Political systems in Star Trek

[Edit_XYZ]

Generally, I think Americans are just a little more rude when it comes to these things and also can't admit to doing wrongs like other countries have. America still can't admit it lost Vietnam.

I know many, many people who will not only admit we lost the Vietnam War, but who will argue that the Vietnam War was an illegitimate war we should never have been fighting in the first place.

And if you really think that Americans can't admit that our government has done wrong things, I'd invite you to consider the hundreds of thousands of people who opposed the Iraq War and participated in numerous marches, protests, and demonstrations against it.

I really think you're stereotyping.

USA has a democratically elected leadership, correct?
This means the politics of said leadership has the support of the majority of americans.
Yes, many are opposed to it - but these 'many' are the minority.

As an example of blatant 'all men are equal, but some are more equal than others' on USA's part - USA soldiers stationed in other countries can get away with manslaughter (driving while drunk and killing a person) simply because they're american soldiers.

The speeches given by USA leaders about democracy, freedom, human rights and all the other uplifting values, on the other hand - top notch.
Theory is easier than practice, yes?

 

[horatio83]

Generally, I think Americans are just a little more rude when it comes to these things and also can't admit to doing wrongs like other countries have. America still can't admit it lost Vietnam.

I know many, many people who will not only admit we lost the Vietnam War, but who will argue that the Vietnam War was an illegitimate war we should never have been fighting in the first place.

And if you really think that Americans can't admit that our government has done wrong things, I'd invite you to consider the hundreds of thousands of people who opposed the Iraq War and participated in numerous marches, protests, and demonstrations against it.

I really think you're stereotyping.

Why this split? In a democracy the population is responsible for the actions of its elected representatives and executive. Not guilty if they commit crimes but responsible.

I find it funny that many people in this thread play the "I defend my country game". I feel just the other way around, precisely because a country is my home I criticize it more ruthlessly than other places.

 

[Sci]

Generally, I think Americans are just a little more rude when it comes to these things and also can't admit to doing wrongs like other countries have. America still can't admit it lost Vietnam.

I know many, many people who will not only admit we lost the Vietnam War, but who will argue that the Vietnam War was an illegitimate war we should never have been fighting in the first place.

And if you really think that Americans can't admit that our government has done wrong things, I'd invite you to consider the hundreds of thousands of people who opposed the Iraq War and participated in numerous marches, protests, and demonstrations against it.

I really think you're stereotyping.

USA has a democratically elected leadership, correct?
This means the politics of said leadership has the support of the majority of americans.

I mean, that depends on the situation. President Obama, for instance, went from a job approval rating height of 69% to his current rating, which is 42. Meanwhile, the United States Congress has an approval rating of something like 12% (and I've been hearing 9% reported on MSNBC lately).

Add to that the corrupting influence of money in presidential elections -- and the argument that American democracy has been so corrupted that in many instances, it is no longer truly a democracy so much as a semi-democratic plutocracy.

So, no, the politics and policies of American leadership do not necessarily have the support of the majority of Americans. Certainly at the moment, neither the President nor Congress have the support of a majority of Americans.

Yes, many are opposed to it - but these 'many' are the minority.

Well, in the specific case of the Iraq War, many thousands were against it from the start but were, yes, in the minority. As the war dragged on, a majority of Americans came to change their minds and realize that they had been wrong to support the war from the start.

As an example of blatant 'all men are equal, but some are more equal than others' on USA's part - USA soldiers stationed in other countries can get away with manslaughter (driving while drunk and killing a person) simply because they're american soldiers.

The speeches given by USA leaders about democracy, freedom, human rights and all the other uplifting values, on the other hand - top notch.
Theory is easier than practice, yes?

I think if we want to debate the merits of the United States's Status of Forces agreements with host states, that's an entirely different level of topic drift and probably best left to TNZ. (For the record, though, I'm fairly happy to argue that the United States's SoFAs are unjust, and troop immunity from local law is one of the reasons I would tend to cite.)

But my point wasn't to say, "The United States Government is righteous and pure." My point was to simply say that there is a wide variety of opinions and ideological conflict in the United States, and that it's stereotyping to say that most Americans think or feel this way or that way in general about foreign cultures.

Just like it was stereotyping for some Federates to think that most Klingons can't talk or for some Klingons to think that the Federation is a "Homo sapiens-only club" in Star Trek VI, which is why we shouldn't take the Klingons' assertion about the Federation to be evidence that the Federation is not a sovereign state.

(w00t. Didja see what I did there, looping the topic drift back to the more directly on-topic question of political systems in the Trekverse? I'm pretty proud of myself for that. )

 

[Paradon]

Anyway, I still the Federation is more like a Confedrate than United Federation of Planet because in certain area the central government has no authority. Even I'm not mistaken, each member who are a memeber have their own laws and war ships.

