Does the United States still exist in the 23rd century?

According to TNG, Earth only became officially United a year before Enterprise's first season, so it makes sense countries would still have their own militaries in the lifespans of the characters.

 

The United Earth according to Bev was founded in 2150.

Enterprise started in 2151.

When Enterprise started, they should have still been cleaning confetti out of the drainage, redrawing maps, and reposting street signs.

There may have been a Royal Navy in 2150, but there might not have been a Royal Navy in 2151.

The Royal Navy had space ships in the 22nd century, and this is a new one for me, but at some point they started calling great Britain "Old Britain".

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Old_Britain

Russia sold Alaska to America in 1867.

There was a decades long border dispute, but Russia and America never agreed that Britain or Canada actually had a leg to stand on when claiming to own Alaska.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/did-alaska-ever-belong-to-canada.html

If the Native Americans did not give up their land, Earth was not United, and the World Government could not have been formed in 2150, which was necessary to seem like they were wearing big boy pants to the Vulcans. Land the Native Americans Claimed during world War Three because they were organized and waiting for this exact opportunity was a problem, but if the US closed up shop, then all of it's treaties are void, and there are no more Reservations. The Voyager Bible said that it wasn't just one tribe that skipped Earth in the 2100s, any native was Welcome so they made a super tribe and then they all went to space together where there were no white people... Theoretically.

 

Yes, thank you, I'm well versed in the history of Alaska now in a manner my ten year old self wasn't.

 

I always took the "Royal Navy" mention in Enterprise to confirm that maybe countries retained limited sovereignty within United Earth. I could see something similar to how a world government was presented on the old 90s show Space: Above & Beyond.

In Space: Above & Beyond, the United Nations has evolved to be a world government but functions as a commonwealth, where individual nations still control their specific regions under their own laws, but the UN sets global policy. Each country retains their militaries, but they fight collectively based on UN directives. That's how the series explains why the US Navy operates space carriers with US Marine officers flying missions as part of a global offensive.

Maybe United Earth has something similar. Each regional government still exists, with their own local militaries, but as part of some sort of federalism, where United Earth and Federation law has supremacy.

 

I am guessing your second and third lines may contain a typo, there. Enterprise started in 2151, IIRC. Is that what you meant?

 

There is still a Seattle, but it's in Cascadia.

 

I thought it was in Ecotopia.

 

The army in peacetime is a method of dealing with unemployment.

It cuts down crime.

The army in wartime is a method of dealing with unemployment.

It creates vacancies

Um...

No scarcity, no poor people, no crime, no need for an army, unless there's some people who really like synchronized marching more than sleeping in til noon.

 

Except there's still internal threats. The existence of groups like Terra Prime indicates there's still internal security problems on Earth after the formation of United Earth.

 

Soldiers are not the police.

Most soldiers are not the police.

Starfleet is the police.

Starfleet are not soldiers, until there is no other choice, but there are not ALWAYS 10 million able crewmen waiting in a dorm for permission to kill their neighbours, while the rest of friendly Starfleet insufferably explores the Galaxy with a smile.

 

"Give up" in what sense? I've been speculating about the possibility of Native American nations regaining territory from the United States and then joining United Earth as co-equal polities of U.E. alongside the U.S.

In other words, if I were to use the Republic of Lakota as an example, the org chart could go:

United Earth
|
--------------------------------------
↓ ↓
Republic of Lakota United States of America
↓ ↓
Crook County State of Maryland
↓ ↓
Town of Sundance Montgomery County
↓
City of Takoma Park

With the Republic of Lakota and the United States as co-equal sub-polities of United Earth, instead of going:

United Earth
↓
United States of America
↓
State of Wyoming
↓
Crook County
↓
Town of Sundance

I mean, that's an argument for the existence of a United Earth equivalent to the FBI or MI5 moreso than for the persistence of national armed forces.

 

In my head cannon Joining the world government means losing your sovereignty.

Because there's a council of assholes in France that can veto any decision you make about your people or your land, while demanding taxation in the form of resources or labor, and you no longer have the authority to stop immigration or eminent domain, so a bunch of white people could be shipped in to live with you, and they could start strip mining your national parks, and you can't stop them because you gave away your sovereignty.

Also I think because of over population, there are trillions of humans in the 24th century, there's a threshold of usefulness that if you do not clear, you're deported to a colony world, and then forced to live in a mansion with a 10 thousand hectare ranch.

