Is Starfleet Military?

[Citiprime]

Once you have committed to funding and maintaining a sizeable peacetime military force, you find there are all kinds of neat things they can do, in peacetime. In war, of course, everything changes.

One thing that’s usually left unsaid during debates about the US military budget is that it’s a jobs program. Wanna cut it? Wanna close bases and do away with weapons programs? Ok, how many jobs are you willing to cut along with them, and how many communities are you willing to negatively impact when the jobs from those bases and programs are eliminated? Not saying it can never be done, but it’s not as easy as the usual rhetoric that talks about the “bloated defense budget,” where every dollar for a bomb just becomes healthcare/education money. It’s more complicated than that.

However, in a post-scarcity society, a lot of those aspects would be much different. Presumably, San Francisco doesn’t host Starfleet Command because of the jobs and economic investment it brings to the area, because there’s no money and no need to worry about job growth since there’s no poverty.

 

[Tallguy]

Presumably, San Francisco doesn’t host Starfleet Command because of the jobs and economic investment it brings to the area, because there’s no money and no need to worry about job growth since there’s no poverty.

Interesting idea: Is there a benefit to more people living in a city even if it isn't monetary? Is there a detriment if people move away? If Starfleet packed up and moved to Vulcan, would it be harmful to SF or to Earth?

 

[Deks]

Interesting idea: Is there a benefit to more people living in a city even if it isn't monetary? Is there a detriment if people move away? If Starfleet packed up and moved to Vulcan, would it be harmful to SF or to Earth?

Cities are larger hubs of activity... and given the kind of society UFP is supposed to be, cities would not feel crowded at all.
They would in fact drastically improve quality of life.
Obviously, living outside the city wouldn't be ostracised in any way... and a few people may choose to live in a less urban setting.

Its also possible most people opt to live in cities in order to minimize their footprint on the environment/nature.

As for if SF or Earth would 'suffer' if the HQ was moved... no, I don't think so.
To me, it never made sense that SF would have Academy for example just on Earth... given the size of UFP, etc. they'd realistically have campuses throughout the Federation.

Similarly with HQ, any member planet would have to be prepared to host SF HQ in case of an attack of if Earth is destroyed... sort of like a contingency... and every member planet would take turns in being the main presence for SF operations.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Everywhere on one planet is just a transporter beam away, or a very small number, like two or three beamings, so the economic distinction between urban and rural would be virtually nonexistent compared to how we perceive the difference IRL today. You could get to the 'burbs from downtown faster than you could walk down the hall to the restroom.

 

[at Quark's]

Everywhere on one planet is just a transporter beam away, or a very small number, like two or three beamings, so the economic distinction between urban and rural would be virtually nonexistent compared to how we perceive the difference IRL today. You could get to the 'burbs from downtown faster than you could walk down the hall to the restroom.

It isn't completely free, though. According to the estimate of his son, young Benjamin Sisko would have used up about a month's worth of 'transporter credits' during his first few Starfleet Academy days, just to get back to New Orleans to have dinner with his parents.

Or perhaps it is practically free, just not at Starfleet Academy, to teach those cadets dealing with limited resources.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

It isn't completely free, though. According to the estimate of his son, young Benjamin Sisko would have used up about a month's worth of 'transporter credits' during his first few Starfleet Academy days, just to get back to New Orleans to have dinner with his parents.

Or perhaps it is practically free, just not at Starfleet Academy, to teach those cadets dealing with limited resources.

That makes sense. You'd want to teach your cadets to solve problems without relying on the transporter.

 

[fireproof78]

Given the tendency in TNG era to say "everyone has perfect self-control so we let systems be open" I would imagine a course in personal responsibility would be a requisite at the Academy.

 

[Orphalesion]

Interesting idea: Is there a benefit to more people living in a city even if it isn't monetary? Is there a detriment if people move away? If Starfleet packed up and moved to Vulcan, would it be harmful to SF or to Earth?

You probably get a lot of cultural exchange due to people from all over the UFP coming to SF to study and work for Starfleet There. Probably some non-starfleet affiliated folks. or retired Starfleet officers choose to settle there too because of it and it ends up with a city where you are more likely to see the art, culture and cuisine from many different planets across the Alpha/Beta quadrant.And it makes the city wonderfully vibrant, colourful and diverse.
If Starfleet Headquarters and/or the Academy moved there would probably be less of that.

 

[NCC-73515]

"Portraying Starfleet as a military organization flew in the face of everything Star Trek stood for"
"At one point I forcefully but tactfully reminded Meyer and Harve that Starfleet was the philosophical descendant of NASA, not the Air Force."
- Nichelle Nichols

The NASA comparison is interesting: NASA shuttles also flew secret missions for the Air Force, and the program was co-funded by the Air Force, and it was supposed to also launch from Vandenberg, and landed at Edwards many times. Many NASA astronauts also were members or vets of the military. They have mission commanders, spacecraft commanders. And yet, NASA never was a military itself.

 

[fireproof78]

When NASA is called to fight wars for the USA her point will make sense. As it stands, it doesn't. Why is the Enterprise sent to defend the Federation and its interests? Send the military.

