Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => Player Driven Content => Topic started by: Chowda on 16 Apr 2011, 16:26
-
The purpose of this thread is as follows:
* Come up with political platforms for the major parties
* Differentiate the party stances, especially in regards to domestic issues
* Figure out what the party lines and talking points will be towards in-game and imagined issues
* Come up with various local and national settings for political conflict, hence enhance the rp
This is pretty much a free-for-all discussion so fire away. I hope to get the bulk of the makeup of those party sites I plan on doing from this thread.
And also note that a party's platform is very ideological. Politicians rarely adhere to their party platforms verbatim for a number of practical reasons. So, they won't be made to bind your rp, just as a jumping off point to enhance it.
-
Not to be pessimistic and all, but why do you want to roleplay the gallente political angles? They've been out there for a little under a decade, and never has any capsuleer been able to undertake a significant role in Federation politics during that time.
The re-election of Foiritan, the only event CCP gave to the Gallente RP'ers as a taste of politics, was godmodded into being a Foiritan victory, even though the vast majority of support was for Autrecht or w/e his name was. Beyond that, political affinities have little to do with capsuleer life, besides character development.
This is generally why I'm apathetic towards focusing on the politics of Gallente RP, rather than the many other undercurrents in their story. But I'm still interested to hear your answers for them.
-
Not to be pessimistic and all, but why do you want to roleplay the gallente political angles? They've been out there for a little under a decade, and never has any capsuleer been able to undertake a significant role in Federation politics during that time.
The re-election of Foiritan, the only event CCP gave to the Gallente RP'ers as a taste of politics, was godmodded into being a Foiritan victory, even though the vast majority of support was for Autrecht or w/e his name was. Beyond that, political affinities have little to do with capsuleer life, besides character development.
This is generally why I'm apathetic towards focusing on the politics of Gallente RP, rather than the many other undercurrents in their story. But I'm still interested to hear your answers for them.
You don't like this topic. Awesome.
-
Anyway, here's some of the broad brushstrokes I think apply to the major parties:
Progressive: Center right foreign policy, libertarian (let's call that right wing based on current western world alignments) domestically. Basically keep the Federation safe enough to allow freedom and commerce, stays out of local issues.
Sociocrats: Center left domestic policy. I'm assuming they can be just as hawkish as the Progressors, but tend to favor domestic spending over military spending. Want to rectify inequalities in society through the government.
Unionists: I need help with this one bigtime. Are they basically for a reformation of society to equal out outcomes? Sort of communist to the Sociocrat's socialism? I have a hard time finding anything except they are the minority's party.
U-Nats: Far right on foreign policy, seek military conquest and giving Federation neighbors a new name: "The Federation". Not real big on domestic issues except where they see social spending, could be military spending.
Federal-Populists: Again need help with this. I'm guessing the anti-corporation party, protecting citizens from the evil big business does. Also the most anti-war party.
Anything wrong?
-
IIRC, the Sociocrats are tied to immigration policy as well and have big support among the Minmatar citizens of the Fed?
-
IIRC, the Sociocrats are tied to immigration policy as well and have big support among the Minmatar citizens of the Fed?
Although the Unionists have a lot of Minmatar immigrants, it makes sense for the Sociocrats to attempt to swell the voter ranks with those who their policies are aimed at helping. Thus they gain more power.
This is how I think the parties come out on immigration:
Unionists: Favor more, possibly no restrictions and completely open borders.
Sociocrats: In favor for the reasons above. Likely propose programs to give them a leg up.
Progressors: Slow, orderly immigration with little to no support for those who arrive.
Federal-Populists: Against immigrants coming, taking their jobs, and driving down wages.
U-Nats: Shoot all immigrants ;)
-
So, the real question is, where do you rely on source material for this? You realize nearly all of the political data we have about the Federation is more than two years old. Massive cosmopolitical events have taken place to change the political fabric of the Federation.
If you presume to roleplay intra-faction politics you have to have something to back it up. Do you?
-
If you presume to roleplay intra-faction politics you have to have something to back it up. Do you?
How much do you need to back it up? Would you not accept a careful player development of the various political factions on "modern" issues? Even if you are given the opportunity to help build it?
Also, food for thought - Link (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/State_of_the_Federation%2C_110.6.11).
-
If you presume to roleplay intra-faction politics you have to have something to back it up. Do you?
How much do you need to back it up? Would you not accept a careful player development of the various political factions on "modern" issues? Even if you are given the opportunity to help build it?
