Luddite said:

 

The Imperial worlds can have whatever political system they wish to have as long as they follow laws and submit tithes. Think about it: if Imperium doesn't intervene when a civil war is waged on a planet, when the king/governor is replaced in a court intrigue etc as long as the world stays Imperial, why would they have anything against people voting to elect their legislative and the governor? Also, Pavonis in "Nightbringer" and Solomon in our own "Disciples of the Dark Gods" have democratic (to various degrees) govermnents.

Idaan said:

Well they may allow it but they certainly don't encourage it. Democratic institutions are not forbidden in the Imperium but the Adepta prefers to deal with feudalistic societies where "people know their place." After all, a democractic country might vote to secede from the Imperium and are generally considered less stable.

Solomon IIRC is not a democracy but more of a Oligarchy with an elected figurehead.. wait that's Sinophia. Solomon is a Munitorium controlled planet with a reputation for going downwards and being host to rebellion and disloyalty, not a democracy!

HERESY.
I know it when I see it.

 

Alex

I don't have my books with me at the moment, but I'm almost certian the core book basically says that the Laws of the Imperium are based on the Emperor's will, so any breach of those laws (so any crime) is technically heresy. 
My Experience is that you only bother actually calling a crime a "heresy" when someone with more authority than you says you should.

I guess, it is like how if you poke me then you have technically assaulted me, although it is more appropriate to say you harrased me.

"Beauty and heresy are in the eye of the beholder"

 

Actual quote from my last DH char.

Mister Zipangu said:

 

Obviously a radical... :P

Not Radical at all, actually quite apt for Dark Heresy, it covers quite a bit of the DH:Ascension book, every Inquistor is an induvidual with an unlimited remit to fill and all see heresy differently then only thing keeping them in check is each other. Yay high politics on the Imperium

Gregorius21778 said:

Seems I was not proofed wrong, was I?

Shameless self-flattery aside, I would like to add some updates/corrections to my little list

Slavery is not Heresy! "Hostile Aquisitions" (p.22) mentioned in one short sentence that somethings are only forbidden under local law. Slaves are one of the examples.

Stealing form the nobles of Scintilla is a case for the Arbites. Or at least that is what we would need to acknowledge if we would take the least on p.33 of the "Book of Judgement" to be serious. Personally I will ignore this (and some of the other paragraphs) completely. It is complete contradiction to other points of the fluff (establishing Arbites as a force that does not care for petty crimes). Of cousre, one could say that we are talking about "Imperial Nobility" here. The High Lords of Terra or such. But since the Paragraph above is about "Imperial Citizens" I guess this is not the case. The way FFG treats its own sources does not help to get a coherent picture of things like Law or Heresy. Not at all.


By the way…what other citizens but Imperial Citizens are their supposed to be? I do not think that their is any kind of accepted citizenship in the Imperium of Men that does not include being a citizen of…well, the Imperium. Meh…

That aside, the mentioned sections contains alot of entries underpinning that crimes against are Adepta are treated as Heresy (so I would not defer to the judgements mentioned…they are outright silly and overdone).

A little later we find "public desecretion of a building" to be crime the Arbites do care about. I can only guess that "desecration" is the key word here. Not just vandalismn but desercreation. Well, I once thought that you can only de-secrate a site/building that has been sacred before (and calling it vandalismn otherwise). But BoJ has it different, desecration of a Shrine is a different categorie *sigh*. I will treat it that that it is only desecration if something blasphemous is involved. Like signs of the Chaos Gods or Anti-Imperial propaganda.

A thing of that really strikes me is the following list of crimes

Unsanctioned Assasination is nothing one would wonder about. We know that 40K is ripe with tolerated feudings, trade wars, tolerated death cults and such. Sometimes, assasination is sanctioned.

Unsanctioned Execution is not to much of a surprise either. Sometimes law organce (and the Arbites) start to deal swift justice. And sometimes this seems to lack any legal reason. If you pretend to kill in the name of the law but you don´t…your are guilty. Simple thing.

Unsanctioned Massacre reminds me of our discussion above. As we talked about Massacre being a Heresy and the point was raised that a lot of government ordered massacres are going in the sector. It take this as proof to my above mentioned attitude towards this topic ("it is not what you do but for whom you are doing it").

Unsanctioned Murder is a term that gives me a pause. "Murder" is a term that is used to describe an unlawful act of killing. What could be sanctioned murder besides a contradiction in itself? Another definition (and a more legal-ese one) is binding the term murder to "base motives". As compared to manslaughtered, murder is planned act you commit out of greed, hate or any other number of not-so-civil reasons. So what could sanctioned murder be? I would go for assasination, but this already has it´s own mentioning in the book. Any ideas? Does the law tend to pardon "honour killings" and makes them different from Assasinations? Is it refering to a duel? Well, that could be it, taking into account that the list deals with Scintilla which is known for its duelling culture (in both Sibillus and Gunmetal City).

