The Far Future

I think it'd be cool if the Bajorans, Cardassians, Klingons, Ferengi, and Romulans all joined the Federation by the 29th century. How much territory would you say it has by then? What do you think the Milky Way would be like in the 123rd century when the Kelvans were supposed to invade? Any Decipher employees or freelancers got anything to say about far future coverage?

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

Personally, I'd rather they not do that, but instead form a coalition similar to the United Nations but retain their own sovereignty.

To join the Federation would make the Klingon, Romulan, and other great sovereign powers subjugated under the Federation law, which may not be a good thing, IMHO.

------------------
Anyhoo, just some random thoughts...

Dude, the Federation is a United Nations!

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cochrane:
I think it'd be cool if the Bajorans, Cardassians, Klingons, Ferengi, and Romulans all joined the Federation by the 29th century.

---

I'm going to have to side with REG on this one. I really don't like the idea of the Federation "Assimilating" all of the other nations/races of the galaxy. Sure, the Federation is an idealistic state, but does that give it the right to "assimilate" its neighbors? And will the Federation always be the friendly, idealistic state that it is during Trek?

The Federation seems to have the tendency to "assimilate" its neighbors, and before long their distinctiveness becomes lost in the mix of the monolithic Federation.

For examples of this trend, look at the TOS Andorians, or the Tellerites. They've gone from distinctive races to background extras. What ever happened to IDIC?

If things continue the way they are, the Federation will be about as diverse as the Borg by the 29th century, let alone the 123rd.

Well the Vulcans, Betazoids, Bolians, Benzites, Bynars, and Trill are distinct enough, and I'm not talking about conquest, I'm talking about everyone deciding to join.

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

"We are Federation. Prepare to be assimilated. We will add your social and cultural distinctiveness to our own. Resistance is futile."

I just think that the Federation - especially as it was presented in TNG, and more and moreso as the shows went on - was a bland, bureaucratic, paternalistic, and socialist state. I can think of lots of reasons to avoid joining.

Couldn't the individual worlds, both colonies and clients, as well as the homeworlds, join?

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cochrane:
Couldn't the individual worlds, both colonies and clients, as well as the homeworlds, join?

---

I don't think that's realistic.

Consider the following; Now that the Soviet Union is no more, why don't the former Soviet states and their client states just apply for Statehood and join the United States?

I think that the 29th century might look [politically] something like this:

Just prior to (and since the end of) the 24th century, several independent races joined the United Federation of Planets. By the year 2831, the United Federation of Planets encompasses over twelve hundred sectors and nearly a thousand races throughout the galaxy.

The Bajorans were formally admitted to the UFP in 2381 under First Minister Levas Shrinau.

The Cardassian Union went through a massive restoration (with the assistance of the Federation) and applied to join the UFP in 2394.

The Romulan Star Empire, plagued by internal strife and rebellion, withdrew from the galactic scene in 2400. Contact has only recently been fully restored. The Romulan Empire has decayed severely over the intervening years and has dwindled to a handful of star systems. Much like the Rome of Ancient Earth, Romulus is dying. Requests for humanitarian aid have began leaking out of Romulan space.

The Klingon Empire, under the harsh, heavy-handed rule of Emporer Kaerna, broke its alliance with the Federation in 2421. Hostilities began shortly thereafter and continued until 2475 when Kaerna, nearly a century old, was killed by the High Council. Fifty years of hostility created a huge rift between the superpowers that has still not been healed (as of 2831).

The Taurhai Unity has extended its reach and controls much of formerly-Romulan territory as well as reaching the edge of the Delta Quadrant. The UFP and the Taurhai Unity have had some contact, and said contact has been cordial but limited.

The Dominion has maintained its integrity for the past five centuries without fail. It has not expanded its territory further, but neither has it lost any of its holdings. The Founders maintain a strained relationship with the Federation, but (to the best of Timefleet Intelligence's information) no other Alpha or Beta Quadrant power.

The Ferengi have changed many of their artless ways the result of policies implmented by Grand Nagus' Zek and Rom. While still a heavily-capitalistic culture, the Ferengi are closely associated with the Federation.

The Borg Collective was all but wiped out in 2791 when they encountered a race of energy beings called the Z'ral, designated Species 16945 by the Collective. The Z'ral destroyed entire star systems inhabited by the Borg, reducing their holdings to a few worlds scattered throughout the Delta Quadrant. Few fear the Collective these days.