Also, food for thought - Link (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/State_of_the_Federation%2C_110.6.11).
As I said, two years ago dex. Well, more specifically, one year, 11 months. ;)
But yes, I would not accept a careful player development of the various political factions on 'modern' issues. As we, as players, cannot take any responsibility, whatsoever, for things that are not our characters. We must be careful of the line between godmodding and character development.
-
Take a look at the EVElopedia article "Gallente political parties" and "Gallente voter blocs". Can't link them as I'm on the phone and its cumbersome :p
-
It is not because something is 2 years old that it is automatically outdated or wrong. Or if it is the case, well, we are pretty screwed because Eve dates back to 2003 and still at least half of the backbone of the PF dates back from that.
So here are the links Seri mentionned :
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Gallente_political_parties (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Gallente_political_parties)
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Gallente_voter_blocs (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Gallente_voter_blocs)
And honestly, I don't know what Mentas Blaque is doing in the Sociocrats party. He believes in a governement including only ethnical gallenteans and in the gallentean supremacy. Sounds very U-Nat to me. I suppose as he was in the sociocrat party and not u-nat, he was probably at the extrem left instead of the extrem right, and was some kind of gallentean "trotskist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyism)" (communism that has to be spread around)
-
Unionists: I need help with this one bigtime. Are they basically for a reformation of society to equal out outcomes? Sort of communist to the Sociocrat's socialism? I have a hard time finding anything except they are the minority's party.
Federation has a large number of large minorities: Matari, Mannar, Jin-Mei, Intaki. Also Caldari, I think?
In the spirit of brainstorming, some questions...
- Who vote for the Unionists? All minorities? Would it be more likely Unionists represent some minorities (and their issues) more than others? Are they often in the opposition, do they gather many "protest votes"?
- Are all the ethnic groups equally well off? Would equal opportunity / area development programs be something that would collect votes? Are members of certain races over- or underrepesented in influential positions? What would Unionists think of ethnic quotas?
- Does the Federation have an official common language? What is the status of minority languages and cultures? Do they receive special Federal funding and support? (Federal grants to Intaki artists? Mannar added as an official language for a district if more than 50% of local population register their ethnicity as Mannar?)
- Might the Unionists want more local independence in government "for expressing local cultural diversity"? Or more regulations from the top and subsidy programs to ensure no region is left behind economically?
- How would Unionists view immigration and immigration policies? Is everybody welcome to the big happy Federation family?
- What do Unionists think of the Caldari minorities, especially with the war going on?
-
One possible pitfall is letting Federal political parties fall in squarely with real-life equivalents. This would make in-game political discussions a close mirror of real-world political party debate. While this is enjoyable for some, others play the game to get into a sci-fi, immersive environment that's at least somewhat detached from real-world economics.
To avoid that pitfall, it may be best to have your parties focus on political issues that aren't present or merely speculative in modern day Earth. That is, issues raised due to the Federation's status as a futuristic, almost transhuman society. Platforming on specific issues also allows you to circument the traditional 'left-right' divide in western politics and get into more nuanced stances that reveal underlying philosophies.
Example:
The lore posits the Federation as "the one true democracy of New Eden." As the lore speaks directly to the player, we understand the Federation as embodying the modern-day values of democracy as we know it - popular control over government, universal suffrage, and equal treatment of citizens under the rule of law.
Issues of Suffrage
- The rise of infomorphs challenge the definition of human. From a clinical standpoint, capsuleers die each time their pod is breached. However, their activated clones inherit personality and memories and they maintain control over resources and accumulated wealth.
- Does the existence of de-facto immortals threaten the basic premise of a society of equals?
- Is the fact that the current President is a capsuleer a cause for worry, or irrelevant to his performance in his office?
- If infomorphs remain citizens under the law, does that establish a precedence for purely digitized citizens, or AIs becoming citizens?
- AIs are a commonplace occurrence in the New Eden cluster. Should they be permitted to participate in the democracy?
- Can AIs vote? How do you distinguish between individual AI programs and tally the votes? What if an AI copies itself en masse with small variations in order to game the system?
- Is the Federation a democracy of human citizens, or a democracy of sentient beings? If the former, how do you define human?
- Given the preponderance of genetic engineering and 'body-modding,' what is the baseline definition of a human or sentient being?
- Who decides? Can local planets or assemblies define citizenship, or should there be one definition throughout the Federation?
