Are "Imperial uniformity" and "dead sameness" (see here) accurate descriptions of conditions in the Terran Empire? The Empire is diverse both in species and in cultures and allows considerable local autonomy. Human colonies on various planets are in no way uniform. In the Patrician System, there are human beings and two intelligent Starkadian species on Imhotep as well as human beings, Cynthians and Donarrians on Daedalus. There were also Zacharian human beings on Daedalus until the events of the Magnusson Rebellion. Human beings and Merseians are fully integrated on Dennitza. The joint human-Ythrian colony on Avalon is not in the Empire politically but is in a volume of space where the Empire and the Domain of Ythri interpenetrate and thus is close enough to influence Imperial planets.
Avalonians resisted incorporation into the Empire because they did not want their unique biracial culture to be diluted by unrestricted immigration but how are such issues addressed on planets that are within the Empire? In Julian May's Galactic Milieu, as far as I remember, a human colony planet can be ethnically Scottish if a specified majority number of its population is of Scottish descent but the remaining minority can be fully mixed. This is an attempt to preserve cultures without clamping down too much on mixed immigration. However, the Terran Empire allows unrestricted freedom of movement. But this should spread the diversity, not impose any "sameness."
The best motto, I think, is: "Difference without Division; Unity without Uniformity."
8 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And this makes me think Christopher Holm's belief that annexation of Avalon by the Empire would lead to a deadening "sameness" was at least overstated. True, because of Terran influence there would be some cultural uniformity, such as the widespread use of Anglic as a common language many beings thru out the Empire would find useful to learn.
The Imperial domain was so vast, spread out over hundreds of light years, that a tightly centralized rule was simply not practical or desirable.
Finished rereading Stirling's BLACK CHAMBER and THEATER OF SPIES. For a change of pace I'm rereading some of the stories in THE SATURN GAME (NESFA Press, 2010): "Sam Hall," "Mustn't Touch," and "Elementary Mistake." All worth reading!
Ad astra! Sean
It always struck me that the collective name of the Zacharians should have been "Pouty McPoutyface".
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Ha, that was amusing! I even wrote a long article comparing Merseia/Zacharians to your Draka and the Domination. The only way the Zacharians could have achieved their ambition of becoming the "natural leaders" of mankind would have been by following a path similar to that taken by the Draka. I mean my essay titled "Was the Domination Inspired by Merseia?"
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
The other way to become natural leaders is simply to lead by example, to inspire others, to excel in every profession and every kind of activity. The Zacharians would have to do this entirely by their own efforts, not by imposing their rule on anyone else and certainly not by entering into a covert alliance with the Merseians.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
That kind of leadership would work only for very temporary, ad hoc situations, and not for long lasting problems requiring a formalized institutionalized structure to handle.
I did suggest in my article the Zacharians could have worked their way up the ranks of the civil and military services of the Empire, where their abilities would have seen many of them rising to the top. But that would have meant renouncing dreams of becoming a master caste.
Ad astra! Sean
Indeed, that has to renounced.
The Zacharians genuinely expected the rest of humanity to take one look at their natural superiority and become worshipful acolytes.
When that didn't happen, they pouted.
That shows their lack of understanding of human psychology.
They could have got admiration and respect simply by being the best at whatever they did without having to insist on it.
Post a Comment