I think the Fed is governmental and Starfleet functions, as the situation dictates, as a military.
Fundamentally Important Aspects of ST Even Fans Misunderstand
- Thread starter JeffinOakland
- Start date
That Starfleet is the unified starfleet of all member planets is just as much a fan assumption. I think of Starfleet as simply being the most dominant of the individual members' fleets, such that it has practically assumed that role. Starfleet vessels that are crewed entirely by another species in the 23rd century are probably part of a sort of exchange program, having come over from their world's service. By the 24th century, non-humans serving in Starfleet is much more common, but humans still dominate the organization.
No it is not "just as much" an assumption.
That's your theory, and I really wouldn't mind seeing it in a parallel universe in an episode, but I do not think it qualifies under the title of this thread as a misunderstood fact.
I would like to see more ships from the individual memberworlds though. Although the combined Federation fleet is Starfleet, the local security forces (police or national guard units?) seem to be less cosmopolitan in design (the Vulcan ships from "Unification" were pretty distinctly Vulcan). I don't want to see it pushed too far (i.e. I imagine humans and Andorians and many other races present in the Vulcan defense service), but it would be interesting to see for example what purely Terran ships look like, or what 24th Century Andorian ships look like -- I'm picturing something with Son'a Battleship-like curves...or....
Yes, it is. Unless you've got some evidence to the contrary.
In TOS (I think) it was deliberately planned that the Enterprise was going to be a Earth ship.
Lots of countries militarys operate fighters, but only about a half dozen countries manufacture fighters.
China "new" aircraft carrier was built in Russia, India only resently built their first carrier, prior to it India's aircraft carriers were also built in Russia.
Starfleet has usually been depicted as not having huge numbers of starships, short-handed, the hero ship being the only one available for a given assignment.
Yet during the Dominion War we hear (but usually don't see) of vast fleets. If Starfleet is short on ship, where did these tremendous numbers of starships come from?
And I'm talking about "in-universe."
ST is make-believe. ST scriptwriters are tasked with the responsibility of telling interesting stories not of being consistent to every other story. If the plot calls for one ship to tough it out all alone, one ship is provided. If the plot calls for multiple ships, then we get multiple ships.
My interpretation of Starfleet is that it is a service formally devoted to science, discovery and diplomacy with defence as a secondary function.
Realpolitik, it is Starfleet's military muscle that is the glue that underwrites Federation prosperity.
All this comes from the Federation wanting to position itself as a union of peace. But the reality is, one cannot be a power with good intentions and high ideals alone.
Realpolitik, it is Starfleet's military muscle that is the glue that underwrites Federation prosperity.
All this comes from the Federation wanting to position itself as a union of peace. But the reality is, one cannot be a power with good intentions and high ideals alone.
No it is not, just as much as. You could also say Trek was in fact written by a Flying Spaghetti Monster and psychically deposited in the minds of Terran writers, but though there's no evidence to the contrary, it's not as likely as the alternative.
You aren't really arguing over the likelihood quotients of 2 completely unprovable possibilities, are you?
From Wikipedia:
During production of early episodes of the original series, several details of the makeup of the Star Trek universe had yet to be worked out, including the operating authority for the USS Enterprise. The terms Star Service("The Conscience of the King"), Spacefleet Command ("The Squire of Gothos"), United Earth Space Probe Agency ("Charlie X" and "Tomorrow Is Yesterday"), and Space Central ("Miri") were all used to refer to the Enterprise's operating authority, before the term "Starfleet" became widespread from the episode "Court Martial" onwards.
Given the nature of sci-fi TV prior to Trek, it shouldn't be surprising that they'd begin under the assumption the Enterprise is an Earth ship. But that's part of Trek's brilliance, that when it thought things through, they didn't remain...dare I say bigoted in their approach.
Though there is also a poetic symmetry to Majel Barrett's Number One going on the chopping block after "The Cage" and Janice Lester decrying there being no female starship captains in "Turnabout Intruder."
That throws out the best part of there being 150+ separate fleets: the cool different ships. It also suggests that upstart Earth magically makes the most sophisticated ships in the galaxy. If all the provincial powers are looking for ships to acquire, why not buy them from Vulcan or Andor or maybe even older models from Qo'nos? And now the Vulcan National Guard looks like a mishmash of Vulcan-looking and Terran-looking ships? Meh, I don't like the visual incongruity.