Issues of Self
- The Gallente Federation is known for its liberal tolerance of self-modification and self-expression. Body-modding is popular, and accepted.
- How far should this tolerance go? Can the government regulate body-modding that's unhealthy, either to the self or others? Can it regulate body-modding that that produces alterations that can be used as weapons?
- Should the government intervene when private companies strongly encourage employees to body-mod in order to be more efficient at the workplace?
- Should self-modification that interferes with, modifies, enhances, or retards cognitive function be treated any differently from purely "cosmetic" or physically-enhancing body-mods?
- How far are parents permitted to go in modifying their children, before or after birth? How old can a child be before they have the right to modify themselves?
- Can local governments and companies publish an individual's past forms or genders, or is this protected private information?
- The Intaki have a rebirth tradition, formerly accomplished by mental discipline and older practices. These days, technological assistance permits them to carry this tradition further.
- Does a reborn Intaki inherent the property, debts, or crimes of his or her past self?
- Can a reborn Intaki testify as to the events of his or her past life?
- Does the practice interfere with the rights of the child that serves as the host to the past identity?
Issues of Governance and Society
- Futuristic technology permits direct communication and exchange that present technology can only dream of. This can make new forms of governance, and raise other issues about the structure of government.
- Off-world voting via FTL communication.
- Virtual environment debates between diverse communities.
- Broadcasting of political messages and advertisements through new media. Political product placement in holoreel entertainment and virtual environment games.
- Hacking and subversion of any media to change or rebroadcast messages. Hijacking the broadcast of rival ideas.
- AI simulations of proposed economic or political plans. Virtual environments and games to permit citizens to 'live out' political proposals and see results for themselves before voting. Virtual environments to show the proposed results of a building project.
- Drones. The average Federation citizen takes for granted how drones do a variety of tasks that once required boring, mundane labor.
- Is this reliance on drones a blessing that elevates humans above demeaning work? Is it a curse that makes citizens lazy and complacent?
- Is the emergence of rogue drones a warning sign of over-reliance, or simply an accident of progress? Should rogue drones be reintegrated, ignored, exterminated, or treated with?
- Can individuals create and program their own home-made drones without a license? Can government regulate drone manufacture and development, or is the Right to Craft Drones universal to all citizens?
- Do drone armies represent the future of the Federation's defense? Or should the Federation rely more on its tradition of citizen armies?
- Holoreels, VEs, futuristic forms of narcotics and other addictive media, etc.
-
Welcome Shaalira \o/
Good to see you here, and starting with a very strong and comprehensive post.
Anyways, i'm chewing through the threadand ideas, cause part of what Julianus says its true, we have very very little details on what is the dynamic inside the Federation. But still elaborating and exploring "possible scenarios and interaction" may go a long way towards either revitalizing Pro-Fed RP, or just give greener pastures to create more RP around it.
Since the Federation is a mish-mash of local governments and elected bodies, in the first place, each political group or party might just be looking to extend their "dominion" in the next system, adding more voters to their pool, by either backing up a local and give him spotlight, or simply by sending representatives.
I presume, not all unionists or progressists may be equal, as the distance, regions and bloodline might have a very profound definition of the guy (ie: Eman Autrech and Souro Foiritain both being Intaki yet different).
The above are just random thoughts though, I'll post more when i get a better set of arguments to describe.
-
Shaalira's post is excellent, and is very good in reminding folk that the Federation, while a democracy, is NOT a c/p of an IRL one. This is a sci-fi setting after all, and I think stuff like drones integrated with society is one step from distancing the Feds from IRL.
-
Throwing this out there as a comparison to look at maybe, on the topic of rights for Artificial Intelligences.
Given the incident between the Gallente and what spawned the Rogue Drones, a parallel to mass effect is drawable. Quarians and Geth, respectively.
The Gallenteans try to improve their automated laborers, inadvertently give them some type of sentient or self-evolving thinking, said laborers rebel and fuck off.
The Federation may be highly anti-AI based on that experience, and programs defined by strict limitations may be the only kind allowed in Federation space. I cannot think of much to indicate a counter point, except the presence of things like AIMEDs, which may be quite limited in thinking.
-
Throwing this out there as a comparison to look at maybe, on the topic of rights for Artificial Intelligences.
Given the incident between the Gallente and what spawned the Rogue Drones, a parallel to mass effect is drawable. Quarians and Geth, respectively.
