> [ps. I think Phil's conception of "modern nation state in space" would be
> worth chewing through as a model for the Solomani Confederation ...]
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019, 11:41:55 PM MST, Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
But note that in canon individual worlds and clusters in the Solomani
Confederation have even more independence than systems do in the
Imperium. It's not feudal, but it has many/most of the same issues as
the 3I, and similar ways of dealing with them.
I recall an article that stated that one of the immediate consequences of the creation of the 'Solomani Autonomous Sphere' was that nobility was immediately removed from any political function.
I've always found this to be odd as I figured that it was the solomani nobles, who had been excluded from court by Arbellatra who were probably agitating the most.
I also don't see that the creation of the 'Sphere' would necessarily have that effect.
And there's even mention, in SJG's TNS dispatches of pro-Solomani Imperial Nobles present & active w/i the 3I's portion of the SolRim sector.
Of course, one of the big problems with the SolConfed is the 'citizenship' question.
I read where some constituent systems recognize sentients (I recall 'uplifted' dolphins) as citizens while the Confed does not.
Of course, in SJG's timeline a massive system devastating civil war broke out.
It was short but brutal &, last I heard, it left the Confed (incl it's capital) in considerable turmoil.
OK, so how could a hypothetical Solomani Confederation actually work in the 870 to 1115 era?
Arguing from analogy, we know that GDW liked to draw several parallels between the Solomani Confederation and the USSR: a one-party political state that is nominally democratic, but with elections of dubious validity, and a tri-polar balance of internal power between the party, the military, and the secret police.
While the analogy with the USSR is somewhat useful, the travel delays are on a similar scale to the Imperium, so the idea of any form of centrally planned control of the economy, the society, or the government is dead in the water. (Well, without some truly radical changes in how society is governed ... but that is another discussion.) The same problem also comes in to play with the other USSR-surrogate, the Zhodani Consulate. Instead, there are other historical analogies that can be used, which I will describe later.
The individual Solomani nation-states generally seem to be under a subsector in size. This means any world in a Solomani state will be no more than a couple of weeks away from every other world in the state. This is roughly equivalent to the "time/size" of modern nation-states up until the 1850's - and the widespread implementation of the telegraph and railroads. I think it is conceivable a number of different government types (representative democracies, oligarchies, dictatorships, colonial empires) would be able to exert meaningful control over states of this size. It is also conceivable for states of this size to be able to build a shared cultural identity.
In short, I think all the already described Solomani states (Turin Consolidation, Bootean Federation, Wuan Technology Association, etc) are viable as written, and there are likely many more such states not yet described. On a slightly smaller scale, it is likely that "independent" HiPop worlds between these states would each be surrounded by a gaggle of dependent less-populated worlds under de facto, if not de jure, control by their closest HiPop world. These HiPop worlds would likely be considered full Member-states of the Confederation (as described in MT:S&A, p8).
So that just leaves trying to model how the Confederation as a whole works.
To me, it is instructive to consider the role of the Church in binding together "Christendom" in the period from 900 to 1500. On one hand, there were independent secular states, some with a reasonably cohesive cultural identity, some that were merely dynastic agglomerations. Over all these states was a vague sense of "being Christian" being the highest form of allegiance, and of much of Europe sharing a cultural identity distinct from that of the Levant. From 1095, it was also clear that "Christianity" was able to effect some sort of semi-coherent foreign policy.
The Catholic Church in particular was able to operate as a stand-alone state (the Papal State), but also operated as a "state within a state" in most European kingdoms. Although not able to levy massive military forces of its own, the Church had several tools (excommunications, papal blessings, church office-holders being part of the feudal hierarchy in secular states) to exert significant influence on theoretically-autonomous kingdoms' domestic and foreign policy. Even where a feudal lord, or even a king, was not personally pious, that lord/king could not afford to be seen to be in open conflict with the Church within his realm, let alone in conflict with the Pope.
