[OTU] "The Imperium rules *space*"... um, how?

[StephenT]

Actually the "powerful Archduke" is a GURPS-Thing.

In the GDW-variant the Archdukes are mostly figureheads.

I thought the idea even from GDW was that Archdukes used to be figureheads, until Strephon decided to restore their powers and make them truly influential once again, in a bid to stave off the decline of the Imperium?

In MT and TNE Strephon's plan backfired because one of his Archdukes tried to assassinate him and started a civil war. In the GT alternative timeline, the Civil War never happened (yet...) so the powerful archdukes are still around.

On subject, I note that in TNE, the Reformation Coalition and the Regency both look back on the old Third Imperium as seriously flawed - although one says "it was evil, we're well rid of it" while the other said "it had its problems which we've been able to correct, keeping the best elements."

 

[Majestic7]

I thought the idea even from GDW was that Archdukes used to be figureheads, until Strephon decided to restore their powers and make them truly influential once again, in a bid to stave off the decline of the Imperium?

Yeah, this is how I see it as well. Starting from naming of Dulinor to Archduke of Ilelish - which happens within CT timeline - the Archdukes started to slowly regain their powers as actual administrators of the Domains for the Emperor in good and bad alike. I suppose Norris was the first "real" Archduke since the Pacifications in a sense? In MT it all went to hell, in GT it seems to work pretty well. (Since someone just happened to explode in to a million tiny bits...)

On subject, I note that in TNE, the Reformation Coalition and the Regency both look back on the old Third Imperium as seriously flawed - although one says "it was evil, we're well rid of it" while the other said "it had its problems which we've been able to correct, keeping the best elements."

Yeah, but their viewpoint isn't really connected with the point I made earlier about indifference to social injustice. It is more about politics of loyalty and how to keep interstellar structures together.

I'm glad we always have the Consulate, the happy lalalalala-land where everyone is content and if someone is unhappy, there are some friendly people in uniforms that will fix it for them....

 

[Mithras]

Can you get planets that have completely joined the Imperium so that there's no independent planetary authority (i.e. it's ALL imperial territory)?

I suppose those government types 6, like Jenghe/REgina are like that. Directly ruled by the Third Imperium.

 

[Vile]

I don't think so (I may be wrong) - as far as I know those worlds are just colonies of other systems, like Vilis / Garda-Vilis.

 

[rust]

According to GURPS Traveller (e.g. Behind the Claw) at least some
worlds are under direct Imperial military rule, although not many.

 

[Shiloh]

Can you get planets that have completely joined the Imperium so that there's no independent planetary authority (i.e. it's ALL imperial territory)?

I suppose those government types 6, like Jenghe/REgina are like that. Directly ruled by the Third Imperium.

There are certainly worlds in the Core that are all Imperial fiefdoms. I'm sure there's a reference in the "3rd Imperium" section of the Spinward Marches book. They're rare though, and exceptional.

 

[captainjack23]

According to GURPS Traveller (e.g. Behind the Claw) at least some
worlds are under direct Imperial military rule, although not many.

They are much more common around the Solomani rim on the actual border - especially in 1105. They are still under military occupation, although Terra has been granted home rule finally.

 

[EDG]

Though there's a difference between "under full Imperial Military rule" and "run as a civilian government of the Imperium". I think the type 6 government interpretation is a possible one though (but I'd rather keep that for "Colony world").

I think my problem is that the Imperium largely seems to be a vague concept than anything actually real. Systems like Depot (and occupied territories) may be owned and run by the Imperial Navy, but they're not civilian governments that are fully Imperial rather than having any other identity.

And I guess that the type 3 government (Self-Perpetuating Oligarchy) would be more appropriate for a feudal/noble-based Imperial style government - prior to TNE (and Norris' reforms in the Regency) there weren't really any signs that Imperial culture (such as it is) was particularly democratic.

 

[captainjack23]

Though there's a difference between "under full Imperial Military rule" and "run as a civilian government of the Imperium". I think the type 6 government interpretation is a possible one though (but I'd rather keep that for "Colony world").

I think my problem is that the Imperium largely seems to be a vague concept than anything actually real. Systems like Depot (and occupied territories) may be owned and run by the Imperial Navy, but they're not civilian governments that are fully Imperial rather than having any other identity.