The Krenim Hegemony (formerly the Krenim Imperium), a stern enemy of the Romulan Star Empire, has caused serious damage to their infrastructure. Attacks by the Krenim (among others) are what caused so many problems with the Romulans. The Krenim Hegemony has limited relations with the UFP and the Klingon Empire.

The Breen Union was wiped out by the Romulan Star Navy in 2512. Only a few Breen remain alive after the intervening centuries. Most are nomadic, wandering through the galaxy as raiders, but a small group petitioned the UFP for membership and were allowed to settle on Bree'nrak, the new Breen homeworld, near the Draconis Outback.

The Kazon Republic, presently operating under the leadership of Premiere Jal Sendek, established a peaceful domain in the Delta Quadrant in 2536 after successfully negotiating a lasting peace with the remaining Trabe. The Kazon left their barabaric ways behind them after contact and lengthy negotiations with a UFP convoy led by the U.S.S. Millennium, commanded by Captain Akemi Sulu.

The Talaxians, finally freed by their oppressors in 2416, lead a quiet existence even in the 29th century.

The Ocampa and their homeworld mysteriously vanished from its location in the Delta Quadrant in 2501. Not trace of it or its inhabitants (including the Kazon-Ogla) were ever found.

mactavish out.

There would have to be an overriding reason for the parties mentioned to seek membership, not to mention that the Federation council must then vote on that application.

The most likely to join are the Bajorans, however, this is dependent on the state of the Cardassian military, and how much risk of another war there might be.

I don't think the Romulans,Klingons or even the Cardassians would ever join the Feds.

1. No empire in earths history has ever willingly surrendered its autonomy to another. I know my history, it has never happened willingly.

2. Romulans act like the U.S.S.R. and the Tal Shiar like the ex-KGB, you dont see them clamoring to join the U.S.A.

3. And even if they wanted to, they wouldn't allow them, they are stricken by internal problems, no potential economic value.

4. Empires collapse and rise, why doesn't the UFP collapse, a civil war erupts and different species join the other Empires.

5. If all the Empires joined the UFP, then there would be no reason to continue StarTrek, where is the conflict?

Just a few thoughts, any ideas/suggestions/threats?

Hey mac, youze forgetteded the Tholians, Gorn, Sheliak, Tzenkethi, and Cytherians.

Khrys,
1: There's always Texas
2: No Trek culture is based exclusively on one earth culture
3: Good point
4: You pessimist, you
5:You think the known empires are the only ones there are?

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

The Federation can't just have another power near its size join, even over time. The only exception being empirical collapse as in the Cardassians and, for some of our campaigns, Romulans but even then it's unlikely.

Star Trek: Century 29 continued...

The Tholian Assembly established a lasting peace with the UFP in 2512 after Federation scientists managed to cure a strange disease that threatened to destroy the entire Tholian race. Tholian space, while still technically off limits to outsiders, often sees invited Federation diplomats aboard Starfleet vessels.

The Gorn Union maintain diplomatic ties with the Federation, but has been evasive and withdrawn for the past 200 years. Rumors abound that large numbers of Gorn have been undergoing some sort of "strange transformation," though no details are forthcoming.

The Sheliak Corporate has little contact with any humanoid races or governments.

The Tzenkethi petitioned for admission into the UFP early in the 27th century but were rejected due to internal "human rights" practices. They have remained isolated and sullen since that time, though there are suggestions that the Tzenkethi government is positioned for a fall and that the new leaders may make the necessary changes to win Federation favor.

The Cytherians, a mystery to the UFP for years, were discovered again in 2801 when the U.S.S. Data, a deep space explorer, encoutered their homeworld. The Cytherians, possessing far superior technology, offered to provide samples and schematics in exchange for information collected regarding the Gamma and Delta Quadrants. Negotiations are ongoing.

mactavish out.

[This message has been edited by mactavish (edited 06-06-2001).]

"You [the Federation] are worse than the Borg - at least they warn you that they're going to assimilate you." "Nobody leaves paradise."

- Lt. Commander Eddington, "For the Cause"

I've often found the Federation to be a tad creepy to be honest with you, especially that of the TNG-era. It is a communist's dream in many ways. Sometimes the Federation shows an incredible amount of being "holier than thou".
"We no longer enslave our animals" (you who do are barbarians).

