Worldbuilding: New member integration in the UFP

Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Penta, Aug 5, 2010.

  1. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Oh it isn't logical, but neither is treating two different planets by two different standards, the only difference between Adana and Bajor would (at least on the surface) be that one caste system is class based and the other religious based.

    Actual the discussion between Sisko and Kira about the Federation not admitting Bajor if there was a caste system does prove part of my theory, if the Federation had the power to change it Members laws and societies, then all the Federation would have to do is admit Bajor with a caste system and then dissolve the caste system. The effect would be the same as admitting Bajor without a caste system in the first place.

    If I'm right and Bajor had been made a Federation Member while a caste system was in place, then there would be nothing the Federation government could have done about it, just like it couldn't have done anything about Adana's. And that assumes that the Federation even has a general prohibition against caste systems.

    If a group with too many voices can't make decisions, then how do you think the Federation council get anything done with it one hundred and fifty voices ?

    The difference would be that the Federation government isn't a true central national government, it would have few of the traditional duties, remember each of the member planet already have established national governments, either one or many. The same government that the various worlds have before joining, is the same government after, none of the duties and responsibilities are transferred to the Federation. The Federation government's only responsibilities are limited specific areas.

    Imagine a chain of islands in the middle of the ocean, the Federation is only responsible for the deep water, the members are responsible for the land and the shallows.

    Good question, do you have a answer?

    :):):):):)
     
  2. ProtoAvatar

    ProtoAvatar Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    Considering the draconian prime directive interpretation of the 24th century, the federation integrating new members (aka interfering) is practically a plot hole:

    Preparing cultures for membership in the federation by trying to steer their values (by cultural exchange) - blatant violation of the prime directive!
    A society enters the federation when all its members ask for membeership? No society has only one opinion - there are many voices. And majority opinion is not enough to justify federation interference (as proven in the klingon civil war).
    Giving new members technology more advanced than their own - blasphemy!

    Letting species die rather than interfere because...if you interfere the entire species will commit suicide? Ridiculous:guffaw:! During our entire history, there is NO SINGLE CASE in which a society was 'overwhelmed' and commited mass suicide, regardless of what it was confronted with.


    Hell - it's a wonder the federation actually explores (interfering!) and doesn't stay at home, hidden under cloacking fields - just to make sure no other people will see it and be influenced by the federation and its values:guffaw:!
     
  3. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    In two of the early Star Trek novels, Price of the Phoenix and Fate of the Phoenix, a planet is invited to join the Federation, there was supposed to be a planet wide discussion, followed by a vote whether or not to join. The end result was the entire planet descended into civil war as the populace divided into factions.

    You'll never get one hundred percent of a populace to agree to anything, a clear majority probably would suffice. Or the decision might be made by the existing leadership, if the their political system allows them to make that level of decision.


    It's possible that the Federation might require a plebiscite as a condition on membership.

    Interpretation of the PD does seem to change over the course of the multiple series. Possible the PD is concidered part of the Federation government's foreign policy, as various Presidents and foreign secretaries come and go the PD get reinterpreted, rewritten and it various sections assigned different levels of priorities. Every few months Starfleet Captains will receive the latest updates and revisions.


    :):):):):):)
     
  4. ProtoAvatar

    ProtoAvatar Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    T'Girl

    In "Redemption", the legally elected klingon government (supported by most of the population) asked for federation help against, essentially, terrorists.
    The federation refused to interfere, because stopping terrorists is an 'internal matter'.

    If this 'internal matter' was beyond the federation's authority, why should romulan help for the klingons be anything the federation can interfere with?
    Now the federation can't interfere in internal politics, but has free reign to interfere in external politics (that do not involve it?)? What's the justification for this division?

    And, of course, an romulan-klingon alliance would be disastruous for the federation.
    The federation's refusal to interfere was suicidal.


