www.ditl.org

Teaos wrote:Its widely assumed there is around 150 species in the Federation, yet we only ever see maybe 20 members species, so its not to far fetched to believe we never saw a large number of them.

I know they said the federation had 150 members but did they ever specify that they were 150 species of members?

Debate split to here. ~Rochey

I think we may assume that "member worlds" wouldn't include colonies or protectorates.

Mikey wrote:I think we may assume that "member worlds" wouldn't include colonies or protectorates.

Well if a colony got big enough population and industry wise you'd think it could obtain a member status.

I always took "member worlds" to be a colloquialism for "member species."

Mikey wrote:I always took "member worlds" to be a colloquialism for "member species."

Well, that's a rather large assumption. I wouldn't be suprised at the writers for going either way depending on who's in charge for the movie/episode that clarifies it.

Phantom Renegade wrote:Well, that's a rather large assumption.

Yep. I won't argue that. However, the US (for example) sends a delegate to the UN - but not an extra delegate for Guam, or Puerto Rico, etc. That's the example of usage I was going with.

Mikey wrote:

Phantom Renegade wrote:Well, that's a rather large assumption.

Yep. I won't argue that. However, the US (for example) sends a delegate to the UN - but not an extra delegate for Guam, or Puerto Rico, etc. That's the example of usage I was going with.

True, but if you have a colony with a self-sustaining industry and a population in the hundred millions they could operate as an independant planet from the species' world of origin. I see no reason why they couldn't be recognized as such, except for legal fineprint in the colony's charter. Many real-life colonies became countries. The USA is the first place that comes to mind.

Phantom Renegade wrote:True, but if you have a colony with a self-sustaining industry and a population in the hundred millions they could operate as an independant planet from the species' world of origin. I see no reason why they couldn't be recognized as such, except for legal fineprint in the colony's charter.

Exactly - except for the legal fine print. Many US states would probably be able to operate as independent countries - California in particular springs to mind, since it's the world's fifth largest economy on its own. However, no US state has a seat in the General Assembly.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Phantom Renegade wrote:True, but if you have a colony with a self-sustaining industry and a population in the hundred millions they could operate as an independant planet from the species' world of origin. I see no reason why they couldn't be recognized as such, except for legal fineprint in the colony's charter.

Exactly - except for the legal fine print. Many US states would probably be able to operate as independent countries - California in particular springs to mind, since it's the world's fifth largest economy on its own. However, no US state has a seat in the General Assembly.

Pennsylvania has the 11th largest economy. We could survive without the US on our own. And technically we're a "commonwealth" so I suppose we could try it. But last time states tried to leave, some in Washington didn't like it, and there were problems.

Texas is the only state to join the US, rather than be created. As we were our own country before joining, there is a clause that allows for us to leave if we choose to.

Considering that we'd be swallowed by Mexico if we did leave, I'm guessing that clause will never be used.

Tsukiyumi wrote:Texas is the only state to join the US, rather than be created. As we were our own country before joining, there is a clause that allows for us to leave if we choose to.

Considering that we'd be swallowed by Mexico if we did leave, I'm guessing that clause will never be used.

If you're not careful, Mexico may swallow you anyway...

They may find us to be rather unpalatable.

Tsukiyumi wrote:Texas is the only state to join the US, rather than be created.

I think Vermont and California might qualify too.

As a side-note, the Soviet Union did actually manage to get extra UN seats for two of its republics, Ukraine and Belorussia. Apparently the justification was that they had been fucked over so bad in WW2 that they deserved it.

Lazar wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:Texas is the only state to join the US, rather than be created.

I think Vermont and California might qualify too...

As I said, the Republic of Texas joined the US. The California Territory was turned into a state.

Anyways, how could a colony become a member? No matter how prosperous it is, it's still just a colony. Unless it declares it's independence, and later chooses to join, or if it was always independent, and grows powerful enough to be accepted as a member.

Tsukiyumi wrote:As I said, the Republic of Texas joined the US. The California Territory was turned into a state.

But there was a short-lived Californian republic which was proclaimed by American settlers, and lasted for a few weeks before being annexed by the US. (Likewise, Hawaii existed as an independent kingdom before being conquered by US interests.) But even disregarding that, Texas wasn't the only place to go directly from nationhood to statehood: Vermont existed as an independent republic from 1777-1791, before choosing to join the US.

Anyways, how could a colony become a member? No matter how prosperous it is, it's still just a colony. Unless it declares it's independence, and later chooses to join, or if it was always independent, and grows powerful enough to be accepted as a member.

In the case of the British dominions like Canada and Australia, they did have a rather gradual evolution from colonies (mid to late 19th century) to nearly independent countries (late 19th, early 20th century) to fully independent countries (modern day), without an explicit declaration of independence.