Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The main ingredients in Protein Delicacies were in fact organic waste, processed station sewage and second grade biomass? For more, read here.

Author Topic: Colonization in regards to Federation and member states  (Read 1453 times)

Seriphyn

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2118
  • New and improved, and only in FFXIV

This has me confused. Some known facts....

- Inside member state original territory, Federal law need not apply
- Anywhere else, Federal law applies.

The question is, for all that is harped on about "member states", if one takes a very base look at it...this means that it works out like...

10 systems Intaki
10 systems Jin-Mei
10 systems Mannar
200+ systems Federation

This seems a bit disproportionate for a 'Federation'...the current level of authority and autonomy is...

1 - Federal (Three branch system)
2 - Region (?)
3 - District (Parliamentary system with judiciary 'district court')
4 - Sub-district (?)
5 - Planetary (Any system, as long as universal suffrage and other laws are abided by)
6 - Planetary division (Any system, as long as universal suffrage and other laws are abided by)
(7 - Municipality inc. megalopoli or rural regions)

Planets on non-temperate worlds with large populations, such as the subterranean Seyllin I with 500 million population may or may not have level 6 divisions. I am GUESSING deadspace colonies and stations would fall under level 3 or 4 authority, or may have their own branch of level 5 authority (without any levels beneath that). EDIT - Deadspace colonies I think would by level 7 authority, by population versus compared to planets

The primary question is what sort of authority the Intaki Assembly and other member states have beyond their original territory. PF makes mention of a "Mannar mining colony" (that can be anywhere in the Fed) and there was an "Intaki farming colony" on Reschard V. The question that I raise is...

- Are they referring to ethnic composition? If so, why would this be an issue of the 'widely diverse' Federation?

What I can GUESS is that the individual member states are free to colonize any area outside their original territory, if "Intaki" or "Mannar" refers to the member state. HOWEVER, they are then bound by Federal Law (which is, in theory, agreed to by everyone in the Federation).

This article talks about "new Amarrian settlements on the border regions"...the Gallente epic arc has a Minmatar clan settled in Federation deadspace, while this AURORA IGS post has a Minmatar clan living in the Federation.

My head hurts from this. If member states were free to colonize worlds outside their original territory, then the idea of a "Federation" would make more sense. HOWEVER, this may conflict with the Federal system and levels of authority. For example, if a Sang Do lord ruled a continent on Tolle V, where does it fit on the Federal scale?

so confusing.

Otherwise, if such a system did not exist, then member states would be so small in relative size of the Federation, that their existence and focus on them "being autonomous" would be pointless and miniscule.
« Last Edit: 28 Nov 2010, 14:47 by Seriphyn »
Logged

Bataav

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
    • Intaki Liberation Front
Re: Colonization in regards to Federation and member states
« Reply #1 on: 28 Nov 2010, 14:31 »

Looking at the "member states" I'd suggest that there's one missing - the Gallente.

In my view I'd have said that each member of the Federation would have their own original dominions, including the Gallente. In addition to these systems, whether Gallente, Intaki, Jin-Mei or Mannar, there would be specific individual colonies on planets or in stations that do not necessarily take full sovereignty of the system they exist in.

We're then left with the mass of Federation systems tht exist between the various member states.

It's only within the Federation systems that the 7 levels of authority exist from top to bottom. Within the member states the autonomy comes in at a predefined level (District?).

The exception to this rule would be the established colonies of a member state outside it's own borders (the Intaki farming colony of Reschard V for example) which retain autonomy on a level 7 basis. It seems reasonable to me to assume that member states (in this case the Intaki Assembly) would group all of it's non-domestic colonies together and consider them a district in their own right.

I've also spent time wondering whether these colonies are labelled "Intaki" or "Mannar", etc are done so on an ethnic composition basis or not, and in my opinion they are not. By referring to a colony as Jin-Mei, or Intaki, it would suggest to me that these colonies are exactly that - a colony established by the member state in question, and therefore falling under it's autonomous domestic governmental boundaries.

