Page 1 of 2

The rise and fall of Empires

Posted: 2003-05-23 11:11pm
by Darth Wong
The thread discussing the possible decline of the Romulan Empire got me to thinking: historically speaking, all empires in which vast holdings are controlled by a small centralized seat of power eventually seem to die. Look at the various European empires; they were all large but they all ran out of steam. Britain, France, Spain ... hell, even the fucking DUTCH had an empire at one time.

America is very large in terms of geography; it could have easily been regarded as a world-spanning empire if it was plopped into ancient Europe. But it thrives as long as the wealth is reasonably dispersed throughout its territory. If 95% of the money in America was in Washington DC and the rest of the country was basically impoverished, how long do you think America would last as an intact unit?

Anyway, it occurs to me that both the Klingon and Romulan empires are really living on borrowed time. How many worlds are there in the Klingon or Romulan empires? How many of those have enough wealth and power to be noticed or recognized by anyone outside the Empire? Both the Klingon and Romulan empires seem to be highly centralized fiefdoms in which slave races labouring on outlying planets are used as grunt labour, supporting the opulence and military programs of the ruling race/world on their backs. The Romulans were such isolationists that they had no contact at all with the Federation for decades, until "The Neutral Zone" in TNG; a likely theory is that they were quelling internal troubles.

I'm only posting this because I suspect it's the only viable reason for the success of the Federation in spite of their absolute cluelessness. Their enemies are seriously fucked up.

Posted: 2003-05-23 11:30pm
by Gil Hamilton
I know what you are talking about. Just look at ST6. The Praxis disaster crippled the Klingon Empire and forced them into a position where they'd have to talk with the Federation or go to war. You'd think for an interstellar empire with hundreds of systems with thousands of planets and moons, such a disaster would be unfortunate, but it wouldn't be fatal, unless of course the Klingons put all their eggs in one basket, as it were. Had the Klingons not put all their energy production facilities on Praxis, they'd not have been so vulnerable. It gives one the impression that the Klingon Empire could have been brought down in one strike.

Re: The rise and fall of Empires

Posted: 2003-05-23 11:32pm
by Sea Skimmer
Darth Wong wrote:
I'm only posting this because I suspect it's the only viable reason for the success of the Federation in spite of their absolute cluelessness. Their enemies are seriously fucked up.
In most every respect, especially there ship designs and the competence of there military personal. The Federation also seems to have a major technological advantage over some of them, The E-D knocked the shields of a Galor down with two phaser hits, and they seem to have the most sane ship designs around.

Posted: 2003-05-24 12:57am
by HemlockGrey
Highly centralized empires failed in ancient times because of a lack of communication and lines of supply.

By the military token, invaders could apply a persisting offensive strategy to the outlying possessions of an empire with much greater ease than its interior, because it would take much longer to rely messengers and armies to the outlying regions. With a highly centralized government, the procutors of the besieged region have less authority, less power, and less ability to combat the invasion.

But things don't work domestically, either. Because the emperor or whatever could not make his presence felt in the outlying regions, these regions naturally decentralized over time as power fell to the local governers and adminstrators, or they centralized under a seperate entity owing only nominal alliegence to the central state, until it can no longer enforce its laws and the outlying region declares its independence- ala the War of Independence.

This changes with the advent of super-fast communications. Since the outlying areas cannot decentralize, since it is easier to impose imperial will upon them, if they are not treated fairly or subject to what they percieve as an unfair state they will gradually grow in resentment and anger; sparking either a revolt, indepedence movement, or until a foreign invasion comes along and finds it easy to subdue the local populace.

Because of the nature of the highly centralized state, it can adminster itself without these outlying territories. However, more often than not, it needs these territories to help its economy survive, and without them holding it up the 'centerpiece' state will also collapse.

Posted: 2003-05-24 09:17am
by Colonel Olrik
Britain, France, Spain ... hell, even the fucking DUTCH had an empire at one time.
.. Portugal was once the most powerful nation on Earth.



