What does TL mean?

A slight quibble:

I wonder if it has more to do with economic privation and the attendant anxiety than the nature of the regime. If people live in a society in which their economic security is always at risk, they'll be highly motivated to get what they can at every opportunity. The only authoritarian regimes we have recent knowledge of arose during times of life-threatening instability, and had economic components to their ideology which created problems.

It seems like a combination of:
  • Economic anxiety, insecurity, or instability that gives people the feeling that they need to get what they can because disaster is always around the corner.
  • Recent memory of severe privation.
  • A culture of corruption.
  • Ineffective law enforcement.
  • Social classes farther up the societal hierarchy get lenient treatment from the courts.
  • Restrictive laws that people don't support or think necessary.
I read something a long time ago which stated that in the 1700's or something British customs officials were notoriously corrupt until the British government repealed a great many taxes, tariffs, and fees. Afterwards, British customs officials were noted as notoriously honest.
Well, in general it appears that the more authoritarian regimes exist with a strong bureaucracy, and one that is motivated by things other than pride or belief in the law. I'm not saying there aren't, or won't be, zealots who truly believe (look at Nazi Germany) in the cause of the authoritarian government. However it seems that they can be more easily swayed with bribes and such because the authoritarian regime typically is, well, not a very fun one and it also impinges on other aspects of society. Democracies can also have the same sort of individuals in them, but it seems that there are more people are fundamentally believing in the law (for moral or ethical reasons) than not. Still a bureaucracy, but less interested in oppression. And I don't have any specific data to cite. I'd have to do some digging for that.

I tend to agree that most authoritarian regimes rise to power based upon instability, fear or other negative things. The classic Italian justification of voting for Il Duce was that the fascists made the trains run on time. Or Hitler promising a whole lot to gain power and then creating more chaos to justify destroying the Republic that allowed him to be voted into office.
 
Ok. Wasn't sure.

I have a question about what you said here then:
I will try to answer as best I can.
(1) The ship captains are acting with the authority of the Imperium, and they get a handsome kickback from world governments and the subsector duke to ensure that they enforce Imperial trade rules.

(2) Why take a bribe when you can just impound the whole ship, sell it for prize money, confiscate the goods, and sell the crew to the nearest prison planet?

Agreed that military captains are acting with the authority of the Imperium. But they also are acting under the laws of the Imperium. I can't say that I know Imperial law code all that well, but it seems odd to me that except in times of war or perhaps in certain restricted areas, opening fire on a civilian ship only suspected of something seems overly harsh.
The Bloodwell was destroyed over a transponder issue and a refusal to answer comms, that's the Imperial side of the story, there was no call for the Captain of the ship to be court martialled or even investigated. The matter of fact TAS News item indicates to me this is not an out of the ordinary happening. A lot to take form one news item, but back in the day that is all the setting info we had - plus Adventure 1 where PCs are arrested and imprisoned with no trial at the whim of the IN ship captain who catches them.
We know from some explanations in canon that interdicted worlds may have nuclear-armed satellites that will fire on ships - but they give fair and frequent warnings before doing so. To me that sounds like their are very specific rules of engagement, and laws, that are being followed in order to do such things. I think that would factor greatly into how the IN acts.
I take my model of the Imperium from early Library Data, A:1 and A:2, subsequent attempts to soften the Imperim through in universe propaganda have not had an affect on me... :)

More seriously they have gone out of theri way to make the Imperium have the morals and laws of a western democracy - this does not fit with the"reality" of the setting. Even if you take the most liberal interpretation to date, the mongoose Third Imperium book, scratch the surface and you have an authoritarian state that rules every world but pretend it doesn't.
The comment about kickbacks... I have never read that. Is that mentioned somewhere I'm unaware? Do you have a source for it? It doesn't seem like what a lawful government would engage in.
Poor choice of words on my part. What I mean is the wages and status, the rewards, gained by being a ship captain enforcing Imperial, subsector and planetary law (and we all know the planets have to obey Imperial rules for trade...)
As for the 2nd comment, it would take (I think) a court to ok the seizure and sale of a ship to get prize money (and I'd think merchants would be peeved if it was a common occurence).
The Imperim imprisons with no trial, why would there be a court? The ship has been impounded by an Imperial warship, here are the comms logs and transponder records - thanks, here is the cash for you and your crew. The Imperium is not ruled by law courts...

The majority ot trade in the Imperium is conducted by megacorporations and sector lines, they follow the rules. Look what happened to the Bloodwell when it didn't.