    Picard saved the day only because the romulans acted equally opaque:
    One wonders why, after Picard&co found the romulans, Sela didn't say:
    "You found me. Big deal. I just returned from your ship, Picard. You know nothing you didn't already know.
    This changes nothing - this is not hide and seek; I have no reason to return just becase you see me.
    If you have the balls, open fire.
    If not, get out of my way. I have a war to win. And, when I'm done, I'll come with my new klingon pals and start taking federation worlds apart"
     
  5. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Klingons obtain a position on their council either through family bloodlines or by rising to prominence. There are no elections by the Klingon general population.

    And speaking of our good old friend Kor, at one point in his career, Kor was the Klingon ambassador to Vulcan. Not a Consul-General running a consulate, but a full ambassador. That means the Klingons had a embassy on Vulcan, therefor the Vulcan government had a separate sovereignty from the Federation government.

    :):):)
     
  6. Sci

    Sci Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Location:
    Montgomery County, State of Maryland
    And yet the Federation was still able to make Vulcan go to war with the Dominion without asking Vulcan's permission, the same way the United States didn't have to ask Ohio's permission to declare war on the Third Reich in the 1940s. Go figure. :vulcan::rommie:
     
  7. neozeks

    neozeks Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Eh, I view that as a leftover from the pre-Federation days. Functionally, it pretty much is a Consulate, it just keeps it's old name. It's not impossible the EU states will some day reach full federation and yet still have representatives called ambassadors sent to them (or between them), as a matter of tradition.
     
  8. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    A few days ago Joao Vale de Almeida was formally installed as the EU's ambassador to America and has suggested that American officials should regard him as their first point of contact for European discussions and not individual European Ambassadors, he informed Washington DC officials and politicians that under the EU's' new Lisbon Treaty, he will be "leading the show" among European representatives in Washington.

    Which seems to have pissed off the British Ambassador for one, not sure about the other 25 European Ambassadors..

    ---------

    In TUC, Spock was referred to as the Federation special envoy, while Sarek was called the Vulcan Ambassador. So there are separate Federation and Member diplomatic entities. In the episode Yesteryear, in a (very slightly) alternate ttimeline, Sarek was the Vulcan ambassador to seventeen different Member planets over the course of thirty years.

    The Member planets establish official diplomatic missions to each others planets and with foreign powers too. Meaning the Members are separate political-national states from each other and from the Federation.

    The Members have "pooled together" to maintain a interstellar political body called the Federation, to collectively handle interstellar matters for them. Interstellar speed limits would be a interstellar matter, so would interstellar defense.

    As I understand it, all the Ohio state delegates did voted for war against Germany on December 11,1941.

    Of the five declared wars in Americas history, three were delared when Congressinal delegations were selected directly by state governments and in 1941 the Ohio state delegates did represent the Ohio people. So Ohio was asked.

    In what episode was Vulcan "made" to go to war? The Vulcan government could have withdrawn from the collective decision the go to war, if necessary by withdrawing from Federation Membership.

    The Federation never formally declared war upon the Dominion, I started a thread about this a few months ago.

    :):):):)
     
  9. neozeks

    neozeks Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    I think Sci's point was that even if they hadn't voted for it, Ohio would (as a part of the US) still be at war.
     
  10. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    I must have misunderstood Sci's words, my bad.

    However, I do believe I'm correct that if the majority of the state delegations had voted against the war declaration the measure would have failed. In the portion of the war declaration pertaining to Japan, one senator (Montana?) did vote no.

    Now of course US law does allow the President to send the military into combat without a formal declaration. During DS9, there was no (canon) declaration against the Dominion, in fact from on screen evidence it would seem on the surface that it was Starfleet's defense mandate that took the Federation into war, not a deliberate decision by the Federation council.



    :borg::borg::borg::borg::borg:
     
  11. Sci

    Sci Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Location:
    Montgomery County, State of Maryland
    But that doesn't mean they asked Ohio's permission. President Roosevelt did not call up John Bricker, Governor of the State of Ohio, to ask his permission. The Ohio General Assembly did not get a vote. The government of the State of Ohio had no authority whatsoever over how the Members of Congress from the State of Ohio voted on that declaration. Congressional delegations answer to the people of their districts and their states, but they do not actually answer to the state governments themselves.