The Gallenteans try to improve their automated laborers, inadvertently give them some type of sentient or self-evolving thinking, said laborers rebel and fuck off.
The Federation may be highly anti-AI based on that experience, and programs defined by strict limitations may be the only kind allowed in Federation space. I cannot think of much to indicate a counter point, except the presence of things like AIMEDs, which may be quite limited in thinking.
That's how the setting for the original Dune universe went down, banning outright all "thinking machines". Well done.
I think this is where the Federal-Populists would come into play, maybe being a central issue to them. The constant struggle between the "common worker" and corporations pushing the ethical boundaries and developing their replacements.
-
...now I want to play a Gallente mentat.
-
I want to play a Gallente mentat.
That sounds like a musical instrument.
[spoiler]How about a Gallente mentat who communicates only through song! :o[/spoiler]
-
It's good time to share opinions on this topic. I'm disagreeing with some of you but feel free to pour cold water on me.
The god-modding issue that Julianus has bought up is something that made me also worried a while ago. From the eve wiki: "The two largest parties are the Progressive Party and the Sociocrat Party, but there are numerous others across the broad sweep of the Federation." To me this sounds like a hint to players to form their own corporations but of course it is possible to interpret it as a promise by the fiction writers to come up with a complete list of the Federal political groups at some point in the future. Whatever the case, I personally have chosen to view the player political parties as some kind of self-acclaimed support groups in the best tradition of New Eden loyalism.
The topics proposed for New Eden-specific discussions are interesting, but somehow I find it difficult to see a major confrontation building around many of these issues. Most people don't care about subtle questions. Many of the topics also refer to facts which are poorly known among the players but would be quite useful in an in-depth discussion between characters. I hope that the EVE fiction writers find this list and start filling the gaps.
In real life, and also in the chronicles and news items, the politics seems to be always rotating around economics and war, and I find it difficult to see how this could ever change, even in 30000 years. EVE is a special game because both the economy and warfare have their consequences, with a good flavour of realism in many ways. Players are building stuff, trading with it and the markets react in perfect agreement with the economic theory. The systems are changing ownership, corporations are calling men in arms and loosing major investments. In my opinion the game politics should use these tools as an inspiration.
I have envisioned the divisions between the parties to be something like militaristic vs. non-militaristic and economic freedom vs. economic control, following the trade and wars theme. There are social reasons why the major parties have to be close to the majority opinion, and I don't see why this should be different in New Eden than in real life.
From this background, with regard to militarism, I tend to think that the two major parties would probably not be excessively militaristic, but it's hard to guess where the unionists might stand in this respect.
The party descriptions are quite clear that the two largest parties have very different opinions on the level of proper control over the economy, but I think the writers have tried to avoid portraying it as a good vs. evil battle. Following the principle that everyone has potential to be an antagonist, it might be plausible that Quafe and others would use the sociocrats to create laws which suppress competition, and the progressors to minimize government intervention in their business practices.
The U-Nats and Unionists seem like movements centred around their pet issues, "death to Caldari" and "the Matari, one third of the population, is not officially recognized and are severely underrepresented in governance, high-paying professions etc." They would probably choose their talking points to best advance their goals.
I agree that it's an important question, how close to the real life equivalents the Federal politics can be taken. In my opinion the usual conservative/liberal or left/right divisions are not necessary. In the economic sense the sociocratism/progressivism division should deliver the message, and in terms of values the Gallenteans seem to be fairly united, and the big gap lies between them and the other races.
The Amarr players probably have more expertise on how to handle a contentious issue in the game world, but from the outside it seems that the best way to go is to take it over the top. Religion is one of the no-go topics in many places, but in New Eden quite a few of the believers seem to be extremely flamboyant scripture tome wielders, which I can imagine is a very attractive position to play.
-
Good stuff, Ammentio. Here's where I would respectfully disagree:
* The two largest parties likely got where they are by including some social issue groups under their tent. They probably play lip service to them while maintaining their distance.
* I wouldn't say social issues do not drive a wedge between Gallenteans. There has to be hot topic issues, we just don't know about due to the way most of the PF is doled out to us. Are there issues like assisted suicide, abortion, etc... ? I would imagine, by why the heck go there? The scifi setting nicely allows cooler social issues like rogue drones, ai treatment, cloning for industrial benfit, etc... I'd much rather sit and think about how the various parties, described in familiar western world ways, stand on issues like that.