 

[Sci]

Anyway, I still the Federation is more like a Confedrate than United Federation of Planet because in certain area the central government has no authority. Even I'm not mistaken, each member who are a memeber have their own laws and war ships.

In certain areas, the U.S. Federal government has no authority. It can't tell a state not to allow same-sex marriage, for instance, which is why LGBT Americans can get married in Massachusetts even if they can't get married in Texas. And every U.S. state has their own laws -- Ohio has the Ohio Revised Code, for instance -- and their own militaries in the form of their National Guards (which may be called into federal service) and State Defense Forces (which may not).

Is the United States a confederation?

 

[Paradon]

The central government of the UFOP hasn't any authority over each world at all. That's my point. In a lot of cases the federal government of the United States supersede the state's laws if its unconstitutional...I think.

 

[Sci]

The central government of the UFOP hasn't any authority over each world at all.

This is demonstrably false. We have seen the Federation government exercise authority over its Members. We saw the Federation Council banning speeds above Warp 5; we saw the Federation President making foreign policy for the UFP's Members without consulting them; we saw the Federation President declaring a state of emergency and landing troops on a Federation Member world; we know that the Federation government banned genetic engineering on Federation worlds, and that this ban can be overturned by the Federation Supreme Court's powers of judicial review; we saw Federation Security arresting citizens of a Federation Member world; we saw a Federation Penal Colony on a Federation Member world; we know that the Federation Charter's and Constitution's guarantees of certain inalienable rights for sentient beings overrides Member law; etc.

 

[horatio83]

While I totally agree that the Federation exerts good centralized progressive rule I doubt that Starfleet would invade a UFP member planet on which a civil war has broken out. It'd be probably more like, "play according to our rules or quit the club".

 

[T'Girl]

The episode Accession is a excellent example of what the limits of the Federation central powers are.

Bajor considered returning to a societal caste system, which they possessed historically up until the time of the Cardassian occupation. They were informed that this act alone would rendered them unacceptable for future membership.

If the Federation possessed the legal ability to over-ride it's Member's laws, then Bajor having a caste system at the time they were admitted into the Federation would be no problem. The Federation Charter or legal code would eliminate the caste system as soon as Bajor became a member, or alternatively the Federation council would pass a measure dissolving the caste system.

However, if the Federation council lacked the power to interfere with member governments and their laws, then admitting Bajor with a caste system would result in a Federation member having a caste system. the only way to prevent this is for Bajor not to have a caste system when they were admitted. Also if Bajor, or another current member, were to hypothetically adopted a caste system, the most the Federation council would be able to do is withdraw their membership.

In between doing nothing and expelling the member, there would be nothing the Federation council could do.

 

[Sci]

The episode Accession is a excellent example of what the limits of the Federation central powers are.

Bajor considered returning to a societal caste system, which they possessed historically up until the time of the Cardassian occupation. They were informed that this act alone would rendered them unacceptable for future membership.

If the Federation possessed the legal ability to over-ride it's Member's laws, then Bajor having a caste system at the time they were admitted into the Federation would be no problem. The Federation Charter or legal code would eliminate the caste system as soon as Bajor became a member, or alternatively the Federation council would pass a measure dissolving the caste system.

Why are you assuming the Federation would be willing to admit a Member with a caste system in the first place, even if it has the authority to override it?

ETA:

To make a modern comparison:

If apartheid South Africa had applied to join the Union in 1985, yeah, the U.S. Constitution and civil rights laws would have over-rode South African apartheid laws. But it's pretty doubtful the U.S. would ever have accepted South Africa in the first place.

 

[Paradon]

Earth is more important than other worlds. It has been mentioned quite a few time. Weyoun said if they ever defeated the UFP, the birth place of a resistance would be earth. And on the new ST movie you see Niro trying to get the code of the earth's defensive grits, but you don't see any of that on Vulcan. Niro took over Vulcan with ease. And before TNG not a lot of Vulcans will even consider joining Star Fleet.

 

[Sci]

Earth is more important than other worlds.

Insofar as it is the seat of the Federation government, yeah. But there's no indication it has any special legal status.

And on the new ST movie you see Niro trying to get the code of the earth's defensive grits,

"Nero." "Defense grid." "Grits" are a type of food.

but you don't see any of that on Vulcan. Niro took over Vulcan with ease.

We don't know that, actually. For all we know, Nero might have had a tough enough time with the Starfleet defense forces in orbit of Vulcan -- remember, there was a giant starship saucer that the Enterprise almost ran into when it left warp in Vulcan orbit; there were no ships that large with the fleet that left Earth, so that starship must have already been at Vulcan -- that he felt that it would be better to get the codes to Starfleet's Earth defense grid.