And I guess that the type 3 government (Self-Perpetuating Oligarchy) would be more appropriate for a feudal/noble-based Imperial style government - prior to TNE (and Norris' reforms in the Regency) there weren't really any signs that Imperial culture (such as it is) was particularly democratic.

Theres nothing to preclude the empire as a whole being classed as GT 3.

The imperium is a diffuse concept - and odd government types is standard SF theme.. still, it may help to think of it having more in common with the (pre WWI) British commonwealth than the United States of Europe, actually. Again, too, it bears some similarlity to the British worldwide "empire" as it was run before voting rights reform of the 1840's....or more possibly to the Spanish system of 1500-(about 1700).


I hate to say this, but one of the best descriptions of the construction of the Imperium is given in T4's Milleu 0. If you have it, its worth a read, reghardlesss of one's opinion of the play systems used.

 

[captainjack23]

Though there's a difference between "under full Imperial Military rule" and "run as a civilian government of the Imperium". I think the type 6 government interpretation is a possible one though (but I'd rather keep that for "Colony world").

Ooops, for got this part.


Honestly, I'm not sure if there is such a thing as a civilian government under imperial rule -except possibly for Capital (arguable) and those starports on zero pop worlds, I suppose.

The issue of return to civil (local) control is a big one out in Solomani areas, and theres another good discussion of the whole relationship between civil, Noble and military rule, and the transitions between them in either or both of Gurps Trav Rim of Fire, or the Solomani Module for CT.


I get the impression that the imperium as a government doesn't run colonies either - they tend to be corporate projects (with that GT) or Mayflower type projects (which could have any GT).


Other sources of captive governments are colonies of individual worlds (some in the Sword worlds, I believe and a fewe other places inside the Imperium), and conquests/takeovers by member world governments (e.g. Villis and Garda-villis) in the spinward Marches.

 

[EDG]

The imperium is a diffuse concept - and odd government types is standard SF theme.. still, it may help to think of it having more in common with the (pre WWI) British commonwealth than the United States of Europe, actually. Again, too, it bears some similarlity to the British worldwide "empire" as it was run before voting rights reform of the 1840's....or more possibly to the Spanish system of 1500-(about 1700)

Yeah, but the thing is that there was a real, physical, distinct entity called "Britain" with its own citizens and government that was running the empire and commonweath in the examples you mentioned. There isn't a real, physical, distinct entity called "The Imperium" though.

Which is why I was saying that it sounded more like the relationship between the US States and the Federal Government - though I'm not sure that there's much that's actually "federal" about the Imperium. But like the USA, there's a federal seat of power (the Imperial Senate, Palace etc) on one of its member worlds (which would be like saying Capitol Hill was in Washington DC. That said, DC isn't a real state is it, it's "District of Columbia" whatever that means).

 

[Majestic7]

Though there's a difference between "under full Imperial Military rule" and "run as a civilian government of the Imperium". I think the type 6 government interpretation is a possible one though (but I'd rather keep that for "Colony world").

I think my problem is that the Imperium largely seems to be a vague concept than anything actually real. Systems like Depot (and occupied territories) may be owned and run by the Imperial Navy, but they're not civilian governments that are fully Imperial rather than having any other identity.

The Kingdom of Prussia was at times known as "an army that has a country", not a country that has an army. Perhaps you could say the same about Imperium - claiming that it is actually pretty much just the Navy, the Imperial nobility and ISS through its X-Boat network. If any one of those institutions would cease to exist, Imperium would cease to exist. IMOJ and other structures are more sugar on the top than the vital organs of the state. In a same way the Consulate can be identified with the political structure, the intendants and the Thought Police. If any of those three ceased to exist, hilarity... I mean...bad things would follow.

One important thing to note is that the people living in the Third Imperium don't necessarily have any clearer picture on the issue than you do! During CT timeline, leading either in to MT or GT, it is often said that the common people, not Travellers, but those who live most of their lives planetside, have trouble identifying themselves with the Imperium. People talk about their planets, systems and to lesser extent subsectors, but Imperium itself is just a vague thing.

The way power is divided between different branches of government might be equally vague, even in legal terms. Over a thousand years of political intrigue between powerful interest groups tends to create laws that have a huge amount of holes in them for creative interpretation - and corruption. Even if we assume that the Emperor and most of the high nobility are all good, uncorrupt people, they still have to struggle with huge legacy of lawmaking and bureaucracy to get anything done, especially if they want to change anything. This is especially true if we assume that there are many Vilani involved in the structures, as their resistance to anything new is legendary.