-
* The two largest parties likely got where they are by including some social issue groups under their tent. They probably play lip service to them while maintaining their distance.
I agree, social issues are important and the parties are likely to have some spread in their approach to handle them. Probably there's no lack of game mechanics and pieces of backstory which can be viewed from this angle.
* I wouldn't say social issues do not drive a wedge between Gallenteans. There has to be hot topic issues, we just don't know about due to the way most of the PF is doled out to us. Are there issues like assisted suicide, abortion, etc... ? I would imagine, by why the heck go there? The scifi setting nicely allows cooler social issues like rogue drones, ai treatment, cloning for industrial benfit, etc... I'd much rather sit and think about how the various parties, described in familiar western world ways, stand on issues like that.
It feels fairly plausible that stem cells, abortion and many of the ethical puzzles which are debated nowadays would quite likely be non-issues in the Gallente Federation. What has been proposed would totally fly in this setting much better.
I still maintain that in questions which do not violate the bottom line, it might actually be preferable for the largest parties to go with very vague and similar standpoints, to avoid alienating the voters. On the other hand, just a narrow range of talking points gets easily tiresome, and for instance near the elections there might be an opposing need to agitate the people emotionally. I don't think there's a real disagreement here either and clearly this can be taken to a number of directions.
-
I wound up on the Mentas Blaque Evelopedia page and it was the bio from 2004 in the present tense. So, I did my best to make a quality page:
http://wiki.eveonline.com/wikiEN/index.php?title=Mentas_Blaque&stable=0 (http://wiki.eveonline.com/wikiEN/index.php?title=Mentas_Blaque&stable=0)
That guy is quite the bastard. Critiques are appreciate, BTW.
Anyway, as I was going through the articles, there's scant mention of parties. I'm guessing because the CCP writers just didn't want to get bogged down. I'll go out on a limb and say the national parties have offices everywhere, but their reach is limited when there isn't an election going on. When there is, they have the expertise and manpower to organize the masses. That would jive with the lack of mention in articles where they would in the real world equivalent.
Looking through Evelopedia, I now want to make a Gallent Senate page. Not the npc corp, the actual Senate. I found the number of voting districts, which is 528. Does that make sense for the number of senators? I think it does with Federation voters numbering in the trillions. If anyone has any knowledge or ideas in regards to Senate makeup, procedures, etc... I'd love to hear it.
-
Chowda, you and Seriphyn should collaborate on that. He did write the book (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/The_Fully_Factual_Guide_to_the_Federation) on it... ;)
-
Chowda, you and Seriphyn should collaborate on that. He did write the book (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/The_Fully_Factual_Guide_to_the_Federation) on it... ;)
I forgot to go look at that. I'll have to ask him about some of the references on the Senate if its to be an Evewiki page, but it looks pretty darn close to what I would have thought. Great stuff.
EDIT: Found the Chronicles on it. And I also read the part on how its all PF.
-
I've been thinking about this for awhile. Here's what I think the Unionists are:
* There is a sizable amount of Minmatar immigrants/refugees in the Federation. They aren't known for participating in the government, or the system by and large, except for joining the military.
* With the Federal government's tradition of laissez-faire, it is entirely possible and plausible they have set up societies and subcultures outside of the normal Federation economy. Being surrounded by other Minmatar, but on safe planets with abundant resources, they revert back to their tribal ways at a higher standard of living than in the Republic. Large portions of them ignore census counts to be left alone. This would explain their lack of political representation.
* Some local parliaments ignore the situation, some lobby the Senate to force their taxation. And some other politicians simply dislike them.
* The National Unionist Party could be one of a few things. Here's some possibilities:
- The subculture thrives on the planetary level, but some want to trade with such people on other planets. The purpose of the party is to pass legislation allowing special dispensation for trade between tribal communities without Federation tax levies. The "union" would be the special economic zone they want to create. Of course, every other major political party is against this.
- The community has grown by leaps and bounds, creating a system that takes care of everyone, with the successful giving up most of their profits to take care of the unsuccessful. The Unionist Party wants to bring this "miracle system" to the Federation at large.
- The party could be there just to protect their culture from the evils of racist politicians, greedy corporations, and nosey bureaucrats
- Contrary to all I have just said, the party could aim to integrate Minmatar into Gallente culture. Maybe very similar to the Sociocrats without all that Gallantean supremacy. They would be in favor of affirmative action and quotas in government and the corporate world. The "union" would indicate their desire to finally assimilate with the Federation.