And before TNG not a lot of Vulcans will even consider joining Star Fleet.

There is no canonical evidence for this.

 

[Paradon]

Spock's niece was the fiarst to graduate at the top of SF, remember? It suggest that earth and Vulcan is not as united as people think. And on the new ST movie the member of the minister chamber proudly say no member of Vulcan has ever join SF before Spock. Furthermore, Weyoun said if they overrun UFP, the birth place of an organized resistance would be earth suggesting SF is more of an earth organization than UFP.

 

[Sci]

Spock's niece was the fiarst to graduate at the top of SF, remember?

Valeris from Star Trek VI was the first Vulcan to graduate at the top of her class from Starfleet Academy, but she was not his niece. Spock and Valeris flirted way too much for that.

It suggest that earth and Vulcan is not as united as people think.

No, it suggests that Vulcans aren't always the smartest guys in the room, that's all.

And on the new ST movie the member of the minister chamber proudly say no member of Vulcan has ever join SF before Spock.

No, he did not say that. He said that no Vulcan had ever declined admission to the Vulcan Science Academy.

Here is the transcript for that scene:

[Vulcan Science Academy]

(Spock is in front of the Vulcan Council)

MINISTER: You have surpassed the expectations of your instructors. Your final record is flawless. With one exception, I see that you have applied to Starfleet as well.

SPOCK: It was logical to cultivate multiple options.

MINISTER: Logical but unnecessary. You're hereby accepted to the Vulcan Science Academy. It is truly remarkable, Spock, that you have achieved so much, despite your disadvantage. All rise!

SPOCK: If you would clarify, Minister. To what disadvantage are you referring?

MINISTER: Your Human mother.

SPOCK: Council, Ministers, I must decline.

MINISTER: No Vulcan has ever declined admission to this academy.

SPOCK: Then, as I am half-human, your record remains untarnished.

SAREK: Spock. You have made a commitment to honor the Vulcan way. MINISTER: Why did you come before this council today? Was it to satisfy your emotional need to rebel?

SPOCK: The only emotion I wish to convey is gratitude. Thank you, Ministers, for your consideration. Live long and prosper.

As you can see, no mention is made of there having been no Vulcans joining Starfleet before Spock.

Furthermore, Weyoun said if they overrun UFP, the birth place of an organized resistance would be earth suggesting SF is more of an earth organization than UFP.

Weyoun wasn't talking about Starfleet when he said that -- he was talking about a civilian resistance movement.

Here is the relevant line to which you are referring, from Season Six's "The Sacrifice of Angels:"

WEYOUN
If you ask me, the key to holding
the Federation is Earth. If
there's going to be an organized
resistance against us... its
birthplace will be there.

DUKAT
You could be right.

WEYOUN
Then our first step will be to
eradicate its population.
(convinced)
It's the only way.

 

[horatio83]

Why are you assuming the Federation would be willing to admit a Member with a caste system in the first place, even if it has the authority to override it?

ETA:

To make a modern comparison:

If apartheid South Africa had applied to join the Union in 1985, yeah, the U.S. Constitution and civil rights laws would have over-rode South African apartheid laws. But it's pretty doubtful the U.S. would ever have accepted South Africa in the first place.

Sure but what about this point T'Girl made? A society can change while being a Federation member.

Also if Bajor, or another current member, were to hypothetically adopted a caste system, the most the Federation council would be able to do is withdraw their

Think about Little Rock Nine, would the UFP president really send in Federation troops to enforce Federation law on a member planet with billions of inhabitants? I seriously doubt it. Even if he wanted to it would be logistically impossible.

 

[T'Girl]

Think about Little Rock Nine, would the UFP president really send in Federation troops to enforce Federation law on a member planet with billions of inhabitants? I seriously doubt it. Even if he wanted to it would be logistically impossible.

Especial if the Federation President lacked the authority to command directly local courts, law enforcement and indigenous military units. I mean what is the President going to do, order Starfleet to bombard from orbit? I seriously doubt Starfleet would accept the order.

The President and the council could threaten to expel the planet, and depending on how beneficial membership was, this might have the desired result. There also are other possibilities like diplomatic pressure and trade restrictions.

 

[Sci]

Why are you assuming the Federation would be willing to admit a Member with a caste system in the first place, even if it has the authority to override it?

ETA:

To make a modern comparison:

If apartheid South Africa had applied to join the Union in 1985, yeah, the U.S. Constitution and civil rights laws would have over-rode South African apartheid laws. But it's pretty doubtful the U.S. would ever have accepted South Africa in the first place.

Sure but what about this point T'Girl made? A society can change while being a Federation member.

