Does the Federation still exist in the 31+th century?

That is interesting. I would think a confederacy might be next.

 

I always thought that Daniels said he worked for the Federation, but this whole thread has put me into doubt.

The Department of Temporial Investigations book was mentioned, and I gotta say I enjoyed that book very much, and I enjoyed the new interpretation of the Temporial Cold War and how two factions are Federation (29th Century and 31st Century) but they don't agree on how things should be done (I guess 31st Century agents don't directly take things into their own hands and just try to get indigenous people prevent the temporial damage while the 29th Century takes a more active role, going as far as making temporial clones of people by trying over and over).

Empires do rise and fall, but if the Romulan Empire and Klingon Empire can sustain for so long then I don't find it hard to believe that the Federation can survive for at least a thousand years.

 

Or 51% of them, anyway.

Stupid and irrational are traits that seem to be abundant in the Federation. Just about everyone whose name isn't on the opening credits possesses at least one of them. Gotta make the main characters look good, after all.

 

Perhaps this planet simply doesn't want to be in the Federation. They have that right.

Or, OTOH, the constant squabbling of the Kyrians vs. Vaskans would have disqualified them for membership, anyway (the Federation requires a one-world government). In the closing scenes, when the two groups are at peace, then they'd be eligible, assuming they have achieved political unity.

In any case, it's a huge galaxy. There's room for many different federations. As for *the* Federation, I find it very likely that they will exist for centuries, even millennia.

 

Ehm, the episode clearly shows that they have a skewed view of Voyager. And they needed the Doctor to correct them. If they made contact with the UFP (Federation)/ or UFP with them, the false notion would have been corrected. Also, the Doctor would not need to start a long track home, he could just call the nearest outpost or ship and get a lift to Earth.

 

By the time the episode was over, they WERE corrected. They no longer had that skewed concept of Voyager as a warship. That was the Doctor's doing.

We don't know how long it would take for the Doctor to reach Federation space. Assuming this planet is not a member of the Federation, he might have had to do a bit of searching for the nearest Federation world. Still, that might not have been too far away.

 

^Right. So, I don't understand your earlier post, if you knew this.

 

Having served as a receptionist and staff assistant myself, I'm curious about what's so "stupid" about the idea. Or, for that matter, how a computer could be expected to keep an office running while the principals are preoccupied.

Having assistants is not a sign of a repressive economy or ideology. Disrespecting assistants and not providing good compensation for their services is a sign of a repressive economy or ideology.

 

26th century - the battle of Procyon 5.
Daniels tells Archer directly that the 26th century federation consists of "dozens of species". The statement puts certain limits on the number of member species in the federation - a few hundreds, at most.

Well - the federation contains a few 'dozens of species' (hundreds of species) by the 24th century, as well.
Sounds as if a long period of isolationism - or, at least, limited to non-existent inclusion into the federation of new members - is coming for the federation.

Considering that the, BY FAR, largest, most radical changes for the federation resulting from recent exploration were the dominion war and the borg invasion (both of these antagonists, relatively newly discovered)...well, the loss/gain results of exploration don't look good at all.

PS
BTW, Sci, it's not exactly enlightened to put the equal sign between stupidity/irrationality and opinions you don't agree to (mostly, due to feel-good sayings).

 

Then again, the 26th-century timeline that we saw, will not happen. The destruction of the Sphere Builders and the Expanse in ENT (the Expanse covered a quarter of the galaxy in that 26th-century scene) prevented that. Whatever form the 'real' 26th century takes in Trek, it will not be like that. The Enterprise-J might even be different.

 

A version of that 26th century will happen. A pretty close one, as the scarce on-screen evidence indicates:
Daniels had no problem with Archer destroying the spheres - which he should have, he being into preserving the timeline; except if the change was of little consequence or at least surgically limited - at least for the federation.
Daniels was not in the least affected by the change.
As a general principle, it's constructive to interpret on-screen events in the way in which they have an effect, the alternative being baseless feel-good speculation.
etc

One can go further, to the 28th century and that federation's 'guilty until proven innocent' policy.
The isolationist policy of the previous centuries - becoming an extremist, 'for the fatherland' loss of liberty in the name of security?