:(

Posted: 2003-05-24 09:59am
by Grand Admiral Thrawn
Colonel Olrik wrote:
Britain, France, Spain ... hell, even the fucking DUTCH had an empire at one time.
.. Portugal was once the most powerful nation on Earth.



:(

For about 4 seconds.

Posted: 2003-05-24 10:33am
by Gil Hamilton
Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:For about 4 seconds.
Oh, but what a four seconds! :D

Posted: 2003-05-24 12:23pm
by Colonel Olrik
Gil Hamilton wrote:
Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:For about 4 seconds.
Oh, but what a four seconds! :D
We did manage to legally own half of the world outside europe, for a few decades. And it was the best part.

Posted: 2003-05-24 01:09pm
by Darth Wong
HemlockGrey wrote:Highly centralized empires failed in ancient times because of a lack of communication and lines of supply.
Warp drive and subspace communications are slow; it takes more than a month for communications to reach outlying Federation territories, and YEARS for a ship to get there. Romulan and Klingon territories can be assumed to be similarly isolated unless they're much smaller than the Federation, which does not seem to be the case. As I said, they're massively overcentralized; it's a wonder the outlying territories can be kept under control at all, hence it's not a surprise that the Federation can hold its own despite inexcusably stupid policies.

Posted: 2003-05-24 01:30pm
by NecronLord
Hence the utility of religion in anchient (sp) empires.

Anyway, the reason for the fleeting power of the european colonial empires was an unsustainable technological lead. It's technically the same with the US, it's US tech that keeps them ahead, (it used to be economics, but not any more) which is unfortunately for the US and other empires that relied upon it, the most fleeting advantage. (as compared to territory population and competance)

The UFP wins through (writers) luck, that's the long and the short of it. As for the decline of the Romulan Empire, I blame the incompotents in charge of trek now, after all, between TOS and TNG their rise was meteoric (From a minor trouble spot compared to the klingons and federation, to having the most powerful and largest ships in the quadrant and routinely kicking the klingons about like a soccer ball) Damm B&B to the domain of eternal pain and agony.

Posted: 2003-05-24 01:48pm
by HemlockGrey
Warp drive and subspace communications are slow; it takes more than a month for communications to reach outlying Federation territories, and YEARS for a ship to get there. Romulan and Klingon territories can be assumed to be similarly isolated unless they're much smaller than the Federation, which does not seem to be the case. As I said, they're massively overcentralized; it's a wonder the outlying territories can be kept under control at all, hence it's not a surprise that the Federation can hold its own despite inexcusably stupid policies.
Even the Federation is massively overcentralized, which, due to the slowness of communications, leads to decentralization the further you get from Earth. This leads to stuff like Captian Picard conducting negotiations on behalf of the Feds and systems that are only nominally under Fed control, like the Baku.

Posted: 2003-05-24 02:22pm
by Peregrin Toker
HemlockGrey wrote:Highly centralized empires failed in ancient times because of a lack of communication and lines of supply.
They still fail, or at least stagnate. Just look at the Soviet Union.

Posted: 2003-05-24 02:47pm
by HemlockGrey
They still fail, or at least stagnate. Just look at the Soviet Union.
Well, yes, but for different reasons.

Posted: 2003-05-24 04:15pm
by Drooling Iguana
I wonder how much the threat of assimilation by the Federation helps or impedes the various empires' ability to maintain control...

Posted: 2003-05-24 04:36pm
by Sea Skimmer
Colonel Olrik wrote:
We did manage to legally own half of the world outside europe, for a few decades. And it was the best part.
Just because the Pope says so doesn’t make it true.

Posted: 2003-05-24 04:57pm
by Warspite
Sea Skimmer wrote:Just because the Pope says so doesn’t make it true.
???

We had colonies from Brazil to Japan... That's a big chunk of the world!

*Edit* Besides, the Papal aproval mattered only to us and the Spanish, the rest of Europe was busy with wars, and as long as we provided them with spices and silk, they were happy.

Posted: 2003-05-24 05:20pm
by Dark Primus
I think what keeps Federation holding together is the common enemy strategy. External threats like Romulan Star Empire, Borg, Dominion will keep the outlaying worlds in check. They will be dependant on protection from the heavy industrialized worlds, since they are the ones building the ships.