 

[scotpens]

"Portraying Starfleet as a military organization flew in the face of everything Star Trek stood for"
"At one point I forcefully but tactfully reminded Meyer and Harve that Starfleet was the philosophical descendant of NASA, not the Air Force."
- Nichelle Nichols

No disrespect meant to the dead, but Ms. Nichols was simply wrong. As originally conceived by the Great Bird, Starfleet was the literary and philosophical descendant of the navies of the European colonial powers in the 18th and 19th centuries. Nicholas Meyer may have gone a bit overboard with the nautical touches, but at least he grasped the concept.

 

[Citiprime]

When NASA is called to fight wars for the USA her point will make sense. As it stands, it doesn't. Why is the Enterprise sent to defend the Federation and its interests? Send the military.

Arguably, the Earth Starfleet circa 2151 is probably the best fit for the NASA argument.

• Their primary mission is exploration, with the defense of Earth not seeming to be a top priority for the ship or Starfleet at first.
• Starfleet appeared to send the Enterprise out with a limited armament, initially, because the Enterprise is not intended to be a warship. The Enterprise is never mentioned as "patrolling" Earth territory for threats.
• Archer makes a clear distinction between Starfleet and the military when he brings the MACOs on board.

Although, it does bring up an interesting question for anyone who wants to take a guess as to how policy would roll in a real-world situation. If NASA had the ability today to send starships out into space, and we knew for a fact there was the potential for hostile alien encounters, would we:

• Give weapons to NASA and let NASA decide how best to handle things with their people and ships when they send out exploratory missions?
• Subsume NASA into the Department of Defense and basically merge it with Space Force?
• Or let there be two separate agencies, one for defense, one scientific, that had different roles? NASA stays civilian without any armaments but reports problems to DoD and they handle the military side.

 

[fireproof78]

Arguably, the Earth Starfleet circa 2151 is probably the best fit for the NASA argument.

• Their primary mission is exploration, with the defense of Earth not seeming to be a top priority for the ship or Starfleet at first.
• Starfleet appeared to send the Enterprise out with a limited armament, initially, because the Enterprise is not intended to be a warship. The Enterprise is never mentioned as "patrolling" Earth territory for threats.
• Archer makes a clear distinction between Starfleet and the military when he brings the MACOs on board.

And that's great at that point in history. In TOS Starfleet is a combined service, Kirk is a soldier and they fight wars or prevent wars. They respond to all attacks on Federation territory. They defend and expand Federation interests. So, how does NASA factor in to that?

 

[Farscape One]

"Portraying Starfleet as a military organization flew in the face of everything Star Trek stood for"
"At one point I forcefully but tactfully reminded Meyer and Harve that Starfleet was the philosophical descendant of NASA, not the Air Force."
- Nichelle Nichols

The NASA comparison is interesting: NASA shuttles also flew secret missions for the Air Force, and the program was co-funded by the Air Force, and it was supposed to also launch from Vandenberg, and landed at Edwards many times. Many NASA astronauts also were members or vets of the military. They have mission commanders, spacecraft commanders. And yet, NASA never was a military itself.

It makes a lot of sense that military officers or vets are NASA astronauts for two simple reasons.

First, the physical aspect. Peak physical condition is needed, particularly due to the g forces in getting to space, and the loss of muscle mass from staying up there for protracted periods of time. The military is definitely a place to find people in peak physical form. (Particularly Air Force and Navy, which pilots already have been through g forces in maneuvers and divers having the closest experience on Earth to being in space.

Second is mentality. Military are trained to be effective and handle emergencies and dangerous scenarios quickly and with a cool head.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

Archer makes a clear distinction between Starfleet and the military when he brings the MACOs on board.

Which could have been as simple as reflecting the "soldier=military, sailor ≠ military" philosophy of the Age of Sail explorers that Starfleet, particularly early Starfleet, has always been modelled on.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Did I say the thing in this thread? That they lost a war somewhere and can't call Starfleet a military a la Japan even though it very obviously is.

 

[Tallguy]

Did I say the thing in this thread? That they lost a war somewhere and can't call Starfleet a military a la China Japan even though it very obviously is.

Fixed. And if you didn't say it somebody did. Pre-coffee, not looking.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Apologies and fixed!

 

[Jedman67]

Nicholas Meyer may have gone a bit overboard with the nautical touches

Just a bit

 

[Tallguy]

"Portraying Starfleet as a military organization flew in the face of everything Star Trek stood for"

We're on page 14 of the umpteenth thread on this topic and I still have a hard time articulating why I find this not only wrong but (especially considering the source) hurtful and sad.

Since Encounter at Farpoint just came up in another thread something just occurred to me. For Roddenberry (at least) it was on its face wrong and possibly even a little funny to imagine a future where lawyers were deemed to have no value and were considered a societal ill. "This is a court of fact!" was meant to have a chilling response and it did. Even at TNG's most utopian it was necessary and honorable to have a legal profession. This was seen as advantageous at both a societal and an individual level. (And he was right.)

But even though it was demonstrated in apparently all but name over and over again that the same applied to a military organization in every flavor of Star Trek ever made, the same consideration of that necessity and honor was out of bounds to Roddenberry and Nichols and others.