Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
The way I see it, without a strong Party/SolSec holding it together the Confederation would fragment into its constituent states.
Is Solomani evil?
- Thread starter Cymew
- Start date
saulweaver
SOC-8
Leaving aside the issue of whether peasants or intellectuals are more prone to utopian/tyrannical nonsense, here is my history of the evolution of the Solomani Confederation from decentralized confederation to centralized tyranny:
1980-Library Data (A-M). It contains the "History of the Solomani Movement" essay, but has almost nothing to say about the nature of the Confederation government. Interestingly, it says that "wherever political freedom is tolerated there is generally at least one (and sometimes several rival) Solomani parties." (p. 39). The "Movement" appears to be a belief system, rather than a political party. At this point anyway, there does not appear to even be a single Party, and there is no mention of SolSec.
1982-Solomani Rim (Harshman). It notes that the Bootean cluster has "considerable influcence in the Confederation government" (p. 36). With regards to the Kukulcan trade war, "Although such large-scale rivalries are not permitted in the Imperium, interworld factionalism forms much of the politics of the Solomani Confederation." (p.40). No mention of the Party or SolSec.
1982-Library Data (N-Z) (LKW, MWM, Harshman). Big essay on the Solomani Confederation and its government, with an emphasis on the secretariat. For the first time, there is a single Solomani Party, called the "Solomani Movement." (p. 20). "All government office holders and officials must be members of the official party, the Solomani Movement. Although formerly of great power and influence, the party is now weak, decentralized, and of little importance. Real power in the Confederation is held by the government and the factions." (p. 19). "Because of the greater degree of local autonomy that exists in the Solomani Confederation, interworld factionalism exists to a much greater degree than would be allowed in the Imperium. Coalitions of world exist outside the normal government channels, sometimes equalling them in importance within a given region." (pp. 19-20). It again mentions the Bootes cluster and Kulkcan trade war.
At this point, the party is weak, whatever centralized power there is in the Confederation seems to belong to the secretariat, and the Confederation is extremely decentralized, much more so than the Imperium. There is not yet a SolSec.
Interestingly, the big change from a decentralized confederation to a Soviet state evolved out of a wargmame. In 1983 Viktor Suvorov publishes a book called "Inside the Soviet Army." It has a detail of the Soviet order of battle, which is copied verbatim by Frank Chadwick and John Harshman in their 1984 game "The Third World War." The book also describes the Soviet political system as a "Bermuda Triangle" of "the Party, the Army and the KGB." (p. 27). It talks of checks and balances which keeps the other members of the triangle in line.
1985-Signal GK. SolSec makes its first appearance. It is not described as part of any governing triumverate.
Finally, in 1986 we get the Alien Module (MWM and Harshman). Now, "[w]herever political freedom is tolerated, there is at least one faction of the Solomani Party." (p. 12). Note the difference in this language from that of the original Libray Data supplement. Also, the name of the party is no longer the "Solomani Movement," which again appears to be a belief system; it is now just the "Solomani Party." Finally, the "Triumverate" of the "Solomani Party," military and SolSec are introduced as the government of the Confederation. "Each part of the [triumverate], pursuing its own goals, is held in check by the others." Prior emphasis had been on the Secretariat and the multi-world coalitions, but these are no longer mentioned. Harshman, who co-wrote AM6, also was a co-designer of the "Third World War" wargame.
I hope this clarifies my position on the changing nature of the Confederation, and how it ended up with a decentralized centralized government.
1980-Library Data (A-M). It contains the "History of the Solomani Movement" essay, but has almost nothing to say about the nature of the Confederation government. Interestingly, it says that "wherever political freedom is tolerated there is generally at least one (and sometimes several rival) Solomani parties." (p. 39). The "Movement" appears to be a belief system, rather than a political party. At this point anyway, there does not appear to even be a single Party, and there is no mention of SolSec.
1982-Solomani Rim (Harshman). It notes that the Bootean cluster has "considerable influcence in the Confederation government" (p. 36). With regards to the Kukulcan trade war, "Although such large-scale rivalries are not permitted in the Imperium, interworld factionalism forms much of the politics of the Solomani Confederation." (p.40). No mention of the Party or SolSec.
