Alternate Political Symbols

[Hapsburg]

The emblem or logo of the National Humanist Imperial Labor Party, a nationalist, integralist and anti-alien political party in my setting.
The NHILP arises in 3015 from the ashes of the Empire of Man Party, and gradually builds itself up as the predominant party in the Terran Empire. It suffers setbacks, especially in its first century of existence, but after achieving electoral success and the patronage of wealthy spacer and colonial industrialists in the middle 3100s, it is able to institute itself into a position of power as part of a coalition government headed by the Terran aristocrats and conservatives. Through voter intimidation, parliamentary walkouts, filibusters, and a good-old-fashioned police state, they seize absolute power in the last few decades of the Terran Empire after having already come to dominate local and provincial elections in the colonies. It becomes itself overtaken by a new generation of radical republican leaders starting the 3250s and they eventually orchestrate a galaxy-wide war that sees the total victory of the Empire and its allies followed immediately by their merger and dissolution into a totalitarian Republic where political parties are banned as a threat to the government.

The globe represents Earth, the cradle of humanity and centre of the Terran civilisation. The sheaves of wheat around it represent prosperity and growth, as well as the produce of the Terran labourer. The red star above the Earth is the eternal glow of revolution, guiding the Party forward. Below is draped a flag with the three colours of Terra: white, green, and blue. On an open tome reads the words "Mankind, Forwards", the Party motto.

 

[False Dmitri]

I've always liked your drawing style, Hapsburg.

 

[Lapsed Pacifist]

Social Democratic Party of Bavaria (SPDB)

 

[machinekng]

United Kingdom Political Spectrum - 2068 C.E.

Zoomable

 

[Nanwe]

Really cool @machinekng. I was wondering though, what would be examples and the differences between maximalist technocracy, managed democracy, technocratic democracy (which I imagine is very similar to current democracies), populist democracy, maximalist populism and participism (which I imagine is some kind of cantonal direct democracy stuff?).

 

[machinekng]

Really cool @machinekng. I was wondering though, what would be examples and the differences between maximalist technocracy, managed democracy, technocratic democracy (which I imagine is very similar to current democracies), populist democracy, maximalist populism and participism (which I imagine is some kind of cantonal direct democracy stuff?).

Technocratic and populist democracy are both fairly similar forms of representative democracies, using either parliamentary or presidential structures. The biggest difference is in tone. Technocratic democrats believe in meritocracy and picking the right people to lead the nation. Populist democrats believe in representing public opinion and popular interest.

Managed democracy is the belief that democratic structures have some value in selecting leadership and maintaining legitimacy, but the substance of democracy, popular representation, is not particularly beneficial to society. Managed democracies tend to limit ballot access and make heavy use of state propaganda and security to ensure that only the "right sort" of politicians have the chance to be elected. Managed democracies also rely heavily on autonomous ministries, albeit the degree of autonomy varies greatly.

Maximalist technocracy goes further, discarding all but the slightest trappings of democracy. Maximalist technocrats believe that all governing should be done by purely autonomous ministries, and that any sort of governing body should be nothing more than a rubber stamp.

Maximalist populism is not just a governmental system of view, but also a philosophical one. To maximal populists, the idea of objective ideas of justice or ethics are simply myths. Rather, the only real form of justice is what is popularly decided on. This is an ideology that embraces the idea of tyranny of the majority. Maximalist populist governments tend to use a mixture of single-seat constituencies and direct democratic institutions, as well as relying heavy on volunteerist institutions like militias or trade unions. While maximalist populist governments are usually described as regimes, these governments are technically democratic and supported by "free" elections, even if extrajudicial and popular violence is used to suppress dissent.

Participism essentially comes in several major flavors, Municipalism, Synthesis Marxism and Anarchism, although other pariticipist ideologies exist or have begun to emerge. In all cases, participists believe in using purely direct or delegative institutions, in which citizens directly consider and approve propositions. For Municipalists, this looks like cantonal or Athenian democracy, where mass, public forums are assembled to undergo discourse. For Synthesis Marxists and Anarchists, the system is more delegative. Direct democracy occurs at the Collective (Marxist) or Commune (Anarchist) level, and delegates are sent upstream through councils, up to the Combine (Marxist) or Syndicate (Anarchist) level. Of course, the interactions between Collectives/Combines and Communes/Syndicates are very different, namely due to the differences between Synthesis Marxist quasi-markets and Anarchist decentralized planning. In addition, Synthesis Marxists tend to have additional, limited national governments that selected through representative mechanisms, while the Anarchists regulate inter-Syndicate disputes through the mechanisms of the Anarchist Federation.

 

[shiftygiant]

Ooo that's purdy.