    The comparable situation, of course, would be that the Federation Councillor representing the Confederacy of Vulcan would have voted for the war against the Dominion. But that doesn't mean that the Federation President called up the Administrator of the Confederacy of Vulcan or that the Vulcan Council had any say.

    Congressional delegations have never been selected directly by state governments. United States Representatives have always been popularly elected; before the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913, only United States Senators were selected by state governments. And we've thankfully outgrown this ridiculous notion that federal legislators should have to answer to the state governments as if they're the governors' ambassadors.

    Maybe. There's no canonical indication that Federation secession is legal. But if we accept the novels, which do indicate that secession is legal for the Federation, then we have to also accept that the Federation Council voted to declare war upon the Dominion after it attacked Deep Space 9 in the DS9 Season Five finale, "A Call to Arms," as established in the novel Articles of the Federation.
     
  12. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    State Congressional delegations, and state officials, represent the people of their state (hopefully), so how wasn't Ohio asked?

    Neither is there any canonical indication that the Federation council declared war at all, which doesn't mean it didn't happen off camera. It's possible that "Declarations of War" are consider to be nothing more than some charming old custom from one member's dark ages.

    Another possibility is that Starfleet has a ongoing mandate to defend the Federation, to their best ability, as the Admiralty decides. While instructions from politicians are a possibility, under the Federation-Starfleet system they might not be necessary.

    :borg:
     
  13. Sci

    Sci Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Location:
    Montgomery County, State of Maryland
    Because it was neither put to a referendum in Ohio, nor was the elected Ohio government asked. Yes, the persons elected by the Ohio population to represent them in the Congress voted on the declaration of war, but that's not the same thing as Ohio being asked. The difference is that Members of Congress work for the people of a state, not the state itself.

    That's why the Governor of the State of Ohio can't call up the Ohio Congressional delegation and tell them how to vote on a given matter. They're not ambassadors, they're independent federal legislators. They don't work for Ohio, they work for the people of Ohio.

    Ohio is not the same thing as its citizens. The State of Ohio is the political organization that its citizens empower to make the law for them; it is not the same thing as the people living in the place called Ohio.

    Are you seriously going to claim that Starfleet gets to decide when the Federation goes to war and the elected Federation government doesn't necessarily have any say in it? That the Federation is in essence a military dictatorship?

    But of course you aren't. Know why you aren't? Because both Star Trek VI and DS9's "Homefront"/"Paradise Lost" made it very clear that Starfleet doesn't get to make those decisions for itself, but instead must get permission from the Federation President.
     
  14. Mr. Laser Beam

    Mr. Laser Beam Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    The visitor's bullpen
    AFAIK, it's the DS9 episode "Rapture" which first suggests that a new member world's military forces will be absorbed into Starfleet. It doesn't say exactly how they do this, although I'm sure that it's a simple matter of their officers receiving some kind of Starfleet training, after which they receive Starfleet ranks equivalent to what they had (for instance, after Bajor joined the Federation, COLONEL Kira of the Bajoran Militia became CAPTAIN Kira of Starfleet).

    About a new member not necessarily having a global government: I don't think that's possible, as one of the (few) requirements for Federation membership is that a world MUST have a single global government. (TNG's "Attached")
     
  15. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Or then COMMANDER Kira, assuming she were a Lt.Colonel. After all, that's the uniform she got to wear when undercover on Cardassia, and it would hardly make sense to force her to wear a uniform for lower rank than the one she held in Bajoran service.

    Although of course a promotion would probably be due if Bajor joined the UFP, a development in which Kira would have played an active part...

    What is a single global government? Does it suffice that it speak with one voice in matters of foreign policy? In that case, the planet might have plenty of nations in the current sense, as long as a unifying agency of some sort channeled the foreign policy decisions to interstellar space.