A word of note: I know that I am actually committing a crime against the good conduct of discussion. I am picky in regard to what parts of my source material I except and what parts I do not. But honestly…. what else is one supposed to do under that circumstances? Frankly, the next time somebody tries to refer to "canon" I will be laughing out loud… in madness and sadness.

Oh! By the way! Sector HeadHoncho Hax outlawed TradeWars in all of the Calixis Sector (p.76 "Into the Storm"). So, a lot of Murders & Assasinations & Massacres have to be counted as unsanctioned if still going on. I wonder what this means for the Great Fanes of GunmetalCity (meeeeeeeeh).


 

Gregorius21778 said:

 

I'd like to answer other bits of your post as well, but I've only enough time for this one. Imperial Citizens is a very wide term, which intends to mean everyone under the rule of the Imperium. However, when looking at it from a point of Imperial Law, I think distictions need to be made. For example, even though the Adeptus Mechanicus is part of the Imperium, the Tech-Priests are not strictly speaking Imperial Citizens, since they have a level of autonomy regular members of the Imperium do not enjoy. The same goes for human military organisations (Imperial Navy and Guard). You may consider them citizens, but in truth, they are governed by different, stricter laws, with specialised law-enforcement units (i.e. Commissars). And what about the Adeptus Astartes? They are a very important part of the Imperium, but no one in their right mind would consider them citizens. Not to mention all those people with special priviledges (planetary governors, astropaths, rogue traders), whom you can't just easily describe as citizens.

It might be more accurate to say that they are members of the Imperium. Saying they are citizens presumes too much or too little. 

Luddite said:

 

I don't think this is a very odd thing at all, and neither do I think that it might mean that there is a liberal 21th century democracy at work or even close to it. As far as I can see it just means that on some level you vote, maybe an oligarchic assembly or an aristocratic council, and these do in some way vote according to voting electorates.

 

Also I have never understood the talk about Imperial Citizens. For me there has only been the God-Emperor's subjects, never any kind of citizens.

 

[delete by author for being pointless]

Gregorius21778 said:

As I see it, it's a matter of degrees of service.

The common person in the Imperium is beneath all notice, and is little more (in the grand scheme of things) than mortal fuel in the grand mechanism. For example, the common manufactory worker, miner, agri-labourer and so forth. This common mass of people serve the needs of their world and support the Imperium indirectly - an agri-worker's crop will contribute towards the planetary tithe, but it does so as part of that planet's obligation to the Imperium.

Above them, in some small way, are the servants of the Adeptus Terra - which includes staggering numbers of individuals of low importance. The Codex Imperialis mention Menials (non-specialised workers, unskilled labour and so forth, who are recruited from the non-Adept population) and Subordinates (specialised or skilled servants working for a particular part of the Imperium, whose titles and duties are hereditary and who have the opportunity to advance through the ranks, becoming Scribes and Ordinates). These lowly individuals, and all those above them, bear the title of Adept, and are servants of the Imperium. All brothers of the Adeptus Astartes, and some high-ranking officers of the Imperial Guard, bear that title as well.

With that all in mind, I personally regard all who bear the title of Adept (of any rank, role or status - from the lowliest Menial to the High Lords of Terra) as Imperial Citizens, in that their duties are in direct service to the perpetuation of the Imperium, while those who do not bear the title of Adept are beneath the consideration of Imperial Law.

N0-1_H3r3 said:

I have to admit that this would make sense in regard to the list of given on p.33 of the BoJ. The thing that still keeps me from "liking it" is the phrase "citizens of the Imperium" which has been used to describe each and any non-excommunicated, non-mutant human.But since "common wording" and "wording of the law" ARE known to be quiet different indeed this might just be the solution. Thank you!

 EDIT: But I would change the ending of your last sentence into "beneath the protection of the Adeptus Arbites". No-one ever was, is or will be beneath the consideration of Imperial Law (for it would mean that it would not apply to them).

EDIT-EDIT:… so "Imperial Nobles" is mentioned since this is a list for Scintilla where Marius Hax court does reside…and these are imperial nobles then…. ?

Gregorius21778 said:

In some cases - some of the nobility are the nobles of the Imperium (including, but not limited to, every planetary governor - Imperial Commanders, to use their proper title), others are mere planetary nobility. I imagine that the court of the Lord Sector will contain a considerable number of both Imperial nobility and lesser planetary nobles.

Again, I have to agree that this makes sense. Will treat it that way, thanks for useful input.