"We are no longer motivated by the pursuit or wealth" (you who do are barbarians)

Listen to Picard in "Who Watches the Watchers", the hostiility held towards religion. Or Quark confronting Sisko about the way the Federation looks so far down on the Ferengi ("The Jem'Hadar")

I'm actually overstating my case to illustrate how easy, in my opinion, it would be for the Federation to become incredibly intolerant, with the noblest of intentions. Many classic SF dystopias followed a similar path - take a good idea and take it to the worst possible extreme.

One could make a nightmare 29th century Federation.

Perhaps a civilized 29th century captain could say...
"Our medical science has found a way to eradicate those negative impulses and thoughts and make criminals productive members of society". Yikes! Give me the Klingons any day. http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/smile.gif

This is the same 29th century Timefleet that arrests Captain Braxton as a version of himself from several years down the line is the one commiting crimes?

I believe the wording was "For crimes you are going to commit!"

Dan, you may have hit the nail on the head, and given an alternative if not particularly pleasant aside to the Plot experiment going on in the Narrators section... Hmmm, how to make the bad guy sympathetic and the good guy look bad... This is it!

------------------
Dan.

"A couple of thoughts from a random mind!"
http://www.theventure.freeserve.co.uk

Heyheyheyhey. The Feds are the good guys. It's as simple as that.

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dan Stack:
One could make a nightmare 29th century Federation.

---

Dan-

Sounds like we're in complete agreement as to our views about the TNG era Federation. It is kinda creepy...

I remember thinking this was the case when TNG first came out. I liked the TOS/Kirk days; the Federation was more passionate and idealistic; Picard et al seemed to be smug, bland, condecending, and "morally superior..."

Back in the FASA days I ran an adventure about this; this was during TNG's first season. (1988 or so...?)

It was a "Mirror Universe" adventure in which the PC's were sent to a "Mirror Federation." Rather than the traditional "Evil/Goatee" Federation of the TV show, in this Mirror Universe the PC's were the unrestrained barbarians, and the "Mirror Federation" was "Too Good to Believe." I loosely based it on the TNG Federation.

They'd blockade and embargo planets who refused to join the Federation. They'd "shoot on sight" any spaceship which carried weapons (obviously an act of agression). They'd imprison and brainwash anyone who refused to see the "enlightenment" of the Federation.

It was a fun adventure. I'll never forget one of my players trying to debate the "Federation" brainwashers; "Wait, you mean I'm the evil one?"

Note that the "brainwasher" was based on Counsellor Troi; a Psychic Therapist - what a nightmare that could be! "I'm sensing hostility. Put him back in his cell and fill him full of Prozac."

As TNG continued on TV, the Federation got more and more "smugly superior." I stopped watching; I've since seen TNG in reruns, but I'll take the TOS era any time. Perhaps my biggest dislike of the TNG age is its condecending socialist smugness...!

Anyone gonna help me defend the Federation?

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

Not me, Cochrane. I think they're a bunch of communists with an attitude problem. I think that that aspect of the UFP has really been overdemonstrated.

I am not a TOS fan, but at least at that point in Trek history they didn't think they were morally superior to everyone else.

mactavish out.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cochrane:
Anyone gonna help me defend the Federation?

---

Actually, Cochrane, I will - in a way.

Despite what I've posted about the TNG era Federation, I think that the Federation as originally conceived of by Gene Roddenberry back in the TOS era was a decent idea. It was less sanctimonious, less socialist, and less "holier than thou."

It's interesting to theorize about why and how the "Federation Concept" has changed so much over the years. Personally, I think that the "Federation" is just a reflection of the times of the TV show that produced it. The Federation of the late '60's was a lot rougher around the edges, but less sanctimonious than the Federation of today...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cochrane:
Anyone gonna help me defend the Federation?

---

Also, not to "double post," but-

First - Cochrane, I'd be much more interested to hear you defend the Federation!

Second; to be fair, the Federation may have become a bunch of smarmy, self-righteous socialists by the TNG era, but look at what else is out there on SciFi TV. I can't think of a single other quasi-utopian society on SciFi TV that's preferable to the Federation...

Quote:

---

Despite what I've posted about the TNG era Federation, I think that the Federation as originally conceived of by Gene Roddenberry back in the TOS era was a decent idea. It was less sanctimonious, less socialist, and less "holier than thou."

