I think that's an excellent conjecture -- if not in terms of the absorption of Federation Member State starfleets, then probably in terms of the relative division of power between the Federation and Member State governments. Is the Federation a state or an alliance? That's probably a major question that was a source for a lot of conflict.
AFAIK, Federation member worlds can - and always could - run their own local affairs pretty much however they want, provided they adhere to minimum standards set forth by the UFP constitution: no caste based discrimination, and one-world governmental state. Beyond that, anything goes, really.
We don't know that, though. It seems to be the popular fan assumption, but I don't think we've ever gotten a clear answer on how power is distributed, either on paper or in reality, between the UFP and its Member State governments. Certainly I'd be really surprised if the Federation Charter/Constitution/Whatever-they're-calling-it-this-week doesn't impose more obligations on Member State governments, including the existence of a democratic government, the protection of free speech, etc.
And, frankly, there's
always a question of where one level of government's jurisdiction ends and another begins. For instance, early in American history, it was presumed that the federal government would stay out of the state governments' business, but this created major problems. The Bill of Rights, for instance, supposedly guaranteed that all United States citizens had freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, were protected from unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant, were protected from cruel and unusual punishments, were guaranteed due process of the law, etc. And yet, at the same time, it was believed that the federal Bill of Rights did not apply to the states -- meaning that while the
federal government couldn't do any of this to you, but, for instance, the government of the Commonwealth of Virginia could declare, say, the official church of Virginia to be the Anglican Church and compel taxpayers to subsidize this church; could deny freedom of speech and the press; could arrest you and throw you in jail without due process of the law; could deny you a jury trial; could engage in cruel and unusual punishments. Etc. And all of it was okay under that era's interpretation of federalism. So there's a question of the preservation of the rights of sentient entities as they move from Member State to Member State if we say that the Federation only has a very few requirements of its Member States.
Another example of a potential conflict with that set-up comes from U.S. history. At various points, the federal government has imposed tariffs on goods imported from a given country, or has even tried to bar trade with that country, even though a given state's economy might rely in great part upon trade with that country. What happens if the Federation decides to impose a trade embargo upon the Romulan Star Empire, but the Federation Member State of Antede's economy is heavily reliant upon grade with Romulus? Under a really extreme interpretation of the idea that a Member State can do whatever it wants, Antede might make the same argument that South Carolina did during the Jackson Administration: That it can nullify federal law and do whatever it wants. The Federation might find its efforts to embargo Romulus thwarted by its own Member governments.
The only thing we
do know is that the Federation Supreme Court has the right to throw out a law it finds to violate a sentient entity's rights. We do not know if this applies only to
Federation laws or also to those of UFP Member States.
Bottom line: We've never really seen a full-on conflict between the UFP government and one of its Member governments. The implication in the minor conflicts we've seen has been that Federation law would prevail, but we don't know for certain.
I'd think that every Federation Member State retains its own domestic space force for use within their territorial jurisdiction, with the Federation President occasionally "federalizing" them, in much the same way that U.S. states maintain their own state defense forces and Army National Guard and Air National Guard units.
In fact, the DS9 Homefront/Paradise Lost arc was supposed to feature exactly that - the UFP President (Jaresh-Inyo) federalizing native United Earth military forces to help with the growing crisis. But that got cut for time.
Fascinating!
Praetor, you are truly too kind. Muchas gracias.
That might be more accurate. Still, I'd like to find a reason why humans seemed so omnipresent, other than the fact that the various series mostly tended to follow ships manned by mostly humans, and were made for humans. Then again, maybe that was enough...
I don't think we should look for any such explanation. If we do, it will inevitably seem to imply that the Federation is significantly less egalitarian than the principles of equality and liberal democracy imply it should be. I say we just accept it as a conceit of the drama that we tend to see Human-dominated ships but Starfleet is not Human-dominated -- same way we just accept it as a conceit of the drama that we happen to hear background music and sounds in space even though they aren't "actually" there.
I know, but it was the closest analogy I could think of. The Coast Guard doesn't really have any super-duper heavy hardware and sticks close to "home," and that was what I was envisioning for the local guard forces of the UFP.
Gotcha. Bear in mind that the Coast Guard
does sometimes deploy overseas, though. A close friend of my grandmother's was a USCG officer who served in Vietnam.
As for the absorption of a planet's military: Presumably a prospective member world will know that will happen. If they don't like it, they don't have to join.
Yeah, but surely you don't think that would stop anyone from having second thoughts?
Despite what batshit-insane would-be revolutionaries like Michael Eddington might claim, I'm sure that a Federation member world can leave.
The novels have established that this is the case, and that a number of Member States have either left voluntarily or even been kicked out. Apparently, the world of Cait has a history of joining and then leaving again.
There's no way the UFP would force anyone to stay if they don't want to.
In general, that's
probably the case. Of course, you've got to be asking yourself -- what if the world that wanted to leave of was vital strategic or resource importance to the Federation? What if it was a world that the Federation felt it honestly could not survive without?
Then, of course, there's the unanswerable question: If any Federation Member State can leave if the Federation as a whole does something they don't like, what is there to keep the Federation together in the long-run? How can you prevent chaos as everyone packs their bags and goes home because they don't like how the democratic process happens to have played out?
)
