|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jun 13, 2004 6:20:53 GMT -5
Liinking in to one of Kage's comments in the IG thread...What kinds of 'outside' organisation can we agree have some say in the running of an 'average' Imperial world?
I can think of:
The Administratum
The Adeptus Ministorum (and by proxy, the Classis Mercantilis)
The General Staff of the Imperial Guard and of the Navy
The Departmento Munitorum
The
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 13, 2004 9:27:37 GMT -5
Fascinating thread, Sojourner. I've been trying to figure out how to introduce this both here and on Portent and so thanks for taking care of one of those problems!  If you believe the canonical material then the above organisations have absolutely no say in the running of an individual world as long as the feudal overlord - the Imperial Commander - maintains their obligations to the Imperium... Of course, we all know that it doesn't quite work that way but that is the strict letter of the 'fluff'. This is also where we get into the concept of 'integration of the world' into the structure of the adeptus terra of which there is a thread somewhere closer to the bottom of this board. The proposal there is that, for the most part, unless specifically determined by local socio-history that the Imperial government (i.e the presence of the adeptus terra) tends to be a minimal thing. Anargo is somewhat unique in that it has a city of 500,000,000 (ish) adepts in the Imperial Conclave... but they again it is meant to be the capital and the world is meant to be slightly more 'integrated' than others. Then we have the related concept of that which defines 'Imperial society'. I've always been rather fond of the idea that this is primarily through the nobilitas, which I personally divide into imperialis (a special class from Terra) and provincialis (those that maintain the nobility by extension from the Imperial Commander; it is essentially a similar distinction between 'rogue traders' (local) and 'Rogue Traders' (Imperial))... At this point I cannot help but remember what the archaeologist John Collis said about Ireland, i.e. from his perspective as a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant (without KKK overtones there!  ), Ireland was a country divided by a common religion... But that is an aside and not meant to incite too much comment! With that said, however, the Anargo sector as suggested elsewhere by myself and others (in an extension of a general argument) be integrated into a defined hierarchy which should include the aforementioned organisations. This should be both social, political and military as represented with sub-division of authority from Terra to the individual segmentae... Said hierarchy would be useful for transmission of information both through the standard Astropathic Network, but also through the so-called "Imperial Pony Express" (though it would appear less Imperial and more civil in more recent intepretations)... Integrating these social, political and military functions should be an interesting challenge, especially since it must take into account both the Imperial and 'local' side of things... Kage |
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jun 14, 2004 0:32:02 GMT -5
What is this 'Pony Express' you persist in rambling on about...? Anyway. I can't help but disagree wholeheartedly with this one. although perhaps that's a result of semantics - I was really talking about having a 'stake' in so-and-so world, that is, reserving the right to take what is entitled to them should they choose. Which raises the question of how this authority is exerted, beyond outright confrontation. The most basic 'feudal' model implies that every decision is backed up with force, but I can't help thinking that this is just far too simplistic even for the Imperium. There must be varying levels of diplomacy - in a literal sense where the various Imperial bodies wrangle with the locals over more minor issues. I'd be disappointed if every point of contention has to result in military action. Obviously if the local government is outright rebellious and has no interest in any Imperial authority, there is little action left except invasion under decree from the Praefect's council for the relevant region. But even then - who is responsible for assessing the condition of the world and applying military force appropriately? Even military council must answer to a higher body whose position it is to decide whether or not they are to intervene. Furthermore, how is military intervention moderated with regards to the focus and intensity of projected force? Naturally the military would love to bomb their targets of choice and shatter everything before committing valuable forces, but virtually all of these circumstances would require that collateral is limited. So who reigns in the destructive tendencies of the military? I presume this would be an ad-hoc gathering of Munitorum and Administratum officials, but where these come from and what their powers are is open to debate. That's all for now, I'll have another read, think, read, think... |
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 14, 2004 1:03:17 GMT -5
What is this 'Pony Express' you persist in rambling on about...? Well, at least there was a smilie that time! ;D The "Imperial Pony Express" is a tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact that communications in the Imperium cannot seriously be maintained by the Astropathic Network. Rather, that organisation is reserved for privileged communication, both in terms of Imperial communication and those that wish to pony - ha! - up the cost of hiring an Astropath. The implications of the argument are that give the significant volume of information that must be transmitted to maintain the Imperium as a viable bureaucracy - more so if one perpetuates the imagery of the 'paper and quill' that everyone loves so much - a system of 'ships' must be maintained to do this. Integrated into the 'hierarchy of worlds' concept this can translate over to ships of the classis mercantilis or specific hired ships of the classis civiles, though the latter more for planets that lie "off the beaten path"... I can't help but disagree wholeheartedly with this one. although perhaps that's a result of semantics... More than likely. Everyone has their favourite way of putting things and this can often lead to confusion when none really exists... ...reserving the right to take what is entitled to them should they choose. A wide open term... the Imperium could, at any point, revoke the rights of an Imperial Commander and take whatever they pleased. But we all know this already... As has been said many times, as long as the tithe gets paid and the Imperial Commander plays nice, the adeptus terra doesn't care a fig what happens on the world... The most basic 'feudal' model implies that every decision is backed up with force, but I can't help thinking that this is just far too simplistic even for the Imperium. It is the threat of force, not force itself. There must be varying levels of diplomacy - in a literal sense where the various Imperial bodies wrangle