1982-Library Data (N-Z) (LKW, MWM, Harshman). Big essay on the Solomani Confederation and its government, with an emphasis on the secretariat. For the first time, there is a single Solomani Party, called the "Solomani Movement." (p. 20). "All government office holders and officials must be members of the official party, the Solomani Movement. Although formerly of great power and influence, the party is now weak, decentralized, and of little importance. Real power in the Confederation is held by the government and the factions." (p. 19). "Because of the greater degree of local autonomy that exists in the Solomani Confederation, interworld factionalism exists to a much greater degree than would be allowed in the Imperium. Coalitions of world exist outside the normal government channels, sometimes equalling them in importance within a given region." (pp. 19-20). It again mentions the Bootes cluster and Kulkcan trade war.
At this point, the party is weak, whatever centralized power there is in the Confederation seems to belong to the secretariat, and the Confederation is extremely decentralized, much more so than the Imperium. There is not yet a SolSec.
Interestingly, the big change from a decentralized confederation to a Soviet state evolved out of a wargmame. In 1983 Viktor Suvorov publishes a book called "Inside the Soviet Army." It has a detail of the Soviet order of battle, which is copied verbatim by Frank Chadwick and John Harshman in their 1984 game "The Third World War." The book also describes the Soviet political system as a "Bermuda Triangle" of "the Party, the Army and the KGB." (p. 27). It talks of checks and balances which keeps the other members of the triangle in line.
1985-Signal GK. SolSec makes its first appearance. It is not described as part of any governing triumverate.
Finally, in 1986 we get the Alien Module (MWM and Harshman). Now, "[w]herever political freedom is tolerated, there is at least one faction of the Solomani Party." (p. 12). Note the difference in this language from that of the original Libray Data supplement. Also, the name of the party is no longer the "Solomani Movement," which again appears to be a belief system; it is now just the "Solomani Party." Finally, the "Triumverate" of the "Solomani Party," military and SolSec are introduced as the government of the Confederation. "Each part of the [triumverate], pursuing its own goals, is held in check by the others." Prior emphasis had been on the Secretariat and the multi-world coalitions, but these are no longer mentioned. Harshman, who co-wrote AM6, also was a co-designer of the "Third World War" wargame.
I hope this clarifies my position on the changing nature of the Confederation, and how it ended up with a decentralized centralized government.
I can sort of see the evolution since you've laid it out so clearly.
However, since I read it in about the order you lay it out, I guess I always formed my first impression from the early stuff, and thought that the after stuff added to it rather than replaced it.... that is to say that the Confed was more divisive than the Imperium, prone to more internal factionation (Soviet Union did this a lot too if you watch the internal power struggles in the Politburo but also between Republics, etc), and that the Party was sort of like the government you dealt with, but their were various branches of it and they contested with one another. And there were a few rabid zealots, but most people (as in the real world) just didn't give a flying hoot about any Solomani Hypothesis. I sort of viewed the radicals as something even the Solomani Party main body politic more or less tried to ignore.
So I never viewed them as Nazis in space. Just a bureaucracy on par with the Empire, with a few zealots. (As opposed to the Empire.... an absolute monarchy.... talk about your bad historical examples!!!!!)
I view both as modern states.... with some zealous folks involved but the majority just going about the business of governing a large trade based empire.....
However, since I read it in about the order you lay it out, I guess I always formed my first impression from the early stuff, and thought that the after stuff added to it rather than replaced it.... that is to say that the Confed was more divisive than the Imperium, prone to more internal factionation (Soviet Union did this a lot too if you watch the internal power struggles in the Politburo but also between Republics, etc), and that the Party was sort of like the government you dealt with, but their were various branches of it and they contested with one another. And there were a few rabid zealots, but most people (as in the real world) just didn't give a flying hoot about any Solomani Hypothesis. I sort of viewed the radicals as something even the Solomani Party main body politic more or less tried to ignore.
So I never viewed them as Nazis in space. Just a bureaucracy on par with the Empire, with a few zealots. (As opposed to the Empire.... an absolute monarchy.... talk about your bad historical examples!!!!!)
I view both as modern states.... with some zealous folks involved but the majority just going about the business of governing a large trade based empire.....
