How is that social power? There were predominantly more black men in the military in Vietnam than whites, yet that was not indicative of social power.
The Puritans lacked social power, so they established colonies on distant shores.
How Do Social Conservative Star Fans Enjoy Star Trek?
- Thread starter JeffOakland
- Start date
- Status
How is that social power? There were predominantly more black men in the military in Vietnam than whites, yet that was not indicative of social power.
The Puritans lacked social power, so they established colonies on distant shores.
I'd like to hear someone explain where - on the political spectrum (pick a nation, any nation) - that societal "policy" (if it can even be called such) lies.
Star Trek is fiction, an entirely made-up future. There's plenty of fiction of all types and subjects that all kinds of different people enjoy regardless of their personal beliefs.
I have a hard time believing that this was a serious question.
That's more budget than anything else. Extras are cheaper if they don't spend two hours in a make-up chair.
I dunno, if I were an explorer, while I'd like to visit alien environments, I'd actually like to live in one that's closest to my home.
The farmer in Enterprise had some kind of energy weapon.
Iirc the initial suspect in that DS9 episode with the projectile weapon had a large weapon collection. While he was starfleet the collection was personal not part of his duties.
Troi, Geordi, and Worf all got rank promotions without changing jobs. I'm less familiar with DS9 character ranks but I'm pretty sure there were some promotions there without changing jobs as well.
Basically all of them. Sisko, Kira, Jadzia, and Bashir (aka: every character who actually had a rank) all got promoted without significant visible alteration to their duties. (Later, Ezri and Nog also got promoted. Ezri got hers as part of the "come to DS9 and be a counselor instead of assistant counselor" though, and also started manning communications on the Defiant a little while later.)
Wesley called Beverly "Mom". And I don't think anyone else except Egad Bad Dad Worf was a parent. Picard was one on Kataan, but I think his children called him "father" because they didn't want Kataan's culture to seem to Earth-like.
The opposite, I would say. The socially powerful were able to dodge the draft. Those of moderate power had to go if they were unlucky. And those low on the totem pole either enlisted for a better life, or got the "service or slammer" choice.
Deep Space 9's promotions were perfect. Kira, Sisko, Dax, Ezri, Bashir, Nog... they all ranked up. O'Brien was presumably near the top of the enlisted rank hierarchy, and Worf was freshly promoted to LCDR and therefore not due yet.
TNG's were perfect save one: Data deserved to be a commander way more than Troi did.
And if VOY was going to have Tom get demoted and promoted back, it's just stupid that an equally competent officer was stiffed. I don't know which is worse, the ineptitude of the showrunners or their mean-spiritedness.
Yeah, the occasional multi-species experiment aside, logistically its easier to keep species together. Vulcans find human ships cold and smelly, and I'm sure there are many other examples in universe. You'll have your handful of volunteers, and some others assigned by necessity. We just dont see the Andorian ship with 3 humans assigned to it.
I still wonder how it works (for lack of a better word) regarding rewards in the Federation. I mean, even if people get all possible opportunities for development, they still aren't born with equal capabilities or talents, and given that there's a ban on genetic manipulation, that probably won't be fundamentally different in the Federation.
So one might be born with an IQ of 160, great artistic gifts, good with people, a body that needs only 4 hours sleep per night and near inexhaustible energy, a person that even with an 80 hour working week still wonders what to do with the time left (I've really known a person with that much energy), and capable of Olympic level sport achievements if he puts the training in, and the other with an IQ of 80, a weak sickly body, capable of 10-15 hours of work a week tops, the rest spent in recuperation, and no particular visible gift or talent in any other area either. Obviously the first person is going to achieve more than the second person. So, should I expect the first person to become head of Starfleet, live in the most prestigious house around, have all kinds of perks and privileges associated with his position (e.g. his own spaceyacht), and the 2nd person to just get by on the Federation equivalent of welfare, or baseline existence? Or have these things also been more equalized?
So one might be born with an IQ of 160, great artistic gifts, good with people, a body that needs only 4 hours sleep per night and near inexhaustible energy, a person that even with an 80 hour working week still wonders what to do with the time left (I've really known a person with that much energy), and capable of Olympic level sport achievements if he puts the training in, and the other with an IQ of 80, a weak sickly body, capable of 10-15 hours of work a week tops, the rest spent in recuperation, and no particular visible gift or talent in any other area either. Obviously the first person is going to achieve more than the second person. So, should I expect the first person to become head of Starfleet, live in the most prestigious house around, have all kinds of perks and privileges associated with his position (e.g. his own spaceyacht), and the 2nd person to just get by on the Federation equivalent of welfare, or baseline existence? Or have these things also been more equalized?