I have to ask, is there a basemap for the spectrum?

 

[machinekng]

Ooo that's purdy.

I have to ask, is there a basemap for the spectrum?

I used to try having a full set, with all of the spectra on the same .svg, but it put too great a load on my cpu. I can put together a .zip with all the individual spectra.

 

[machinekng]

Nothing to do with Our Fathers' Stars, but just a little set of political logos I made for Bastille Day.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In June 1791, King Louis XVI, who had changed his mind from a slow moving coach to a faster one, was nearly killed in his escape from Paris. The fast-moving coach's wheel hit a hole in the road, scaring the horses and ultimately flipping the lighter carriage to its side, giving the King a near-fatal concussion. While the King was apprehended by the revolutionaries, and returned to Paris, he was only barely lucid, and almost unable to leave his bed. While the King's flight had shocked and angered the nation, his condition left him unable to exercise the powers granted to him by the Constitution of 1791, preventing a constitutional crisis. The King's newfound status as a figurehead monarch meant that the abolition of the monarchy had much less appeal for the revolutionaries. With the ascendancy of the radical republicans prevented, the Kingdom of the French was able to come to peace with its enemies in 1795.

While the Kingdom of the French has had several constitutions since the Revolution, including ones that more formally stripped the power of the Monarchy, the French nation has remained relatively stable in peacetime. The Kingdom possesses some of the oldest continuous political parties in the world, outgrowths of the political factions during the revolution.

Feuillants (Right-wing): The Feulliants are a liberal conservative, monarchist party. The party has its origins in the faction that supported the constitutional monarchy. While the Feulliants have traditionally opposed reforms reducing the monarchy's powers, most of the party is satisfied with the current arrangement. While the Feulliants have been traditionally been protectionist in their economics, the party's newest generation is more open to free trade. Still, the party remains conservative when it comes to social issues, and tends to oppose secularism, believing that religion is nesecary for moral sensibility and a fair society.

The Gironde (Center-Right): The Gironde is a liberal-radical party, and has often been the governing party in France. The Gironde have consistently supported free trade and free market economics throughout their existence, albeit tempered with state intervention in order to ensure equality of opportunity. The Gironde is also socially liberal, and fighting for minority rights and individual freedoms. The Gironde has traditionally been in favor of secularism and limiting royal powers, albeit these issues have become less important to many of the party's members.

The Mountain (Center-Left): The Mountain is a social democratic party, and has often been a governing party. While the Mountain's policies could originally be described as liberal-radical or social-liberal, the party's economics have since moved leftward. The Mountain is highly in favor of secularism and reduced royal powers, and tends to be liberal on most social issues.

Mutualist Party(Left-wing): The Mutualist Party is democratic socialist party, which emerged out of the trade union movement in the 19th century. The Mutualists have traditionally argued for a form of market socialism, and have since refined their views to supporting the idea of economic democracy. While the Mutualist party supports both secularism and republicanism, the party has often been criticized for being moralistic and conservative in its social views.

 

[Turquoise Blue]

I love that Montagnard symbol.

Your logos always look quite realistic.

 

[machinekng]

I love that Montagnard symbol.

Your logos always look quite realistic.

Thanks! I tried to make this set a more "US-style," in that all the logos rely on national colors. The rightist parties also include gold, the color of the monarchy, while the leftist parties have their own emphasis. I think that my favorite out of this set is the Mutualists, as I like how the flags form a subtle 'M'.

 

[Lapsed Pacifist]

The logo of The Party from 1984, done in the style of a modern political party.

 

[Hapsburg]

Organisational logo, sometimes used as a flag, of the Colonial Liberation Organisation. The CLO was a federation of thousands of self-described "armed liberation movements" across several Terran colony worlds, formed in 2946; the dominant ideology was some form of revolutionary socialism, though its affiliate groups ran the gamut from communists to libertarians. It typically stood at odds with the Terran People's Liberation Army, the armed wing of the Terran Communist Party, which sought to keep the Terran Empire united but as a communist republic. The CLO sought the separation of the Terran Empire's colonies as a confederation of autonomous states, generally intended to be worker's republics. The CLO believed that the Earth-centric aristocracy and the capitalist-industrial power elite had seized power in the Terran Empire and colonies were being exploited by this power elite, necessitating armed struggle for the freedom of colonial populations. The CLO, originally a legal organisation and a federation of colonial home rule political parties, was banned in 3012 and became known primarily for its guerilla warfare techniques, including acts of terrorism, to confront the Terran Empire. However, the CLO also fielded a unified ground force with military equipment, the Colonial Liberation Army, with which to engage Terran Imperial Army forces in armed insurrections. These usually met with failure and the destruction of Colonial Liberation troops, but often only after protracted battles of attrition. The CLO carried on its struggle for over two and a half centuries, with the civil war in the Empire reaching a fever pitch in the 3250s.
The Terran Empire entered into an armistice with the CLO at the outset of the Great War in September 3265, promising greater autonomy for the colonies and more extensive investment in social services in impoverished planets in exchange for a ceasefire in order to focus on the war. While the Terran government, and later Central Galactic Government, made good on some of these promises, it would be on their own terms and for their own, nationalistic reasons. The leadership of the CLO was subject to assassination or extrajudicial execution, and the rank-and-file soldiers of the CLO were slaughtered in mass executions in the early 3270s. But the CLO's raison d'etre did not go away entirely, and remnant factions split off to carry on the struggle. But they would not be as united as they had been before the war.

