3 ms·

> But for future interplanetary colonization, the rule would become one light month. Not very far. But imagine any form of communication taking years to bounce

> But for future interplanetary colonization, the rule would become one light month. Not very far. But imagine any form of communication taking years to bounce back and forth. That could not be centrally governed. It might not just be travel time, but it probably does correlate. The rule seems too simplistic. What's so special about 1 month? Is the significant value time to communicate, time to move military forces, or something else? For instance, for your hypothetical interplanetary empire: How could a capital, with a military that can move at 1% light speed, effectively rule over a colony one light month away if the worst it could do for ten years is send a nasty letters over radio? Having local forces isn't a good answer, because one of the easier paths to rebellion is for the leader(s) those forces to declare independence and make themselves kings.

brians 4y ago
Well, yes. There are plenty of takes on this. The "Traveller" RPG has a nice one: distributed feudal confederation. There's a nominal emperor, but it's hugely important that he never do almost anything, because "his" empire is a lifetime across. Nearly the only law is that you don't impede the mail system, and that you pay a small tax to support the fleet that will hammer you into the ground if you impede the mail.
kqr 4y ago
You can hypothetically keep 120 military ships en route to the colony at all times so that a forceful response is always at most one month away.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > You can hypothetically keep 120 military ships en route to the colony at all times so that a forceful response is always at most one month away. One problem with that idea is that either the king's forces would be spread very thin or they would be massively (and expensively) oversized.
  - speed_spread 4y ago
    Just make most of your economy based on mass manufacturing weapons and vehicles, problem solved
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      >> One problem with that idea is that either the king's forces would be spread very thin or they would be massively (and expensively) oversized. > Just make most of your economy based on mass manufacturing weapons and vehicles, problem solved That feels like "solution" that you spent little more time thinking through than it took you to write it. Those kind of things both unconvincing and have a very high probability of being wrong. I mean, you don't even mention trade-offs and there are obvious historical parallels that call your solution into question. Isn't one of the (many) reasons the Soviet Union collapsed is that is allocated too much of its economic capacity to military expenditures?
Retric 4y ago
Biology and more specifically lifespan being fixed through human history seems like a significant confounding factor here. A 50 year trip isn’t such a big deal if people are living 100,000 years and have near perfect memory.
sobkas 4y ago
> > But for future interplanetary colonization, the rule would become one light month. Not very far. But imagine any form of communication taking years to bounce back and forth. That could not be centrally governed. It might not just be travel time, but it probably does correlate. > The rule seems too simplistic. What's so special about 1 month? Is the significant value time to communicate, time to move military forces, or something else? > For instance, for your hypothetical interplanetary empire: How could a capital, with a military that can move at 1% light speed, effectively rule over a colony one light month away if the worst it could do for ten years is send a nasty letters over radio? Having local forces isn't a good answer, because one of the easier paths to rebellion is for the leader(s) those forces to declare independence and make themselves kings. Have assassins embedded in their chain of command, so poison or dagger is always just few metres away. And they know how short their rein as a king will be.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  >> Having local forces isn't a good answer, because one of the easier paths to rebellion is for the leader(s) those forces to declare independence and make themselves kings. > Have assassins embedded in their chain of command, so poison or dagger is always just few metres away. And they know how short their rein as a king will be. I don't think that would be as effective as you think it would be. Why would your assassin be any more loyal than the other garrison forces? Especially when he's ten years away from any help or evacuation.
  - mxkopy 4y ago
    The rebellion would have to distribute its resources amongst an army large enough to hold a planet. At that scale, teams of dozens of people would be sufficiently motivated to kill whoever, if their reward is still some fraction of that.
  - sobkas 4y ago
    Blackmail is a wonderful thing if you know how to use it. For example if would be assassin doesn't fullfil his duty a little bird can whisper his name to people who would very violently frown at would be assassin. Or have things that for his wellbeing should be left in shadows. Things that you would prefer not to see in the planetary governor or a general. It's good to have some disposable pawns to do some dirty work. Even better if they can't be connected to you.

brians 4y ago

Well, yes. There are plenty of takes on this. The "Traveller" RPG has a nice one: distributed feudal confederation. There's a nominal emperor, but it's hugely important that he never do almost anything, because "his" empire is a lifetime across. Nearly the only law is that you don't impede the mail system, and that you pay a small tax to support the fleet that will hammer you into the ground if you impede the mail.

kqr 4y ago

You can hypothetically keep 120 military ships en route to the colony at all times so that a forceful response is always at most one month away.

tablespoon 4y ago
> You can hypothetically keep 120 military ships en route to the colony at all times so that a forceful response is always at most one month away. One problem with that idea is that either the king's forces would be spread very thin or they would be massively (and expensively) oversized.
- speed_spread 4y ago
  Just make most of your economy based on mass manufacturing weapons and vehicles, problem solved
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    >> One problem with that idea is that either the king's forces would be spread very thin or they would be massively (and expensively) oversized. > Just make most of your economy based on mass manufacturing weapons and vehicles, problem solved That feels like "solution" that you spent little more time thinking through than it took you to write it. Those kind of things both unconvincing and have a very high probability of being wrong. I mean, you don't even mention trade-offs and there are obvious historical parallels that call your solution into question. Isn't one of the (many) reasons the Soviet Union collapsed is that is allocated too much of its economic capacity to military expenditures?

Retric 4y ago

Biology and more specifically lifespan being fixed through human history seems like a significant confounding factor here. A 50 year trip isn’t such a big deal if people are living 100,000 years and have near perfect memory.

sobkas 4y ago

> > But for future interplanetary colonization, the rule would become one light month. Not very far. But imagine any form of communication taking years to bounce back and forth. That could not be centrally governed. It might not just be travel time, but it probably does correlate. > The rule seems too simplistic. What's so special about 1 month? Is the significant value time to communicate, time to move military forces, or something else? > For instance, for your hypothetical interplanetary empire: How could a capital, with a military that can move at 1% light speed, effectively rule over a colony one light month away if the worst it could do for ten years is send a nasty letters over radio? Having local forces isn't a good answer, because one of the easier paths to rebellion is for the leader(s) those forces to declare independence and make themselves kings. Have assassins embedded in their chain of command, so poison or dagger is always just few metres away. And they know how short their rein as a king will be.

tablespoon 4y ago
>> Having local forces isn't a good answer, because one of the easier paths to rebellion is for the leader(s) those forces to declare independence and make themselves kings. > Have assassins embedded in their chain of command, so poison or dagger is always just few metres away. And they know how short their rein as a king will be. I don't think that would be as effective as you think it would be. Why would your assassin be any more loyal than the other garrison forces? Especially when he's ten years away from any help or evacuation.
- mxkopy 4y ago
  The rebellion would have to distribute its resources amongst an army large enough to hold a planet. At that scale, teams of dozens of people would be sufficiently motivated to kill whoever, if their reward is still some fraction of that.
- sobkas 4y ago
  Blackmail is a wonderful thing if you know how to use it. For example if would be assassin doesn't fullfil his duty a little bird can whisper his name to people who would very violently frown at would be assassin. Or have things that for his wellbeing should be left in shadows. Things that you would prefer not to see in the planetary governor or a general. It's good to have some disposable pawns to do some dirty work. Even better if they can't be connected to you.