[/B]

---

I cannot agree with your assessment. I to liked the early Federation/Starfleet of the TOS era. It brought a kind of "cowboy" feel to sci-fi...more frontiers, the crew were quick with the phasers and so forth. But, the points you refered to above were still there, the socialistic views (the whole "we don't seek money, but the betterment of the species) and the "holier than thou" attitude. I think the Federation of the TNG era is a logical extension of the TOS Federation...Became more bureaucratic, politics became more important then exploration. I always liked the way the Federation was portrayed in the TNG era, but for a "negative" reason...It showed the Federation in "decline". I don't mean about to fall but the cracks are beginning to show: rogue officers, sepratist movements on most of the Founding Planets, terrorist activities on the rise. It wasn't as ideal as the TOS Federation was.

Um, Phantom? I don't see how you're disagreeing with me. If you're saying that the signs of decline are present in the TOS era, but fully manifest themselves in the TNG era - well, I agree with you...!

Perhaps the TOS era did have a bit of the socialism/holier-than thou attitude; but by your own admission these attitudes were far less severe than they became in the TNG era.

And (to swing this back on topic) I cannot help but think that if those trends continued until the 29th century, the Federation would become a hellish dystopia indeed. I can only imagine a "hyper politically correct" bunch of borg-like bureaucrats...!

Am I completely alone in not finding
the "socialist" aspects of the Federation
implausible, distasteful, or offensive?

I think people are underestimating just how
utterly alien the Federation's economy
is from our perspective. Given cheap energy,
a limitless supply of raw materials in space,
and replication technology, a (nearly)
utopian economic system becomes at least
moderately plausible (although, I hasten to
point out, somebody once said that the
difference between civilization and savagery
is three or four square meals -- I see no
reason why that shouldn't be the case in the
Federation, too). A utopia, yes, but one
that is absolutely dependent upon a
a very fragile technological foundation...

A random thought, however:

Some people just don't play well with others.
I've always wondered how many such people
abandon the safety of the Federation to seek
their fortunes "out there." Since there are
plenty of planets in the "Star Trek" universe
inhabited by (relatively) primitive humanoid
races, there are lots of opportunities for
would-be conquerers (to borrow a useful term from G.D.W.'s "Traveller: the New Era,"
"Technologically Elevated Dictatorships").

Granted, hundreds of years of psycho-cultural
engineering would reduce the number of such
people but it doesn't take much Federation
technology to take control of a primitive
planet. I wonder how many "Technologically
Elevated Dictatorships" are out there, beyond
the Federation's borders, quietly growing
into nasty little pocket empires...

Is it just me, or does this of all topics seem to be getting heated? It seems to me, if you think the Federation is wrong, you wouldn't watch star trek or consider yourself a fan. Or do all those Fed-bashers mainly like DS9, which is less fedcentric than the other series? What makes you so sure that the Federation isn't better than its neighbors like it thinks it is? After all, the others aren't human. Why can't one society or culture be better than another? It doesn't mean the individuals or their DNA are. You believe the United States government and Western Society are better than socialism, communism, and Naziism, right?

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

The big complaint here is that the Federation as presented in TNG-DS9-Voy is too much like communism to be acceptable?

You may have problems with socialism or communism as they've operated in our history, but Star Trek shows us a future where the best of all principles have come together to create as close to a perfect society as possible. Including the strange concept of democracy.

Yes it is utopian and maybe naive to our understanding of politics and government but the show's premise is one where it works because everyone works toward that goal. There are no personal sacrifices expected "for the common good." Freedom isn't abolished to ensure conformity.

The way I see Star Trek is IMHO similar to the way the U.S. Founding Fathers would look at our modern society.

(national anthemn softly in the background)

When America was started it was based on very troubling tenets. Equality of all men; Rights of individuals; Seperation of powers; Seperation of church and state; and above all Democracy.

The various nations of the time didn't think the U.S. experiment would work. You couldn't have individuals loyal to a government if they were promised individual rights. You couldn't have a society without classes or a caste system. You couldn't have a nation without a strong central government. You couldn't provide a place for people of different beliefs, creeds and cultures to come together without them turning on each other.

