RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,713
Posts: 5,432,149
Members: 24,835
Currently online: 567
Newest member: SB118_T'Mar


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 8 2013, 11:42 AM   #1
Cmdr.Druss
Lieutenant
 
Cmdr.Druss's Avatar
 
Monarchy within the Federation.

I've been wondering recently whether todays monarchies survived in the future, and what function they hold. Purely ceremonial? Do the royalty serve in Starfleet? Were they wiped out during WW3?
Cmdr.Druss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 01:25 PM   #2
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

There was a reference to a "Vulcan Princess" in one of the movies.

And I'm not sure, but Malcolm Reed may have said that Britain still had a "Royal" navy. Suggesting that Kings and Queens were still the heads of state in Britain.



__________________
.
It's easy to support someones beliefs if they are identical to your own.
Tolerating beliefs that you don't personal embrace, or even fully understand, is harder.
T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 02:32 PM   #3
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

I don't see that it would be a problem as long as the government they headed (or figureheaded) was still run as a democracy.
Forbin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 07:28 PM   #4
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

The planet Troyius (sp?) seemed to possess a ruling royal system, if it were to become a Federation member, it could do so with it's governmental system intact.

Why would they have to become a democracy just to join?

If planet Saudi Arabia, or planet China joined the Federation, they obviously wouldn't be democracies. Up until a few centuries ago, planet Hawaii had a ruling King (in the 24th century) would they, with their royal system be excluded?

For all we know, in the 24th century only a few dozen of the Federation's 150+ members are democracies.


__________________
.
It's easy to support someones beliefs if they are identical to your own.
Tolerating beliefs that you don't personal embrace, or even fully understand, is harder.
T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 04:54 AM   #5
Darkwing
Commodore
 
Location: This dry land thing is too wierd!
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

As long as they meet the civil rights requirements and don't have abhorrent practices, then they can become members, IMO. Assuming they have warp comms or warp drive, of course.
__________________
If you don’t drink the kool-aid, you’re a baaad person - Rev Jim Jones
Almond kool-aid, anyone? Or do you prefer pudding?- Darkwing
Darkwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 11:52 AM   #6
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

Well, we never really learn that one'd need to have warp in order to be a member, or a trade partner or whatnot. Or that one'd need to have specific civil rights or steer clear of abhorrent practices; Vulcans have duels to death at least.

And I'm not sure, but Malcolm Reed may have said that Britain still had a "Royal" navy. Suggesting that Kings and Queens were still the heads of state in Britain.
Or then not, as I could well see an organization preferring to keep "Royal" in the title well past the date monarchy expired. Unless it expired by going particularly sour.

In any case, that was before even the era of ENT; Reed's dad served in said organization, but was supposedly retired by the time of the televised adventures already. Our evidence for a (British? Australian? Dutch? Indian? Malesian? South Italian? Texan?) Royal Navy thus apparently predates even the final unification of Earth in 2150.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 01:06 PM   #7
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

There are only two requirements for Federation membership: One world government, and no caste-based discrimination. A world that is ruled by a monarchy would qualify, as long as it satisfied those two things.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Mr. Laser Beam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 01:19 PM   #8
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

Malcolm said that went he was considering his future, it was between Starfleet and the British ("Royal?") Navy.

Darkwing wrote: View Post
Assuming they have warp comms or warp drive ...
Timo wrote: View Post
Well, we never really learn that one'd need to have warp in order to be a member ...
I sometimes compare jet engines on modern Earth, to the warp drive in the future Federation. Most nations on Earth have jet aircraft, but only a few nations actually build the engines. The majority of nations import their jets.

If a species' culture and society was the equal to 24th century Earth in every way, except they lacked an indigenous warp drive, why would they not be able to just purchase them from a different species that produced them?

Darkwing wrote: View Post
As long as they meet the civil rights requirements and don't have abhorrent practices ...
If the culture's various practices were too abhorrent, likely no, they wouldn't be invited into the inner circle. But if each of the Federation's founding members possessed some oddity, and the follow-on members also brought their own personality traits to the mix, then mildly "abhorrent practices" could be the Federation norm.

Alien Nation: "Your mother breeds out of season."

Darkwing wrote: View Post
civil rights
What constitutes a "civil right" probably varies widely among the Federation's members.

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
One world government
Wasn't that just a preference? The Federation in one TNG episode was considering a world for membership with at least two separate nations on it.

