this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2026
17 points (87.0% liked)

Worldbuilding

1541 readers
78 users here now

A place to share your original creations or those found from around the world.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The good guys are a leftist Kingdom with gender-equality (sortof a matriarchy).

So I'm going with a deliberately girly name.

Wondering what comes to your mind when you hear this? Does it work as a name?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Osana@hexbear.net 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's more like.... I get more joy from creating art than trying to convince hostile skeptics or self-appointed gatekeepers.

Can you understand that?

[–] BanMeFromPosting@hexbear.net 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah I do, which is why I'm curious as to how you're going to pull it off. I guess I just don't take mild critique to be hostile gatekeeping shrug-outta-hecks

[–] Osana@hexbear.net 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Hmmm you may have redeemed yourself. I'll answer and trust you to not do cheap low-effort teardowns or sarcasm.

For starters, the tone is silly and whimsical, so it'll fail a really hard-nosed political analysis. It's about the realism-level of Shrek. I can't do what lurkerlady said and get rid of the monarchs coz I want to play with the silly tropes of castles and ballrooms and whatnot.

The Good Guy kingdom have a central state that implements most of the demands in The Communist Manifesto: land tax, nationalisation of the banks. It uses this to fund a welfare state. (That is historically inaccurate: absolute monarchies and welfare states are fairly different things, except for maybe the Inca. But not going for realism.)

There's no legal wage-labour, instead worker-owned co-operatives like Yugoslavia. The bourgeoisie try to de-regulate this, and illegal wage-labour does happen under the table. In reality, craft-guilds were not necessarily socialist, but in its ideal form the guild-model can approach a kind of socialism. And the idea of banning wage-labour by non-profit-sharing members is historically attested: "Illegal work did not pass unnoticed by authorities at the time, and are documented by police reports and guild complaints. Guild officers were able to arrest people who were working in the trade without guild credentials, and could use municipal law enforcement to aid them in the arrest." – historical guilds could/should have been more profit-sharing than they really were, especially with non-master-members.

The antagonists include the emerging bourgeoisie. Usury is illegal and they try to conspire and get the crown to legalise it. This compares to how actually the bourgeoisie gained wealth and conspired against the monarchy. The difference here is that the monarch has the class interests of the common people at heart, which I happily admit is unrealistic. The bourgeoisie wants to set up an extractive rentseeking system: the aristocracy wants to keep extracting surplus-value mostly for funding welfare+defense+infrastructure. (Plus admittedly they keep a bit for their own luxury, but imagine the entire GDP gets taxed at 20%, and from that about fifty people are kept in luxury; it's a much lower rate-of-exploitation than capitalism.)

Another antagonist is foreign invading slavers, who are well-organised like Romans. The Primrose Guard will have to fight them off using Vietcong tactics.

Some aristocrats are less virtuous than others, and consider getting in cahoots with the bourgeoisie or the foreign imperialists. Political intrigue, divided loyalties, back-and-forth.

So it's like: benevolent welfare-monarch (Inca is the closest historical example, but this is pure imaginative fiction and not history) sustaining co-operativism+welfare+nonslavery, versus the bourgeoisie and slave-trading imperialists.

The critique that monarchs are not in reality benevolent is valid, but this is not supposed to resemble reality.

An orthodox Marxist take would be Monarchy>Capitalism>Communism. In this fictional fantasy lie, the Monarchy is fighting the capitalists FOR communism.

The central state does what Charles Tilly says a state does: levies taxes and maintains itself. It largely leaves the individual alone and focuses on tax, defense, welfare, and infrastructure – the tributary system of the pax romana or the pax mongolica (plus welfare). The way Italian city-states treated the contado might be an analogy here but I need to read more Jacob Burckhardt, Gene A. Brucker, and Lauro Martines to find out.

The state does not do what Michel Foucault says the modern state does: enforce justice on the individual. The villages within the kingdom run their own affairs (much like the barbarian villages in Kropotkin's Mutual Aid with community-justice) and pay the protection racket in gold and soldiers. Kropotkin says that the model of barbarian villages gave way to the model of walled cities when defense required stone walls. The rural contado of the kingdom are the barbarian villages, while the central state is the walled city that maintains the roads and organises violent defense. Adding welfare to that village-state relationship is a fantasy.

One neighbouring realm (less built so far) may be an anarch like the Old Swiss Confederacy or the Frisian Freedom, I haven't decided yet.

[–] BanMeFromPosting@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You fool, you fell for it! Now I get to be really shitty!

No in all honesty it sounds really cool and well-thought out. I must admit my tone was hostile in retrospect, I could have gone about asking the same questions in a better way. I was pretty convinced you hadn't put much thought into it - egg on my face.
I would like to reiterate that I'd love a tag when the book is released. The concept sounds neat, I'd like to see if you pull it off.

If you like silly fun, knights and ballrooms, have you read any of the books in the Disc world series? I'd really recommend them, might be a source of some inspiration. The author wasn't super big on world building in the beginning and then you get the sense that's something that develops along the way. At the same time the author kind of moves the setting from medieval fantasy to something more akin to early industrialisation. Pretty cool. There's also a Rightful Heir who rejects the throne, which is a cool subversion.

So it's like: benevolent welfare-monarch

This makes me think of the concept of "noblesse oblige" or the portuguese state under Salazar. Not so much in practice, but the idea/ideals at least.

Edit: The only thing you dont really mention, which does give me some worry, is the idea of the state being a matriarchy. I hope you have also made some considerations about that being a Sort Of Bad Thing (tm). The patriarchy isn't bad because it puts men in charge, its bad because its a repressive system of gender norms. Putting women in the drivers seat doesn't suddenly make it good.

Edit Edit; where did you end up with the guards name origin?

[–] Osana@hexbear.net 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Hey look at that! Conflict-resolution! solidarity

Yes, Discworld would be a good comparison for the silliness, and it has a benevolent dictator

I'll just lean into the sinister aspects of matriarchy. I remember an interview where Chuck Palahnuik said that his writing-students always try to solve the problems in their stories, and he has to tell them, "No, don't solve it, make it worse!" Resolving tension leaves you in a serene greyness – you should be trying to intensify it. And I already risk making the queendom a utopia, the more tensions I have in there the better.

The guard's name origin is from the Queen (UmbraVivi's first thought). She builds public libraries in pink and issues coins like the Gold Daisy and Silver Star; everything official to the state should be girly to the point of annoying. Like imagine Princess Peach is in charge.

Now the reveal: literally the only reason I started this thread was to see if anyone had heard of Benjamin Disraeli's Primrose League, or if that was obscure enough to be ignored. Fifty comments later I have my answer.

[–] BanMeFromPosting@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago

Yes, Discworld would be a good comparison for the silliness, and it has a benevolent dictator

I love how Vetinari develops over the series

'll just lean into the sinister aspects of matriarchy. I remember an interview where Chuck Palahnuik said that his writing-students always try to solve the problems in their stories, and he has to tell them, "No, don't solve it, make it worse!" Resolving tension leaves you in a serene greyness – you should be trying to intensify it. And I already risk making the queendom a utopia, the more tensions I have in there the better.

Honestly that's exactly what I was hoping you'd say.

50 replies later I have my answer

Lol