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
I agree there has been an evolution, but that's true of everything in Traveller (and many other things) - hell, when it was first published there wasn't even an Imperium!
I think it was stated years ago that, in general, if two canon sources contradict, the most recent takes precedent.
I think it was stated years ago that, in general, if two canon sources contradict, the most recent takes precedent.
saulweaver
SOC-8
Well good, because MT seems to have ignored the Alien Module and reverted to the 1982 version of the Confederation.
At least in the library data in the Imperial Encyclopedia, the Secretariat is back, the name of the party is again the Solomani Movement, the party is weak and divided, and the Confederation is more decentralized than the Imperium. Basically, it copies the information from Library Data (N-Z). SolSec no longer gets billing as the third branch of government, and the triumverate is not mentioned (although it may be mentioned in one of the side-bars littering the MT books, I am not sure).I am not saying that IMTU the AM was ignored, but I just took the approach that kaladorn does. I found it made the setting more interesting and flexible.
Perhaps I was overstating it to say canon is contradictory. Rather, there are two separate conceptions about the Confederation. One involves a decentralized confederation, and the other a police state imported from the Soviet Union. The question is not whether one is right or the other, because they are both right. The real issue is how to reconcile them. I think kaladorn's approach does that best.
I just read 'case for the solomani' and some other Solomani related stuff in TD#19. They show a tinge of the neo-fascist, but they also reveal a lot about why the Solomani feel the way they do. The bits where they expose the transcripts of public announcements from party, solsec, and finance about the plans to attack the Imperium to get Terra back (among other things... some of them see themselves as saviours for the 11 trillion humans in the Empire...) were good.
The best part was where the finance minister raises the sorts of points about growing disruption, the problem where SolSec or military have had to engage Solomani populations, etc. He does give a very clear idea of a factionated Confederation as relative to the Empire and one with a large (though perhaps not heard so much in the PR end) liberal movement.
I can't rightly post the whole article, but if anyone is interested, I could probably snippet some of the key lines...
Tomb
The best part was where the finance minister raises the sorts of points about growing disruption, the problem where SolSec or military have had to engage Solomani populations, etc. He does give a very clear idea of a factionated Confederation as relative to the Empire and one with a large (though perhaps not heard so much in the PR end) liberal movement.
I can't rightly post the whole article, but if anyone is interested, I could probably snippet some of the key lines...
Tomb
Which Solomoni? In Rim of Fire it says that the only thing they agree on is that "Solomoni are real cool". This can span the whole gamut from genocide, to mere snobbery. Some don't even hold to the "Solomoni Cause" any more than is necessary to keep their jobs.
Is the Solomani state evil? Sometimes. Every people has to have a government and the Confederation isn't evil simply by existing.
The question is therefore, "Is the Solomani Cause evil? I would have to say yes. It teaches people to hold themselves superior to others because of their ancestry. It also (sometimes) encourages hatred of those outside. Therefore it is an evil ideology-but some variations of it are more evil than others.
Is the Solomani state evil? Sometimes. Every people has to have a government and the Confederation isn't evil simply by existing.
The question is therefore, "Is the Solomani Cause evil? I would have to say yes. It teaches people to hold themselves superior to others because of their ancestry. It also (sometimes) encourages hatred of those outside. Therefore it is an evil ideology-but some variations of it are more evil than others.
PapaGolfWhiskey
SOC-13
Well said. Jatay. I was aiming for a similar thesis but you said it much better.
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
"Evil" is a bit subjective, but it's certainly racist, which most people agree is A Very Bad Thing.
The Party uses the Cause as its foundation, but individual factions or members may be less evil.
The Confederation government consists of Party members, but being Evil Space Nazis is only a small part of their job.
Individual Solomani are probably no more or less evil than any other humans.
saulweaver
SOC-8
So racism is alway bad, right?
's advocate here.
The modern liberal experience of course rejects racism, I think in large part because the Nazi's gave it such a bad reputation. In fact even suggesting that there might a difference between the races is virtually criminal, and certainly socially forbidden.
I have three points in regard to this why the Far Future might be somewhat different.