(In my head canon I have Oberlindes involved with the Ine Givar, his aim is to rid the Marches of Imperial authoritarianism)
And selling the crew sounds like slavery to me, and isn't that illegal in the Imperium under the warrant of restoration? Member worlds are also prohibited from doing so even if local laws might allow for it.
That slavery thing was invented by the fanon that became canon thanks to the T4 authors thinking the Imperium was the US in space... previous canon shows otherwise with many examples, the Warrant of Resoration is an utter joke:
I already mentioned PCs imprisoned with no trial, they even lock up political prisoners by disappearing them, the Traveller Adventure has people bought and sold as sex slaves no less, the Imperim kidnaps, tortures and imprisons with no legal case as shown in A:2 - what a lot pf people miss about A:2 is that it is not some mad renegade scientist, it is a fully by the books Imperial Research station with IN and INI support,
 
I will try to answer as best I can.

The Bloodwell was destroyed over a transponder issue and a refusal to answer comms, that's the Imperial side of the story, there was no call for the Captain of the ship to be court martialled or even investigated. The matter of fact TAS News item indicates to me this is not an out of the ordinary happening. A lot to take form one news item, but back in the day that is all the setting info we had - plus Adventure 1 where PCs are arrested and imprisoned with no trial at the whim of the IN ship captain who catches them.
Ok. I had to go look this one up. I did not recall it and found it:

Dentus/Regina

Word was received today that two weeks ago the Imperial Battle cruiser Adamdun mistakenly engaged and destroyed the merchant craft Bloodwell of the Oberlindes Line. The Bloodwell, according to the crew of the battle cruiser,was not showing its ID transponder signal and would not answer broad-beam hails. The Bloodwell was under full acceleration, and after it refused to change vector in response to laser warning fire, it was engaged by high-G missile fire and destroyed. A subsequent (and unsuccessful) search for survivors resulted in the identification of the ship.

Oberlindes Lines officials called the story "an obvious cover-up of a tragic display of incompetence." and claimed that the Bloodwell's transponder had just undergone its annual maintenance check, and could not have failed to function. As in all commercial vessels, the ID transponder wa ssupposedly tamper-proof, and are could not have been turned off by the crew. Legal action is expected.


According to the blurb the craft was destroyed by accident. It says the ship was "mistakenly" engaged. I'm not sure the TNS would be useful, as it doesn't provide much info other than an Imperial ship opened fire on a merchant and claimed it was not showing an ID Transponder. In theory the military ship was bigger and faster (it's a BC, but this is CT, so that makes it a Kininur class) and could have done more with it's weapons fire to disable rather than destroy. Not to mention the ship itself should be in their data files. MAYBE it was supposed to be captured by pirates onboard who were trying to flee and that's why blew it up? The second paragraph indicates the line did not agree and was going to sue, so maybe there is more to this story than the blurb suggests (like incompetence on the part of the ships captain). I don't think a single instance is a good example.

The same TNS set of data I pulled up had numerous references to l-hyd tanks as well, including a ship that was destroyed when (they postulate) the tank failed to jettison on time causing the accumulators to overload. Seems that drop tanks would be quite dangerous and that little tid bit isn't covered in the rules either. It's an example, but I'd hope that this would be found in a better source (like description of naval ops, or a policy or something).
I take my model of the Imperium from early Library Data, A:1 and A:2, subsequent attempts to soften the Imperim through in universe propaganda have not had an affect on me... :)
Herr Goebbels would be proud to know his trainees have persevered into the 52nd century!
More seriously they have gone out of theri way to make the Imperium have the morals and laws of a western democracy - this does not fit with the"reality" of the setting. Even if you take the most liberal interpretation to date, the mongoose Third Imperium book, scratch the surface and you have an authoritarian state that rules every world but pretend it doesn't.

Poor choice of words on my part. What I mean is the wages and status, the rewards, gained by being a ship captain enforcing Imperial, subsector and planetary law (and we all know the planets have to obey Imperial rules for trade...)
I don't, personally, get the feeling that the Imperium is this sort of police state. Even kings and emperors of the past had morals - just like some were raving lunatics who were silently, or publically, removed from the throne as a threat to the land. CT never gave me the vibes of a threatening police state. Again, that's just me.

While we know today that ships captains in the past were provided prize money for seized ships, I don't know of any modern captain or crew to have gotten that sort of reward. Prize monies seem to have kind of died along with the age of sale. I had to go look this up, but in 1899 the US Congress eliminated prize money under the law. However it was actually paid for the last time in 1947 to two ships for capturing a German freighter that had occurred 6 years previously when the German ship was captured flying an American flag.
The Imperim imprisons with no trial, why would there be a court? The ship has been impounded by an Imperial warship, here are the comms logs and transponder records - thanks, here is the cash for you and your crew. The Imperium is not ruled by law courts...
Why would you think the Imperium imprisons with no trial? If they do not follow laws then having laws is pointless. The Imperium MUST be ruled by laws or else it's bureaurcracy and military portions would fail. Without a formal process in place then every captain or soldier with a weapon would be able to do whatever they want through force alone. An interstellar government would collapse under such chaos.