    Some sort of fine structure for local representation will probably exist beneath the unified level anyway. Few UFP members are likely to be ruled by an absolute sovereign who allows for no dissent whatsoever.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  16. George

    George Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Sorry for bringing this up randomly again, but I completely and utterly disagree with the idea that First Contact is first and foremost a diplomatic act. First Contact is, well, First Contact, it's a category of its own. Priorities should be set more on the scientific side of things than the political side of things. If, for an Earth example, NASA successfully accomplished FTL travel, then the UFP should contact NASA, not the UN or the US Government. Scientists are usually more suitable for contact, since they are the people who really expect the existence of aliens. If they are welcomed on a Federation starship, they are much less likely to be overwhelmed and frightened by the advanced technology, than being fascinated by it. That being said, I think scientists should be the first people the UFP approaches, followed by political leaders and only then followed by the military.

    Regarding the point that governments may not wish to reveal the existence of the UFP to the general population, I think that the UFP should not listen to those governments, but rather consult its observation teams, asking them, not the governments, whether the population seems ready. If the OTs say yes, but the government says no, the government should be ignored. Governments are often not very reliable and more than often don't want the best for their people, but just the best for themselves. The OTs are clearly more suitable for independently analyzing the situation.
     
  17. Sci

    Sci Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Location:
    Montgomery County, State of Maryland
    Oh, really? So, in other words, we should ignore their sovereignty and violate the will of the legitimate government of the planet being contacted?

    I'm sorry, but that's the very definition of a violation of the Prime Directive: You are robbing that culture of its right to make its own choices through its legitimate government.
     
  18. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    I recalled this from an old thread and dug it out.

    If you (as a planet) came to the Federation, hat in hand, they might help you, but that doesn't mean you get made a Member. Managing a single warp flight doesn't qualify you for Membership. Being able to pulling your own weigh militarily makes a certain amount of sense from the Federation's point of view. You'll be able to make the group stronger.

    Bajor had a small space fleet, they used it to challenge the Romulans over control of one of the Bajorian moons.

    I've also noticed that in every case of whether or not a Member had any colonies, the Member always did. Now most of the time the question was never raised, but when it was, the answer was always yes. Prior to the creation of the Federation Earth, Vulcan and Andor all had colonies. Even poor and impoverished Bajor had colonies (colony?). This might one of the many requirements to becoming a new Federation Member. You have to demonstrate the ability.

    Wrong, the Ohio government isn't same thing as Ohio's citizens. Ohio is it's citizen, just as America is it people. Look I aware that there are employees (I consider elected politicians employees) who think that the US Government is somehow the entire country all by itself, that they are in no way "ambassadors" of the little people who elected them and that by simply winning a election they have near unlimited power.

    The fact that America doesn't currently have a single payer health care plan, mean all that's false. Politicians are on a leash. The people are the ones (usually) in control. And the people of Ohio were asked (through their mouth pieces) about the declaration of war.

    The preamble to the US Constitution doesn't start with "We The Government..."

    What I'm seriously claiming is that Starfleet gets to decide when to engage in COMBAT, not war. That, barring any instructions from the politicians of the moment, Starfleet would fight a foreign force attacking the Federation. Sci, it wouldn't make a difference it the defence were labeled as a war, a skirmish, a incident, whatever. Starfleet officers operate under standing rules of engagement. They started fighting the Dominion under those standing orders.

    Starfleet was going to fight the Dominion, unless the President ordered them to stop.

    Just that, we contact the planet, not the government. (maybe the government too, at some later time)

    But a direct contact would be the epitome of the inhabitents "making it own choices."

    The antithesis of the culture "making it own choices" would seem to be what you're suggesting.

    :):):):):):)
     
  19. George

    George Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Yes, because something tells me that the government has a 50-50 chance of not making the right decisions either.

    You are mistaking the interests and decisions of one or more governments for those of the people. As another Earth example, a majority of US citizens opposed the Iraq War, and yet the government decided to make it happen... ...this tells us that it is more than common for governments to make the wrong decisions or decisions which conflict with the will of the people.
     
  20. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Sorry George, but I was alive in March 2003, opposition among Americans at the time was pretty thin.