ACH - Playing and Role-playing politics
ACH is clearly utopian. For the Kesh, a good life is to do as little as possible beyond survive, have consequence free sex, keep physically fit, and play word-games. There seems to be no inequality in their society that is not due to moral failure. You might think that table-top roleplaying should fit right into , but there doesn't seem to be any conception of self beyond religiously authorised totem-identities, and reciting religiously authorised dramas. Its all about hinging around themselves. The only threat to their integrity is the dystopian illness of a nomadic Semitic culture that has been urbanised, with which compromise cannot be reached - they are simply terminally ill.
TBH the culture seems to me an example of typically American puritan hedonistic and fundamentalist world-stance where further technological knowledge and research, and systematic and mathematical thought, are unnecessary, and perhaps even bad, for human flourishing. Everything we need to know has already been worked out. Leave exploration to machines. The opposite of the typically American puritan hedonism of Star Trek, where knowledge and research are the apex of human flourishing. Pay no attention to the Borg.
What they share is an absence of descriptions of functional politics that does not pose an existential threat to itself, or protagonists whose politics lead to social change without revolution. I think that RPGs, even when they present conflicted social interactions, likewise have difficulty including the dynamic communal and social compromises that characterise most of us humans most of the time. Why is it so difficult to describe, and design for, an unending play of compromise and politics? If you have played at this, how did it go?