(Battle Hymn of the Republic now playing)

U.S. history proves that it wasn't easy, but it was possible. It took several tries, and lots of give and take, not a few mistakes and a lot of learning and growing as a people, but it happened.

(segue to TNG theme music)

Star Trek is the same way. It provides for everyone's needs and individual pursuits, while still providing a sense of community. It guides, doesn't push. It learns from its mistakes and tries to bring all senients to where no one has gone before. And does so arm in arm, blue blood, red blood, green blood, from the mountains of Earth to the deserts of Vulcan to the seas of Trill.

(building to a cresendo)

Sometimes the needs of few outweigh the need many.

(Federation flag waving in the background as the spotlight softly fades)

The federation accepts the principal of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. Each member species has a very distinct culture and member worlds are allowed a wide variety of politics. The Romulans and Klingons subjugate other races, denying them equality. The Federation is peaceful. is there something wrong with peace, or do you prefer Klingon violence?

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

Ooops... Seems it got a little more heated than I had intended.

First off, as I stated, I was overstating things to illustrate how one could interpret the Federation in the darkest possible light, a way of advancing things to a dystopia.

On to specific points... Regarding the "communist utopia" - I agree, the Federation has resources incredibly beyond our own. With that much in the way of resources, I will grant that it is possible for a socialist or communist economy to thrive. (My personal belief in human nature makes me believe it to be unlikely, but I would agree the technology does make it possible).

What I honestly do find unappealing about the Federation is I honestly believe it is sometimes intolerant in terms of others beliefs, goals, etc. This is that "smugness" I (and others) refer to. The Federation is tolerant, but only so long as you fit within a set of parameters. For example, look at the open disdain the Federation shows for the Ferengi. Quark illustrates this so perfectly in both "The Jem'Hadar" and in "Caretaker". The Federation is disgusted by the Ferengi system of beliefs, motivations, and goals. "You're a Ferengi, we were warned about you?" What a horrible thing to say! "You're a Christian. We were warned about you." "You're Italian, we were warned about you."

TOS wasn't immune to this, it just took it from a different perspective. Kirk could not abide people living in paradise if it was a stagnant paradise. Take "The Apple" as the perfect example. A civilization happy, yet stagnant. Everything they needed was provided by a god-like computer. The computer, if I recall, didn't demand ritual sacrifices, didn't hurt them. But Kirk saw them as a stagnant culture in need of being saved. Similar to his attitude towards the Organians in "Errand of Mercy" - he kept going on and on regarding how much the Federation could improve Organia.

Why do I bother watching? Because I enjoy it, no more, no less.

I do see flaws in the Federation society. I don't know if the producers of the shows would see it that way - I suspect Gene Roddenberry wouldn't - though to be fair, he made the Federation his version of a perfect society. For me, personally, I actually prefer it to be a flawed society. I enjoyed the way the Maquis in Deep Space Nine challenged the Federation's ideals, showing a group of people who believed in something very passionately and honestly, but those beliefs ran contrary to the Federation. In a society where anything material could be obtained at the press of a replicator button, what they wanted was the homes they had built with their blood, sweat, and tears - something a replicator cannot give. Homes which had the misfortune of being on the Cardassian border and ceded to the Cardassian Union as part of a peace treaty. That sounds like the "primitive beliefs" so often critisized in TNG - if you want to put the Maquis in the least favorable light, they are like petty feudal lords, motivated by their desire to keep their land and property. But if you put them in the best possible light, they are people who built something out of nothing and refused to abandon it, even often in the face of opposition from those closest to them.

One of the reasons I like DS9 the most (by far) out of the modern Star Treks is the way it challenged the ideals of the Federation. It didn't say the Federation was evil, corrupt, or bad, but it forced one to really take a look at it, see it wasn't perfect. But it still had ideals, it still tried to do good. That is far more appealing to me than perfection.

That said, the Federation as seen in Star Trek would, I suspect, be a wonderful place to live. I bet 99% or more of us would happier in the Federation than we are today. But perfect? I don't think so. And from a dramatic standpoint, dull.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cessna:
Um, Phantom? I don't see how you're disagreeing with me. If you're saying that the signs of decline are present in the TOS era, but fully manifest themselves in the TNG era - well, I agree with you...!