First, this modern attitude towards race is just that. Just 80 years ago, the most civilized places on earth had some pretty definate and accepted ideas on race. For instance, the British had the notion that certain races in India made better soldiers than others, which today seems preposterous. A whole bunch of things that we now think are cultural they thought were racial. I suspect a lot of people today say its cultural differnces, suspect there is a genetic component, but don't discuss it. But my point is that racism can exist overtly in some civilized societies (and it certainly exists covertly in all socieities); in some ways, Western Civilizion was more civilized 100 years ago than it is now, when it was much more racist.
Second, in the Far Future they are going to know a lot more about genetics. They will be able to identify how Terrans are different that Viliani, let alone the differnce between Terran and Hiver, and they will not just be relegated to stereotypes as a basis for the racism. Nor will science have to rely on the shapes of people's heads to determine racial differences. In other words, racism will be much more scientifically based. The cultural component can be removed, and the nature/nurture puzzle solved. In the current cultural climate, such research and discussion is discouraged (which is fine by me BTW), but that may not always be so.
(On a side note, IMHO genetics is really going to throw our society for a loop some day soon, and not in a good way).
Third, racism seemingly does not have much of a rational basis right now. For the most part, the genetic differences are only skin deep. I'm sure you have all heard of the Bell Curve book. If the authors thesis was that there is a racial/genetic component to IQ (and I am not sure that it was, and if it was I don't think he proved it), the differences were not enormous. There might be a standard deviation or two of difference, but there are not races walking around with an average IQ of 200 and others with an IQ of 30. But when racial differences are more than skin deep, when we are really talking about different species rather than different races, that might be the case. The differences might be much bigger, with some "races" barely considered sophnots.
To be honest, I am not sure what the crux of the Solomani Movement is. Are Solomani destined to rule the Imperium, or the entire universe? Are the other major races disdained or accepted as equals? I think I have read all of these approaches in various places.
But my primary question with respect to this issue is this:
Would the Solomani be less evil if their theory, that they are best-placed to rule the Imperium, was actually true, and it could be scientifically proven through genetics?
I am just trying to be open minded, like all good Solomani.
The modern liberal experience of course rejects racism, I think in large part because the Nazi's gave it such a bad reputation. In fact even suggesting that there might a difference between the races is virtually criminal, and certainly socially forbidden.
I have three points in regard to this why the Far Future might be somewhat different.
First, this modern attitude towards race is just that. Just 80 years ago, the most civilized places on earth had some pretty definate and accepted ideas on race. For instance, the British had the notion that certain races in India made better soldiers than others, which today seems preposterous. A whole bunch of things that we now think are cultural they thought were racial. I suspect a lot of people today say its cultural differnces, suspect there is a genetic component, but don't discuss it. But my point is that racism can exist overtly in some civilized societies (and it certainly exists covertly in all socieities); in some ways, Western Civilizion was more civilized 100 years ago than it is now, when it was much more racist.
Second, in the Far Future they are going to know a lot more about genetics. They will be able to identify how Terrans are different that Viliani, let alone the differnce between Terran and Hiver, and they will not just be relegated to stereotypes as a basis for the racism. Nor will science have to rely on the shapes of people's heads to determine racial differences. In other words, racism will be much more scientifically based. The cultural component can be removed, and the nature/nurture puzzle solved. In the current cultural climate, such research and discussion is discouraged (which is fine by me BTW), but that may not always be so.
(On a side note, IMHO genetics is really going to throw our society for a loop some day soon, and not in a good way).
Third, racism seemingly does not have much of a rational basis right now. For the most part, the genetic differences are only skin deep. I'm sure you have all heard of the Bell Curve book. If the authors thesis was that there is a racial/genetic component to IQ (and I am not sure that it was, and if it was I don't think he proved it), the differences were not enormous. There might be a standard deviation or two of difference, but there are not races walking around with an average IQ of 200 and others with an IQ of 30. But when racial differences are more than skin deep, when we are really talking about different species rather than different races, that might be the case. The differences might be much bigger, with some "races" barely considered sophnots.
To be honest, I am not sure what the crux of the Solomani Movement is. Are Solomani destined to rule the Imperium, or the entire universe? Are the other major races disdained or accepted as equals? I think I have read all of these approaches in various places.
But my primary question with respect to this issue is this:
Would the Solomani be less evil if their theory, that they are best-placed to rule the Imperium, was actually true, and it could be scientifically proven through genetics?
