Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
They're also, of course, the only democratic state!
The Solomani, not just bad guys anymore
- Thread starter Murph
- Start date
I assume you mean the only democratic sizable interstellar state. Not so. The Zhodani Consulate is a democracy. One with limited franchise, to be sure, but most historical democracies have had limited franchises.
Hans
So also, of course, were mid 20th C Communist China and the USSR... but democratic processes are meaningless when only one name appears on the ballot for each race...
While we don't know for certain that Solomani elections are quite that narrow, it's a ruthless monoparty state...
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
There's only one Party, but it has many factions, some very different.
Really? U.S., France, Canada, et al...
So did the Communist Party of the Soviet Union... but only one of the factions was represented in the Congress of People's Deputies.
Monoparty systems are noted for reducing choices to near irrelevance, as the choices are made before the elections.
If someone in the USSR was a party member with non mainstream political views, and was elected to the local community board, he would be monitored. If enough of that board were to be of that same factional alignment, you might get one to the district council... but if that faction is too radical or too localist, ad puts him up for higher level, he suddenly has a very public arrest (trumped up or not), and a show trial, and loses party membership.
Factions can't survive open conflict with the dominant faction in such a system. Especially since the Party picks who is on the ballot. Only rarely would an election actually be a public decision; it's been made well before by apporatshiki in the party.
Change, real change, in such a system only comes from broad social movements where there really is majority support for the change, to the point that there is no one left who doesn't want the change to pick from.
Rereading AM6, the Confed in IY1100-1110 appears to be in a tolerant stage; the Rim War concessions seem to be taking hold, and factionalism is being encouraged by policy... (it seems almost predictive of the later Soviet Glasnost, even.)
The widest talk of factions, however, is talking about OUTSIDE the confed. Specifically about the 3I areas of the Solomani Sphere. Within the confed, it looks like the factionalism is essentially monolithic single-faction in most worlds, with the factions in the high council being mostly due to homeworlds. (See AM6 p.13)
The U.S. definitely (white males only), France, I think so, Canada I'm not sure about.
Hans
LOL!
That's how a non-white got elected US Pres.
Sorry, you make ZERO sense as you were alleging that only certain people could run for office. You just got toasted.
I deleted my first response to this amazing post.
Instead, let me just inform you that you've managed an epic fail in understanding what I was saying. Perhaps the fault is mine. Perhaps I didn't express myself clearly enough. When I said "most democracies", I include the historical ones too. In fact, I was thinking almost exclusively of historical democracies. Just how you could possibly believe that I was referring to the present-day U.S. when I spoke of the franchise being limited to white males is beyond me.
Hans
E.D.Quibell
SOC-13
Canada was the same a Britian, landowners only; however Male or Female (widow) landowners.
Regards,
Ewan
E.D.Quibell
SOC-13
Sorry? What? Hay?
What percentage of Black people had the vote in the US in 1900?
Regards,
Ewan
The US, at inception, only gave franchise to white male landowners. It was not until later that most states dropped the landowner requirement, and no women got votes until the 20th century. While Blacks got the vote somewhat earlier, restrictions and poll taxes essentially disenfranchised most blacks until the 60's.
In point of fact, until the last 30 years, no democracy has had universal suffrage at inception. All have had limited franchise.
In point of fact, until the last 30 years, no democracy has had universal suffrage at inception. All have had limited franchise.
E.D.Quibell
SOC-13
Hans,
You clearly said "historical" democracies, and pretty much every democracy there has ever been was men only until the 1900, and most well into the 20th centry. I think New Zealand was the first to give women the vote IIRC.
Best regards,
Ewan
Madarin Dude
SOC-13
A lot of interesting posts. Long running totalitarian regimes have more of an ebb and flow to them and are more and less totalitarian at different times and i think you can view what is written as a snapshot perhaps taken at one of the worst times. At a later time perhaps there is room for more diversity and at other times it was harsher. Also note that the further you are away from the seat of power the less it holds sway over you.
Also, factor in the more complex a society gets...the less totalitarian it must appear. Informal contracts make up for what a formal system tries to accomplish. With time these become routine and people go through these backdoors making the regime more porous and less totalitarian.