-
I'm also going to go out on a limb and say the voting blocs (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Gallente_voter_blocs) in YC110 were a direct result of the confusion after the outbreak of law and the subsequent loss of control of contested systems a year or so later. The political parties were likely at their height (along with Senatorial power) until Foiritan was elected and pretty much went to political war to gain power for the executive branch.
Since Foiritan move away from his party, they tried to subvert him, but it only served to shoot the Progressors in the feet when he fell, as the public still associated them with him. Blaque has very nationalistic and Gallente supremacy views which likely alienated the Sociocrats from the very people their policies were aimed to help.
Now that the outsider Roden is in office and the warzone is relatively stable, the parties are rebuilding their power and image, trying to get back to the ideals they held until everything went crazy.
-
Here's what I think the Unionists are: ...
This is an excellent idea and would add to some depth to the Unionist movement. Because there is a Sociocrat party, it has indeed been slightly unclear why would anyone need the Unionists? It's quite plausible that one big reason for the poor success of the latter is the resistance by the other parties. Progressives and Nationalists are clearly not very compatible with them, and Sociocrats probably don't give extremely high value to competition, especially when it's costing them voters.
It's also curious what is the relationship of Sociocrats to immigrant employment issues? I could imagine that their main voter base comes from the recognized four big races of the Federation, but do they even pretend to represent the Matari labourers? Are they focused on the Intaki "minority," or have they been infiltrated by some anti-government operatives? Is there tension between the Matari immigrants and the average voters of the Sociocrats?
In some parts of the world the tribal system with clans, local kings, blood rituals, shamans and messengers coexist with "democracy" and to get things done, the government officials actually have to negotiate with the clan leadership. There is some amount of friction between the modern and old ways and the success of public projects depends on the approval of the local pacesetters. The Jin-Mei backstory and the actions of the Intaki Assembly show that it can happen in the Federation. And to have new immigrants joining the existing networks and kind of drift away from the average lifestyle would also be quite plausible.
I'm personally a bit apprehensive about giving an explicit meaning to the Union, because if the GM's ever decide to start writing more PF, which I hope they'll do, it might cause some inconvenient conflicts with their ideas. Originally the writers have probably just simply been thinking something like worker unions. Nevertheless, promoting benefits and seeking to establish tribal systems to some selected parts of the Federation sounds wonderful and I guess using "Union," "Communion," "Cohesion" or whatever to describe these endeavours is right on the button.
The suggestion that the Unionists would use subsidies and tax penalties as tools also makes sense, because by being methodologically close to Sociocrats they can better compete over the same voters.
-
I'm also going to go out on a limb and say the voting blocs (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Gallente_voter_blocs) in YC110 were a direct result of the confusion after the outbreak of law and the subsequent loss of control of contested systems a year or so later. The political parties were likely at their height (along with Senatorial power) until Foiritan was elected and pretty much went to political war to gain power for the executive branch.
I see the voter blocs as index groups or stereotypes, created by the media to describe certain kind of behaviours. The classification makes many references to war but I guess the same people might extend their voting patterns to other issues without much hesitation.
Since Foiritan move away from his party, they tried to subvert him, but it only served to shoot the Progressors in the feet when he fell, as the public still associated them with him.
In my opinion Foiritan's story is a very shrewdly and carefully planned political manoeuvre, extending over a number of years, and still continuing (OOC, IC I don't know enough to see it that way). I find it hard to see, why the directorate of the progressors would be against him, except in public of course. It's possible of course that even they don't know all the details. The average voters would probably see Foiritan as a villain, but that's exactly how he wanted it to be. I can't see that he would have really shot himself in the feet even once.
Blaque has very nationalistic and Gallente supremacy views which likely alienated the Sociocrats from the very people their policies were aimed to help.
True, and he is also power hungry and totalitarian. I'm believing IC and OOC that the criticisms of Julian Hevard (http://www.eveonline.com/news.asp?a=single&nid=3220&tid=5) towards Blaque are quite accurate.
Now that the outsider Roden is in office and the warzone is relatively stable, the parties are rebuilding their power and image, trying to get back to the ideals they held until everything went crazy.
Yeah, Roden is like someone who can unify the Federation. I think Foiritan put him in power because Roden is an outsider and both Progressives and Nationalists can rely on his policies. The support of the Sociocrats was bought by letting them have the Directorship of FIO and the Senate at the same time. Only the Unionist party was left out of the arrangement, but they are a minor player in the politics anyways.
