RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,135
Posts: 5,433,678
Members: 24,934
Currently online: 560
Newest member: Emperor Khaless

TrekToday headlines

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Cracked’s New Sci-Fi Satire
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16


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 > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 7 2013, 04:13 AM   #16
Pavonis
Commodore
 
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

Of course the Federation is "inhumanly" benevolent - the bulk of the Federation is not human!
Pavonis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 7 2013, 04:29 AM   #17
plynch
Commodore
 
plynch's Avatar
 
Location: Outer Graceland
View plynch's Twitter Profile
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

"You can throw nature out with a pitchfork, but she always comes back with a vengeance." - CG Jung
__________________
Author of Live Like Louis! Inspirational Stories from the Life of Louis Armstrong, http://livelikelouis.com
plynch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 7 2013, 06:14 AM   #18
Dale Sams
Fleet Captain
 
Dale Sams's Avatar
 
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

Once replicators came around and (apparently) Earth ditched currency (Ala' Miracle Man) things probably REALLY took off for the better. Now if they just drafted rather than electing officials, they could have hit the trifecta.
Dale Sams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 7 2013, 12:02 PM   #19
Rusty Nova
Fleet Captain
 
Rusty Nova's Avatar
 
Location: Avon
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

"i can believe in Dick Van Dyke solving murder cases, but him being a doctor is just too unbelievable"
__________________

Hello to Jason Isaacs!
Rusty Nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 7 2013, 08:40 PM   #20
Robert D. Robot
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Pre-Warp Civilization of New England
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

junxon wrote: View Post
or the vulcans secretly doped up earths water supply to make everyone more positive after archers crazy antics
I thought Pierson's Puppeteers did that in order to make humans get along better with the Kzinti!
Robert D. Robot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 7 2013, 10:45 PM   #21
Silvercrest
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

Terran_Empire wrote: View Post
intergalactic
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Silvercrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 7 2013, 11:02 PM   #22
Emperor Norton
Lieutenant Commander
 
Emperor Norton's Avatar
 
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

You fail to understand the post-WW2, Cold War era optimism of Star Trek (something others have given up, but which was the thinking for the people of the era). That thinking essentially being this:

Slavery was with humanity from the beginning, and we came to understand it as wrong, we morally declared it wrong, and we made it illegal. If we can overcome that, we can overcome all our other evils like greed and violence and racism and bigotry, and we are constantly evolving to social perfection and evolving closer to utopia with the end product being utopia. So in centuries to come things will continue to be more and more utopian.

It actually is a bit like the Borg in narrative. Closer and closer to perfection, always evolving towards perfection. Except man's perfection is not malicious in the way of what is essentially a rape on the part of the Borg towards individuals and species with their assimilation process; forcing the will of a mass and their idea on a people, and forcibly stealing people from their own self determination and very soul in what is a cruel torture of making someone themselves but not themselves. Or, you can make Federation utopianism malicious by saying the Cold War era thought had those same properties: coming out of WW2 and going through the first half of the Cold War, government was big and intrusive (to some opinions at least) and did things like pay farmers to plant certain crops and banned them from planting certain crops (to avoid flooding the market too much with a commodity; fear of economic depression for want of regulation was high), and socially during that era people kept there heads down and didn't make too much of a ruckus because they didn't want to rock any boats and they wanted their utopia with a house in suburbia with a white picket fence, a wife who cleaned and cooked and knew her place, and 2.5 kids with crew cuts for Billy and a nice dress for Susie, and Billy would go join the army or work in a factory or office like his dad, and Susie would know her place as a good wife when she grew up, and things would go great forever with better living through chemistry. And woe to whoever made a ruckus during that time, like the blacks asking for Civil Rights or the Beatniks, because to those people wanting their utopia, how dare these people cause havoc to our perfection? And so they disliked those people, to varying degrees from calling them lazy good for nothings to beating them up or beating them to death, and that just got worse as then women wanted equality, and there was a war effort in Southeast Asia these longhairs were protesting and they were being unpatriotic for protesting, and so on. Mind you, I'm speaking not of personal opinion but in the voice of how these people thought. Persecution of anything different was big. And these are people who later voted for Nixon (not the whole of the voters, but the "I want my 50s back" segment was big). So for those reasons, you could take the view of Federation utopianism as malicious because it is based on that post-WW2, Cold war utopian and because in that thought process, deviation from what is declared the norm, deviation being free will, is persecuted and not ideally allowed and everyone lives in houses made out of ticky tacky and all look just the same and go to college and they all come out the same and get married and the marriages are all just the same. You could also take the view that that version of utopian optimism is a naive and malicious one and that the type of Cold War era optimism that went into Star Trek was not that version at all, and welcomed differences and promoted them. You could alternately take the view that all utopianism demands lack of difference and lack of free will and conformity, and utopia is inherently malicious. This is a fruitful area for debate.

