3 ms·

That’s a federation, like the USA or Switzerland. It doesn’t matter what type of government you have, it must protect its control over its laws, the federated s

That’s a federation, like the USA or Switzerland. It doesn’t matter what type of government you have, it must protect its control over its laws, the federated system is a subset of those laws. So federated governments would take a similarly dim view if foreign entities tried to park and govern themselves in that federation’s border, the foreigners can’t just say, “hey you’ve got a new state in your border”.

nostrademons 8y ago
In this case the federated system is worldwide, and the individual phyles by definition must park and govern themselves within the federation's border. Because the federated system is worldwide, it must contain only a small subset of the laws we normally associate with a nation-state, those that directly affect peaceful trade and dispute resolution. Cultural values are left for the phyle to administer. Another key difference is that your phyle follows you around, geographically, while your nation's jurisdiction ends at its borders. If I'm an American expat interacting with another American expat in Shanghai, I'm still subject to Chinese law. If I'm a Neo-Victorian (to use one of the phyles from Diamond Age) interacting with another Neo-Victorian in Hong Kong, I'm subject to Neo-Victorian law. A block over could be a Han Chinese (also using the Diamond Age phyle, but in this case it corresponds to a real ethnicity in our world) enclave, and its citizens would be subject to Han Chinese law when interacting with other Han Chinese. If, as a Neo-Victorian, I cross the street to do a business deal with a Han Chinese, our dealings are governed by the Common Economic Protocol, the set of laws common to the federated system as a whole.
- selimthegrim 8y ago
  How is this different from the millet system?
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > Another key difference is that your phyle follows you around, geographically, while your nation's jurisdiction ends at its borders. A nation-states jurisdiction does not end at it's borders unless it chooses for it to, which few do entirely. It ability to practically enforce it's rules may or may not do so, depending on the power of the state and power and interests of other states who may be concerned with the specific matter (especially, but not exclusively, the one in whose borders the target of the enforcement is located.)

nostrademons 8y ago

In this case the federated system is worldwide, and the individual phyles by definition must park and govern themselves within the federation's border. Because the federated system is worldwide, it must contain only a small subset of the laws we normally associate with a nation-state, those that directly affect peaceful trade and dispute resolution. Cultural values are left for the phyle to administer. Another key difference is that your phyle follows you around, geographically, while your nation's jurisdiction ends at its borders. If I'm an American expat interacting with another American expat in Shanghai, I'm still subject to Chinese law. If I'm a Neo-Victorian (to use one of the phyles from Diamond Age) interacting with another Neo-Victorian in Hong Kong, I'm subject to Neo-Victorian law. A block over could be a Han Chinese (also using the Diamond Age phyle, but in this case it corresponds to a real ethnicity in our world) enclave, and its citizens would be subject to Han Chinese law when interacting with other Han Chinese. If, as a Neo-Victorian, I cross the street to do a business deal with a Han Chinese, our dealings are governed by the Common Economic Protocol, the set of laws common to the federated system as a whole.

selimthegrim 8y ago
How is this different from the millet system?
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Another key difference is that your phyle follows you around, geographically, while your nation's jurisdiction ends at its borders. A nation-states jurisdiction does not end at it's borders unless it chooses for it to, which few do entirely. It ability to practically enforce it's rules may or may not do so, depending on the power of the state and power and interests of other states who may be concerned with the specific matter (especially, but not exclusively, the one in whose borders the target of the enforcement is located.)