• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Eddington's vitriolic assessment of The Federation

Eddington's point is that in a meta way, Rodenberry's dream doesn't work. its a cultural dead-end. 99% of the advancements made by humans were done because of adversity (conflict, environmental, etc.). Without an opposing force we have stagnation. Good little worker-bees in a hive.

The problem with that argument is that it is a tautology. "If something is already perfect, you don't improve it."

No duh.

All of Star Trek's advancements are because of a desire to improve.
 
Why was the Federation even involved in the problems between Bajor and Cardassia? And in the end, both groups were our 'fiends', and possible future UFP members? Getting involved in far-away 'brush-fire wars' so that eventually you'll have another group to add to your side... sounds familiar. The U.S. only fought a 'cold war' with Russia (and possibly China, except we technically didn't even recognize them as a country back then), but the Federation appears to be fighting a cold war on every front, with everyone. The Klingons land on some backwater world to talk to the inhabitants, and Starfleet is beaming down an away team two seconds later. 'Control through kindness' is a real thing. Is it evil? Not exactly... but then, the Borg make the same point; assimilate everyone and there is no more conflict, bigotry, starvation, lack of other resources, etc. Once everyone is 'the same', you have a nice little civilization of well-behaved drones. So whats the difference between programming fed directly into your brain, and being brainwashed by your culture (and insane amount of rules/laws) to think you are living in paradise? Is it paradise, if you don't earn it? Its hollow. Thats the point.

But the Federation wasn't involved in the problems between Bajor and Cardassia. When Bajor was occupied the Federation didn't do anything about it (if you want to go by the novelverse, because the recognized Bajoran government at the time accepted Cardassian rule), and in fact that likely spurred on the Maquis.

The Federation didn't get involved at all until the Cardassian withdrawal, when the Bajoran provisional government asked for Federation assistance.

I'm also not sure what you're talking about when you claim the Federation is trying to make everyone the same; can you please cite specific episodes that support your claims?
 
The problem with that argument is that it is a tautology. "If something is already perfect, you don't improve it."

No duh.

All of Star Trek's advancements are because of a desire to improve.

PICARD: Nuria, your people live in huts. Was it always so?
NURIA: No. We have found remnants of tools in caves. Our ancestors must have lived there.
PICARD: So why do you now live in huts?
NURIA: Huts are better. Caves are dark and wet.
PICARD: If huts are better, why did you once live in caves?
NURIA: The most reasonable explanation would be that at one time we didn't know how to make huts.
PICARD: Just as at one time you did not know how to weave cloth, how to make a bow.
NURIA: That would be reasonable.
PICARD: Someone invented a hut. Someone invented a bow, who taught others, who taught their children, who built a stronger hut, built a better bow, who taught their children. Now, Nuria, suppose one of your cave dwelling ancestors could see you as you are today. What would she think?
NURIA: I don't know.
PICARD: Put yourself in her place. You see, she cannot kill a hornbuck at a great distance. You can. You have a power she lacks.
NURIA: Only because I have a bow.
PICARD: She's never seen a bow. It doesn't exist in her world. To you, it's a simple tool. To her, it's magic.

To some, the hope they dream of is magic. However, even if it - against all odds - seems impossible, they will continue to dream until what was once magic is now the reality.
 
The U.S. only fought a 'cold war' with Russia (and possibly
China, except we technically didn't even recognize them as a country back then),

During the Korean War, mainland Chinese troops and American troops were fighting each other directly.

I don't see what the Federation does and what the Borg does as even remotely comparable. Membership in the Federation and trade with it is completely voluntary. If you don't think that matters, your country has probably not been invaded recently.
 
But the Federation wasn't involved in the problems between Bajor and Cardassia. When Bajor was occupied the Federation didn't do anything about it (if you want to go by the novelverse, because the recognized Bajoran government at the time accepted Cardassian rule), and in fact that likely spurred on the Maquis.

That's heavily implied on-screen as well:

KIRA: I don't believe the Federation has any business being here.
SISKO: The provisional government disagrees with you.
KIRA: The provisional government and I don't agree on a lot of things, which is probably why they've sent me to this god-forsaken place. I have been fighting for Bajoran independence since I was old enough to pick up a phaser. We finally drive the Cardassians out and what do our new leaders do? They call up the Federation and invite them right in.
SISKO: The Federation is only here to help—
KIRA: Help us. Yes, I know. The Cardassians said the same thing sixty years ago.
 
^I can't recommend the Terok Nor trilogy of novels, especially the first one, highly enough. The process by which Bajor became occupied is outlined in excruciatingly tragic detail. I'd kind of love to know what someone who hadn't seen the series (and who consequently didn't know what was coming) would make of it.
 
Eddington's point is that in a meta way, Rodenberry's dream doesn't work. its a cultural dead-end. 99% of the advancements made by humans were done because of adversity (conflict, environmental, etc.). Without an opposing force we have stagnation. Good little worker-bees in a hive.

Francis Fukuyama -- you probably remember the phrase "the end of history" even if you don't remember him -- said something along those lines:

... if people can’t struggle for justice and peace, then they’ll struggle against justice and peace because it’s a part of human nature that we want to struggle.

From a recent interview on Vox.
 
I think you have to distinguish between what Eddington said about the Federation, and Roddenberry’s original premise of a peaceful, prosperous earth. Take away that essential positive vision of our future, and it’s no longer Star Trek. At the same time, DS9 and other series do reveal a darker side of huge institutions like Starfleet and the UFP.