As much as you may want to make a special case for the native Americans, there's also the Aboriginal Australians, and most of Africa and the Pacific in the same boat where there are millions of people wondering why they are indigenous yet have no power, and joining he world government wouldn't change that if they are only given one vote to any important matter decided upon between 2 hundred nation states, Mars and the moon.

I looked up the Lokata Proposal.

The people behind this was a political group with no power, that thought the existing tribal governments should be abolished, because they wanted power.

The whole thing was imaginary and unrecognized.

 

As pro-American as I am, I don't think "The United States of America" exists as it is presently constituted. I mean, we always get the occasional "Texas wants to secede from the Union" thing. In fact, don't think most nations today will exist as there are in the future (i.e. The Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China, etc.), if there is going to be some sort of "United Earth", resulting in states and provinces being the main thing around the world.

 

Well, we know that at some point, the Amerind people decided to colonize worlds for their own purposes, as colonies of the Federation.

 

New thought...

The United States didn't join the World Government and get one vote for one minister of the World Government.

58 States of the recently defunct United States joined the World Government and got 58 votes for 58 minister of the World Government.

(It's just a guess that there were 58 US states in 2151.)

 

In a federal system, the constituent polity retains a level of sovereignty alongside the federal government, so the constituent polities retain exclusive authority over certain competencies as a matter of constitutional law.

I think it's unlikely that United Earth would not be a federal state, and as such its constituent governments probably retain exclusive jurisdiction over things like land use, etc.

On Earth? That seems unlikely. The assimilated Earth in the alternate 2372 created in Star Trek: First Contact only had a population of 9 billion, and Vulcan only had a population of six billion in 2258 of the Kelvin Timeline.

No canonical evidence of this.

Who said I wanted to make a special case for Native American nations? I only talked about that one because I was speculating about the status of the United States. I fully support the "Land Back" principle for all indigenous, colonized cultures.

Why do you assume they'd only get one vote? It makes more sense to assume that the constituent polities of United Earth would receive representation in the U.E. legislature that's proportional to their populations.

The idea of a Republic of Lakota is just one example of a hypothetical future in which the U.S. cedes land back to Native American nations. I wasn't referring to the specific 2007 declaration. Land Back is a much larger, wider movement than that particular set of activists.

"The Amerind people?" There are hundreds of Native American nations. Canon has never specified which nation decided to colonize uninhabited worlds.

 

The problem with regional population, and the census.

Instantaneous free global transposition.

You could sleep in Portugal, go to school in Ireland, have a part time job in Afghanistan, and sleep over at your boyfriends place half the time in Austria.

Scarsity today keeps poor people locked to the same 2 Square miles for generations.

No money means housing is assigned per need. What ever is close to your job per what is available, but there's massive unemployment due to no money, mechanical automation and holographic slaves, so idle people trying to find something to do, or insisting that they are an artist, putting in requests to living everywhere nice on Earth and waiting in line for an answer, who are not exactly desirable citizens, so they have to chose between homelessness or a mansion on a colony world.

I was remembering casualty reports from the dominion war wrong, I could have sworn they kept casually talking about trillions of deaths...

I didn't mean that there were trillions of humans on earth. I meant that there were trillions of humans in the Alpha Quadrant. I heard years ago that if everyone on the island of Manhatten got out of their buildings and tried to stand on the ground at the same time, that they would all drown in a 25 foot deep sea of armpits and assholes. So what's happening on Earth is probably at the limit of fine until 600 billion colonists try to "come home" at the same time, which would probably never happen, but immigration would be tight, and deportation would be common if they are close to capacity, or an artificially low fake capacity.

 

United Earth has a President as head of state, and (if MINISTER Nathan Samuels is any indication) a Prime Minister as head of government.

As for the USA: I see no particular reason to assume it’s ceased to exist. It’s simply part of a larger whole. I mean, United Earth still exists as a Federation member world (just like any other); same story here.

 

(Here I go again)

The founding of the Federation.

5 empires.

Earth didn't have ships, advanced technology, manpower or a distributions system, or resources for construction and consumption, on par with the other worlds who had been in space for centuries if not millennia.

What Earth had was an empty nuked out world with a depleted population, to offer to the Federation as a Throne World.

Humanity gave away Earth in Exchange for a seat at the table.

Which is how Washington DC was originally staged.

2 states ceded land, and built a city that was entirely supposed to be about the recourse of government, of which none of was controlled by Maryland or Virgina, or any one else, who might kidnap the president if they do not get their own way.

In the case of earth and the Federation, I assume it's a century long lease?

If the Federation has sovereignty over maybe half of Europe, that's another reason why there is no room for humans on Earth, and why they have to raise up the sea floor to expand habitation.