The hand gripping the rifle represents armed resistance, and the small stars shooting off from the larger one represent the "smaller" colonies breaking away.

 

[Hapsburg]

And the emblem of the Terran People's Liberation Army, originally the armed wing of the Terran Communist Party. Banned in 3230 as a subversive organisation, in part due to its direct ties to the TPLA, the Terran Communists thereafter eschewed legal means of social change. Seeing the impossibility of gradual reform with the tremendous power wielded by the National Humanists and Tories, the TPLA began a campaign of terrorism and insurrection designed to spark a popular revolution. From its outset TPLA was an "urban guerilla" movement that attracted far leftists that desired the overthrow of the Terran monarchy and the abolition of nationalist and conservative political elements. Like the CLO, it was the target of Imperial military crackdowns and unlike the CLO it was not subject to a truce in 3265. Internal forces of the Empire continued their war against the TPLA until it was officially declared eradicated in 3273.

 

[Pragmatic Progressive]

Organisational logo, sometimes used as a flag, of the Colonial Liberation Organisation. The CLO was a federation of thousands of self-described "armed liberation movements" across several Terran colony worlds, formed in 2946; the dominant ideology was some form of revolutionary socialism, though its affiliate groups ran the gamut from communists to libertarians. It typically stood at odds with the Terran People's Liberation Army, the armed wing of the Terran Communist Party, which sought to keep the Terran Empire united but as a communist republic. The CLO sought the separation of the Terran Empire's colonies as a confederation of autonomous states, generally intended to be worker's republics. The CLO believed that the Earth-centric aristocracy and the capitalist-industrial power elite had seized power in the Terran Empire and colonies were being exploited by this power elite, necessitating armed struggle for the freedom of colonial populations. The CLO, originally a legal organisation and a federation of colonial home rule political parties, was banned in 3012 and became known primarily for its guerilla warfare techniques, including acts of terrorism, to confront the Terran Empire. However, the CLO also fielded a unified ground force with military equipment, the Colonial Liberation Army, with which to engage Terran Imperial Army forces in armed insurrections. These usually met with failure and the destruction of Colonial Liberation troops, but often only after protracted battles of attrition. The CLO carried on its struggle for over two and a half centuries, with the civil war in the Empire reaching a fever pitch in the 3250s.
The Terran Empire entered into an armistice with the CLO at the outset of the Great War in September 3265, promising greater autonomy for the colonies and more extensive investment in social services in impoverished planets in exchange for a ceasefire in order to focus on the war. While the Terran government, and later Central Galactic Government, made good on some of these promises, it would be on their own terms and for their own, nationalistic reasons. The leadership of the CLO was subject to assassination or extrajudicial execution, and the rank-and-file soldiers of the CLO were slaughtered in mass executions in the early 3270s. But the CLO's raison d'etre did not go away entirely, and remnant factions split off to carry on the struggle. But they would not be as united as they had been before the war.

The hand gripping the rifle represents armed resistance, and the small stars shooting off from the larger one represent the "smaller" colonies breaking away.

View attachment 287285

Yeah! Communism and armed revolution can into space!

 

[Deleted member 82792]

Can someone do the logos for the political parties of a modern Kingdom of Louisiana?

 

[Woolly Mammoth]

United Kingdom Political Spectrum - 2068 C.E.

Zoomable

I think the true genius here is creating a spectrum where I don't think I would support any of the parties.

 

[machinekng]

I think the true genius here is creating a spectrum where I don't think I would support any of the parties.

You're welcome?

 

[Turquoise Blue]

I think the true genius here is creating a spectrum where I don't think I would support any of the parties.

That's interesting. What do you define yourself as, in terms of ideology?

 

[Woolly Mammoth]

That's interesting. What do you define yourself as, in terms of ideology?

Pretty standard socialist really - I mean more in terms that I am not a great believer in nationalism and so the traditional economically-left parties in that scenario are not really that closely fitting.