I am just trying to be open minded, like all good Solomani.
Hmmm. Unsupported conclusion. Evidence? You've asserted we were more civilized 100 years ago. You have not supported the claim. I'm not saying you are right or wrong, I'm just not prepared to let you get away with not supporting this assertion.
They'll know more about psychology, sociology, and psycho(haha!)history. They'll also know more about cultural psychology particularly. So inasmuch as any discrimination will be more scientific, it may not be tied any moreso to genetics. Furthermore, it may be based on some 'dubious science' as some of todays discriminatory theories are (and, sadly, many of the refutations....).
Or perhaps just cloaked in fancier pseudo-science.
The average person may well not be competent to make a fine distinction between what is and is not good science in this regard.
On this much we agree. I once had the misfortune to watch a previously respectable Canadian science radio/TV personality utterly degrade himself using terrible tactics to assail another scientists research relating to race. The reason it was horrid was that the scientist who had proposed some of the racially-inflammatory results had performed his studies/etc. in such a way that they could be methodologically, scientifically or statistically assailed. But our TV/radio fellow felt compelled to assail him using BS rather than taking the intellectual high road and ended up (although having much popular support from the rather disgustingly partisan audience) making a mockery of the whole process of intellectual debate.
Interestingly, a lot more studies are showing certain mental abberations and diseases have a genetic component. So perhaps things are really more than skin deep in some areas.
Side note: IQ is a bogus measure of true intelligence (by that I mean applied real-world intelligence). It measures some abstract capabilities, but I've known a few guys who scored between 150 and 160 on IQ tests who couldn't 'keep it together'. People with 130 IQs were far more 'real world' intelligent.... this is the difference between a theoretical intelligence measurement and a measure of anything useful.... which is why using IQ for hiring people is an absolutely inane policy.
The Movement probably has a number of 'main players' and each probably has his own faction and his own take. Some will be bigots, some will just be people who think (with, I might add, plenty of historical canon to support the theory) that the Solomani have done more than the Vilani ever did to get things going and advance mankind, so they should be the ones running things.
It is often a fine line between pride in oneself and ones forbears and prejudice.
"Evil" is (IMO) an utterly subjective classification. It depends extensively upon the cultural and personal experiences of the individual involved. There are some common threads that flow through most societies, many of which are just practical, but it only takes one counter example to destroy the idea of absolute good or absolute evil. Once we acknowledge that such judgements are moral relativism (BTW, before anyone chews me for this, I'm not a moral relativist in the modern sense - I do happen to believe in 'good and evil' but I happen to understand my belief is a result of who I am and where I grew up.... doesn't mean I'm not willing to defend such a belief.....), then we realize that 'evil' is in the eye of the beholder.
So the Solomani aren't 'evil'. *Some* Solomani have views that *some* of us nowadays with our *current* values might term evil, but that's not an absolute. In different circumstances, the same people (us) might have differing perceptions if we'd been raised differently.
That's what I've always liked about the Traveller Universe - even the 'evil' guys had enough depth to be consistent in themselves.... so you could have two factions direly opposed, and neither be 'right' or 'wrong' other than in their own perspectives.
Some Solomani are bigoted. Some are ignorant. Some are merely proud of being Solomani. Some are actively liberal. Some eschew everything to do with the Solomani Philosophy. Some have a mild form of it (probably a *good* thing, most races have this one way or other). Welcome to the world of 65000 shades of grey.....
(PS, if we want to argue about who *really* are the most advanced humans and deserving of ruling things, the Zhos might have a claim - they understand the concept of stable civilizations without being too large and overpowering, they understand having a happy populace and one interested in exploration and discovery and that engages in warfare only to protect itself, and they have obviously evolved great genetic gifts.... AND they've held a stable empire for 2100 years or more.....).
Speaking of Devil's Advocate...
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
Can open, worms everywhere...
There are two things to consider here.
First, contrary to the Declaration of Independence, all men (and women, and aliens) are not created equal. The Olympics would be really dull if they were. Everybody is unique, with their own strengths and weaknesses. Some races may tend to be stronger or weaker in some areas.
Second, what do you do about it?
