Planetary Unity and Galactic Empires

A response to Christopher Lockett

A slightly more serious take on Old Freebie.

A few days ago, Christopher Lockett posted a brilliant article exploring and largely arguing against the plausibility of two common sci-fi tropes: single-planet governments and galactic empires. As a connoisseur of galactic empires myself, I naturally felt the need to weigh in.

The Sociological Novum

In his article, Lockett implies that planetary unification is analogous to a novum, a concept introduced into science fiction literary theory by Darko Suvin. To quote Lockett, who explains the concept far better than I could:

“Literally meaning ‘new thing,’ the novum as theorized by Suvin is a defining element of SF: the introduction of an imagined scientific or technological break with our primary reality that facilitates the creation of a speculative futurity. Or more plainly, the novum is the ‘science’ of science fiction, and however likely or possible its eventuality seems, it still entails the introduction of technology or science not presently available to us, which takes us out of the present moment and defines a fictional reality.”

In his article, Lockett insinuates that while the political conditions of planetary unification do not strictly constitute a novum by Suvin’s definition, they do constitute something analogous to it—a kind of sociological novum. Much as a Suvinian novum facilitates “cognitive estrangement” from the present moment, so to does the sociological novum of a planet-wide or even galaxy-spanning government.

In science fiction, nova¹ can vary wildly in believably. A mission to Mars is a more plausible novum than a prescience-granting drug produced by sandworms. Lockett even points out that the plausibility of the novum is what separates hard sci-fi² from soft sci-fi. Likewise, sociological nova vary wild in believably as well. US-Chinese cooperation on a Martian rescue mission is a bit of a stretch, but the UNification of Earth is laughable.³ Or is it?

Well, yes. Mostly. It certainly doesn’t seem likely that Earth could unite under a single planetary government (at least, not any time in the next few millennia or so). However, I don’t think it’s implausible that other planets could be politically united.

Planetary Unification and Galactic Conquest

Taking for granted that there are habitable planets other than our own in the galaxy and that we could feasibly reach them in less then a human lifetime,⁴ I don’t see why a planet couldn’t be colonized by a single government and administered as a single government.⁵ Instantaneous communication and air-travel should make it easy to maintain a relatively homogeneous culture, and if the modern US equipped with only 21st century technology is able to maintain global deployment of its military, the colonial administration on New Eden or Terra Nova certainly could as well.

As for galactic empires, I think their plausibility depends on the existence of faster-than-light travel (FTL). As I pointed out in my last post, no government could ever plausibly control another star system if the speed of light remains a hard limit. The furthest any empire in human history has ever extended it’s reach is ~110 days journey from the capital, and even if you could ride on the back of a light beam, that’s still only 7% the travel time to our closest solar system.

However, if FTL does exist, then unlike Lockett, I don’t think an interstellar empire is implausible. Lockett’s opinion that it is seems to be animated in no small part by the fractured politics of our multipolar world. However, our current politically fractured world is based on circumstances that are specific to the present day. As the Ukraine War has shown, the current “meta” of military technology strongly favors the defender in a conflict.

That may not be true forever. In fact, physics tells us it should be the reverse at interplanetary scales. Attacking down a gravity well is far easier than attacking up one, and you can’t fortify against orbital bombardment when falling rocks strike with the energy of atomic bombs. This set of circumstances seems to lend itself strongly to the ability of a naval hegemon to form a large interstellar empire.

The notion of monoculture planets ruled by a single polity might seem ridiculous, but there are clear historical parallels. Just as the Athenian Empire ruled over a diverse collection of city states, so to might a Galactic Empire rule over a diverse collection of planet-states, as in Star Wars, Foundation, Dune, and beyond.

Conclusion

The common sci-fi tropes of pan-planetary governments and interstellar empires are sufficiently distant from our own present-day as to constitute a kind of sociological novum, one which Lockett doesn’t find very plausible. When it comes to our own planet, I can’t disagree. Other planets, however, might very well find themselves united under one banner, and if FTL is possible, the law of gravity itself might conspire to build an interstellar empire.

---

1. The proper Latin plural of novum

2. Lockett uses the abbreviation “SF” for science fiction, which is standard in academia. For the sake of both both personal preference and my non-academic readers, I abbreviate science fiction as “sci-fi” in this essay, as in all my others.

3. I want to be clear that my examples are not original. The Martian, Dune, and The Expanse are the examples used by Lockett.

4. A hell of a thing to take for granted, but I digress.

5. While Lockett writes that “…the sheer expense of space travel at scale seems best accomplished as a collaboration of nations,” I don’t it must be necessarily accomplished as such. The US alone is responsible for roughly a fourth of GDP and China roughly a sixth. There is not an order-of-magnitude difference between the capabilities of a united Earth and the current top-dogs.