|
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. |
|
|||||||
| General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Lieutenant Junior Grade
|
Monarchy within the Federation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Admiral
Location: I said out, dammit!
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
__________________
My kitbashes: http://www.inpayne.com/models/kitbash/trekpage.html My Kitbash Wallpapers: http://www.inpayne.com/models/wallpa...allpapers.html My kitbash calendar: http://inpayne.com/calendar/kbcalendar2013.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Commodore
Location: This dry land thing is too wierd!
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
__________________
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 http://deadreckoning-darkwing.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Fleet Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
__________________
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. |
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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?
Alien Nation: "Your mother breeds out of season." What constitutes a "civil right" probably varies widely among the Federation's members. 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | ||
|
Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Captain
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
__________________
What if it's a smart fungus? |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Fleet Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
__________________
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Commander
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
Also the argument could be made that what Ardana had was a class system, and not a caste system.
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Re: Monarchy within the Federation.
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. |
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.

