On one extreme, we have what is basically the current Western way of thinking (in theory, anyway), which is to give everybody equal opportunities, and try to help them compensate for their weaknesses.
On the other extreme, we have the Nazis, who believed that "untermenchen" were a blight on genetic purity and should be exterminated. (Incidentally, if you haven't seen Conspiracy then do so immediately. Kenneth Branagh is brilliantly chilling as Reinhard Heydrich).
There are various attitudes in between. For example, the British Empire was often benignly patronising towards coloureds - it wasn't their fault they weren't lucky enough to be born British. Obviously, they're culturally and intellectually inferior, but once they've been civilised (ie taught the words to Jerusalem and God Save The King/Queen), they're okay. With British people in charge of them, obviously.
Let me bring Commodore Carter in again:
"You know what the closest we have to Utopia is? The Zhodani Consulate. No crime, no mental illness, everybody's happy. But have you seen their art? God, it's dull. The first hint of creativity, of passion, and they carry you away and "reeducate" it out of you. Sorry, but I like my brain the way it is: a little crazy, maybe, but it's mine."
Spacehand Arioch
SOC-8
In the present world everyone likes to belong to something, be it a school, a frat house, a political party, a country. It helps us individuals feel that we are important and have something to contribute to our group/community or country. It gives us a feeling of acceptance and accomplishment.
That is my view of the Solomani. Proud to be the decendants of Terrans. Does that make me better than a Hiver? some may say yes, most will say no.
I see Solsec more as an anti-terrorism/extremist agency hunting those down that would seek to distablize the confederation.
Long live the Confederation.
(er, at least until 1128 or so.....
That is my view of the Solomani. Proud to be the decendants of Terrans. Does that make me better than a Hiver? some may say yes, most will say no.
I see Solsec more as an anti-terrorism/extremist agency hunting those down that would seek to distablize the confederation.
Long live the Confederation.
(er, at least until 1128 or so.....
What do we mean by superiority? Superiority in talents is different from what might be called "metaphysical" superiority. Metaphysical superiority(a term I invented) implies that one person can be superior to another in a way analogous to the way people are assumed to be superior to animals. Take the British assuming some tribes were better soldiers. This could be from a rational reason(I.E. they get lots of exercise from herding goats). Or it could be irrational(soldier folklore). But did they think goatherds were just naturally a superior class than valley folk? In fact they probably didn't think about it much; from what I read of the Victorians, only a few went in
for that sort of thing.
One group can have a greater average talent in a given field because of the way they live(otherwise why does the Imperium bother training marines instead of simply pressing people here,there and everywhere?). That does not make them "superior".
for that sort of thing.
One group can have a greater average talent in a given field because of the way they live(otherwise why does the Imperium bother training marines instead of simply pressing people here,there and everywhere?). That does not make them "superior".
jchurchill
SOC-12
Incidentally, if you haven't seen Conspiracy then do so immediately. Kenneth Branagh is brilliantly chilling as Reinhard Heydrich).
===============================================
It was a fine performance and shows that "evil" can be people attempting to do a job in an efficient manner for a cause they believe in. Te beauty of that performance was the cool matter of fact manner rather than scenery chewing villainy..
British Empire was often benignly patronising towards coloureds - it wasn't their fault they weren't lucky enough to be born British. Obviously, they're culturally and intellectually inferior, but once they've been civilised (ie taught the words to Jerusalem and God Save The King/Queen), they're okay. With British people in charge of them, obviously.
================================================
You've been reading that wicked Niall Ferguson again...
----------------------
Let me bring Commodore Carter in again:
"You know what the closest we have to Utopia is? The Zhodani Consulate. No crime, no mental illness, everybody's happy. But have you seen their art? God, it's dull. The first hint of creativity, of passion, and they carry you away and "reeducate" it out of you.
This reminds me of the famous quote in the Third Man....
"In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."
===============================================
It was a fine performance and shows that "evil" can be people attempting to do a job in an efficient manner for a cause they believe in. Te beauty of that performance was the cool matter of fact manner rather than scenery chewing villainy..
British Empire was often benignly patronising towards coloureds - it wasn't their fault they weren't lucky enough to be born British. Obviously, they're culturally and intellectually inferior, but once they've been civilised (ie taught the words to Jerusalem and God Save The King/Queen), they're okay. With British people in charge of them, obviously.
