Sure, if one isn't familiar with humans. Otherwise it falls apart. Would be better to use with Vargr or the like.
Men, not Laws
- Thread starter Azezel
- Start date
Sure, if one isn't familiar with humans. Otherwise it falls apart. Would be better to use with Vargr or the like.
The general rule in history is that empires fail at 3 months travel time to the edge. Democracy fails at about 1-2 weeks to the edge. The US was organized at first as a confederation specifically because of that historical truth (ISTR it being mentioned in The Federalist Papers) and, to be blunt, it hit that limit.
And every time the expansion came, it came with decreased communication times. The British Empire was, historically, the largest exception, having strongly decentralized authority in strong autocratic governors, and having a 4 month trip to its furthest flung outposts - india, New Zealand and Australia. 3 months to the N. American colonies.
Rome, when it crossed 3 months end to end at force march, turned into 3 empires sharing a name.
Correct. But my argument is about absolute monarchies NOT existing at all once the doctrine of Divine Right is rejected. In the 3I there is no real legislative branch. Hence, not gonna happen for any length of time as it reads. People would reject it and it would devolve into internal wars to get rid of hereditary rulers.
BTW, fascinating info there aramis. Thanks
There's not much else that can replace it. Autocracy and quasi-feudalism are the only means of overcoming the issues.
I guess you're right there.
If you wish. For me, an analysis of a hypothetical star-spanning far-future civilization of trillions - consisting of several distinct star spanning human cultures and including non-human sapient species, with economies and industries in most cases driven by relatively cheap fusion and scarily advanced computers - based on trends in the culture of one world during that world's development from muscle power through the industrial revolution, pretty well defines the word speculative. It can never be said with confidence to be correct. Possible, yes. A fair educated guess, certainly. Correct?
Well, if you're going to speculate based on modern evidence, I'd again point out that despotism is despotism, whether rationalized by religious hokum, pseudo-scientific eugenics hokum, or some brutally extreme interpretation of the Golden Rule. It ultimately relies on the availability and use of overwhelming force, and it can take some very special circumstances to unseat.
Whether the 3I does or does not represent a tyrannical government depends in some respects on the opinion of the gamemaster running the game and the sources he relies most heavily on - the 3I of the Kinunir adventure surrounding the Gaesh was not the 3I of MegaTraveller. It also depends on where and when you are: the behavior of Cleon III prompted his nobles to the extreme of assassination as a means of limiting Imperial power, while the citizens of Ilelish could hardly have considered the Imperium under Martin III as anything but tyrannical.
The Third Imperium represents an odd beast. The Imperium for the most part doesn't rule people - it rules planetary governments. Those planetary governments are the interface with the people: the product of local history, culture and power dynamics, and the power structure that must face those people if those people get fed up and rebel. Part of the 3I's recipe for survival is the fact that it limits its power, ceding most planetside authority and therefore making it more of a federation than an empire. It has made it very clear that - within certain broad limits - it doesn't care who rules the planet or how, so long as that government remains loyal to the 3I. However, within its declared jurisdiction, the 3I has made it very clear that its authority is total, absolute, and that the admission ticket comes with a no-exit-without-our-consent clause: Ilelish shows that breaking away from someone able to put the industrial might of a thousand worlds in your orbit tends to take the industrial might of a lot of other worlds and more than a little luck. That pair of strategic advantages trumps most of the circumstances that left primitive Terran despotisms to fall to the hoi polloi.
I respectfully disagree.
The Imperium gives autonomy to worlds. If the Imperium controls the governments, then it follows that the Imperium follows a form of colonialism such as the British Raj.
What the Imperium controls are trade and commerce.
All trade between worlds goes through imperium's starports.
The Emperor and various Imperial nobles generally own controlling shares of the major corporations.
These give enormous levers to control a world's economy and thus government policies; the golden rule....those with the gold makes the rules.
The Imperium doesn't control the planetary government. The Imperium does control planetary economy.
The Imperium gives autonomy to worlds. If the Imperium controls the governments, then it follows that the Imperium follows a form of colonialism such as the British Raj.
What the Imperium controls are trade and commerce.
All trade between worlds goes through imperium's starports.
The Emperor and various Imperial nobles generally own controlling shares of the major corporations.
These give enormous levers to control a world's economy and thus government policies; the golden rule....those with the gold makes the rules.
The Imperium doesn't control the planetary government. The Imperium does control planetary economy.
Not necessarily. Imperial worlds can have more than one starport. It's just that one of them is the Imperial one.
'The Emperor' and 'various Imperial nobles' are different factions.
That depends entirely on how big a part of a planetary economy is interstellar trade. Early CT material implied that it was minuscule; later material upped that to tiny.
I can't prove it, because the actual number we have are exceedingly vague, but I think that high-tech, high-population worlds control enough wealth to sneer at megacorporations. There certainly has to be some reason why the Imperium tends to curb the activities of megacorporstions instead of aiding and abetting them (as evidenced by various mercenary tickets), and the desire to keep the powerful member worlds happy could very well be it.
Hans
Supplement STP-002 Starports! says otherwise. The Port Authority and its administration also oversee non-Imperial starports.
often from the same family and definitely from the same Imperium government structure.