---

I guess the point I disagree is that although I see the TNG Federation, as the late Roman Empire was, its starting to show its age the cracks are forming. The beginning of the end if you will. I have never really seen it as a communistic government, and as Roddenberry fought in the Korean war I doubt that was what he was trying to convey. I'm not sure why Utopian societies are always likened to Communism. But, I do have to say I have never thought about this issue until I read this thread.

I have always seen Communism through this quote "Everyone is equal, some are just more equal then others."-Orwell. Now in the Federation everyone, disregarding criminals, everyone IS equal. People have the jobs they want, if you want to join starfleet all you have to do is pass the entry tests (like all military academies before it), no-one needs worry about monetary issues (as long as you have a replicator). I don;t know, its hard to explain.

Also, has anyone considered that was what Roddenberry might have been working on...Reforming the Federation? Besides, given current records about Republics and Empires, I doubt the Federation would even be around in the 29th century.

From webster's:

Communism: 1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the U.S.S.R. b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively


Socialism: 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Based on that, it's a bit tough to say which the Federation is. If you take communism to mean elimination of all private property, it would seem closer to socialism - there is still some ownership of goods - Picard's flute, personal bottles of wine, Sisko's baseball, etc. But not a whole lot. On the communist side, goods are held in common by the Federation and distriubted as needed. You could probably make a case for either.

Sorry for the wild tangent, though I must say I am interested in what people have had to say regarding this.

Despite what I've posted about the TNG era Federation, I think that the Federation as originally conceived of by Gene Roddenberry back in the TOS era was a decent idea. It was less sanctimonious, less socialist, and less "holier than thou."

While I may (and I emphasize "may") agree with two of your reasons above, the humanocentric Federation has been holier than thou, if not haughtier. It was the most utopian futuristic society humanity has ever reached, even in TOS. While the ideals of the Federation is great (about as ideal as the United States of America), their governmental policies has been lackluster, almost hypocritical.

Besides, who says that joining the Federation would be the only good thing any nonhuman civilization they could do?

And I'm sorry, Cochrane, but joining the Federation is not like becoming a member of the United Nations but becoming a member state of the USA. At least with the United Nations, you can retain your sovereign and cultural identity. With USA, you give up all rights to any government that does not conform to the ideas of the democracy. If that were the case, Hawaii would have retain its monarchy government, which is the antithesis of the American democratic philosophy (as history have shown).

------------------
Anyhoo, just some random thoughts...

Looking at TOS, the Federation seems to me to be a bit less closely nit - for example, look at the big disupute regarding the admisison of Babel - suspicion that the Tellarites are looking after their own interests above those of others - something one would not find in the TNG Federation.

I've tended to view the early Federation as similar to the early United States - an alliance, a common navy, but loyalty split between Federation and homeworld. The TNG Federation seems to be far more Federalized. One could postulate a 29th century Federation would be even more centralized - with faster communications and travel, a Federal government is able to become far more powerful.

Hmm... the Peacekeepers have a certain appeal to them. Yeah, it's SO much better than the Federation. http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/smile.gif


Just kidding, for anyone who thought I was serious about the PKs being better.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dan Stack:
From webster's:
Based on that, it's a bit tough to say which the Federation is. If you take communism to mean elimination of all private property, it would seem closer to socialism - there is still some ownership of goods - Picard's flute, personal bottles of wine, Sisko's baseball, etc. But not a whole lot. On the communist side, goods are held in common by the Federation and distriubted as needed. You could probably make a case for either.

.

---

I don't see that. When you see the quarters of the various characters there are personal items all over the place, from Livingston(Picard's fish) to Data's Poker Set. These are all owned items. Ok they are small items but I don't see anyone getting permission to bring their car with them on a mission. People still own property and homes and all that goes with them.

The Federation is simply an ideology where everyone can achieve or OWN whatever they want, within the standard of law we have today. If you want to be a lawyer...You have the chance, if you want to join SF...you have the chance, if you want to own the cottage in the woods replicate what you need. It has been stated that most of the Federations citizens have access to replicator tech. I believe the Romulans are the only one who restrict rep. Tech to the military...They still have a monetary system. All the Federation has done is get rid of things like poverty, homelessness and the power of the all mighty buck. There are still private business...other wise there could not be organized crime within the Federation (I am not connecting crime with private business I only use it as an example of the foothold it can give to those organizations). It is a Utopian Society (which does LEANINGS toward socialism...But doesn't cross the line) and it is certainly not Communistic.