More importantly, again there's been NO mention of any of that in 50 years of Star Trek. Even if you won the lottery and offered 100 million to CBS for free to make just one episode with that being the case, it wouldn't change the reality of it not having been so previously.
Space is huge. If you want to take the silly writer's ploy of making the Enterprise the only ship in the "quadrant" *seriously, then you could still have one ship per sector, and there still be countless sectors each with one ship to administrate.
*First of all, if they're spread evenly between quadrants, you're saying Starfleet has two ships? Or they're spread unevenly, you're saying Starfleet placed one ship in half the space they inhabit and the rest of the fleet in the other??
To straighten out a few "fundamental misunderstandings" here...it is not an assumption or a fan theory that Starfleet began as an Earth organization comprised almost exclusively of humans, with the other worlds that would go on to found the Federation along with Earth having their own separate fleets. That is shown on ENT. It is an assumption/fan theory that these fleets were eventually folded in with Starfleet after the founding of the UFP. That was never specified anywhere onscreen. It is not an assumption or fan theory that Kirk's Enterprise is cited as operating under Earth authority multiple times in TOS. It is an assumption/fan theory that we should ignore this because the Federation hadn't been invented by the writers yet. It is not an assumption or fan theory that we have seen far more humans in Starfleet than we have aliens. It is an assumption/fan theory that there are not actually more humans than aliens in Starfleet.
(This is not to say some of these assumptions and fan theories can't be seen as reasonable or sensible, but let's be clear as to which is which on that score.)
LESTER: I hoped I wouldn't see you again.
KIRK: I don't blame you.
LESTER: The year we were together at Starfleet is the only time in my life I was alive.
KIRK: I never stopped you from going on with your space work.
LESTER: Your world of starship captains doesn't admit women! It isn't fair!
KIRK: No, it isn't. And you punished and tortured me because of it.
LESTER: I loved you. We could've roamed among the stars.
KIRK: We'd have killed each other.
LESTER: It might have been better.
And before you appeal to what Roddenberry (who was well-known to spin things after the fact and counter to it, including specifically that Number One was axed due to sexism as opposed to objections to him casting his mistress in the part, and who was also effectively out of the picture for the third season) later said about the line being simply sexist, consider that whatever the behind-the-scenes intention was or wasn't at the time, it has since been firmly established by ENT that Starfleet allowed women to captain starships already a century earlier (see Hernandez, Erika).
(This is not to say some of these assumptions and fan theories can't be seen as reasonable or sensible, but let's be clear as to which is which on that score.)
Of course, yet this doesn't necessarily mean we have to ignore these references and pretend they really all refer to Starfleet (though some would indeed make sense as nicknames or divisions of that organization). It's entirely possible the there was indeed more political autonomy of UFP member worlds and complex interaction among various bureaucracies in Kirk's time. This wouldn't contradict anything from later productions thus far. Indeed, we know that the UESPA continues to exist and have some relationship to Starfleet up to at least the time when the Enterprise-B is constructed, based on her dedication plaque.
But she never actually said any such thing. In context, she's clearly talking about her personal relationship with Kirk and how it foundered because he became too preoccupied with the responsibilities of command to remain intimate and she became resentful:
LESTER: I hoped I wouldn't see you again.
KIRK: I don't blame you.
LESTER: The year we were together at Starfleet is the only time in my life I was alive.
KIRK: I never stopped you from going on with your space work.
LESTER: Your world of starship captains doesn't admit women! It isn't fair!
KIRK: No, it isn't. And you punished and tortured me because of it.
LESTER: I loved you. We could've roamed among the stars.
KIRK: We'd have killed each other.
LESTER: It might have been better.
And before you appeal to what Roddenberry (who was well-known to spin things after the fact and counter to it, including specifically that Number One was axed due to sexism as opposed to objections to him casting his mistress in the part, and who was also effectively out of the picture for the third season) later said about the line being simply sexist, consider that whatever the behind-the-scenes intention was or wasn't at the time, it has since been firmly established by ENT that Starfleet allowed women to captain starships already a century earlier (see Hernandez, Erika).
All of this.
I don't know whether to be amused or concerned. I'm kinda sorry I created this thread...and kinda proud.Welcome to the internet.