Last edited by Emperor Norton; March 7 2013 at 11:43 PM.
Emperor Norton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2013, 10:00 AM   #23
Elvira
Vice Admiral
 
Elvira's Avatar
 
Location: t'girl
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

Yo dude, they're called paragraphs!
Elvira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2013, 10:07 AM   #24
Emperor Norton
Lieutenant Commander
 
Emperor Norton's Avatar
 
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

T'Girl wrote: View Post
Yo dude, they're called paragraphs!
Paragraphs are for sufficiently differentiated thoughts. I give you brilliance in bulk.
Emperor Norton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2013, 02:12 PM   #25
Rusty Nova
Fleet Captain
 
Rusty Nova's Avatar
 
Location: Avon
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

'I Give You Brilliance in Bulk' sounds like the name of a specialty porn film starring obese persons
__________________

Hello to Jason Isaacs!
Rusty Nova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2013, 09:29 PM   #26
Elvira
Vice Admiral
 
Elvira's Avatar
 
Location: t'girl
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

Terran_Empire wrote: View Post
... the Federation portrayed as a very powerful and respected intergalactic government ...
A few things here, a small thing first, but you might have meant "interstellar." Also, as depicted on the show the Federation actually doesn't seem to be very well respected by others in the interstellar community, I mean not in general.

If the Federation and Starfleet are largely or exclusively comprised of non-augmented human beings
Starfleet debateably a maybe, however the Federation is made up of a mostly non-Humans (as point out previously) and Human are a likely a minority of less than one percent of the Federation's population.

...how viable is the gracious benevolence of such an organization?
The Federation's policies concerning "benevolence" is likely a variable that changes through the years as new Member are incorporated into the whole and the composition of the Federation Council itself changes over time. The policies in place during Kirk's era would be distant history by the time of people like Sisko and Janeway.

I'm not taking about people being nice, i'm talking about a massive intergalactic ruling organization being implausibly well-intentioned.
The Federation isn't exactly a total push over, they're shown multiple time fighting others for territory they desire to hold or expand into. They have little respect for other species established territories, unless the other species can defend it.

At the same time (or perhaps different times) there is a directive to largely leave "primitive" people alone. It would seem obvious that this directive is subject to modification, but it is there. The people of the Federation made a collective decision to have this directive.

So, reasonably well-intentioned, not implausibly well-intentioned.

Dale Sams wrote: View Post
Now if they just drafted rather than electing officials, they could have hit the trifecta.
Drafting has the exact same difficulty as electing. Draft the right person for the right job and all is grand, draft the wrong person and the effect is the same as electing the wrong person.

junxon wrote: View Post
"i can believe in Dick Van Dyke solving murder cases, but him being a doctor is just too unbelievable"
And he was realistically nailing Mary Tyler Moore on a regular basis when she was 25, I mean come on!!!

Elvira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 13 2013, 04:10 PM   #27
Spocktoberfest
Captain
 
Spocktoberfest's Avatar
 
Location: Marsden is celebrating Vulcanian Style!
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

There is actually a lot of benevolence in the Star Trek galaxy.

The Orgainians can conquer all to combined empires we ever see, but they just want to be left alone.

The Metrons might be able to as well, but they don't really leave their system.

The Talosians are less "benevolent" but they show the ability to project convincing illusions over light years distance and could certainly carve out quite an empire with that ability.

The First Federation really didn't seem aggressive, the Fesarius seemed like it could conquer quite a bit, and we don't know how many there are like it.

The Thasians could be very dangerous, but they only seemed to be concerned with other's saftey, saving Charlie and then saving everyone else from him.

Trelane wasn't benevolent, but his parents were. If their "kid" could create planets and drive them around, I think they would have serious power potential.

I haven't even gotten out of the first season, but I think I made my point.

And I agree, the Federation seems exceptionally "nice" to almost everyone, the Haulkans, Capellans, and Organians (before they reveal their true nature) case in point.
Spocktoberfest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 29 2013, 05:51 PM   #28
thesadpanda
Commander
 
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

I have always found Star Trek's view of human beings in the future to be realistic, though certainly an optimistic projection. There are four basic reasons why I find Star Trek's vision of humanity's future realistic.

1) Human beings were much more barbaric 300 years ago than they are today. Star Trek assumes the trend will continue in that direction. We are already making "rapid progress," as Captain Picard once said.

2) The Federation has apparently renounced materialism. This seems outlandish and unimaginable to us, since materialism seems as natural to Americans and Europeans as breathing air. But materialism is not an innate human trait -- it's a relatively recent development in human history, and it's by no means universal on Earth today. One interpretation for modern materialism is that it points to a spiritual emptiness. Although the Federation isn't particularly religious, Star Trek characters seem spiritually fulfilled by their humanist belief that the purpose of existence is to improve oneself. Once people stop taking comfort in material possessions, the material needs of the whole society are much less, and the society no longer has as much cause of conflict with others.