-
Looking through Evelopedia, I now want to make a Gallent Senate page. Not the npc corp, the actual Senate. I found the number of voting districts, which is 528. Does that make sense for the number of senators? I think it does with Federation voters numbering in the trillions. If anyone has any knowledge or ideas in regards to Senate makeup, procedures, etc... I'd love to hear it.
Federation Goverment (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Gallente_Federation_Goverment)
And : The Federal Senate holds 881 members, with elections held every 5 years.
-
I may have got it wrong regarding the Intaki Assembly bit, and this might exist for Jin-Mei and Mannar too. As in, there may be 62 districts and 3 assemblies (similar to Russia having multiple types of subdivisions).
In RP, fiction and whatnot, there's always talk of "Federal" institutes...what about exploring district things? District courts, district parliaments, district laws, district politics...I think however, that the use of Federal foremost is that they are the most likely ones to have the most influence/authority over capsuleers (a capsuleer that strolls out of their areas of station, or walks around on planet, is going to be subject to local law IMO). Even lower than district, apparently the systems vary.
Moreover, perhaps party lines are being downplayed to distance it from IRL? Abraxas was extremely creative in regards to the Gallenteans in TBL, perhaps he wants to plan something similar in regards to outlining Federal government and politics? Maybe a more SW Old Republic thing, of having planets with a wide variety of different systems (all adhering to basic constitutional tenets), and their own governance, but with a Senator. No parties as the Federation may be too diverse to be able to consolidate political opinion.
One of these things. We'll See™ once this immersion project is finally updated. I think one of the biggest assumptions people make is that the Federation has monolithic control. The Federation is a federation.
-
I think the local districts are where the true rp opportunities are. It's sort of like coming up with your own space marine chapter in Warhammer 40k tabletop (never played, but really into the fiction). The setting allows you to come up with varying setups without breaking the game.
What I still want to do, and what Seriphyn has done great work on, is get the factual PF about the Federation and try filling in some logical gaps to further enhance the setting.
-
Well, a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, a little red-haired Gallentean ran off and started her own political movement called the Progressive Reformist Party (http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=166581). It's a take on federation politics from a distinctly capsuleer, big-picture perspective.
-
Well, a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, a little red-haired Gallentean ran off and started her own political movement called the Progressive Reformist Party (http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=166581). It's a take on federation politics from a distinctly capsuleer, big-picture perspective.
Thanks for pointing out this awe-inspiring project. Really good stuff.
-
Well, a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, a little red-haired Gallentean ran off and started her own political movement called the Progressive Reformist Party (http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=166581). It's a take on federation politics from a distinctly capsuleer, big-picture perspective.
Good stuff.
Curious: What did you think of the term "progressive" in regards to Gallente politics back when you did that project?
-
I think the local districts are where the true rp opportunities are. It's sort of like coming up with your own space marine chapter in Warhammer 40k tabletop (never played, but really into the fiction). The setting allows you to come up with varying setups without breaking the game.
In principle I agree that special interest groups and local RP would be realistic and offer lots of opportunities. Still, when people have tried to set up this kind of projects, they have generally seemed to be receiving pretty disillusioned response from the commentators, and running into recruitment difficulties. If there were a large number of players pursuing parallel, similar projects, things would probably get much more dynamic.
Or maybe I misunderstood what you meant by local RP? Does a Murethand-based PvP corporation qualify? I was thinking something along the lines of Sotaku estate, or Achura/Intaki secessionist movements.
-
Curious: What did you think of the term "progressive" in regards to Gallente politics back when you did that project?
Uh, it has been six years, but from what I recall, Kal's progressive stance had been to encourage technological advancement to make things like clones more accessible to the citizenry, trimming funding to CONCORD to bolster our own military (that may have helped, huh?), but also for the government to take an active interest in affairs in 0.0 by either forming active relationships with capsuleer alliances or subtly encouraging the spread of democracy in the outer regions.
Not much has really changed in that regard either, except now there's a war and the Intaki situation has deteriorated dramatically. :P
-
Curious: What did you think of the term "progressive" in regards to Gallente politics back when you did that project?
Uh, it has been six years, but from what I recall, Kal's progressive stance had been to encourage technological advancement to make things like clones more accessible to the citizenry, trimming funding to CONCORD to bolster our own military (that may have helped, huh?), but also for the government to take an active interest in affairs in 0.0 by either forming active relationships with capsuleer alliances or subtly encouraging the spread of democracy in the outer regions.
