'Empire': a cliché?

[Agemegos]

G'day

 

I have an SF setting that I have been running games in (using Hero System and ForeSight as the ruleset on various occasions) since 1987, but which I am now putting through a major revision (its second).

 

The premise is that Earth estalished several hundred colonies using marginal, expensive, inconvenient means of interstellar travel that were very limited and effectively one-way. Then Earth was destroyed by what is believed to have been an unexpectedly powerful weapon, but what might have been an accident in a lab researching FTL travel. (In the first veersiion these 'primary colonies' were established by an instantaneous technolgy that required preparation of the destination. In the second it was STL lightsail tech. In the new version it will be JAFAL technology in which a stator propels a ship in a modified Alcubierre warp bubble.) After a couple of centuries of independent and divergent development on the part of the colonies, a bloke called Eichberger invented a convenient means of FTL in which ships are self-propelling. This allows return travel, and makes interstellar commerce possible. Eichberger became very, very rich: but unscrupulous and negligent people did great evils using his invention. After about 75 years, Eichberger vested the greater part of his fortune in a trust or foundation, with its purpose to mitigate and compensate the downside of FTL travel. This trust built a fleet, and used it to pursue pirates &c. But #1 and #2 on its 'most wanted' list succumbed so decisively that #3 (Jorge Luis Bertillon) attempted pre-emptive defence. He destroyed Eichberger's homeworld (and killed Eichberger and most of the trustees) using a Catalytic Thermonuclear (CT) device. The Trust's fleet, shipyards, merchant ships &c were, however, pretty much untouched. One of the Trust's (or Foundation's) commodores (Thyomas Kobayashi) pursued Bertillon to a world that acted as a fortified base for pirates. The world (Orinoco) refused to give Bertillon up, and began to prepare a war-fleet. So Kobayashi blasted it to a cinder with an improvised CT weapon, then shot himself. The surviving employees of the Foundation (or Trust) then swore to dedicate their lives and their posterity to protecting everyone they could from the danger of mass killings and other evils Eichberger had identified. There followed about fifty years of 'Formation Wars' in which the Trust (or Foundation) attempted to establish its power to do these things in the face of opposition by planetary government trying to maintain their untrammelled sovereignty and the absolute freedom of the spaceways. This ended in a stalemate and was settled by negotiation and ended in the Treaty of Luna, which acts as a constitution. The broad outline of the Treaty of Luna is that the colonies retain sovereignty within their atmospheres, and the power to supervise (through court which they appoint) all activity of the Foundtion (or Trust) within it. Meanwhile the Trust (or Foundation) is sovereign in vacuum and on unihabited worlds and has a limited authority to pursue its mission (eg. jurisdiction over WMD, terrorism, inter-colonial trvel, extradition, quarantine, etc.) subject to a bicameral legislature representing the colonies and with absolute control over taxation. The legislature has the power to authorise the Empire to intervene in a colony on which government fails. The power of this legislature has turned out to be far less than the framers of the Treaty of Luna expected, because the revenues of interstellar commerce and planet development make the Trust (or Foundation) independent of tax revenues.

 

I have hitherto called the institution that the Treaty of Luna created out of the Eichberger Foundation 'The Empire', its supreme executive body 'the Imperial Council', its chief executive officer 'the Emperor', its navy 'the Imperial Navy', its marines 'the Imperial Marines', etc. But some of my players protest:

 

1. That there are far too many space empires around anyway.

 

2. That the word 'empire' seems like an unlikely term for the negotiators at Luna to revive.

 

3. That the word 'empire' suggests an hereditary monarchy, not a meritocratic oligarchy self-perpetuating by co-option.

 

4. And therefore that I would be better-advised to use 'Foundation', 'Trust', 'Company', 'Directorate, or 'Zaibatsu', and 'Board of Directors' or 'Board of Trustees', along with 'President', 'Chairman', 'Managing Director', 'Chief Trustee', 'Secretary-General', 'Director-General': or something like that.

 

5. In addition to which, they think that the word 'Foundation' is too suggestive of Asimov, ant that I ought to use 'Trust' or "Eichberger Family Trust'.

 

Any comments? Am I okay using 'empire' to describe a government with supreme authority over an extensive group of states that have limited sovereignty, even though it is not a monarchy? Is it quie implausible that a bunch of diplomats would choose that term when (they thought) they were setting up such an interstellar institution? Does this term give the wrong 'feel'? has it been over-used? Is it misleding to new players?

