The Far Future

[Dan Gurden]

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

[Cochrane]

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.

[Cessna]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Dan Stack:
One could make a nightmare 29th century Federation.
</font>

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...!

[Cochrane]

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.

[mactavish]

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.

[Cessna]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Cochrane:
Anyone gonna help me defend the Federation?
</font>

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...

[Cessna]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Cochrane:
Anyone gonna help me defend the Federation?

</font>

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...

[Phantom]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">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]</font>

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.

[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...!

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...!

[John Raynor]

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...

[CaptainGonzalez]

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)

[Cochrane]

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.

[Cochrane]

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.

[Dan Stack]

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.

[Phantom]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">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...!
</font>

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.