Not much has really changed in that regard either, except now there's a war and the Intaki situation has deteriorated dramatically. :P
So more of a real world definition in regards to applying academic theory to governmental planning to better society versus the Federal Progressive Party which says it stands for libertarian ideals. FWIW, I've always though it was a poor choice for the party name.
-
So more of a real world definition in regards to applying academic theory to governmental planning to better society versus the Federal Progressive Party which says it stands for libertarian ideals. FWIW, I've always though it was a poor choice for the party name.
I have actually taken the following quote from the Fully Factual Guide to the Federation as the practical "definition" of a New Eden progressive: 'The Progressors believe in laissez-faire politics, and the belief of the "Promised Land", that all individuals must rise up on their own without the help of the Federal government.'
Renjith Prabeaux (a player character) once gave the following rant about the term: '"Progress" is so often invoked as a clever cover term for the sort of unregulated and uncontrolled economic opportunism that brought us commercial "success" stories like the Serpentis Corporation.'
What I'm trying to suggest is that the label 'progressive' might have been introduced in the context of Federal politics as a highly misleading marketing term. Looking at the real life party or ideology labels, many of them seem to be catchy and inspiring but describe the ideology fairly inadequately.
-
So more of a real world definition in regards to applying academic theory to governmental planning to better society versus the Federal Progressive Party which says it stands for libertarian ideals. FWIW, I've always though it was a poor choice for the party name.
I have actually taken the following quote from the Fully Factual Guide to the Federation as the practical "definition" of a New Eden progressive: 'The Progressors believe in laissez-faire politics, and the belief of the "Promised Land", that all individuals must rise up on their own without the help of the Federal government.'
Renjith Prabeaux (a player character) once gave the following rant about the term: '"Progress" is so often invoked as a clever cover term for the sort of unregulated and uncontrolled economic opportunism that brought us commercial "success" stories like the Serpentis Corporation.'
What I'm trying to suggest is that the label 'progressive' might have been introduced in the context of Federal politics as a highly misleading marketing term. Looking at the real life party or ideology labels, many of them seem to be catchy and inspiring but describe the ideology fairly inadequately.
It would seem that the idea rarely remains intact when applied to the real world. It's no surprise that progress to some is not the same to others, and in pursuit of its meaning in New Eden we find plenty of variation. When Kaleigh was involved in Fed politics she was also heavily inspired by freespace ideology and the transhumanist ideal from her former allies at Star Fraction, and clearly influenced her vision for a technologically progressive nation.
-
Psst. If Gallente elections are every five years and the last big one was YC108, then the Fed is due for a Senate election (it would be Presidential too except for Foritain -> Roden). It's doubtful that CCP will do anything for it but there's room for players to have fun with it.
-
Psst. If Gallente elections are every five years and the last big one was YC108, then the Fed is due for a Senate election (it would be Presidential too except for Foritain -> Roden). It's doubtful that CCP will do anything for it but there's room for players to have fun with it.
IC news items have been dead since December, so... probably not a single thing going to happen in terms of PF. If anyone there is aware of this, they probably think there's nothing to worry about until Roden's been in the seat for five years himself.
-
Psst. If Gallente elections are every five years and the last big one was YC108, then the Fed is due for a Senate election (it would be Presidential too except for Foritain -> Roden). It's doubtful that CCP will do anything for it but there's room for players to have fun with it.
IC news items have been dead since December, so... probably not a single thing going to happen in terms of PF. If anyone there is aware of this, they probably think there's nothing to worry about until Roden's been in the seat for five years himself.
I'm thinking of just saying one of my characters got elected senator. He's more qualified than Padme, I tell you that.
-
Psst. If Gallente elections are every five years and the last big one was YC108, then the Fed is due for a Senate election (it would be Presidential too except for Foritain -> Roden). It's doubtful that CCP will do anything for it but there's room for players to have fun with it.
IC news items have been dead since December, so... probably not a single thing going to happen in terms of PF. If anyone there is aware of this, they probably think there's nothing to worry about until Roden's been in the seat for five years himself.
I'm thinking of just saying one of my characters got elected senator. He's more qualified than Padme, I tell you that.
Poppycock. I guarantee you that his hairstyle and/or bewbs are nowhere near as awesome.