I don't think economics has to be a hugely important part of politics. The invention of replication, after TOS, changes everything. In TOS, I'd say 99.9% of Starfleet was human. In TNG I'd say it's at most 90%, and that only if you stick to what's onscreen. If one era is less tolerant of others, it's TOS. I'm not sure though, but I think the aliens themselves decided not to join the Fleet. The Ferengi are greedy. Is greed a good thing? I honestly think DS9 shattered Roddenberry's parameters.

------------------
The Trekkie Formerly Known As Surak, AKA The Coch, Humble Creator of the Bwuutut and Mensaeans, Aba and Zwickau, and the Perseus Federation, Guy Who Still Hasn't Actually Played The Game, And Who Finally Decided To Use A Signature.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Cochrane:
I don't think economics has to be a hugely important part of politics.

---

Well you might not think it, but it is. In fact economics is replacing the concept of nationality and individual countries. Why do you think people riot against these "world trade" summits? The fear is that when Economic powers become able to ignore the civil rules, environemental rules and even religious rules of nations, human rights can get lost.

The Federation has undone this fear by getting rid of economics and making materialisim a thing of the past.

Now none of us on this planet can understand this syetm since it has never exisited. We can debate it from now until the end of time, but until we have a working model of a socity with unlimited energy resources to power "artifact creators" we can only throw around words liek comunisim, democracy, solcialisim, totalitarianisim, etc...my thought is that there would be a whole new word for what the Federation is, a "sentiantarinist" socitey for lack of a better term (but I encourgae all to give it a try).

The ideal of the Federation is that all individual cultures are important and must be cultivated. Protected and nurished. But first they must achieve a level of "sentient rights" and "moral correctness" laid out as the definition of what the Federation is. Are they going to look down their noses at other cultures? Sure, if they percieve them as less developed they will see them as something to be studied or avoided, or even guided if close enough to making the big step.

This happens today, in a myriad of cultures on Earth. Have you ever sat in a room of Canadians talking about Americans? Or have you ever been on the reciving end of an "Ugly American?". What about the reputation for American's treatment in France since the war? The English take on "provincial colonies"?

Not (by a longshot) every member of these socities are this way, but enough are that a reputation has developed. I see it as no different then the Federation's moral and sentient sense of superiority.

Is it right? I would think not. Is it a part of their world that makes them bad? No. To judge a socity, one must measure they good they produce vs the bad. The Federation, being a very moral (depsite their guidelines) organization tries to do what is best for everyone or leave them alone. If not the mighty Starfleet would be landing on planets and setting up parliments for everyone and teaching them "their" ways. We saw this on our own world with the Romans and the English Empire, etc...

Is the Federation stagnant? Yes. It has become a dying thing. The Dominion War could have been a catalyst to show the Federation that it was weakened and limping, but she had enough fight in her (with the serious aid of the Romulans and Klingons and the turn of the Cardassians, 3 not so sentient rights concerned governments) to survive.

UFP citizens cannot make the mistake of thinking that wining the DW assured them a ticket to the 29th century. It was but the first test, many more come and not all will be passed.

(back on topic)

If there is a Federation in the 29th century I think it will be a reformed Federation after having been lost in the 25th or 26th century. Maybe the 27th and 28th centuries have no Federation and it is only in the 29th century it is reformed.

As plausible an idea as any I would guess.

Sorry if I seem all over the map, just getting out what is in my head after reading 36 posts. http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/smile.gif

This topic again shows why I love these boards. There is much intelligence and maturity here and that more than anything else is the idea of Star Trek for me. http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Aslan Collas
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RPG_Trek; http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rpg-trek
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ferengi Rule Of Acquisition #76: Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies.

[This message has been edited by AslanC (edited 06-06-2001).]

I always thought that that line of thinking could be a great game/campaign. The “McCarthyism/Politically Correct” Federation faction has take over control of the Federation Government. A civil war insues over control of the fed.

Hmm, this topic can get heated, but then it does go to the heart of the appeal of Star Trek. A couple of comments:

1. I detect a lot of friction around the proper application of terms like "Communist" and "Socialist", and whether these apply to the Federation. Given the really incredible technological differences between the Feds and the present day, I would suggest that these terms are actually meaningless. It is a lot like trying to ask whether pre-Revolutionary France was "socialist" because of the government's strong role in the economy. The structural and social differences mean that that type of analysis just doesn't work.