 

Regards,

 

 

Brett Evill

[Fitz]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

Any comments? Am I okay using 'empire' to describe a government with supreme authority over an extensive group of states that have limited sovereignty, even though it is not a monarchy? Is it quie implausible that a bunch of diplomats would choose that term when (they thought) they were setting up such an interstellar institution? Does this term give the wrong 'feel'? has it been over-used? Is it misleding to new players?

 

If you'd be happy describing the United States or the USSR as an empire, then fine. If not, then I think you need some other term, because it sounds as though that's the sort of political situation you're describing ("a government with supreme authority over an extensive group of states that have limited sovereignty")

 

An empire implies the existence of an emperor, and although it's possible to have an elected emperor, in practise they tend to create dynasties. I think the term "empire" would give a misleading impression to the players, and it has been overused.

 

I think that about covers it

[UltraRob]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

You refer to it through most of your writeup as "A Trust", so why not just call it that instead? "The Trust" can sound just as fearsome as "The Empire" once the players learn what it really means. ^_- It also gives you a lot more latitude in terms of what your political system can do.

 

Rob

[cold_victim]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

If you want the organisation to be benevolent, I wouldn't use empire, it has very oppressive connotations. Here's some other Ideas.

 

* Union - If the group is made up of members from worlds which have only come together for a common cause.

 

* Commonwealth - This would be used if the organisation was seen as being intrinsically superior to themember worlds, but in reality the member states are mostly independent.

 

* Confederacy - If you wish for soemthing like a federation but without the Star Trek motif, try this. It would tend to mean worlds coming together against a common enemy.

 

* Conference - This would signify an organisation made up mostly delegates or diplomats, it would be more interested in commercial activity than security.

 

* Conglomerate - This would signify states coming together for the sake of mutual self interest alone, they don't like each other.

 

Hope these are of help.

 

CV

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

What you have there is normally called a confederacy.

[tmutant]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

The Sten books by Allan Cole and Chris Bunch deal with the idea that an Empire is always going to be a bad thing. Power corrupts, and an Emperor will eventually rise who will abuse his power. If real checks and balances exist to keep your interstellar governing body from becoming a totalitarian state then call it a commonwealth, or grand alliance.

[BlackSword]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

What you have there is normally called a confederacy.

I agree that Confederacy is the best term for describing that politcal set-up. Loose knit group of soveriegn nations bound together for mutual protection and trade agreements. The Eichberger Confederacy shall surely drive fear into the hearts of all men who do evil.

[Mentor]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

The Sten books by Allan Cole and Chris Bunch deal with the idea that an Empire is always going to be a bad thing. Power corrupts' date=' and an Emperor will eventually rise who will abuse his power. If real checks and balances exist to keep your interstellar governing body from becoming a totalitarian state then call it a commonwealth, or grand alliance.[/quote']

I loved the way these guys sucked us in, making the reader really get into the Eternal Emperor, and the having him go insane. One of my favorite series. I too realized that this was a great case for anything but an empire.

[Dauntless]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

Sounds to me like what you've got is a Union. In essence you have several client states which have some local sovereignty but must defer some matters to the central government. In effect, what you describe isn't too different from our own american form of government.

 

For all the reasons that you describe, I'd avoid the word Empire. Now, there is one reason why Union or Federation doesn't quite fit. From what you've described, the various client states have submitted to the Treaty of Luna under duress. For this reason, it's a little more similar to the former Soviet Union and the warsaw pact. So could could conceivably call it a Bloc Union.

 

But the word empire has been used and abused, and I'd avoid it because of all the connotation it implies (that doesn't seem to fit your game world).

[Agemegos]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

From what you've described' date=' the various client states have submitted to the Treaty of Luna under duress.[/quote']

 

Correct. Two other points also make me hesitate to use 'Union', 'Confederation', 'Federation', or 'Commonwealth'.

 

1) The Imperial Service does recruit from the colonial populations, but its employees live, work, and raise their children in orbital habitats in extra-territorial space. When an Imperial Servant visits a colony either on a holiday or in the course of his or her work, his or her status is that of a visiting alien: he or she doesn't even have residency. And colonials think of Imperials as foreigners, not fellow-citizens. I am aware of an analogue in the District of Columbia and the Australian Capital Territory, but this is seems is a bit more distant and un-fellowlike.