Also if Bajor, or another current member, were to hypothetically adopted a caste system, the most the Federation council would be able to do is withdraw their

Think about Little Rock Nine, would the UFP president really send in Federation troops to enforce Federation law on a member planet with billions of inhabitants?

Why not?

If something like that were to happen -- if, say, the Andorians were to try to deny admission to their universities to Aenar students purely on account of their subspecies? Yeah, I can see the Federation President either calling Andorian Imperial Guard members into Federation service (the equivalent of the U.S. President calling members of a state National Guard unit into federal service), or just using Starfleet, and then sending them down to Andorian universities to enforce a Federation court order allowing Aenar to attend Andorian universities.

And why shouldn't they?

 

[horatio83]

Why should the UFP not enforce the interspecies equivalent of human rights on Vulcan and destroy the institution of arranged marriage? What about Andorian honour rituals, they are nearly as horrible as Klingon ones.

You cannot compare the Federation with a federal state because Starfleet's numbers are tiny compared to trillions of Federation inhabitants and because geographically it is the equivalent of small islands spread far apart.
Even if you wanted to send forces on a planet it would not be feasible. An average starship can perhaps transport a few thousands troops. How many ships are you willing to commit on such a UN protectorate kind of mission, how much blood, red, green or blue, are you ready to spill?

In my opinion "Journey to Babel" provides the best picture of the Federation. There is a lot of cooperation but the Federation does not micromanage the life of each member planet. If a culture changes significantly and does not play by the common rules anymore throwing them out seems more practical and less bloody than enforcing your principles with violence.
The soft, non-military incentives T'Girl mentioned make much more sense than sending the troops in. If you are engulfed by other Federation members you think twice before you violate the rule book lest you suffer dire economic consequences.

 

[Sci]

Why should the UFP not enforce the interspecies equivalent of human rights on Vulcan and destroy the institution of arranged marriage?

Has it been established that Vulcans are legally incapable of refusing to enter arranged marriages?

(And bear in mind that arranged marriages aren't illegal even today in the United States.)

What about Andorian honour rituals, they are nearly as horrible as Klingon ones.

Well, "ENT: United" established that the ushaan ritual was already rare and dying out. We don't even know if it still exists as a provision of 24th Century Andorian law.

But if it does? That doesn't necessarily violate anyone's rights. Federation law may allow for mutual consensual homicide if both parties consent to such fights to the death. A strong argument can be made that consenting adults should be able to kill one-another, if they both agree to accept the possibility of the other combatant winning.

You cannot compare the Federation with a federal state because Starfleet's numbers are tiny compared to trillions of Federation inhabitants

1. We don't know that. We don't know how large Starfleet is, and we don't know how large the Federation's population is.

2. It's also irrelevant. A single phaser can vaporize huge edifices (as seen in TNG's "The Ensigns of Command"). A single starship can wipe out all life on a planet. The ability of the state to use force is thus vastly increased for much smaller numbers of agents of the state.

and because geographically it is the equivalent of small islands spread far apart.

Are you contending that the Federated States of Micronesia is not a sovereign state? The Republic of Palau? The Republic of Indonesia? The Republic of the Marshall Islands? The Republic of Maldives? The Republic of Seychelles?

They're all sovereign states that are geographically composed of small islands spread far apart. Doesn't mean they're not sovereign states -- or federal states.

Even if you wanted to send forces on a planet it would not be feasible. An average starship can perhaps transport a few thousands troops. How many ships are you willing to commit on such a UN protectorate kind of mission, how much blood, red, green or blue, are you ready to spill?

Isn't that a bit like asking President Eisenhower if he intended to send in the entire United States Army to occupy the State of Arkansas in order to integrate the Little Rock Nine?

I mean, seriously. You're jumping to the most ridiculously extreme scenario here.

In my opinion "Journey to Babel" provides the best picture of the Federation.

The problem with that assertion is that Kirk's logs make it very clear that "Journey to Babel"'s plot hinges on the Federation being in the midst of a major political crisis over the issue of the admission of Coridan, with Federation Members who have financial interests in illegally mining Coridanite dilithium because of the weakness of the Coridanite government being at the throats of Federation Members who favor admission in order to strengthen the Coridanite government and ensure that Coridanite wealth is distributed fairly amongst the Coridanite populace. The episode makes it very clear that the situation it depicts is a major, major deviation from the norm.

The soft, non-military incentives T'Girl mentioned make much more sense than sending the troops in. If you are engulfed by other Federation members you think twice before you violate the rule book lest you suffer dire economic consequences.

I see no reason to view it as an "either-or" situation.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Has it been established that Vulcans are legally incapable of refusing to enter arranged marriages?

Quite the opposite, really...the first time we ever SEE Vulcan in TOS, it's established that a Vulcan is perfectly capable of refusing - by choosing the "kalifee" (challenge).