Roman pre-consuls had great powers being so far away from Rome, yet they were still bound by Roman laws (at least for Roman citizens). Sure, some took liberties with their power, but some also were rebuked and/or replaced for stepping over the line. That's been the case throughout history.
The majority ot trade in the Imperium is conducted by megacorporations and sector lines, they follow the rules. Look what happened to the Bloodwell when it didn't.

(In my head canon I have Oberlindes involved with the Ine Givar, his aim is to rid the Marches of Imperial authoritarianism)
Well, we don't know what happened. the news stuff ends there. I found someone else theorizing about what COULD have happened to the Bloodwell, then fell down the "there IS/IS NOT stealth in space" well... Damn Timmy and Lassie were not around to assist me... if you go looking for it there's at least other alt opines on the topic.
That slavery thing was invented by the fanon that became canon thanks to the T4 authors thinking the Imperium was the US in space... previous canon shows otherwise with many examples, the Warrant of Resoration is an utter joke:
I already mentioned PCs imprisoned with no trial, they even lock up political prisoners by disappearing them, the Traveller Adventure has people bought and sold as sex slaves no less, the Imperim kidnaps, tortures and imprisons with no legal case as shown in A:2 - what a lot pf people miss about A:2 is that it is not some mad renegade scientist, it is a fully by the books Imperial Research station with IN and INI support,
Meh, this is potentially one of those Traveller versioning things - personally I try to keep arguments within a specific version and use only it's references. CT is a little weird because it's got multiple printings of some things and it sometimes contradicts itself. There will always be bad actors, including the government (as evidenced so much throughout history and the recent issues with the US ICE thugs). And, lets be honest here, it's not like a government can't hide "slaver" under something like "20yrs in a penal brothel" or "20yrs in a penal mine".
 
That would mean one could not cite history. And the passage I was referring to went back hundreds of years (in the game).

We're probably talking about different things. My point was that the 3rd Imperium as a government has had a habit of war and state violence for more than 1000 years, from its beginning as the Sylean Federation to its current form.

Or Hitler promising a whole lot to gain power and then creating more chaos to justify destroying the Republic that allowed him to be voted into office.

I recommend an excellent book, The Chief Culprit by Victor Survorov.
https://www.amazon.com/Chief-Culprit-Stalins-Grand-Design/dp/1591148065?tag=ustxtaddt-20
Victor Survorov was a Soviet military intelligence officer who had access to both secret Soviet archives and Nazi German archives that were captured in Berlin in 1945, which are still kept secret by the Russian government today. Highly interressible.

the more authoritarian regimes exist with a strong bureaucracy, and one that is motivated by things other than pride or belief in the law.

Like ideologies, which are generally at odds with reality to a greater or lesser degree, especially economic realities. The bureaucracies and laws are molded to fit the ideology rather than addressing the issues normal people would expect them to. Most people today aren't really acquainted with authoritarian regimes that aren't communist or fascist, both of which were imposed during times of extreme instability and privation, and caused a lot of problems with poor economic policies. Napoleon's regime is another one people are familiar with, and again, he rose to power during a time of instability, privation, and violence. Compare this to Prussian authoritarianism, in which corruption occurred in an environment of lax oversight, nepotism, informal payments, and generally poor compensation of officials. Then again this was the 1700's and 1800's and modern bureaucratic techniques weren't developed. A lot of people will dip their hands in the till if they think they can get away with it, regardless of the nature of the regime.
 
More seriously they have gone out of theri way to make the Imperium have the morals and laws of a western democracy - this does not fit with the"reality" of the setting. Even if you take the most liberal interpretation to date, the mongoose Third Imperium book, scratch the surface and you have an authoritarian state that rules every world but pretend it doesn't.

Agreed. Imposing contemporary rl western liberal democratic values on a far future setting light years away from Earth is a design choice I vehemently reject.
 
I misremembered the patron encounter, they offer contracts to off world women to bear their young, and provide sex to all male relatives. They don't always mention all the terms up front and getting out of the contract may prove difficult - the exotic patron encounter on Paya.
 
The Imperim imprisons with no trial, why would there be a court? The ship has been impounded by an Imperial warship, here are the comms logs and transponder records - thanks, here is the cash for you and your crew. The Imperium is not ruled by law courts...