2053 – World War 3 devastation
2063 - Zefram Cochrane invents warp drive (motivated by financial greed, but it works) which attracts the Vulcans, who land on earth to meet us and continue to advise and guide us for years. The Vulcans inspired us to get past our own violent tendencies -- part competition, part envy perhaps.
2156 – Romulans attack earth, resulting in the neutral zone and United Federation of Planets.

It’s true Kirk does say in a few TOS episodes that humanity has to claw our way up, we need obstacles to overcome (Metamorphosis, This side of paradise, etc). but I don’t think that negates GR’s radical optimism: “I think technology will save us. And our own goodness…basic human decency. Our ability to sympathize with others. The wish to help. These things are part of our nature.”
 
Last edited:
It’s true Kirk does say in a few TOS episodes that humanity has to claw our way up, we need obstacles to overcome (Metamorphosis, This side of paradise, etc). but I don’t think that negates GR’s radical optimism: “I think technology will save us. And our own goodness…basic human decency. Our ability to sympathize with others. The wish to help. These things are part of our nature.”
Which cuts strongly against Gene's later idea of an "evolved" humanity. The idea that we had to "grow out of our infancy" and ignore our nature. Instead, TOS was the idea that humans had the capacity of great good, cooperation and mutual support. In other words, the capacity for making positive choices and personal growth. But, we equally are capable of great savagery, fear and destruction. "We're killers. But we're not going to kill today!"
 
The Vulcans inspired us to get past our own violent tendencies -- part competition, part envy perhaps.

Sadly, ENT downplayed the role model aspect of the Vulcans; that show basically boiled down to "get off my back, old man" beyond the few "good" Vulcans that were protagonist-friendly.
 
Which cuts strongly against Gene's later idea of an "evolved" humanity. The idea that we had to "grow out of our infancy" and ignore our nature. Instead, TOS was the idea that humans had the capacity of great good, cooperation and mutual support. In other words, the capacity for making positive choices and personal growth. But, we equally are capable of great savagery, fear and destruction. "We're killers. But we're not going to kill today!"

Fortunately, the franchise returned to the original vision.
 
Sadly, ENT downplayed the role model aspect of the Vulcans; that show basically boiled down to "get off my back, old man" beyond the few "good" Vulcans that were protagonist-friendly.

Frankly I thought ENT, at least in S1, made it look as though the bigoted humans who often made insensible decisions deserved to have been held back a bit.
 
Which cuts strongly against Gene's later idea of an "evolved" humanity. The idea that we had to "grow out of our infancy" and ignore our nature. Instead, TOS was the idea that humans had the capacity of great good, cooperation and mutual support. In other words, the capacity for making positive choices and personal growth. But, we equally are capable of great savagery, fear and destruction. "We're killers. But we're not going to kill today!"

Frankly, Gene's idea was stupid on multiple levels. It is stupid, unrealistic, preachy... and worst of all, makes for bad storytelling. Without conflict, you do not have a story, and conflict requires imperfection.

That is why I think TOS (where others basically ignored him) and DS9 (which again ignored his ideas) were the best Star Trek series. First seasons of TNG, where Gene is basically allowed to run rampant, were some of the weakest parts of Star Trek IMO (although I never watched Discovery etc., and don't intend to, so...).

So overall, I think Eddington is not entirely wrong... he is wrong in a lot of things, but there are some seeds in all that chaff.
 
"We are the Borg. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

Unless you do not wish to be assimilated. If that is the desire, be aware you are saying 'no' to a quest toward perfection. We will move on to the next group, who might desire to be a part of our goal. No harm, no foul. Enjoy your existence as singular lifeforms, not knowing the purity and belonging of our Collective. Have a pleasant existence."
- New Borg Collective Greeting
 
"We are the Borg. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

Unless you do not wish to be assimilated. If that is the desire, be aware you are saying 'no' to a quest toward perfection. We will move on to the next group, who might desire to be a part of our goal. No harm, no foul. Enjoy your existence as singular lifeforms, not knowing the purity and belonging of our Collective. Have a pleasant existence."
- New Borg Collective Greeting

The Borg assimilated Canada?
 
Frankly, Gene's idea was stupid on multiple levels. It is stupid, unrealistic, preachy... and worst of all, makes for bad storytelling.
I respectfully disagree. What you think is unrealistic I think is aspirational. I don't see the [decrease] in conflict due to some writer's magic wand ultimately conjuring bots more than people, but instead loved educated and seasoned reasoning people trying at working together toward greater mutual gain. That takes faith and trust as much as anything, but, uh, so does banking and modern society. It's when people begin to feel the system is rigged that things deteriorate. No moonbase for us. Back to school shootings.

Without conflict, you do not have a story, and conflict requires imperfection.
Conflict comes in many forms. We don't by and large settle our disputes with duels, rape, and genocide, etc these days, yet drama persists. It's about finding it in the moment. We all feel it in our lives. An argument can be as harrowing, more so, than the umpteenth murder of a redshirt.

Also the first two seasons of TNG were them trying to find what became Star Trek for the decades after. Watch some other sci-fi of the time and thank TNG for its service. While you're at it, I do recommend giving Strange New Worlds a try. Like every Trek series, it's different in its own way from everything else, but I think it's pretty good. I think Discovery, alas, went downhill fast toward the middle-end of its second season, though some people seem to like it still. You tell me if you do. The first season especially is brilliant for something that happens toward the end of it. Maybe consider Prodigy too – it's a charming uplifting [younger fan] show.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top