Posted: 2003-05-24 08:06pm
by Grand Admiral Thrawn
Warspite wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:Just because the Pope says so doesn’t make it true.
???

We had colonies from Brazil to Japan... That's a big chunk of the world!

*Edit* Besides, the Papal aproval mattered only to us and the Spanish, the rest of Europe was busy with wars, and as long as we provided them with spices and silk, they were happy.


Brazil to Japan? You claimed the entire Pacific Ocean?

Posted: 2003-05-24 08:16pm
by Colonel Olrik
Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Brazil to Japan? You claimed the entire Pacific Ocean?
The Pacific hadn't even been discovered yet. We claimed Brazil, Africa and Asia. The spaniards had the rest of the American continent and the rest of the undiscovered world.

Those were the days. Some decades later, we began losing our possessions in India as the other European powers began navigating and started claiming chunks of Africa and Asia.

Then came the dark days of the fusion between Portugal and Spain (hereditary laws are a bitch) and the war with the other Continental Powers, specially England. We lost many colonies during that time. By the time we got rid of the spanish, others already ruled the seas. :cry:

[I'm feeling very nostalgic right now]

Posted: 2003-05-24 10:18pm
by Grand Admiral Thrawn
Colonel Olrik wrote:
Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Brazil to Japan? You claimed the entire Pacific Ocean?
The Pacific hadn't even been discovered yet. We claimed Brazil, Africa and Asia. The spaniards had the rest of the American continent and the rest of the undiscovered world.

Those were the days. Some decades later, we began losing our possessions in India as the other European powers began navigating and started claiming chunks of Africa and Asia.

Then came the dark days of the fusion between Portugal and Spain (hereditary laws are a bitch) and the war with the other Continental Powers, specially England. We lost many colonies during that time. By the time we got rid of the spanish, others already ruled the seas. :cry:

[I'm feeling very nostalgic right now]

Wow. You claimed 2 continents that probably never even noticed they were colonies.

Re: The rise and fall of Empires

Posted: 2003-05-24 10:29pm
by Lord Sander
Darth Wong wrote: ... hell, even the fucking DUTCH had an empire at one time.
That's surprising? :P

Posted: 2003-05-24 10:51pm
by Howedar
Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote: The Pacific hadn't even been discovered yet. We claimed Brazil, Africa and Asia. The spaniards had the rest of the American continent and the rest of the undiscovered world.

Those were the days. Some decades later, we began losing our possessions in India as the other European powers began navigating and started claiming chunks of Africa and Asia.

Then came the dark days of the fusion between Portugal and Spain (hereditary laws are a bitch) and the war with the other Continental Powers, specially England. We lost many colonies during that time. By the time we got rid of the spanish, others already ruled the seas. :cry:

[I'm feeling very nostalgic right now]

Wow. You claimed 2 continents that probably never even noticed they were colonies.
Just like the Baku.

Re: The rise and fall of Empires

Posted: 2003-05-24 11:02pm
by Frank Hipper
Lord Sander wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: ... hell, even the fucking DUTCH had an empire at one time.
That's surprising? :P
The Dutch held their empire longer than anyone else. The British colonies that survived until the twentieth century weren't claimed until the eighteenth, the Dutch had 50 or more years on them.

Re: The rise and fall of Empires

Posted: 2003-05-25 05:00am
by The Duchess of Zeon
Darth Wong wrote:... hell, even the fucking DUTCH had an empire at one time.
Here's one that takes the book: Sweden had two colonies in the Americas.

Re: The rise and fall of Empires

Posted: 2003-05-25 05:48am
by Dark Primus
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:... hell, even the fucking DUTCH had an empire at one time.
Here's one that takes the book: Sweden had two colonies in the Americas.
New Sweden. I think it is still called that even today.
And we once owned a large chunk of the land area around Delaware river. Philadelphia could have been ours. :wink: LOL

Sweden also bought an Island from France (can't remember the name) and then sold it back to French.