 

[captainjack23]

Which is why I was saying that it sounded more like the relationship between the US States and the Federal Government - though I'm not sure that there's much that's actually "federal" about the Imperium. But like the USA, there's a federal seat of power (the Imperial Senate, Palace etc) on one of its member worlds (which would be like saying Capitol Hill was in Washington DC. That said, DC isn't a real state is it, it's "District of Columbia" whatever that means).

Its an arguable point that any government is a physical entity rather than simply a contract, actually, and need not require any land to exist: the UN is one example, as are varous govenments in exile; it need not even have a head of state -in theory, the Russian Empire and the Kingdom of france still exist, despite having no land, no executive and no diplomatic status, yet still have offices, title and citizenship, believe it or not; conversely, many American indian nations are not held to exist despite having all of the above...and flags and passports .

That said, one could identfy the palace and the Moot spire, and whatever land they are on as the "physical" part of the imperium. Still, my thought is that equating being vague and diffuse to the point of non-existance with not "having land and a flag" (to quote eddy izzard) is hardly helpful when the Tigress BatRon is in orbit and the local Government is "invited aboard" for a discussion of trade, defence and the new Starport.

 

[rust]

In my opinion, all this depends very much on whether you see the Impe-
rium as a nation state, like the Roman Empire, or as a supranational in-
stitution, somewhat like the Holy Roman Empire.

I think the Imperium is more like a supranational interstellar institution,
not a nation state, which has the right to control certain policies of its
member states and to enforce this control when necessary.

From this point of view, the Imperium is a kind of close alliance with an
aristocratic / dictatorial leadership and a strong military.

 

[Shiloh]

Honestly, I'm not sure if there is such a thing as a civilian government under imperial rule -except possibly for Capital (arguable) and those starports on zero pop worlds, I suppose.

I'm pretty sure SM mentions that there *are* some such. Come lunchtime, I'll look.

 

[StephenT]

I'd agree that the Imperium is somewhere between a US-style federal state and the Holy Roman Empire. Capital/Core is the District of Columbia.

Mind you, arguably any world which is directly ruled by its Imperial Noble (rather than him acting as advisor to the government) could be said to be under direct Imperial control - though more likely to be classed as a monarchy, dictatorship or oligarchy than Gov Type 6, I'd say. Type 6 would be worlds adminstered by one of the Imperial agencies such as the Navy, Scouts, Starport Authority, Ministry of Colonisation etc - like naval depots, militarily occupied planets, interdicted reserve worlds, Imperial research stations, and worlds where the starport is the only settlement.

 

[cbrunish]

When it comes down to it-Monarchy is the natural form of government.

 

[GhostWolf69]

natural form of government.

The expression itself sends shivers down my spine... :shock:

/wolf

 

[cbrunish]

Seriously! Communisim is flawed because you have to change human nature. Dictatorships don't work because of eventual greed and there are no checks and balances. Republican form of government is still an "experiment" and so far it shows that it really not very effective way to rule masses of people. A monarchy has stability, the ability to get things done but still has the nobility to check any exteme decisions. As long as the commen man is not fracked with then they are just fine.

When it comes down to it, democracy is very overrated.

 

[Shiloh]

Seriously! Communisim is flawed because you have to change human nature. Dictatorships don't work because of eventual greed and there are no checks and balances. Republican form of government is still an "experiment" and so far it shows that it really not very effective way to rule masses of people. A monarchy has stability, the ability to get things done but still has the nobility to check any exteme decisions. As long as the commen man is not fracked with then they are just fine.

When it comes down to it, democracy is very overrated.

Rose glasses view, I'm afraid. A Monarchy suffers from all the problems of a Dictatorship, compounded by a perception of the Monarch that they have a *right* to gather all wealth unto themselves. Effectively a Monarchy is just another form of Dictatorship: even banana republic Dictators have the Generals of the 1st-3rd Armies, the Admiral and the head of the airforce, not to mention the head of the secret police, to keep them in check. Monarchies just have more historical background; they're "strong man politics" at root, same as dictators.

Winston Churchill said something along the lines of "Democracy is the worst form of government. Apart from all the other kinds."