What is the oddest thing about these regime is that they are mostly totalitarian at the top. At the base, they do everything to maintain the popular facade - for even under the Stalin the constitution enacted was far more democratic (even though the document was worthless but allowed countless citizens use it as the basis of appeal which gave way to the informal telephone law**) than what came later.
**Telephone law was the practice of judges to call the local Party secretary to advise them upon what judgement they should pass. Needless to say, countless civil cases did not need this approval giving citizens an argument to counter a local bureaucrat. I remember countless fights in shops and allocation of apartments that could be made by appealing to law and precedent when I lived in the Eastern bloc. And, bureaucrats were helpless because those on top approved it and it was not worth their jobs to question it.
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
Let's try to stay away from RW politics.
G. Kashkanun Anderson
SOC-13
Technically, at least, the same percentage as White people. It depended very much upon where in the US one lived, of course, and prior to 1914 the vast majority of African Americans lived in regions where exercising that right could be classified as an exercise in foolhardiness.
Not true.
'When did Massachusetts sully her proud record by placing on her statute-book any law which admitted to the ballot the white man and shut out the black man? She has never done it; she will not do it'.
-- US Rep. Robert Brown Elliot (R-SC), 1874
-- US Rep. Robert Brown Elliot (R-SC), 1874
From the founding of The Republic, any Free Black man (and some women) who fit the property/net worth qualification could vote in Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania. By 1820 this group included Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island and New Hampshire -- although Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Connecticut later dropped out of the club.
Owning land was also not necessarily a requirement, depending on what state one lived in; any New Jersey citizen that could prove a net worth of over £50 had the right to vote. And yeah... the legislation continued to use the term 'pounds' well into the post-colonial era.
Again, not true. Lots of American women could vote before 1900. For starters, women of independent means could (and did) vote in New Jersey from 1776 to 1807. The relevant legislation even specifically refers to the potential voter as 'he or she'.
The Territorial legislature of Wyoming granted women full suffrage in 1869, with neighbouring Utah following suit a year later. Washington Territory had attempted to do so as early as 1854 (losing by a single vote), and finally got it through by 1883. Both Washington and Utah eventually gave it up (under intense Federal pressure) in order to gain statehood, but Wyoming actually declared its intention to stay out of the Union for '100 years' rather than rescind the vote from its women.
Wyoming was admitted to the Union in 1890 without costing its women their right to vote. By the turn of the century women also enjoyed the franchise in Utah, Colorado and Idaho.
I'm jumping on the "Solomani aren't racist nazis" camp here. I think it's dumb.
The RAW Solomani are one of my biggest problems with the OTU. I can understand why GDW took that route, but I don't like it and won't use it in my games.
I've just decided that all OTU Solomani stuff is the Imperium's National Enquirer version of reality. Any educated Imperial Citizen would roll their eyes at such nonsense.
The Solomani are proud, maybe too proud by some, but not 3I nazis. I'll use the maps and such, but the Confederacy will be nothing like the OTU.
That said, it's no big deal. The OTU stuff is paranoid propaganda only believed by the lowest common denominator, and I'm free to play with a big chunk of Known Space.
The RAW Solomani are one of my biggest problems with the OTU. I can understand why GDW took that route, but I don't like it and won't use it in my games.
I've just decided that all OTU Solomani stuff is the Imperium's National Enquirer version of reality. Any educated Imperial Citizen would roll their eyes at such nonsense.
The Solomani are proud, maybe too proud by some, but not 3I nazis. I'll use the maps and such, but the Confederacy will be nothing like the OTU.
That said, it's no big deal. The OTU stuff is paranoid propaganda only believed by the lowest common denominator, and I'm free to play with a big chunk of Known Space.
Yes, as I have always argued the Solomani are the Swiss of Chartered Space and the Zhodani are the Yugoslavs. But this is a minority view. Whenever, we get to see these nations, it is important to twist the stereotypes around. Another, way to look at the Solomani would be through the prism of a Revolutionary America or the original 13 Colonies. Having thrown out the British but still having a social structure that needs new titles to replace the aristocrats.
So, yes, the Solomani and Zhodani can be viewed as dastardly villains but any time the players actually spend time in that society, it should be viewed a mirror for Imperial society and be given a chance to shatter prejudices.