There's probably some kind of magistrate or official who interprets and enforces Imperial directives, probably the court of the subsector duke. That could be one of his responsibilities, or the responsibility of an official he appoints, and he would have a panel of advisors versed in the applicable lore. I suppose that's a court, of sorts. IN captains would have immense latitude in their decision-making, since bringing a case against one of them would prohibitively difficult and expensive in itself. That said, I'm sure the IN has controls in place to keep its captains from turning to rent-seeking, extortion, or outright piracy. The relationship between IN patrols and independent merchantmen might be strained indeed.

Anyway.

"In return for and in support of all the Imperium provides, its member worlds pay taxes." pg. 10
 
I misremembered the patron encounter, they offer contracts to off world women to bear their young, and provide sex to all male relatives. They don't always mention all the terms up front and getting out of the contract may prove difficult - the exotic patron encounter on Paya.

Ohhh, that part.
 
We're probably talking about different things. My point was that the 3rd Imperium as a government has had a habit of war and state violence for more than 1000 years, from its beginning as the Sylean Federation to its current form.
True, the Imperium has made wars (or had forced upon them) for quite some time. Both internal and external, Civil wars and all that.

I guess that's the crux of the discussion though - if that's affected views or not. Fighting wars forced upon you, fighting wars for the right moral reasons, or fighting purely for power and resources are all different mindsets from a rulers perspective, and, I think, from a populace mentality.

Its an interesting tack to say the least. Definitely one worthy of its own thread and discussions.
I recommend an excellent book, The Chief Culprit by Victor Survorov.
https://www.amazon.com/Chief-Culprit-Stalins-Grand-Design/dp/1591148065?tag=ustxtaddt-20
Victor Survorov was a Soviet military intelligence officer who had access to both secret Soviet archives and Nazi German archives that were captured in Berlin in 1945, which are still kept secret by the Russian government today. Highly interressible.
i will take a look for this. The Gestapo book is very interesting. I also liked a book called Dreadnought. About 1300 pages.. and i was very surprised after finishing it and only a single chapter was devoted to the warship and its buiilding. The rest was about European history and all the alliances and family squabbles that pulled half the world into war.
Like ideologies, which are generally at odds with reality to a greater or lesser degree, especially economic realities. The bureaucracies and laws are molded to fit the ideology rather than addressing the issues normal people would expect them to. Most people today aren't really acquainted with authoritarian regimes that aren't communist or fascist, both of which were imposed during times of extreme instability and privation, and caused a lot of problems with poor economic policies. Napoleon's regime is another one people are familiar with, and again, he rose to power during a time of instability, privation, and violence. Compare this to Prussian authoritarianism, in which corruption occurred in an environment of lax oversight, nepotism, informal payments, and generally poor compensation of officials. Then again this was the 1700's and 1800's and modern bureaucratic techniques weren't developed. A lot of people will dip their hands in the till if they think they can get away with it, regardless of the nature of the regime.
History is replete with many instances of thing the average person is unaware of.

I kind of admire the Prussians and their very Germanic ideals of organization and efficiency. An interesting island in Europe. The Swedes also have an interesting history. Sadly im quite deficient in many non-western civilizations simply because of time and scope. So much to study and learn and having to pick and choose sucks.

Bureaucrats have been roughly the same since ancient times. Methods may have changed, but the mindset appeals to specific classes of people regardless of the time period. And as much as people malign a bureaucracy, having a group of people who more or less are not fixated on efficiency and power outside their own little realm is, as I see it anyway, a good thing! Truly efficient government is terrible for liberty and people. I spent a few years after the military thinking I wanted to be one. Got my two degrees and my foot in the door (state and local government) and found out my idealism clashed with reality. So off I went to the private sector.
 
An entrenched elite eventually feels entitled, and their primary motivation evolves into perpetuation of their perquisites.

Something else, consider what I'll call micro-elites: the people who reach a certain level in their organization, be it a workplace, a military, or a society, can feel entitled.
"Well I've been working here for 27 years, blah blah blah, so I'll sleep on the job or screw around all day!"
"I pulled myself up by my bootstraps and now I'm rich, so everyone who doesn't do that is morally or intellectually deficient and beneath me. Therefore I can commit unethical or illegal actions to screw people over, because they deserve it."
"I'm a senior sergeant so now I don't need to obey the rules and I don't need to bother to obey orders or fulfill my responsibilities. And, if you try to discipline me, I'll drag my feet on the job, and I'm gonna retire! Did you hear me? I'm gonna retire! (Please do.)
 
Last edited:
Exactly like a bureaucracy, then. Or any group of humans; above a certain number of people a group forms who exist solely to 'defend' the group. A phenomena called 'diffusion of responsibility' also settles in.

It's especially funny when they all hate each other, but instantly close ranks whenever someone tells them to do their jobs.
 
Back
Top