What makes the Imperium a Feudal Technocracy?

[mike wightman]

Imperial government begins at the subsector level.
The Imperium does not own member worlds and therefore can not grant land without the world government's authority.
Starports are not necessarily owned by the Imperium, they could be built by megacorprations or even world governments.

Why doesn't the Imperium build an A class port on every world and give it to an Imperial noble to run?

How many Imperial core sector worlds are directly owned by the Imperium?

 

[kilemall]

Imperial government begins at the subsector level.
The Imperium does not own member worlds and therefore can not grant land without the world government's authority.
Starports are not necessarily owned by the Imperium, they could be built by megacorprations or even world governments.

Why doesn't the Imperium build an A class port on every world and give it to an Imperial noble to run?

How many Imperial core sector worlds are directly owned by the Imperium?

I was under the impression T5 had a specific schema which supersedes previous OTU canon, explicit or implied. And of course people are free to change to taste.

What of that canon arrangement, being latest and greatest, makes the Imperium a Feudal Technocracy? If not, what alternative schemes would make it qualify?

The other part is what are the qualifying characteristics for this classification?

Given the classic definition of government type being 'government experienced at individual level rather then conceptual/highend', we may be overthinking the question and the real answer/intent is how interaction at the individual level works.

 

[BwapTED]

Unlikely, if the intent is to promote trade.

Is that the intent, though?

Or is it something more like ''gather all the revenue that runs the Imperium from tariffs and taxes''?

 

[Condottiere]

It's Imperium extraterritoriality, so I suppose it also acts as a local listening post for both overt and covert agencies.

The starport acts to facilitate trade amongst member worlds, whether the local system takes advantage of it or not, since goods can also be transited through.

Imperium taxation would appear to be collected from the system regimes; imposing it on traffic might not be worth it.

Processing fees and service charges that pay for maintenance, are another issue.

 

[aramis]

I was under the impression T5 had a specific schema which supersedes previous OTU canon, explicit or implied. And of course people are free to change to taste.

What of that canon arrangement, being latest and greatest, makes the Imperium a Feudal Technocracy? If not, what alternative schemes would make it qualify?

The other part is what are the qualifying characteristics for this classification?

Given the classic definition of government type being 'government experienced at individual level rather then conceptual/highend', we may be overthinking the question and the real answer/intent is how interaction at the individual level works.

Part of the price of admission to the 3I is forfeiting a chunk of the world to the Imperium for it to grant to nobles... and use as the official starport.

 

[kilemall]

Part of the price of admission to the 3I is forfeiting a chunk of the world to the Imperium for it to grant to nobles... and use as the official starport.

Okay, that feeds into the question of 'what about nobles' and the feudal aspect to an extent, but I'm not seeing where that makes it a technocracy.

 

[aramis]

Okay, that feeds into the question of 'what about nobles' and the feudal aspect to an extent, but I'm not seeing where that makes it a technocracy.

The people in power get land in exchange for performing non-military service; these are nobles in the 3I

The feudal part is that these nobles may grant portions to their functionaries as they see fit; some of these nobles (Baronettes and Knights) are also vauvasars .

Once you get vassalage, you're feudal; it's about the only functional meaningful definitive aspect. Some, myself included, prefer to require subinfeudation, but the 3I has vauvasars, so subinfeudation also exists.

Without the forfeiture to the 3I, there'd be no land to infeudate and subinfeudate.

 

[mike wightman]

Marc's novel gives the Imperium two pieces of technology they 'grant' to a member world - fusion+ and makers. They -the nobles - are the custodians of the keys to these wondrous toys and thus have something to offer.

Nobility = feudal
fusion+ and makers = technocracy.

 

[Whipsnade]

Marc's novel gives the Imperium two pieces of technology they 'grant' to a member world - fusion+ and makers. They -the nobles - are the custodians of the keys to these wondrous toys and thus have something to offer.

Which reminds us of a very important point in all of this: When admitting a new member world, the Imperium most often ennobled the people who were already there. T4's Pocket Empires is rather explicit on that point.

The Imperium didn't show up with a selection of knights, barons, marquises, counts and whatnot stashed in low berths. Instead they created knights, barons, marquises, counts, and whatnot from the existing movers and shakers already running the planet in question.

The lands those people already own - or can purchase with Imperial help - then become the fiefs everyone is worrying about.

Nobility = feudal
fusion+ and makers = technocracy.

That's basically my take. IMTU fiefs are not always land. IMTU fiefs can also be sinecures, monopolies, infrastructure control, businesses, and other similar activities. IMHO, that dovetails nicely with the "feudal technocracy" description and what historians once referred to as "bastard feudalism" from the late medieval period.

T5 seems to emphasize land only, complete with absolute "spreadsheet-isms" like "barons have X, counts have Y, etc.", but I feel the question should be more nuanced than that.

Then again, I'm weird.

 

[jec10]

Yes, I'm with Mike having read the novel.

But who controls immigration policy in the Imperium? Worlds, local nobles or the remote Imperial bureaucracy?

 

[mike wightman]

Good question, and one best answered 'it depends'.

The Forbolden project library data in A1 and a couple of the fluff comments in S3 make it clear the Imperium has a ministry of colonization and directly colonises new worlds. That would imply noble and bureaucratic involvement.

We also have canon examples of worlds set up as colonies from adjacent systems. From said examples I would say that worlds in frontier sectors far removed from the remote central government can launch colonisation missions without regards to Imperial oversight.

 

[BwapTED]

Marc's novel gives the Imperium two pieces of technology they 'grant' to a member world - fusion+ and makers. They -the nobles - are the custodians of the keys to these wondrous toys and thus have something to offer.

