[RPG] Political parties

[Pragmatic]

Reading through the latest Transhuman Space PDF (Cities on the Edge), it has a bit on Stockholm. Reading through its politics, I'm reminded again why I despise political parties.

So those of you who have political systems in your campaigns, care to share how you handle them?

Me, I am a major plagiarist, so my "politics" in my "thought experiment" pocket empire involves getting away from political parties as much as possible. The executive, legislative (tricameral), and judiciary are all non-elective/non-partisan. (Executive: non-hereditary constitutional set-term monarch. Legislative: 1= top families; 2 = council of experts; 3 = jury-pool of qualified citizens. Judiciary: the usual.)

Think a mix of Steakley(rest his soul...)'s Armor (the Guardian of Golden), cyberdemocracy, and multiple sources from various RPGs. (Like I said: plagiarist... :-P)

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

So those of you who have political systems in your campaigns, care to share how you handle them?

In most of my campaigns, they're kept largely offstage. I may work out the details thoroughly, though, if they're going to affect the action. For example, in my current Barrayaran campaign, I've determined all the major factions on several issues. The core issue of governmental structure has advocates of rule solely by the counts with the emperor only primus inter pares; advocates of imperial rule with the ministers stripped of power; moderates who want to keep the emperor and the joint councils of counts and ministers; reformers who want urban corporations allowed to send elected representatives who would be procedurally equal to counts (a way to fit Komarran sectors in, but also a way for urban Barrayarans to gain representation); extreme progressives who want a tricameral Council with elected delegates as the third branch; and advocates of abolishing all authority except the elected delegates. Naturally, the PCs, as young Vor, take an interest in all this.

In an earlier campaign, the entire known world was one huge castle dominated by five aristocratic houses of sorcerers. The head of each had a seat on the Council and a rotating chairmanship. Two of the four senior aristo PCs were on the council. So we played out a number of meetings and the political infighting that surrounded them.

Bill Stoddard

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Reading through the latest Transhuman Space PDF (Cities on the Edge), it has a bit on Stockholm. Reading through its politics, I'm reminded again why I despise political parties.

So those of you who have political systems in your campaigns, care to share how you handle them?
)

They were a big deal with the Peacekeepers in my Alpha Centauri. They represented the possible political stances the faction could take.

I had the

Techno: Planned
Neo-Techno: Planned/Knowledge/Cybernetic
Reform Party: Democracy
Progressives: Democracy/Planned
Neo-Liberals: Democracy/Free Market/Wealth
Dissenters: Fundamentalist
Social Harmony Party: Democracy/Thought Control
Unity Party: Democracy/Power
Enviros: Democracy/Green

And so on. Far too many for any party to have a shot at forming a majority government so it was all coalitions that kept breaking down. Democracy Italian-style.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

So those of you who have political systems in your campaigns, care to share how you handle them?

Pretty much any setting with a wider society has some sort of political system wether you want it to or not.

How I handle it depends upon the type of campaign, most of the time I content myself with chosing the broad type of government (e.g. dictatorship, repersentitive democracy etc) and how this will effect the laws that my players will end up interacting with.

Every so often I find myself running a game where knowing how the government works could be an advantage I plot out the structure of the government(s) in some detail particularly its structure, means of appointment and party structure.

Typicaly political parties will be preasent in some form even in states without any form of election. The underlying characteristics of political parties are a fact of life. People of similar views will form alliences in order to obtain their goals.

For my current partialy intreigue based setting I have a number of systems with varying structures including:

Cascadia, direct democracy no perminent legislature and no formal party system. There are however at least three informal parties identified with factions in the governing bureaucracy, one conservitive with a small c (as in pro the status quo rather than any specific ideology), one strongly pro-business and one favouring more moderate reforms.

Australia, representitive democracy with a unicameral legislature a directly elected present and two dominant political parties. The party system follows the dominant historical model in both Australia and Britain with a broadly center right party and a broadly center left party collecting the major shares of the vote. Specificaly these are the National Liberal Party which is a more or less classical liberal party and the Agrarian Party which is as its name sugests an agrarian socialist (specificaly distributist) organisation.

Ezo, representitive democracy with a bi-cameral legislature (partialy appointive) an indirectly elected president and four to six as yet undefigned parties. The system is modeled (with one or two deliberate chainges) upon the early US congress with a lower house directly elected by indevidual voters and an upper house appointed by regional governments. Political parties dominate lower house elections and have a significant influence on upper house appointments.

[jason taylor]

My politiking is based on honest strife for power within the limits of law and custom. Nontheless there are factional differences. They are not exclusive to each other and thus there are fine lines.


In foreign policy there are

Expansionists: who desire more colonies
Consolodationists: who desire better protection of already acquired territory.
Isolationists: effectively more extreme Consolodationists.

Internally there are

Tribalists: who put clan loyalty first
Civicists : who put the city first
Federalists: who think first of the Federal government

Federalists are likely to be members of smaller clans or clanless immigrants; who need a source of protection and employment; and larger clans who are to powerful to compete without drawing to many enemies, and which can actually have a sizable influence in national policy.

These are just the ideological differences which are comparitively unimportant. Most politics centers around interest rather then ideology.

[Agemegos]

In my SF setting FLAT BLACK each of a thousand inhabited worlds has its own politics. Political systems are madly diverse, and almost oblivious of Imperial affairs, except that every colony appoints Imperial District Court judges who will protect its government from the Commission for Justice.

