Starfleet...Military or Not

I agree that the military performs more role than just combat based, and appreciate your examples.

I think the difficulty in defining Starfleet's role comes partially from inconsistency from various writers over the years and individual attitudes towards the military. There are so many different attitudes, both positive and negative, that depending on those, people tend to push away or embrace Starfleet as a military.

As originally conceived, I would say military, absolutely. I often wish Franz Joseph's Technical Manual could be included in GR's concept because it really breaks down the TOS era Starfleet in a very military style.

Even if it isn't a military exactly as militaries are now, why not call Starfleet a military organization?

 

David Marcus thought Starfleet was military.

 

I was born on a military base and lived on a few growing up.

The military flys into hurricanes for the purpose of research. American scientists are supported in Antarctica by the USAF. It was the US department of defense that discovered chemotherapy and did the initally research into it's uses. The military discovered the Van Allen radiation belts arround the Earth.

It was a military space probe (Clementine) that discovered water ice at Earth's moon's pole.

 

This is along my lines of thinking now as well. Everything that IrishNero pointed out, that's among my first thoughts when I think of Starfleet, not of today's military, but clearly today's military performs those duties. So I'm in the camp that believes that Starfleet is indeed military, but with more emphasis and philosophy on non-violent duties.

After all, as others have pointed out, militaries and their functions have changed over time. And yes, there is indeed a difference between being a military and being a war machine; I think Japan's armed forces are another good example of this difference (well, not just because they're limited by treaty). They stand primarily for defense, and they perform a lot of research and rescue operations, but they can't/won't attack other sovereign powers. Starfleet is under the same philosophy, but without the treaty limitations imposed on them.

 

Because Starfleet is the military; however, Marcus' views always struck me as those of a naive young man making sweeping generalizations about an organization he didn't understand. Whatever his feelings about his father may have been before he met him, David's suggestion that Kirk "killed everybody" aboard Regula I were ludicrous--as was his decision to rush a phaser-wielding Clark Terrell, which got one of his colleagues killed.

--Sran

 

Yes. Specifically, postmodern literary criticism does not. Jacques Derrida seems to have thought along lines that only the reader's understanding is important, especially when the original author is gone and can't be quizzed about it, or when translation and interpretation occur across cultural boundaries.

 

Seems like a good idea in theory, but on screen it looks kind of time consuming. And in BOBW and other episodes, they never even got to that point.

They're going off into violent military situations with families on board. Would this be Starfleet standard philosophy on the matter?

I get what Trek is saying and I like the idea. It would be cool to wear the uniforms, have a rank and such, and yet just be able to follow the career of your dreams (scientist, doctor etc.)

But the way it comes off sometimes is, characters who want to pretend to be military and wear uniforms and have rank, but avoid the other reality of being a military force.

If Picard gets visibly upset at Starfleet being considered a military, then that's an example of denying the military reality of Starfleet.

Thinking about it more, I'm not as bothered as to why they don't call themselves a military as much as why they never had a extended conversation about the subject.

It didn't have to be serious and take up half an episode, but just how the people view Starfleet.

It could be an friendly, amusing debate, with sarcasm and such, or even a running debate spanning other episodes.

Something like, "Oh so you carry high yield weapons, have military protocols, etc, but you're STILL not the military??"

It would be fun to see. All we got were one liners and that was it.

 

The Federation Starfleet is the military; the Earth Starfleet is not.

 

Has anyone ever made a cogent argument that Starfleet isn't a military?

 

I don't think so. You can't take Picard's word for it, anyway.

(As for any proof that the Earth Starfleet isn't military? Well I hate to play the numbers, but at least we have *two* officers' word on that - Forrest and Archer. I'd take the word of two over one, at least in this instance. Especially because of the MACOS...)

 

I have to say this about the MACOS: They were the first non-series regular crew that I can think of seemed competent at their jobs when it came to guarding someone or combat. -Maybe it IS the red shirts that makes you a target.

 

You know I was in the camp of: if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it must be a f'ing duck. In other words, it is a military because it acts like it from time to time.

But the above quote is the best explanation I've ever heard!

 

Even trying to pin down the Earth Starfleet as non-military is problematic. Sure, it might have been the intent that Earth Starfleet is meant to be more NASA-like as opposed to the Federation Starfleet's more militaristic nature. But, even after the MACOs were introduced, we have references to Starfleet court martials and in the Augments story arc Dr. Soong was kept in a Starfleet penal facility. And we know Starfleet handled security on Earth's embassy on Vulcan, a duty which is always handled by a nation's military. So in the end, I'm inclined to think Earth Starfleet is still a military and that Archer and Admiral Forrest just think military is a dirty word.

 

Scroll down to patrol. I suspect that most of Star Fleet operates in a manner similar to the U.S. Coast Guard. This might be consistent with having a fleet of Miranda/Soyuz type vessels (call them "cutters"). Scroll down further to "Science" and "Explorers".

 

Pretty much where I come down. It always feels like the writers think "military" is a dirty word and doesn't really think through what it is that both Earth and Federation Starfleet's do.

Who exactly defends Earth from external threats in the 22nd century?

 

Yeah. Starfleet *is* a military, but the confusion for some people is that they (mistakenly) equate "military" with a very narrow set of objectives, usually of a boots-on-the-ground nature. Even in our current real life, militaries have much broader responsibilities than that, but it goes over the heads of Joe Sixpack, who is all like, "WOOOOO, GUNS AND AMMO MAAAAANNNN, GUNS AND AMMO!!!!!!"

As I and many others have demonstrated earlier in this very thread, historically the types of roles and responsibilities of military service have changed and evolved over time, as society itself has likewise changed and evolved. The 18th century Navy certainly enforced territorial imperitives, but they also had broad ranging responsibilities including exploration and scientific discovery. My feeling about Starfleet is that it too is merely a future military which has evolved towards newer sensibilities, while still retaining certain traditions, just as our current Navy no longer strictly resembles 1:1 the one commanded by Admiral Nelson. Things change, but Starfleet is most certainly a military. Make no mistake about that.

 

Much was made of the NX-01 being Earth's first interstellar exploration ship, okay.

But we saw that Earth previously had Starfleet starships. If these starships were not intended for exploration, what function did they serve in Starfleet?

If Starfleet in the 22nd century was a non-military exploration organization, and they weren't exploring yet, what were these ships doing for Starfleet, what was their purpose?

Both were, neither were not. Usage of the term "military" may have been absent, but not the factual aspect of being a military organization.

 

I wonder if that's a hold over from the attitudes towards the military in the 60s and 70s? That was the time Roddenberry really developed his "pitch" about Star Trek for fandom on the convention circuit. By the time TNG came around attitudes were changing again, but I don't think Roddenberry was changing with them.

 

I really like this description it makes a lot of sense

 

This was one of the main things that brought me to post this article. That and the fact that in several episodes they specifically say they aren't military...yet in other episodes they say or do things VERY military and as many have already quoted "I'm a soldier not a diplomat" I just thought it was funny how much the show contradicts itself, I enjoy debating this stuff and getting other people's take.