3) Speaking of material needs, technology and space travel have eliminated most of the remaining material needs in the Federation. Food and basic goods are produced by replication. Power is produced by fusion, antimatter reactions and renewable sources. Weather disasters are preventable. Colonizing other planets has lead to unlimited land and natural resources. No one is hungry, no one is uneducated, everyone's basic needs are met.

4) For all the advantages provided by the Federation's philosophy and technology, Federation morality is not a fait accompli. Especially on Classic Trek, we see that it is a standard the characters are holding themselves to and are constantly struggling to reach. Human nature hasn't changed, just human values.

Ultimately, I think that whether you find Star Trek realistic is going to depend on a personal belief: do you believe human beings are basically good or basically evil. If you believe that people are basically evil, then you will also believe that a utopia like the Federation would free human beings to be even more diabolical. If you believe that we're basically good, then a utopia like the Federation would give us the opportunity to be angels.

To me, there is no doubt that we're basically good. If we didn't intrinsically value goodness, we couldn't even have even created the concept of goodness. Maybe my belief in human goodness is what draws me to Star Trek, or maybe it comes from the fact that I grew up watching Star Trek. I couldn't say. But that's what I believe that that's why I find Star Trek's future believable.
thesadpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 31 2013, 04:46 PM   #29
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

Emperor Norton wrote: View Post
You fail to understand the post-WW2, Cold War era optimism of Star Trek (something others have given up, but which was the thinking for the people of the era). That thinking essentially being this:

Slavery was with humanity from the beginning, and we came to understand it as wrong, we morally declared it wrong, and we made it illegal. If we can overcome that, we can overcome all our other evils like greed and violence and racism and bigotry, and we are constantly evolving to social perfection and evolving closer to utopia with the end product being utopia. So in centuries to come things will continue to be more and more utopian.

It actually is a bit like the Borg in narrative. Closer and closer to perfection, always evolving towards perfection. Except man's perfection is not malicious in the way of what is essentially a rape on the part of the Borg towards individuals and species with their assimilation process; forcing the will of a mass and their idea on a people, and forcibly stealing people from their own self determination and very soul in what is a cruel torture of making someone themselves but not themselves. Or, you can make Federation utopianism malicious by saying the Cold War era thought had those same properties: coming out of WW2 and going through the first half of the Cold War, government was big and intrusive (to some opinions at least) and did things like pay farmers to plant certain crops and banned them from planting certain crops (to avoid flooding the market too much with a commodity; fear of economic depression for want of regulation was high), and socially during that era people kept there heads down and didn't make too much of a ruckus because they didn't want to rock any boats and they wanted their utopia with a house in suburbia with a white picket fence, a wife who cleaned and cooked and knew her place, and 2.5 kids with crew cuts for Billy and a nice dress for Susie, and Billy would go join the army or work in a factory or office like his dad, and Susie would know her place as a good wife when she grew up, and things would go great forever with better living through chemistry. And woe to whoever made a ruckus during that time, like the blacks asking for Civil Rights or the Beatniks, because to those people wanting their utopia, how dare these people cause havoc to our perfection? And so they disliked those people, to varying degrees from calling them lazy good for nothings to beating them up or beating them to death, and that just got worse as then women wanted equality, and there was a war effort in Southeast Asia these longhairs were protesting and they were being unpatriotic for protesting, and so on. Mind you, I'm speaking not of personal opinion but in the voice of how these people thought. Persecution of anything different was big. And these are people who later voted for Nixon (not the whole of the voters, but the "I want my 50s back" segment was big). So for those reasons, you could take the view of Federation utopianism as malicious because it is based on that post-WW2, Cold war utopian and because in that thought process, deviation from what is declared the norm, deviation being free will, is persecuted and not ideally allowed and everyone lives in houses made out of ticky tacky and all look just the same and go to college and they all come out the same and get married and the marriages are all just the same. You could also take the view that that version of utopian optimism is a naive and malicious one and that the type of Cold War era optimism that went into Star Trek was not that version at all, and welcomed differences and promoted them. You could alternately take the view that all utopianism demands lack of difference and lack of free will and conformity, and utopia is inherently malicious. This is a fruitful area for debate.

utopianism doesn't demand conformity, and there is no such thing as "free will."
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 31 2013, 04:54 PM   #30
Mysterion
Rear Admiral
 
Mysterion's Avatar
 
Location: SB-31, Daran V
Re: Federation is inhumanly benevolent

There's some serious stuff brewing under the surface of the Federation we see in TOS.

Commit a crime and they send you off to an asteroid someplace to make your mind right. Okay, the guy we saw using thew machine was kind of screwed-up himself, but still. Someone somewhere in the Federation government thought this was a good idea to begin with. That's pretty freaking scary if you ask me.
__________________
USS Galileo Galilei, NCC-8888
Prima Inter Pares
Mysterion is offline   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 03:04 AM.

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