__________________
.
It's easy to support someones beliefs if they are identical to your own.
Tolerating beliefs that you don't personal embrace, or even fully understand, is harder.
T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 03:10 PM   #9
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

Malcolm said that went he was considering his future, it was between Starfleet and the British ("Royal?") Navy.
But his future was well in the show's past: he had made the decision already, long enough ago that he now was a Lieutenant in Starfleet.

The Federation in one TNG episode was considering a world for membership with at least two separate nations on it.
...But apparently for the very first time. So the "preference" would have rather deep roots.

In any case, it seemed the Federation was considering making the Kes members while leaving the Prytt outside the UFP, despite the two sharing a planet. Essentially, they'd still be doing the "single government for single member" thing there.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 08:54 PM   #10
neozeks
Captain
 
neozeks's Avatar
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
There are only two requirements for Federation membership: One world government, and no caste-based discrimination. A world that is ruled by a monarchy would qualify, as long as it satisfied those two things.
Those are only the two we heard about on screen. Nothing says they are the only requirements. (Though to make clear, I agree the Federation would have no problems with constitutional democratic monarchies.)
__________________
What if it's a smart fungus?
neozeks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 04:47 AM   #11
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

neozeks wrote: View Post
Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
There are only two requirements for Federation membership: One world government, and no caste-based discrimination. A world that is ruled by a monarchy would qualify, as long as it satisfied those two things.
Those are only the two we heard about on screen. Nothing says they are the only requirements.
Until we hear about more onscreen, then by definition those ARE the only requirements.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Mr. Laser Beam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 07:10 AM   #12
RPJOB
Commander
 
RPJOB's Avatar
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

The no caste based discrimination perquisite is post TOS though. Ardana in The Cloud Minders defiantly had a caste based system and it was very discriminatory yet the planet was a Federation member. Kirk didn't tell them that they had to give up the caste system, just that they had to live up to their Federation obligations and provide the zenite. For all we know the Troglytes were simply provided with filter masks and the caste system remained essentially intact.

If the Federation had admitted Ardana and yet was unaware of the caste system then they'd be very lax about enforcing any sort of membership requirements.
__________________
We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill - today! - Kirk - A Taste of Armageddon
RPJOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 09:27 AM   #13
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

The difference between Ardana and Bajor could have been that Bajor's caste system would seem to have been religious based. Not so with Ardana.

Also the argument could be made that what Ardana had was a class system, and not a caste system.

__________________
.
It's easy to support someones beliefs if they are identical to your own.
Tolerating beliefs that you don't personal embrace, or even fully understand, is harder.
T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 09:47 AM   #14
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

What we know about opposition to caste systems is this specific phrase by Sisko:

"You realize that caste-based discrimination goes against the Federation Charter. If Bajor returns to the D'jarra system, I have no doubt that its petition to join the Federation will be rejected."
Sure, Bajor's system or the discrimination practiced within it might be of a particularly damning type. But Sisko makes it appear more generic than that, that is, all discrimination that is based on caste is frowned upon in the UFP. Caste systems that don't discriminate may be fine, though. How about a species of sentient termites joining? Making the workers do all the peacetime work and the soldiers do all the fighting would probably not count as discrimination if the very biology of the species makes such an arrangement the most comfortable one.

Certainly exotic biologies are acceptable for UFP members, even if the most exotic member species remain offscreen; but even purely cultural quirks are tolerated, and the UFP accepts that certain Vulcan males boss around their designated females and call it "tradition". Makes it highly doubtful that the Ferengi should be required to alter their sexist ways, either, in case they filed an application.

Then again, the phrasing doesn't yet establish that an applicant need be 100% compliant and compatible with the UFP Charter at the moment of filing the application. Perhaps there is room for adaptation later on - much as in "Rapture" where the absorption of the Militia into Starfleet is said to be an exercise for the time following approval of membership.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 10:19 AM   #15
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.

Timo wrote: View Post
"You realize that caste-based discrimination goes against the Federation Charter."
Sisko doesn't say that the Federation Charter prohibits caste-based systems, but specifically caste-based discrimination.

So, if the Federation doesn't consider your particular castes to be discriminatory (because they need your zenite), then you can have castes in your society all you want.
__________________
.
It's easy to support someones beliefs if they are identical to your own.
Tolerating beliefs that you don't personal embrace, or even fully understand, is harder.
T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.