'Imperial Culture' (non-canonista)

[Hans Rancke-Madsen]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

Are you arguing or discussing?

I thought that 'argue' and 'discuss' were synonyms, Let's see what Merriam-Webster has to say. Hmm... Discuss implies a sifting of possibilities especially by presenting considerations pro and con, while argue implies the offering of reasons or evidence in support of convictions already held. So I must be arguing.

If you are arguing, you need to present your Imperial Bill of Rights for consideration. Anything less is grossly unfair, as you can move the goalposts again and again until you 'win.'

I can point out that an objection doesn't rule out my rather vague notion on the subject, yes.

You wrote that it was 'just like' the UDHR, in 'broad strokes' with 'some modifications.' That's too vague for anyone to have a clear idea of what you meant...

I can't help that. That's how vague my own notion is. I blush to confess that I've never even read the entire Declaration through from end to end (just skimmed it)[*], much less considered each individual right's applicability in the context of the Imperium.

[*] I really ought to do that, and I will. Tomorrow or perhaps the day after...

...but it does indicate a strong similarity in the two documents.

Yes, it does. I'm quite prepared to belive that not every single one of those rights would apply to the Imperium, but I think most of them would. A lot of them. Quite a few of them.

If I did go through the list of rights in the Declaration, there would, I believe, be some that were taken seriously in the Imperium, some that weren't taken seriously, and some that had been deliberately removed (which is, of course, another way of taking them seriously). I believe the first two categories would comprise the bulk of them.

Now, back in discussion mode-

IYTU, the Imperium may be essentially a secular liberal state with 'Western/democratic values.'

IMTU, the Imperium is not like that.

Discussing (i.e. sifting possibilities) other people's personal TUs seems like a poor use of my time, I'm afraid. That is selfish of me, I know, but that's how it is. (Not that I'm a complete dog in the manger about it; I'm always willing to help out with specific problems if I can think of anything).

Now, if you want to discuss the Imperial Bill of Rights in my TU, you're more than welcome, but I don't expect other people to be any more interested in my TU than I am in theirs. But if you want to, say, point out rights from the Declaration that you think would be missing from the IBoR, I'd certainly accept your help and be grateful for it.

It rules the space among worlds, not the worlds themselves.

I recognize the quote, of course (IIRC it's 'between' and not 'among'), but what does that actually mean? For all practical purposes there is no such thing as the space between worlds, unless you're referring to the space between world surfaces and jump limits (which is, incidentally, explicitly ruled by the member worlds). Ninetynine point I don't know how many decimals of the Imperial population live and work inside space ruled by member worlds.

It is essentially a hegemonic, monarchial, aristocratic regime with no pretensions of 'democracy.' It doesn't do much of anything for the rights or welfare of 'citizens of the Imperium', at least not in any direct manner.

You can have rights under other systems than democratic ones, as a bunch of barons taught King John at Runnymede.


Hans