Who would win in a fight: The Federation or the Terran Empire?
The Federation has allies that would come to their aid. The Terran Empire has subjects that are just itching for a chance to stab the Terrans in the back.
Who would win in a fight: The Federation or the Terran Empire?
They're on a space ship. There are no seasons unless the environmental controls creates them. I imagine it must be similar for sailors and modern day astronauts.Have seasons lost their meaning in space? Aside from holodeck environments and holiday celebrations defined by the traditions of same, I imagine all the seasons blend together.
Space exploration is controlled by star fleet (the military branch of the federation)
I think this belongs in the controversial opinions thread!I was just thinking that it's a common misconception that Star Trek portrays a utopian vision of the future. Actually I think Star Trek portrays the unchecked consequences of the industrial revolution and the military-industrial complex.
Seemingly everything in Star Trek has to be commercially mass-produced to have value, like food replicators, phasers and tricorders, fuel sources and officer uniforms. Space exploration is controlled by star fleet (the military branch of the federation) and even without any monetary currency or capitalist economics, the militaristic expansion of humanity into space continues to propogate the industrial mass production of weaponry and automatic vehicles.
It shows a link between military expansionism and corporate productivity. Even with a surplus of necessary resources, the resources are not distributed fairly throughout the Alpha Quadrant of the Milky Way galaxy. Federation-linked politicians are elitist and political affairs typically only involve this elitist group instead of allowing for the fair representation of the people being governed.
How is it utopian? Personally I don't think that's the case, space exploration is just an idyllic theme.
I was just thinking that it's a common misconception that Star Trek portrays a utopian vision of the future. Actually I think Star Trek portrays the unchecked consequences of the industrial revolution and the military-industrial complex.
Space exploration is controlled by star fleet (the military branch of the federation) and even without any monetary currency or capitalist economics, the militaristic expansion of humanity into space continues to propogate the industrial mass production of weaponry and automatic vehicles.
Even with a surplus of necessary resources, the resources are not distributed fairly throughout the Alpha Quadrant of the Milky Way galaxy. Federation-linked politicians are elitist and political affairs typically only involve this elitist group instead of allowing for the fair representation of the people being governed.
Expansion? yes. Military? yes, sort of, they need a defense apparatus. But 'militaristic expansion'? I don't see much evidence of that.
Sorry, bit of a pre-disposition to anti-industrialism here. There is an expression around my way that goes something like, "Nice (X), did you make it yourself?" It's something of a compliment to an article of clothing and also an insult to the recipient for consumerism and for wearing something that they hypothetically don't deserve to have. I don't personally subscribe to that notion, it's kind of a pro-slavery attitude, that consumers don't deserve to have it because they don't know how to make it. The subversion of logic behind it resonates anyway with much of modern technology. To be quite frank, it's one of the few common sayings in our language that's known to cause psychological trauma. Being "caught in the crossfire" in other words. Anyway, sorry for posting off-topic, I'll stopI think this belongs in the controversial opinions thread!![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.