I think this illustrates how the Solomani Confederation could work. All Member-states of the Confederation nominally subscribe to the doctrines of the Solomani Cause, as interpreted by the Solomani Party. How the various Member-states (and the branches of the Party within that Member-state) actually practice the tenets of the Solomani Cause within their own borders may vary somewhat. Often, such variations in practice will be allowed to slide so long as the supremacy of the central offices of the Party is recognised. Rarely, a world or Member-state will "violate the doctrines" sufficiently blatantly to attract official sanction from the Party chiefs. Such sanction significantly weakens the legitimacy of a Member-state's government, and threatens the possibility of neighbouring Member-states receiving Confederation authorisation (and funding) to take economic and/or military actions against the heretical state.
The Party itself is democratic (much as the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was democratic), but the results produced will look more like the Catholic hierarchy: imagine an equivalency between the Solomani Secretariat and the College of Cardinals. In some eras the most zealous believers in the Solomani Cause will be ascendant, at other times more pragmatic (even cynical) hands will be at the wheel.
In all Member-states, the Solomani Party will be holding assets that make it a major player in the economy and society of that state, even if it officially has no explicit role in government. (This is also useful in as much as the Party has a source of income independent of tax revenue.) In many Member-states, the Party might have a constitutionally-protected role (eg. the local branch of the Party has the right to elect from within its own membership 10% of the members of the Chamber of Review; like the Lords Spiritual in the UK). Associate-status worlds are directly governed by the Party.
In this way, at _worst_ the Party may struggle with a recalcitrant Member-state government over whether the secular government or the Party head office is directing the policy of that Member-state. Even then, it is going to be more useful for the Party to work with the "loyal opposition" to effect peaceful regime change than to try to overthrow the government by force. It would be as unthinkable for a Member-state to try to evict the local Party as we would find it for Texas to "evict" the US federal government, or for medieval England to "evict" the Catholic church.
The make-up of active Party functionaries in a given Member-state will generally be local recruits at the lower level. As a functionary climbs the ladder, they are more likely to be deployed away from their home, in such as way as to have them identifying more closely with the Party than with the local Member-state where they are presently serving. Nonetheless, the "local Party" is not just a stalking horse for the central offices of the Party. It is also the path by which the citizens of Member-state find representation to the Confederation as a whole, so xenophiles of all sorts are going to be seeking service in the Party. And it is not unknown for a high-ranking "imported" Party official to end up advocating effectively for the interests of their adopted Member-state in front of the highest echelons of the Party Secretariat.
This then means that the Confederation Government itself does not so much represent the individual Member-states, as it does the various Party branches in those Member-states. In a sense, the Confederation IS the Party. And because, in theory, every citizen is a member of the Party, the Confederation draws its mandate directly from the populace, rather than indirectly via the states.
In practice, there is recognition that the Member-states are far more reflective of the distinct cultures of the Solomani Sphere and, due to communications lag, the Member-states are the most appropriate instrument for good governance on a day-to-day basis. There is also recognition that a powerful Party/Confederation, although in one sense in competition with the various Member-states, is essential for preventing conflict between the Member-states, for building a sense of pan-Solomani community and, most importantly, for defending the Solomani people against the the threat of being subjugated by the archaic feudalism of the Imperium.
Things I like about this "light grey" version of the Confederation?
1) It gets rid of the apparent paradox of a "totalitarian confederation".
2) The culture of the Solomani Party becomes less close-minded and conformist, and more xenophilic and trans-national.
3) SolSec is de-emphasised. Even the dreaded monitors can be re-cast as akin to the village priest - perhaps more loyal to their local flock than to the Central Committee back on Home.
4) The Confederation is not a primarily military power. The Confederation Navy is organised to operate in conjuction with the Fleets of the individuals Member-states, either in internal policing, or else in external offence/defence. By itself, the Confederation Navy would be able to take down a single Member-state, but would probably struggle in a war against two Member-states working together. So the Sphere is likely to see a bit more conflict between Member-states than the Imperium does, and the Confederation would respond to these with diplomatic pressure and coalition-forming, rather than just "sending in the Confederation troops".
Did anyone run any campaigns in the Confederation? What sort of "feel" did it have to be living there?
Cheers,
KenB