Romulan Republic?

ladymyajha

Okay so the question I have is... how is the New Romulan Republic a Republic exactly with democratic principles? I see no where in the discussion where D'Tan has been elected, he's more of a (benevolent) dictator who has a rather largish military apparatis underneath him.

I see no mention of a Sentate, no mention of elections, nothing like that. So how exactly is D'Tan different the the Emporess, except he's more benevolent and Fatherly, while Sela is more of the harsh wicked step mother?

Just curious that's all.

tatyanasergei

I will answer that with a counter-question; Do Federation players ever get to see their faction's elections? What about the Klingon High Council's sessions?

Just because we don't see it doesn't mean that it isn't going on off-camera!

purplegamer

Was the Roman Republic a true republic? No.

/case closed

raptor63549

Think of how many countries are named People's Republic of X and Democratic Republic of Y. Just because they name something "Republic" doesn't make it true.

malakhglitch

I think it's a Republic in its oldest form, only the "landholders" vote.

sollvax

I think its a platonic republic (you get a vote if you are a land owner , of age and male)

vitzh

Maybe that is the twist? D'tan enslaves the galaxy?

It is weird but the only inner faction politics we get to actively observe in game are Klingon side. Guess that means Klingons are far more democratic than Feds or Romulans?

drogyn1701

I doubt they've had time yet to establish a government, figure out how the representation works, draft a charter, hold elections, etc, what with the Empire hounding their every move.

Took the United States four years from the end of the Revolutionary war to draft its Constitution and another two years for it to go into effect. We don't really know how long D'Tan's been at this, and I get the impression that aside from the flotilla and a few other supporters scattered across the Empire, he doesn't control a whole lot of territory at the start of the plot.

hevach

Republic and democracy are different things. Both can exist in the same structure, and it became much more common in the 20th Century but neither requires the other. Particularly republic - many of the republics in the modern day are not democracies, and the vast majority of defunct republics were not democracies. Some like Rome were a democracy of oligarchs - a dictatorship in all meaningful measures with a democratic system in place between the ruling class.

Even many democratic republics don't elect their first leader, or only do so as a technicality as their founder ran unopposed.

naevius

A republic is a specific sub-set / form of democracy in which people elect representatives who then vote or otherwise decide on issues. Note that the way in which the representatives decide can vary.

The Roman Republic WAS a true republic, since people voted representatives to the Assembly and to various offices. (But not the Senate.)

At this point, I suspect the Romulan Republic is more of an aspiration than an actuality.

purplegamer

naevius wrote: »

A republic is a specific sub-set / form of democracy in which people elect representatives who then vote or otherwise decide on issues. Note that the way in which the representatives decide can vary.

The Roman Republic WAS a true republic, since people voted representatives to the Assembly and to various offices. (But not the Senate.)

At this point, I suspect the Romulan Republic is more of an aspiration than an actuality.

No. Rome was not a true republic; the vast majority of people subject to Roman law could not vote for their representatives and said representatives were under no legal obligation to represent their interests.

sollvax

One Warbird one Vote??

dalolorn

At this point, I expect they haven't had time to set things up yet, even by the end of the Romulan reputation story. Come on, they only just started building their capital!