TOASTER Sun and Moon [The One All-encompassing Scheme To Eternally Rule]
- Thread starter XO Maenadicus
- Start date
I think that some of the secondary state/province colors could be used for native peoples that historically inhabited territories of said state or province.
We're still missing some German state colors. Specifically:
- There's only one color for "Hesse" (plus Hesse-Nassau). There should be different colors for Hesse-Darmstadt, Hesse-Kassel, and Hesse-Homburg.
- There's already Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, but there should be a separate color for Saxe-Gotha
- Saxe-Hildburghausen
- Waldeck (-Prymont)
- Remaining Austrian imperial lands: Illyria (add to Carinthia), Carniola (add to Slovenia), Istria/Littoral, Moravia, Galicia-Lodomeria, Bukovina
Skallagrim
Banned
That looks really good! If I might make some suggestions:
--I think there probably needs to be a colour for theocracy.
--Secondary Conservatism might additionally be labeled as the colour for Traditionalism. (Which should I think be seen as different from run-of-the-mill conservatism. An arch-reactionary absolute monarchy might by marked with this colour, then.)
--Perhaps it would be worth considering adding some shade of green for Environmentalism. Some kind of 'ecotopian movement' does occasionally show up in timelines, after all.
--Finally (though far less urgent than the others), my unabating interest in various non-mainstream political ideologies leads me to suspect that right-anarchists (or 'anarcho-capitalists', as they often prefer) and objectivists will vehemently disagree with ever being included under the same colour. (The anarcho-capitalists tend to feel that objectivists are "just statists" because they want a minimal government to be retained, and the objectivists tend to consider the anarcho-capitalists "hippies of the right". They tend to get along as persons, but stringently maintain that their ideologies are fundamentally different.
)I think we might have to split TOASTER into TOASTER-Standard and TOASTER-Tiny Useless Divisons, and they'd share colors.
Are you really gonna have all those german states and also other countries on the same map?
That looks really good! If I might make some suggestions:
--I think there probably needs to be a colour for theocracy.
--Secondary Conservatism might additionally be labeled as the colour for Traditionalism. (Which should I think be seen as different from run-of-the-mill conservatism. An arch-reactionary absolute monarchy might by marked with this colour, then.)
--Perhaps it would be worth considering adding some shade of green for Environmentalism. Some kind of 'ecotopian movement' does occasionally show up in timelines, after all.
--Finally (though far less urgent than the others), my unabating interest in various non-mainstream political ideologies leads me to suspect that right-anarchists (or 'anarcho-capitalists', as they often prefer) and objectivists will vehemently disagree with ever being included under the same colour. (The anarcho-capitalists tend to feel that objectivists are "just statists" because they want a minimal government to be retained, and the objectivists tend to consider the anarcho-capitalists "hippies of the right". They tend to get along as persons, but stringently maintain that their ideologies are fundamentally different.
I'll add theocracy, traditionalism and environmentalism/green politics (which I actually intended to add but forgot about it).
I'll also think about what to do with Objectivism.
I think there should be a color for monarchism as well. Maybe you could use purple, as commonly associated with monarchism according to wikipedia, or white, like the Russian counter-revolutionaries.
We could do that. I've also proposed splitting TOASTER into separate images for each section.
Some of the German states listed aren't represented on WorldA, but they reasonably could be in an ATL. And in any case, TOASTER isn't made to allow the inclusion of every color on one map; there are just lots of options. And Galicia-Lodomeria and Moravia do deserve colors.
I can add monarchism and republicanism but they really should be only used when they are the core values of ideology of represented party, regime or faction (e.g. White Russia, Loyalists of American Revolution) and not in case of parties, factions and regimes that are indifferent to it due to it being a non-issue in given society (e.g. most of the Japanese political parties, the main British political parties).
WAHEYYY IM BAC-
what is this heretical talk of splitting up toaster and removing colours
what is this heretical talk of splitting up toaster and removing colours
Well, if you want to be the very best, like no one ever was, you've got to cut things here and there.
Skallagrim
Banned
It's an all-encompassing scheme, in't it? That would mean no cutting and no splitting. Of course, certain sections - like religion or ideology - can be intended for use on separate maps, and would thus be a subsection. Nor are all colours intended to be present on the same map (which would by definition be an insane ASB map anyway). But the universal nature of TOASTER has great appeal. Splitting up the image for practical purposes is one thing; splitting the scheme into multiple (and perhaps in regards to certain colours, mutually exclusive) sub-schemes would rather defeat the purpose, I think.
To illustrate: even as someone primarily interested in antiquity-related scenarios, I would not opt for a specific "Antiquity sub-scheme" (such as the one that exists for the Revised Colour Scheme). Instead, TOASTER has already made strides towards having the same colour represent certain ancient states and certain (related/analogous) modern states that cannot logically exist in a scenario where the ancient state continues to exist. This is the most elegant solution for such issues, in my opinion. (And I greatly advocate it being applied to a greater extent - for instance by having the Chinese Warring States represented by the colours used for more-or-less geographically corresponding modern Chinese regions.)
Anyway, that's all just my opinion, and I'm not in charge here. I just wanted to say that the universal nature of TOASTER is one of the reasons I admire the whole project so much.
To illustrate: even as someone primarily interested in antiquity-related scenarios, I would not opt for a specific "Antiquity sub-scheme" (such as the one that exists for the Revised Colour Scheme). Instead, TOASTER has already made strides towards having the same colour represent certain ancient states and certain (related/analogous) modern states that cannot logically exist in a scenario where the ancient state continues to exist. This is the most elegant solution for such issues, in my opinion. (And I greatly advocate it being applied to a greater extent - for instance by having the Chinese Warring States represented by the colours used for more-or-less geographically corresponding modern Chinese regions.)
Anyway, that's all just my opinion, and I'm not in charge here. I just wanted to say that the universal nature of TOASTER is one of the reasons I admire the whole project so much.
I was talking about splitting the image itself, not the scheme. And I do agree that colors shouldn't be cut, but instead transferred to things that don't have colors yet.