It would therefore be possible for a Mannar colony to exist within a Federation system and retain the autonomy of it's parent member state, while the rest of the system around it operates under Federal law.
Logged
#FreeIntaki | #IntakiPride

Ken

  • Will Rule for Food
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • Must Love Robots
Re: Colonization in regards to Federation and member states
« Reply #2 on: 28 Nov 2010, 15:00 »

I'd like to think that there were far more habitable worlds (or those that could be made habitable) within the limits of the Federation than could have possibly been colonized before its foundation.  So the creation of the Fed was a bit like the establishment of the U.S. and it's very rapid expansion westward such that you ended up with a vast "unsettled" frontier and a number of core "colonies".  Let's remove the other world powers and natives from the equation and the analogy might approximate the situation in the pre-Federation ~250 years before the present.

The establishment of new colonies could have proceeded in a way similar to the westward expansion of American colonial society.  Those with the motivations moved into the "unoccupied" space and made it their own.  In doing so they did not become Western Georgians or Frontier New Yorkers, but took new names and evolved their own local cultures.  Over time, these settlements were permitted to develop and claim a legal status equal to the original states.  The modern Fed may thus resemble the modern U.S., with old, more homogeneous, foundational worlds, and a myriad of younger, more diverse, entities with equal force and status.

EDIT: Perhaps the discovery of the secret Caldari colonies could be compared to a young U.S. in such an "empty continent" scenario uncovering a clandestine fur trading operation in Canada being run by the state of Vermont.  So it got angry and kicked all the Vermonters out and force them to move to New Foundland.  :)
« Last Edit: 28 Nov 2010, 15:04 by Ken »
Logged

Vieve

  • Guest
Re: Colonization in regards to Federation and member states
« Reply #3 on: 28 Nov 2010, 16:42 »

The establishment of new colonies could have proceeded in a way similar to the westward expansion of American colonial society.  Those with the motivations moved into the "unoccupied" space and made it their own.  In doing so they did not become Western Georgians or Frontier New Yorkers, but took new names and evolved their own local cultures.  Over time, these settlements were permitted to develop and claim a legal status equal to the original states.  The modern Fed may thus resemble the modern U.S., with old, more homogeneous, foundational worlds, and a myriad of younger, more diverse, entities with equal force and status.

The "Interstellar Travelling" article does support this idea, though I believe the article suggests a more European Colonial era flavor.

Quote
The Gallenteans and the Caldari discovered jump gate technology at relatively the same time, due to the simple fact that their home worlds were then in the same system. This was a little over 700 years ago.

...

At that time both the Gallente and the Caldari worlds were bursting at the seams and major effort was made in sending ships to nearby systems to build jump gates. The mass exodus of the Gallenteans and the Caldari to other systems was nothing like the calm, deliberate expansion of the Amarr Empire, where only one system was colonized at a time and every aspect of the expansion was rigidly controlled by the state. Instead, private firms, the first of the Caldari Corporations among them, were chiefly responsible for surveying systems, sending the constructions ships, and selling the territory to the colonists. In the space of 500 years or so the combined expansion of the Gallenteans and the Caldari had almost equaled the total expansion of the Amarrians in 2000 years.

EDIT: Perhaps the discovery of the secret Caldari colonies could be compared to a young U.S. in such an "empty continent" scenario uncovering a clandestine fur trading operation in Canada being run by the state of Vermont.  So it got angry and kicked all the Vermonters out and force them to move to New Foundland.

:twisted:
Logged

Seriphyn

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2118
  • New and improved, and only in FFXIV
Re: Colonization in regards to Federation and member states
« Reply #4 on: 28 Nov 2010, 18:15 »

Holy crap, I never noticed that piece of PF before...I'll need to add that to the History section of the guide...if it still counts...
Logged

Vieve

  • Guest
Re: Colonization in regards to Federation and member states
« Reply #5 on: 28 Nov 2010, 18:45 »

Holy crap, I never noticed that piece of PF before...I'll need to add that to the History section of the guide...if it still counts...

Dunno.   It's in the Scientific Articles section.  It's also the very thing that inspired my take on the Mies system, so sheesh, I hope it still counts.  :D
Logged