================================================
You've been reading that wicked Niall Ferguson again...
----------------------
Let me bring Commodore Carter in again:
"You know what the closest we have to Utopia is? The Zhodani Consulate. No crime, no mental illness, everybody's happy. But have you seen their art? God, it's dull. The first hint of creativity, of passion, and they carry you away and "reeducate" it out of you.
This reminds me of the famous quote in the Third Man....
"In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."
Actually the British were rather ambiguous in that respect-they often thought that natives trying to be civilized in the British manner(tophats and tea)was somewhat annoying. In fact they often liked a "worthy foe" better. Despite that they continued building railroads bridges, schoolhouses, etc.
As for weather the Solimoni are evil, I would think the impression that there was something unique about the Solomoni Cause. After all what culture does not think itself superior, so what makes the Cause special? Perhaps the difference is in making a whole ideology around it.
To be fair to the Solomani they can say "so's your old man" ,for the Imperium does encourage hereditary rule, which is enshrined inequality. I don't mind that but I live in an era where most hereditary rulers are essentially meant to be walking museums(no offense to any English monarchists; I like the Queen too and would not want to see her gone). I might feel differently if I lived 300 years ago.
On the other hand the distinction between an Imperial Noble and Commoner is in rank, not presumed worth. A subtle distinction which often disapears in practice, but subtle distinctions can be important.
To be fair to the Solomani they can say "so's your old man" ,for the Imperium does encourage hereditary rule, which is enshrined inequality. I don't mind that but I live in an era where most hereditary rulers are essentially meant to be walking museums(no offense to any English monarchists; I like the Queen too and would not want to see her gone). I might feel differently if I lived 300 years ago.
On the other hand the distinction between an Imperial Noble and Commoner is in rank, not presumed worth. A subtle distinction which often disapears in practice, but subtle distinctions can be important.
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
Guilty (well, I watched the series).
The definitive answer is:
It all depends on who you ask.
Most of the Traveller source material is written from the Imperial perspective. I feel that it's colored to favor the Imperium and its institutions, which is fine. After all, those that win the wars get to write the history.
Ask a Solomani: "Are you guys all a bunch of Nazis?"
He'll say of course not. He will probably go on a lot about Earth being the cradle of humanity, and therefore the natural center for human civilization. He'll tell you that most Solomani institutions are based on democratic principles, which are superior to the "out-dated" concepts of feudalism the Imperium perpetuates.
I ran a campaign several years ago that involved a the PCs (who were Solomani) in something called "Project Phoenix." Just before the end of the Solomani war, the Confederation stashed caches of weapons, supplies, and even ships througout the rim, so that if the war was lost, it could be continued through guerilla actions. The PCs became freedom fighters, trying to liberate Terra and always just a step ahead of Imperial agents.
It was one of the most enjoyable and succesful campaigns I ever ran. The players all had a cohesive sense of purpose beyond "sell this cargo so I can afford a PGMP-12." I was careful not to make the Imperium evil, just opposed to the PCs goals.
It all depends on who you ask.
Most of the Traveller source material is written from the Imperial perspective. I feel that it's colored to favor the Imperium and its institutions, which is fine. After all, those that win the wars get to write the history.
Ask a Solomani: "Are you guys all a bunch of Nazis?"
He'll say of course not. He will probably go on a lot about Earth being the cradle of humanity, and therefore the natural center for human civilization. He'll tell you that most Solomani institutions are based on democratic principles, which are superior to the "out-dated" concepts of feudalism the Imperium perpetuates.
I ran a campaign several years ago that involved a the PCs (who were Solomani) in something called "Project Phoenix." Just before the end of the Solomani war, the Confederation stashed caches of weapons, supplies, and even ships througout the rim, so that if the war was lost, it could be continued through guerilla actions. The PCs became freedom fighters, trying to liberate Terra and always just a step ahead of Imperial agents.
It was one of the most enjoyable and succesful campaigns I ever ran. The players all had a cohesive sense of purpose beyond "sell this cargo so I can afford a PGMP-12." I was careful not to make the Imperium evil, just opposed to the PCs goals.