But in spite of that, there is a body of work that composes the entirety of Star Trek. Do writers have to take that into account, no they can make up anything they want. But the backstory that was put forward by all the writer that came before is still there.
I think one of the prime purposes of the Federation (perhaps unspoken) is to keep the Members from going to war with each other.
Didn't he use to post here?
Unification (part two). And the line I quoted from Journey to Babel.
Not a large number, but you can't say no mentions.
Add to that the multiple references to the Enterprise being a "Earth ship" and being "from Earth" during TOS.
Today, the Department of Defense, and National Command Authority, and US Southern Command, and Unified Combatant Command (and others).
United Earth Space Probe Agency has been name dropped (iirc) in three of the series.
"Fundamentally Important Aspects of ST that fans Misunderstand"
OK all jokes aside, there is a big one. Fans completely miss what Kirk's "5 year mission" was. They view it through the filter of Picard era nonsense. But the actual TOS mission was all about finding and securing resources. Mining Rights! Di Lithium! Energy Production! Just watch TOS and start watching for how many episodes involve mining, mineral rights and trade or defense of such. You will be astonished. Kirk was on a 23rd century Exxon expeditionary force. Most of his contact and conflict with the Klingons involved energy or mining resources. Diplomacy was largely to facilitate trade for same. Science and Exploration was more and more about looking for useful stuff... That could be mined. There Defense roll both in TOS and later seen in ENT is in large part "keep the trade lanes open and safe."
In short, Starfleet is the Ferengi. They (Picard) just don't realize it.
OK all jokes aside, there is a big one. Fans completely miss what Kirk's "5 year mission" was. They view it through the filter of Picard era nonsense. But the actual TOS mission was all about finding and securing resources. Mining Rights! Di Lithium! Energy Production! Just watch TOS and start watching for how many episodes involve mining, mineral rights and trade or defense of such. You will be astonished. Kirk was on a 23rd century Exxon expeditionary force. Most of his contact and conflict with the Klingons involved energy or mining resources. Diplomacy was largely to facilitate trade for same. Science and Exploration was more and more about looking for useful stuff... That could be mined. There Defense roll both in TOS and later seen in ENT is in large part "keep the trade lanes open and safe."
In short, Starfleet is the Ferengi. They (Picard) just don't realize it.
The Federation had no legal authority to evict the Baku from the start. Or even study them without their permission.
Re: the Janice Lester thing only being about their relationship;
It could gave been interpreted that way, until Lester wants to switch bodies with Kirk so she command the Enterprise.
Thereby putting the premise right back to women were barred from being Starship captains, I'm afraid.
Re: the Janice Lester thing only being about their relationship;
It could gave been interpreted that way, until Lester wants to switch bodies with Kirk so she command the Enterprise.
Thereby putting the premise right back to women were barred from being Starship captains, I'm afraid.
"A woman Starship Captain? It's 1968! This is a Science Fiction show! If you want Fantasy try up the block at Disney."
It's clear that at this point Lester envies Kirk's position as a starship captain, perhaps because it's what she sees as having kept him from her. The Enterprise is in effect the "other woman" he jilted her in favor of. And it's equally clear that at this point she "would not be allowed to serve as captain," for good reason, due to her obvious mental instability and her impostory. It might even be clear that she believes she is disqualified because of her gender, but that doesn't necessarily make it true.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not really in denial of the likely intent here, but in retrospect there's just enough room to circumvent or ignore it. And unless you've got a workable theory for why Starfleet would allow, then categorically disallow, then allow again women to command starships, I think the bulk of the canonical evidence suggests that we should do just that in this case.
What makes the situation different with respect to fleet structure and political authority, you might ask? Because there the differences we see in evidence from the 22nd century to the 23rd to the 24th can actually be seen to make sense as a logical and broadly consistent progression over time, IMO. But of course, YMMV.
Last edited:
I think that original intent for "Turnabout Intruder" was formulated by people who, at that point in their careers, had, shall we say, other priorities besides safeguarding the integrity of Star Trek's in-universe continuity. Today there's absolutely no reason why we should defer to what IMO is its sexist original intent. Starfleet allows women captains, full stop, and it allows them regardless of what the intent of "Turnabout Intruder" was when it was written.
Last edited:
Similar threads