From what we've been told, at least by the 23rd century, there's no money. So I would guess that everyone gets a baseline "basic" resources. Although, if every home has a replicator in it, what else would United Earth/Federation have to supply beyond power (and The Voyage Home says it's all solar based)? A replicator would take care of food, clothing, and all basic necessities.
In The Wrath of Khan, during the scene where Spock presents Kirk with a copy of A Tale of Two Cities and discuss his birthday at Starfleet Academy, there's a guy in the background cleaning the floor. And I've always tried to match that with everything we've been told about Earth and the Federation.
Why would a person want to do a job cleaning floors in a money-less society that has done away with greed if they don't have to? Because, even if you take Picard's words from First Contact at face value, polishing linoleum doesn't exactly fit with doing work that's bettering yourself and the rest of humanity. Maybe in a society where people's basic needs are taken care of, that guy is satisfied and happy cleaning floors, and goes home every day to replicate synthehol. The feeling I've always gotten is that a restaurant like Joseph Sisko's exists for anyone to come in and eat. Sisko's father runs it because he enjoys being a cook and cooking for others. And that's how public services exist. In Star Trek's Earth, people work and provide services out of the mutual joy it provides them to perform a function.
But beyond that, how exactly is property transferred in that kind of society? Like do the Siskos "own" their restaurant? Can they "sell" it to someone else? But if you have no currency, how do you buy or sell it? Unless a Ferengi comes along with latinum, is Earth back to the barter system if you want to transfer goods?
Without the pressures of having to earn a living to keep a roof over your head I think we might see people happier to do those kinds of jobs as they won’t have to work 80hrs a week to break even so they are less gruelling but also the idea is that people have reached a point of societal advancement where they all know they must contribute in some fashion or another.
The stigma of those jobs is probably reduced significantly too - every bit counts towards keeping ships, bases, society running
You might also find those jobs preferred by people whose interests are not strictly ‘productive’ - anthropology for example doesn’t build starships but intellectual advancement has its own value so maybe someone who studies it for fun will mop floors as their “productive labour” and so it gives them time to follow their interests freely
The stigma of those jobs is probably reduced significantly too - every bit counts towards keeping ships, bases, society running
You might also find those jobs preferred by people whose interests are not strictly ‘productive’ - anthropology for example doesn’t build starships but intellectual advancement has its own value so maybe someone who studies it for fun will mop floors as their “productive labour” and so it gives them time to follow their interests freely
Well, you'd still need some additional services. Houses and infrastructure would still need (periodic) maintenance, for example. The average citizen's replicator probably cannot fix their crumbling houses if that were to be absent.
Simple work in itself can be quite satisfying. Most of the frustrations I've had with doing (relatively) simple work didn't have to do with the work itself, but with how people treat you based on your role. For example, I've done both vocational and Ph.D. level jobs, and I was taken aback by how differently I was treated, even by the very same people in the same company. Some people excercise all their needs for 'development' within their line of work; others find their expression more outside it and are content to do simple work even if they could do something 'far better'.
It's why I always have refused to believe the Federation has no money. In my view, it's quite impossible to run any sufficiently advanced economy without it. The only explanation I could accept is they invented something beyond money, something better even to handle those kind of needs. But a simple barter system sure as hell it can't be. Money was invented because of the considerable drawbacks of the barter system in the first place. (Well, and to get rid of the hassle of having to determine the purity and weight of every slice of gold or silver that was used in trade, and just refer to a centralised authority (e.g. the king of that reason) that vouched for the value of that piece of gold).
I'll add to that that I'll call any kind of abstracted 'credit' system that can be exchanged for certain (limited) goods 'money', even if they don't. I've always thought it was beyond dumb to have them declare the Federation no longer used money. All they'd needed to do was to declare they still had money, but nobody was interested in it in any other way anymore than as just a means to facilitate fair transactions.
Limited goods there'll always be. Take for example Data in All Good Things holding the Lucasian Chair and living in the original Newton house. Even if others could duplicate the exact house, only Data gets to live in the actual Newton house (as long as he holds that chair, at least). Same for, say, original van Goghs, even though there may be billions of replicated copies floating around.
Holy hell, not the money argument. It's like the is Starfleet military argument but even less fun.
- Status
Similar threads