with the locals over more minor issues. This is why the suggestion in the other thread was that each world maintained a representation of the adetus terra as a 'parasitic organisation' which acted to temper local policy to mirror that of the wider Imperium... amongst other things. I'd be disappointed if every point of contention has to result in military action. So would I, even though that is often how GW would like people to think... Obviously if the local government is outright rebellious and has no interest in any Imperial authority, there is little action left except invasion under decree from the Praefect's council for the relevant region. Praefect? But, yes, in terms of out-right rebellion then military action is the likely solution. But even then - who is responsible for assessing the condition of the world and applying military force appropriately? That gets into the concepts that we're partially after as well... The simple and most 'fluffalogically' correct answer might be that ultimately it is the segmentum commander that decides. After all, other than mentions in Eisenhorn - many people finding the BL novels to be tenuous - there is little structure to the Imperium below this level...
Of course, with the ASP we hope to give that structure.
The combination most naturally will be a reflection of both local and Imperial resources...
Kage
|
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jun 14, 2004 1:10:20 GMT -5
See Tactica
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 14, 2004 2:11:37 GMT -5
Ah yes, I remember now... <sheepish> I should have remembered it before, all things considered. Only problem is at what scale that system finishes... Kage |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jun 16, 2004 23:34:42 GMT -5
I would say that the Adeptus Terra has a say in the running of Imperial worlds, but they do not have to capacity nor the interest to micro-manage Imperial worlds. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." If the world is paying its tithes, why bother moderating local laws on sexual discrimination, mutant policies, economy and gambling, unless it's a direct threat to the entire world and therefore the Imperium? How does the Imperium exert its authority... obviously, the Imperium has other tools than military force. For example, the Imperium has the Adeptus Mechanicus, who have a distinct presence on most Imperial worlds. Their absence is keenly felt, I believe. The Imperium would also have the ability to regulate interstellar trade, I think, which could seriously mess with the planet's economy. Hiveworlds, mining worlds, and several other types of worlds are dependant on other worlds to trade food and water for industrial commodities, or vice versa. If a hiveworld starts to act up, cut off food and water supplies. If an agri-world acts up, cut off industrial supplies. Of course, these aren't always the ultimate tool of exerting authority, and there are worlds that are more than capable of sustaining themselves without outside help. That's when you threat to use military force. But I don't think things would get that far very often. As soon as the Imperium starts to worry about the local commander not being entirely loyal and capable, there will be people knocking at his door. People with power mauls and shotguns with Executioner rounds |
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 20, 2004 2:11:50 GMT -5
I would say that the Adeptus Terra has a say in the running of Imperial worlds, but they do not have to capacity nor the interest to micro-manage Imperial worlds. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I'd broadly have to agree with that, more so because it fits in with the general idea that the adeptus terra is a "parasitic body" on the individual world level, even while it ultimately directs the broad policy of the world through "centralised decision" making of the senatorum imperialis (even though it takes a while to get to the individual worlds in question!). If the world is paying its tithes, why bother moderating local laws on sexual discrimination, mutant policies, economy and gambling, unless it's a direct threat to the entire world and therefore the Imperium? Exactly. That is the job of the Imerial Commander, after all. It is a part of their feudal obligation... How does the Imperium exert its authority... obviously, the Imperium has other tools than military force. Although the threat of exertion of that military force is always there, and one that the brutish Imperium would hold like a guillotine blade over the heads of everyone who wished to look upwards... For example, the Imperium has the Adeptus Mechanicus, who have a distinct presence on most Imperial worlds. I would suggest primarily in the maintenance of those technologies that are beyond the tech level of the world, as well as a general presence with the Imperial conclave... The Imperium would also have the ability to regulate interstellar trade, I think, which could seriously mess with the planet's economy. This is what the Charters do, through the Merchant Fleet, and for me the "temporary charters" which are used to moderate Civil travel... As well as, again, the costs and restrictions on maintenance of high-tech goods of which the warp drive is one of them... (And I really should stop using the ellipsis so much... but I cannot help it! ) If a hiveworld starts to act up, cut off food and water supplies. Which will impact upon the lower socio-economic classes first and, through them, create a bottleneck which will likely bring down a rebellious government through a coup. If an agri-world acts up, cut off industrial supplies. Which does very little. Great, they cannot get their food offworld! As soon as the Imperium starts to worry about the local commander not being entirely loyal and capable, there will be people knocking at his door. People with power mauls and shotguns with Executioner rounds Or, just as aptly, the Inquisition... Or the adpetus administratum suggesting that looking at the tithe status might be useful once more... Hit them in the pockets and remember the Golden Rule!  |
|
|
|
Post by zholud on Jun 20, 2004 5:57:12 GMT -5
My position on the subject of Imperium involvement is closer to CELS’s one. I want, however, to point out that the real answer on the involvement – it depends. For example I envision large degree of Arbites influence in main worlds of the sector. Each world is a castle – yes, but Imperium as a pseudo-totalitarian entity/union and should control/supervise nominal centres, because if they fall to anti-Imperium in a wide sense influences all satellite/companion/dependant worlds will fall as well. Thus is better to monitor them on everyday basis instead of fighting the consequences. At the same time local police forces (Enforcers) are present as well and possibly they are 90% of the guardians on the planet. The same with education – it is better to control process by super-planetary bodies instead of depending on a slim chance that some researcher won’t find damned grimgoire… |
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jun 20, 2004 9:11:12 GMT -5
Well, I wonder...