Apparently, the wounds from the borg invasion left some pretty ugly scars on the federation.

 

Uh, no.

Remember, the Expanse was destroyed in "Zero Hour." That happened in the 22nd century.

The 26th-century scenes in "Azati Prime" took place in a timeline where the Expanse covers 1/4 of the galaxy. This timeline, logically, can never happen now, because the Expanse has been destroyed.

 

As said:
A version of that 26th century will happen. A pretty close one (for the federation, NOT necessarily for the rest of the galaxy - outside Daniels' jurisdiction), as the scarce on-screen evidence indicates:
Daniels had no problem with Archer destroying the spheres - which he should have, he being into preserving the timeline; except if the change was of little consequence or at least surgically limited - at least for the federation.
Daniels was not in the least affected by the change.

As a general principle, it's constructive to interpret on-screen events in the way in which they have an effect, the alternative being baseless feel-good speculation.

PS - talking about 'zero hour' - Daniels reiterates 'dozens, eventually hundreds of species'. And he was pretty adamant about Archer's specific role in federation history.

 

The loss of the Expanse will certainly have repercussions we can't even begin to imagine. The fact that in the alternative 26th century, it covers 1/4 of the galaxy, surely affected every aspect of life (both in and out of the Federation). The fact that the last 400 years have been erased from history is going to wipe the slate clean, as it were. Whatever the Federation is like in that version of the 26th century, the fact that the Expanse essentially never existed is going to result in a whole new version of events.

The reason why Daniels took Archer to see that version of the future is to show him what would happen if he failed to act. Daniels had to make sure Archer WOULD act - to ensure that this version of the future never happened. Which, as we know now, it won't.

 

Daniels can 'imagine' the repercussions just fine.

Almost certainly NOT the scenarists' intent; if that was the scenarists'/Daniels' intent, they gave absolutely no sign of it. Plus, humanity wold be extinct in an 'Archer failed to act' timeline.
More in line with what was shown - Archer changed history, but not in any significant way for the federation.
Daniels was aware and had no problem with the change.

AND - Talking about 'zero hour' - Daniels reiterates 'dozens, eventually hundreds of species'. And he was pretty adamant about Archer's specific role in federation history.
Hundreds of species remains the norm. Meaning, by the 24th century, the federation maxes out

 

It's simple logic, really. You take away something as significant as the Expanse, and history will proceed very differently. There's simply no way that the real 26th century *could* be the same as we saw it there.

It would be like going back to 17th-century Earth and destroying Europe. How similar do you think life would be today, if that had happened?

 

"It's simple logic, really."
Actually, it's a 'see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil'. Comparing Earth's real world history with fictional galaxy's (which is...significantly larger) future history is a straw-man.
Even within the confines of this imperfect comparison, life would be pretty much the same for an amazonian tribe.

Star trek contains enough developments just as far fetched - and few of them have the credentials of a time traveler that is in the know.

 

As for the size of the Federation: Daniels' line leaves a lot of room. There are, AFAIK, about 150 members of the Federation in TOS' time. Four hundred years after that, I'm sure there could be a lot more. If the Federation jumped to over 900 members by that time, it would still fit with what Daniels said. Daniels said "hundreds", but even if taken literally, any upper bound that establishes will still allow the Federation to grow, grow, and keep growing.

 

Danield said twice (in Azati prime and Zero hour) 'dozens of species'.
900 kind of jumpes the shark of 'dozens of species'.

Let's say 300 - if Daniels was REALLY into underestimation, let's say 500 species.

Not enough for constant growth at 23-24th century levels until the 31s century.