 

2) To me, those terms would suggest that the colonies were integral parts, as the American states are part of the Union, and as the Australian states are parts of the Commonwealth. I am looking for a term for the interstellar organisation as distinct from the colonies that it supervises. But I guess that the diplomats who framed the Treaty of Luna wouldn't have meant it to turn out as it did, and might have chosen an official title with a more integrationist connotation. Technically, the distinction is an analogue to that between the Union and the US Government, or between the Commonwealth of Australia and the Commonwealth Government. On one hand I think we would look at our federal governments differently it they pre-existed our federations and imposed federation on us. But on the other I guess the negotiators of the Treaty of Luna might have thought they were forging a new institution by a coming-together of the several colonies and the Eichberger Foundation.

[LordGhee]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

How about league or alliance

[Lightray]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

Perhaps hegemony ?

 

It's a little exotic, possibly sinister, and vague enough to encompass a number of different political structures. I've generally seen it applied to where one political body dominates several others -- as in, the Athenian hegemony of ancient Greece, where Athens dominated Greece despite not actually ruling over many of its "allies".

 

Plus, you can revive lots of nifty pseudo-greek official titles, like Hegemon.

[Agemegos]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

Perhaps hegemony ?

 

It's a little exotic, possibly sinister, and vague enough to encompass a number of different political structures. I've generally seen it applied to where one political body dominates several others -- as in, the Athenian hegemony of ancient Greece, where Athens dominated Greece despite not actually ruling over many of its "allies".

 

Plus, you can revive lots of nifty pseudo-greek official titles, like Hegemon.

 

It is a nice suggestion, except for two things.

 

1) How would it develop? Is it plausible that a group of 28th-century diplomats would revive ancient Greek?

 

2) It just so happens that I use ancient Greek terms very extensively in my fantasy setting, and I think my players would baulk at it invading Flat Black as well.

[Lightray]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

1) How would it develop? Is it plausible that a group of 28th-century diplomats would revive ancient Greek?

Even today, hegemony sees infrequent use. I think I've seen it used to refer to NATO as an "American hegemony" -- but, of course, its use is primarily pejorative nowadays.

 

One plausible use would be for the colonies to start referring to the Eichberger Foundation (Trust, etc.) as the "Hegemony", and to its citizens as "hegemons". Once it becomes common use, it's likely the official name won't see much use.

 

2) It just so happens that I use ancient Greek terms very extensively in my fantasy setting, and I think my players would baulk at it invading Flat Black as well.

I'm not familiar with Flat Black, but if you're already using Greek terms in your setting, it seems more likely that another Greek term would come into common use.

[Agemegos]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

I'm not familiar with Flat Black' date=' but if you're already using Greek terms in your setting, it seems more likely that another Greek term would come into common use.[/quote']

 

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I have a fantasy setting that is pervaded with classical Greek borrowing (linguistic and social): eg. the achipelago i8s ruled by a person whose title is 'hegemon'. I think my players would dislike having me use Greek in my science fiction setting too.

[Ghost who Walks]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

Consortium: Based on your camaign premise, a "trust" basicly took over. However, the trust was probably created from assets left behind by a corporation of some sort. A consortium is a grouping of corporations...

 

The Legacy (I always liked that show): Interstellar civilization is the resule of one guy leaving behind a fortune to the people in his will. An Inheritence is sometimes referred to as a Legacy.

 

The interstellar organization could be named after what it looks like on a map, same as Italy is "the boot". The "Sphere" perhaps, if everyone settled around Earth.

 

If you have aliens, they may call the people something else. "Dirt-People" is always good.

 

As a side note, few empires in history were called "empires" at the time. These are titles historians gave them.

 

If you can't use the Greek, try "Pax Eichberger"

[dbsousa]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

I think what you have here is a Franchise...

[Hopscotch]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

I think that you should stick with "Trust." I like the idea that that particular word might take on slightly totalitarian overtones. I understand that the central government that you have developed is not totalitarian, per se, but I think "The Trust" works very well.

 

Joe

[Blue Jogger]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

I would use Protectorate since, for me, that always summons up an image of over-protective mother.

 

"The Protectorate has ruled that you must have more insulation installed in your ship before heading into deep space."

[Agemegos]

Re: 'Empire': a cliché?

 

I would use Protectorate since' date=' for me, that always summons up an image of over-protective mother.[/quote']

 

Interesting suggestion. For me, "protectorate" evokes Oliver Cromwell.