Megacorps' production and market bases are spread across various worlds. The Port Authority, an Imperial entity, can exert control over imports, exports and immigration/emigration. The Imperium's stated purpose is to foster trade between worlds, aka, support the Megacorps, which are mostly owned by Imperial nobles.
High-tech and high-pop worlds form the core of the megacorps' production and market.
much of the wealth that those worlds have is controlled by the megacorps.
@Ishmael: Carlobrand doesn't talk about about controling, but ruling. IMHO there's a big diference.
While I agree in the principles here quoted, Imperium's decisions affect people. This is like saying that a military officer doesn't command soldiers, he commands NCOs (which might be technically true).
<Sigh> I stand corrected. Imperial worlds used to be able to have more than one starport. Regina and Terra to name two.
The Emperor and his family's holdings are designated 'Imperial family'. My take is that other holdings belong to other noble families and that the nobles that run the Imperial bureaucracy and nobles that run licensed Imperial companies are two different sets of nobles, although they do, of course, have family connections big time.
The a.k.a. is certainly not the stated purpose (the stated purpose would be to promote trade, period). I admit that it's tempting to believe that the Imperium would work hand in glove with the megacorporations, but what evidence we have of Imperial interaction with megacorporations (the aforementioned mercenary tickets) shows the Imperium curbing megacorporate activities rather than aiding and abetting them. But that's besides the point that I was making, which was that if interstellar trade is only a minuscule portion of a planetary economy then even if the Imperium allowed the corporations free rein, their bottom line would still not amount to much compared to planetary economies. No matter how much the Imperium may aid the corporations, they're just not in a position to extract a major percentage of the big planetary economies.
Only the interstellar market, not the entire planetary economy (For the high-population worlds, that is; I'm not saying there aren't some company worlds around).
I doubt that very, very much. As I pointed out, interstellar trade does not seem to amount to much compared to the economies of high-population worlds.
Hans
You misunderstand. There are usually more than one starport, however the Port Authority oversees all of them , including privately owned, non-Imperial, etc. The Port Authority ensures that all of them conform to Imperial standards and regulations/practices, even including visa and smuggling enforcement with respect to Imperial edicts.
At least, that is how I read it.
---------------------
We clearly have different viewpoints concerning the size and scope of megacorporations.
I see them as widespread in industry as TaTa or General Electric, spanning many geographic locations and several economic sectors. And heavily influencing government policies and economies in each geographic locale. They and their subsidiaries provide employment and produce goods. They lobby governments to pass laws that are benficial to their business goals. They have a great deal of influence and weight to throw around to achieve their goals so long as they do not alienate their market base.
You seem to feel that despite theit immense wealth and power, that they have relatively little influence on the worlds where the people that comprise their markets/customers/labor_forces/suppliers live.
We should just agree to disagree here.
McPerth; I'd be interested to know the differences between 'controlling' and 'ruling'. AFAIK, the words are synonomous.
Oh, I'm sure you're right. It's just not a concept that I would have imagined anyone would have come up with. It's one thing for a prospective member world to agree to give the Imperium a starport so that it, the Imperium, can prevent it, the member world, from playing favorites with its own trade fleet. It's an altogether different and much less acceptable thing to hand over control of every port to the Imperium so that it can play favorites against your own trade fleet.
So how does the SPA deal with the lack of extrality and being subject to local laws in the secondary ports?
Clearly. I see them as limited by the relatively small size of interstellar trade.
I feel that their 'immense' wealth and power is only impressive in absolute numbers. They are not immense in relative numbers, because their only advantage over planetary companies (of high-population worlds, that is) is the permission to conduct interstellar business, and interstellar business is not very impressive compared to large planetary economies. Also, all that wealth is spread out across 11,000 worlds; planetary economies are concentrated on one each.
Megacorporations are defined by being larger than sector-wide corporations and covering the entire Imperium. Nothing is said about being large enough to dominate the big planetary economies. They don't even seem to be powerful enough to prevent much smaller (subsector-wide) companies from achieving local superiority over them.
Hans
Last edited:
I won't dare to challenge your english knowledge (it would be quite stupid from my part, as it's not my native language
), but, as I understand it, 'ruling' is able to give orders, while 'controling' is actually moving it (so, no way to challenge or interpret those orders).Please forgive me if my understanding on that is wrong.
The concept is based on the FAA and other aviation authorities as well as customs practice.
The SPA only has to "force" or require all interstellar trade through the Starport. Lesser spaceports have no facility to accept ships arriving from outside the star system as they cannot provide Imperial customs or migration clearance. Think Ellis Island for entry into the US and ports in the Age of Sail which had Customs Houses where customs and excise fee could be paid.
As far as I see it, those smaller companies may actually be subsudiaries or accept the megacorporation as its parent company or else perhaps have been engaged in various mergers or stock swaps.
they are not true synonyms; the subtle nuances do make a difference.
Ruling implies a right to control. Ruling also implies government, while controlling does not. An weak rulers still rule, but do not control...
It can be said that many megacorps control many worlds' economies; the only ones they rule, however are those where they are the legitimate government, or the government has abeyed control to them
Where does it state that the Imperium controls a planets econ?
