerate in their presence, upon their premises, or within specific interactions with themselves.

As relating to business, commercial enterprises, organizations, and other entities, the overall acceptance (or non-acceptance) of the restrictions that these informal controls might place on individual liberties and freedoms is commonly enforced by means of boycott or the exercise of free choice among persons or entities as to with whom they engage in contracts and business and how they do so.

The Illuminatian civil arbitration system comes into play as a formalized framework that might arbitrate these malleable social negotiations. Entities with unpopular policies, for instance, might be subject to civil action by others whom might have been injured by their inability to interact with an organization or enterprise on their own terms. This give-and-take causes businesses and other corporate entities to remain highly cognizant of what norms they choose to enforce, as while acceptance and enforcement of popular mores and customs may yield high acceptance, falling too far outside of mainstream cultural ideals could make a business or organizational entity liable to civil action based upon grounds of public nonservice as the result of their perception of socially-contracted acceptable norms.