The Empire is a sort of weird hybrid of the MicroSoft, the UN, and the estate of Alfred Nobel.

The executive is a self-perpetuating Board of Trustees, and it has astronomical revenues from (1) the interstellar transport monopoly, (2) real estate development: it opens up about four whole planets a year, and sells them off as real estate, (3) orbital industry, and (4) interstellar commerce and banking. Future Trustees are co-opted by existing Trustees, and they are chosen for competence, experience, and a fanatical devotion to "The Imperial Mission", which is to abolish war, famine, plague, and anything else that causes lots of preventable deaths. The Trustees are nearly all trained from birth these days, and are quite fanatical, though most people (including politicians) continue to treat them as politicians seeking advantage and power.

The legislature is a Senate with one senator from each colony. It is so vast that it has to conduct its business with something like message boards. Imperial senators are appointed by the governments of the colonies, not elected, and they have some qualities of diplomats (diplomatic immunity, written instructions, appointment by government). They are generally pretty professional, and usually vote in the interests of their colony, or rather in interests of the government that appointed them. So senators are more like UN delegates or European Commissioners than US senators.

The constitution of the Empire is sketched in the Treaty of Luna, which was signed in 495 PDT (the game date is 606 PDT). That was before anyone realised how rich the Trust was going to be, and the idea at that time was that the Senate should restrain the executive the power of the pursestrings. But at first the Senate tried to strangle the Empire out of existence by approving no Imperial taxes, contributions, or appropriations. So the Empire was very weak until the money started rolling in from real estate sales. Now the executive (the Trust) enjoys a lot more independence than the signatories of the Treaty of Luna bargained for, the Senate strives mightily to restrain it by other means, ans the relationship between the Senate and the Board of Trustees is hopelessly poisonous.

The Board of Trustees needs the Senate for three things. Intervention Acts that allow it to intervene in the affairs of particular colonies against the wills of their governments (usually to depose the government because it is causing preventable deaths on an egregious scale); Establishment Acts that allow it to continue to exercise government on a new world it is opening up for development, even after the first immigrants land; and Conservancy Acts that appoint someone to act for a colony where there is no recognised government, in the matter of dealing with the Empire (eg. granting the Empire permission to set up schools, build hospitals and irrigation projects, etc.).

If there are factions within the Board of Trustees (Imperial Council) no-one outside knows about them. It meets behind closed doors and does not publish dissenting opinions, and no-one announces policy platforms when running for it, because there are no elections and none of the candidates is sure whether he is being considered for election at any particular time.

The factions within the Senate are:

• Colonies' Rights ("League of Repressive Autocracies", "LRA")

  The LRA's concern is to restrain the Empire from interfering with the governments of colonies. It is therefore firmly supported by governments that feel that the Empire would destroy them if it could, i.e. governments that promote conditions in which a lot of people die. Its core members vote against all intervention acts. Its dream is to make the Empire's income from the Eichberger Foundation go into the official Imperial Treasury so that appropriations would require the assent of the Senate. Its big business is making sure that the Empire does not set up a lot of democratic republics on new worlds and thus indirectly stuff the Senate with anti-LRA senators.

• Responsible Government ("The Feds")

  The Fed's concern is to make Imperial government answerable to someone other than the consciences of the Trustees, i.e. to turn the Empire into a republican federation of democratic colonies. It is firmly supported by colonies whose governments are more-or-less functioning democracies where the people think that the only legitimate basis of authority is the assent of the People. It dreams big: it wants to reduce the Board of Trustees to an house of review, institute a Westminster-System government by Cabinet, and nationalise the assets and operations of the Eichberger Foundation. Its big business is making sure that when the colonies on which the Empire set up democratic republics (back when it was allowed to do that) gain independence, the LRA does not block the recognition of their governments and the seating of their senators.

• Economic Justice ("Levellers")

  The Levellers' concern is to transfer income from rich colonies and the Trust to the governments of poor colonies. They are therefore firmly supported by the governments of poor colonies that are not so blatantly kleptocratic that they stick with the LRA for self-preservation. Its dream is to pass a progressive tax on colonial income and regular aid appropriations. Its big business is screwing cash out of the Empire: money and aid work in exchange for intervention acts and particularly establishment acts.

• Public Safety ("Jackals")

  The Jackals' concern is to keep the Empire focussed on its goal of preventing mass deaths. They are firmly supported by governments that run healthy, peaceful, and reasonably prosperous societies without democratic doctrine, including some rather bizarre functioning utopias. Its core members vote for almost all intervention acts. Its dream is to free the Empire's to take firmer action against the nasty governments of the LRA, without subjecting it to the corrupting effects of democratic control. Its big business is making sure that the Empire provides planets for non-democratic but utopian new colonies.

Note well, however, that this politics goes on at the Capital and at Imperial Sector HQs, and that Imperial Senators and Agents are involved in it, and the Managing Trustee, the Chairman of the Trust, and Imperial Ministers. It is almost completely ignored by everyone else, like the proceedings of the General Assembly of the UN, or the internal processes of EU policy-making. Except even more so because (1) the Empire's policy has very little to do with what actually happens on the worlds most people live on, (2) most colonies are 33 days travel from the Capital and 14 days' travel from their Sector Headquarters, (3) there are no elections to stir up interest, the (4) the whole thing is hopeless stalemated and goes on indefinitely with the same old same old.

The colonies themselves have their own purely internal politics, which are much more interesting to the people who live in them: immediate, contested, and dynamic.

Copyright ©2008–2011, by Brett Evill