2. Likewise, it is hard to argue about whether forced tolerance is more intolerant than tolerance of intolerance. The TOS Federation was pretty rough around the edges, but very capable of beating up on cultures it didn't like. The TNG Federation was a lot smoother, a lot smugger, and rather more hypocritical. BOTH were very capable of running roughshod over individual rights, though the TOS Federation tended to be more passionate in such cases, and the TNG Federation rather more ideological.

3. I don't think that anyone could argue that it is better to live under Klingon, Romulan, or other rule than under the Federation, in any era. The Feds would have to decline a long way, indeed, before they offered their citizens less than the subject races of most empires. For this reason, the Feds will have a great advantage over most empires, even in the 29th century, namely, the long term loyalty of most of its rank and file.

4. On the other hand, most of the direction of the Federation's evolution in the TNG era seems to me to be toward what used to be called "decadence". Certainly, the Federation is more homogenous, more awash in luxury, less inclined toward tolerating the taking of risks, less inclined toward pure exploration, and less questioning of its own ideals. The holodeck alone is an example of this. Can you imagine what Kirk would say about the thing? I am surprised that no one has noticed how much the holodeck resembles what happened to the Talosians.

5. Part of the reason for this kind of cultural development may be that the Federation is surrounded. This isn't proven, of course, and big frontier zones are assumed to exist in LUG-Trek, but still the Feds have much less room for expansion than in the TOS era.

All of which brings me to my prediction about the Federation in the 29th century. Far from being huge and dominant, the 29th century Federation may be relatively small, not a whole lot bigger than in the 24th. In such a scenario, it may well be quite decadent, very addicted to luxury, and culturally almost totally homogenized. Far rom being a Communist-style dictatorship, however, I would think that its government would continue in the flabby, smug outlines of the past, maybe with extra layers of bureaucracy.

In such a future, the great powers of the galaxy may well be someone other than the Feds, proabably someone a lot less nice by our standards.

Who this would be, I don't know. The Klingons seems well able to avoid decadence, but are rather too lame-brained to get and keep a technological advantage. The Romulans and Cardassians seem to be undergoing severe problems in the 24th century which probably put them out of the running for the far future.

The Dominion, as unpleasant as it is, seems to have the needed focus and technlogical edge, as do the Krenim. LUG's own Taurhai might also have some advantages.

The Borg are like a giant wave engulfing the galaxy, which will probably eventually force the other powers into alliance against it. This could result in the First Galactic War, in which the Borg go down in a dramatic Third Reich style apocalypse, maybe a couple of centuries after the end of the Dominion War.

Hmmm. Maybe a 29th century in which the Feds are part of a Taurhai-dominated Alliance of Alpha and Beta Quandrant Powers facing off in a three-way cold war against the Krenim and Dominion. At this stage of history, all of the major, and most of the minor powers have been around for centuries, and the cold war itself has lasted for something like 300 years.

If there hasn't been a Second Galactic War by this time, then chances are the Taurhai, Krenim, and Dominion actually cooperate a great deal, and have a sort of detente, based mostly on cynicism and intertia.

------------------
Slan agat!

I agree that using terms like socialist or communist in relation to a utopian society like the Federation is about as relevant as calling calling a modern presidential democracy a feudal monarchy - superficially similar traits but the resemblances are coincidental. I also disagree with the view of the Federation as a decadent inward society: one of the key characteristics of the TNG Federation is that it seems to have a population motivated by both a personal and a civic ethic of development and contribution to the whole. It's an "intellectualist" utopia, for want of a better term - a geek utopia, except the geeks all have social skills (except for Reg Barclay) http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/wink.gif. There's an inherent resistance to decadence and stagnation because it contravenes the social ethos that drives the average citizen.

Hey, it's fiction - it's allowed a little unwarranted idealism.

For another view of a utopia where all Maslow's needs are supported free of charge, I can strongly recommend Iain M Banks' "Culture" series of SF novels. I understand that they're not that easy to get a hold of in the US, but they are interesting as a Euro-centric view of Space Opera rather than the standard US one. If you liked the Peter F Hamilton Nights Dawn series you'll probably like Mr Banks too http://www.trekrpg.net/Board/ubb/biggrin.gif.

------------------
"...and no, I don't play the bagpipes either!"