Nobility = feudal
fusion+ and makers = technocracy.

This makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Condottiere]

If they maintain control and/or profit over the manufacture, ownership and/or use of these items.

 

[Whipsnade]

But who controls immigration policy in the Imperium?

Depends on what you mean by immigration.

Depends on the world in question too.

 

[whartung]

Marc's novel gives the Imperium two pieces of technology they 'grant' to a member world - fusion+ and makers. They -the nobles - are the custodians of the keys to these wondrous toys and thus have something to offer.

Wait, Free Trader Bob with a "Steve's House of Fusion" catalog can't just set up shop somewhere and ship in some power plants to anyone who can foot the tab?

Fusion (and Maker, apparently) technology is restricted?

Anyone can get a starship (with a FREE fusion power plant) after a few years in the service, but if you want your own power, you have to suck up to the man?

 

[Nathan Brazil]

Wait, Free Trader Bob with a "Steve's House of Fusion" catalog can't just set up shop somewhere and ship in some power plants to anyone who can foot the tab?

Fusion (and Maker, apparently) technology is restricted?

Tying other posts together. Yes, wartung, you are almost correct. Again, T4 has the answers...

Earlier in history, in T4, the Milieu 0 book specifically lays out the Agent of the Imperium strategy except makers were not mentioned. In addition, during the early days of the Imperium Fusion Plus was not restricted simply unavailable. Fusion power existed, but not Fusion Plus. Specifically, Emperor Cleon's corporation invented Fusion Plus before he became Emperor and successfully kept it secret from others for a time even after. Fusion Plus units were made black box, with a self-destructs if tampered with. If you needed normal servicing you had to go to Sylea. While I am paraphrasing, that is the story the book gives.

The book even states:

...all units were “factory sealed” encapsulated units, with a great deal of effort put into preventing reverse-engineering of them. Eventually, of course, someone managed to reverse-engineer and duplicate the technology, at which point Cleon Industries released the TL12 version to keep its competitive lead. - pg. 83 Milieu 0

The reason this strategy worked was because

Fusion Plus forces deuterium-enriched water (”heavy water,” which can be produced on any TL5+ world by various means, including electrolysis) into a solid-state matrix.

As Dr Otto Octavius said, "The power of the sun. In the palm of my hand."

 

[Whipsnade]

Wait, Free Trader Bob with a "Steve's House of Fusion" catalog can't just set up shop somewhere and ship in some power plants to anyone who can foot the tab? Fusion (and Maker, apparently) technology is restricted?

It depends on the milieu.

In the Year 0, Fusion+ and the makers which can fabricate copies of the same are the Imperium's trump card. Both are bleeding edge, deliberately hard to reverse engineer, and beyond the technical capabilities of most worlds. Both are also the Big Carrot dangled in front of prospective member worlds and the Big Stick used on less welcoming ones.

As befits the Imperium's trump card, access to both and the ability to manufacture both is controlled. Controlled, but still carefully disseminated.

Thanks to M:0, we know selected groups and individuals are given the tech and told to go out and win worlds for the Imperium. As the Imperium expands, those "filibusters" (or their heirs) and the worlds they control are easily admitted with the filibusters (or heirs) just as easily becoming Imperial nobles.

In PE, an extended family with a freighter full of Fusion+ leaves with the hopes of founding an empire strong enough to make the Imperium negotiate with them for admission. Telling the Imperium "I've a ready made subsector here, make me the duke and it's yours cheap..." can be a nice sales pitch.

Cleon and the Imperium know they can't keep or control the secret for long, but they're determined to make plenty of hay while the sun shines.

By the time 1105 rolls around, Fusion+, makers, and all the rest are old hat. Free Trader Bob can ship both to whomever has the money.

 

[jcrocker]

But who controls immigration policy in the Imperium? Worlds, local nobles or the remote Imperial bureaucracy?

The member world would have customs points outside the starport fence, so they would have final say on who gets to move there.

It wouldn't be much of a stretch to say that if local world policy starts to annoy the Imperium, they would try to change it. Either by quiet meetings with the local leader(s), or if it was a big enough irritant, threats of force.

The Imperial noble on the planet would represent the bureaucracy, so s/he'd be the one to meet with the Synod or the Diet or the Congress or the Most Holy and make them a deal they could not refuse.

 

[Ulsyus]

It wouldn't be much of a stretch to say that if local world policy starts to annoy the Imperium, they would try to change it. Either by quiet meetings with the local leader(s), or if it was a big enough irritant, threats of force.

They might be able to force control in some areas, but controlling a whole world would be pretty hard work. If the place wasn't governed with at least a significant element of legitimacy or over a disinterested population, then it'd take a long time, a generation or two, to get change.

That may not mean that local dissidents wouldn't take advantage of the technology to cause problems for the authority that tried to prevent the importation of the items, just that it would offer some pretty hairy scenarios for players to take part in.

 

[jcrocker]

They might be able to force control in some areas, but controlling a whole world would be pretty hard work.

Oh, they wouldn't have to control a whole world - I don't want to get into a political discussion, but there are any number of examples of Gunboat Diplomacy that are sufficiently removed in the past to serve as good examples.

If leadership of world X is seen to be an anti-imperial problem, I would expect it to be removed. Probably most of the time it would be quietly, rather than loudly, since who wants to be seen as the big heavy? The CT module Argon Gambit shows one example, and most of that was pretty low key.

The leader who decides to spend more time with their family [or the blackmail tapes get released], the sudden shift of power at the Nth Local Party Congress [after the funding for problem people vanishes], there are plenty of ways the Imperium could remove problems. And lots of those would provide lots of fun scenarios for players.