Age of Klingon Empire?

The Next Generation
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6220
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Age of Klingon Empire?

Post by McAvoy »

I would have to ask how much ENT technology we saw on the NX class was home grown or developed from obsolete samples or whatever. Also from what we have seen Earth wasn't that much of presence in the galactic stage. Not much of a infrastructure. Then we compare the Klingons and the Romulans who have been out in space for a much longer period and what do they got?

We do not know the rate of the Federation's tech advancement except in speed. Keep in mind that the turbine engines of 1912 is basically the same as today. Hell hand guns haven't changed much either.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: Age of Klingon Empire?

Post by Teaos »

Tech is secondary in this case. I think industrial capability has a much bigger stake in this. And with hundreds or thousands of years the older empires kick arse.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6220
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Age of Klingon Empire?

Post by McAvoy »

Yes. But what if it was the Federation that kicked off the expansion and technological leaps from the 22nd century on? What I mean is with a young and rapidly expanding organization like the UFP caused the Klingons and the Romulans to jump start their own Empire or be left in the dust?
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Mikey
Fleet Admiral
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 35635
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Age of Klingon Empire?

Post by Mikey »

Captain Seafort wrote:Not all empires are totalitarian.
In common usage, the term "empire" pretty much always implies an emperor of some sort at the top. That's totalitarian. You may be confused by a connotation that wasn't included in my comment - I never ascribed the typical negative connotation to the term "totalitarian," but it still is what it is.
Captain Seafort wrote:And some are responsible for triggering the greatest leaps in technological progress in history.
Even those same ones are also responsible for stifling, either by regulation or by cultural bent, progress in technological and other fields as well.
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Age of Klingon Empire?

Post by Captain Seafort »

Mikey wrote:In common usage, the term "empire" pretty much always implies an emperor of some sort at the top. That's totalitarian.
Not at all - in common usage "Empire", at least on this side of the pond, refers to a nation state expanding to seize control of other nation states, and bring them under its direct control. There's absolutely no connotation of there being an Emperor at the top, or of it being totalitarian, which refers to a state under the absolute rule of a single individual, and usually associated with a cult of personality.
Even those same ones are also responsible for stifling, either by regulation or by cultural bent, progress in technological and other fields as well.
Given that the fall of one of history's definitive empires was far from stifling, and lead to a collapse of technology and civilisation across the known world, I disagree with this notion as well.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Vic
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 12:20 pm
Location: Springfield MO

Re: Age of Klingon Empire?

Post by Vic »

Captain Seafort wrote:
Mikey wrote:In common usage, the term "empire" pretty much always implies an emperor of some sort at the top. That's totalitarian.
Not at all - in common usage "Empire", at least on this side of the pond, refers to a nation state expanding to seize control of other nation states, and bring them under its direct control. There's absolutely no connotation of there being an Emperor at the top, or of it being totalitarian, which refers to a state under the absolute rule of a single individual, and usually associated with a cult of personality.
Even those same ones are also responsible for stifling, either by regulation or by cultural bent, progress in technological and other fields as well.
Given that the fall of one of history's definitive empires was far from stifling, and lead to a collapse of technology and civilisation across the known world, I disagree with this notion as well.
That very empire was quite stifling to many types of technology by cultural bent. It wasn't till the decline of slavery that mechanical technology really took off, and the Roman's had no shortage of slaves to do all kinds of work.

Your usage of Empire is very much a modern one, most empires of history were indeed totalitarian, Shi Huang Di was the very definition of a tyrant. The Romans went from a dictatorial empire to a tyrannical empire over a short period of time, I am using the words in their correct definition not their colloquial ones. Too often today the words are interchangeable .
God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy.
.................................................Billy Currington
User avatar
Captain Seafort
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15548
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Age of Klingon Empire?

Post by Captain Seafort »

Vic wrote:That very empire was quite stifling to many types of technology by cultural bent. It wasn't till the decline of slavery that mechanical technology really took off, and the Roman's had no shortage of slaves to do all kinds of work.
Nonetheless...
Your usage of Empire is very much a modern one, most empires of history were indeed totalitarian
Many have been, that's true, but that doesn't mean the two are synonyms.
The Romans went from a dictatorial empire to a tyrannical empire over a short period of time
And back again. Given how long they ran the known world, it's hardly surprising that the details varied over time.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Post Reply