A shrewd diplomat knows all too well that if you have the 40K equivalent of Americans (for example) bullying and threatening is likely to get you a rebellion, which you are then forced to crush, causing massive destruction and thus acting to the detriment of everyone involved. So I don't think the Imperium would be as keen to threaten as the fluff might suggest. Imperials are zealous but they aren't stupid - sometimes you have to give in and work around a problem instead of flattening it with so many tonnes of adamantium.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 20, 2004 12:19:38 GMT -5
The lex imperialis must be enforced on all worlds, although the Law Level part of the UWP as well as the 'fluff' suggests that there is obvious variation in this. If you're suggesting that the Law code should be high on subsector capitals? Yes, that's something that I can agree with...
Ah, that's not what I meant. That is how most people view it. I would say that a 'walled city' might be a more apt metaphor, all things considered. But it's a very minor point, but many people seem to get all excited about really minor points.
I would say 'supervise' to such an extent that they have greater integration, but that still does not strictly take away the concept that a world is the fief of the Imperial Commander. Here we must - or should - have a continuum of culture/society...
Agreed with the caveat that I think that this is over-stating the problem...
Control is too strong a word here. Influence, yes. Given the individual socio-histories of worlds, I would be keen on moving away from peoples' pet preferences that, say, the adeptus ministorum is in control of education... Again, there is a continuum of experience and integration which varies from world to world, although that does not mean that we should not provide a structured framework for interpretation.
With that said (about the adeptus ministorum) I would imagine that part of the feudal obligations of the Imperial Commander is that the 'word of the Emperor' must be brought to the people of a world. So that, yes, they would have an involvement in certain parts of the education system. (Not necessarily the totality, although that is a possibility; cf. concept of the PDF and the decision by some Imperial Commanders to maintain minimal forces.) Same with the adeptus mechanicus...
I would imagine that the popular stories of Imperial retribution against rebellious worlds would be fairly common knowledge (a feature which could be turned against them, true, but then again this is a part of the 'fluff' itself). But as to the above... Machiavelli springs to mind, i.e. the 'Bad General' concept.
Which we should remember across the board...
|
|
|
|
Post by Sikkukkut on Jun 21, 2004 2:27:30 GMT -5
Imperials are zealous but they aren't stupid - sometimes you have to give in and work around a problem instead of flattening it with so many tonnes of adamantium. You're right, they're not stupid, but you're talking as if the sum total of their options with a wayward world is to either mobilise a giant military operation to reduce the world to rubble, or leave it as is. There are plenty of intermediate steps, depending on how far the corruption has spread - the original Officio Assassinorum colour text (or at least the earliest that I read) spoke of their major role as being as a subtle way of removing dangerous planetary authorities without the level of collateral damage a full-scale suppression would involve. |
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 22, 2004 0:08:55 GMT -5
And there's also another point. One of the factors mentioned above was that a 'rebel world' would also bring down other worlds engaged in certain types of relationship with that world. The opposite is also the case, i.e. a feature of homeostasis... erm, kinda. Suffice to say the nature of relationship is that it might temper 'rebelliousness'. The by-product of this is, of course, that when people go they tend to go in style and take people down with them... Erm, which is basically what zholud said originally but tempered by, erm, something else... |
|
), Ireland was a country divided by a common religion... But that is an aside and not meant to incite too much comment!
