Federation Utopia

[Greg Cox]

But, that's not what Gene Roddenberry tells us 23rd century Earth is like. According to him humans have cast aside ALL their negative qualities, even children are no longer naughty! Humans don't feel envy, jealousy, anger....etc all these things must be psychoanalyzed out of them. This is what he said..

That's much more of a TNG thing, referring to the 24th century, according to Roddenberry in his later years.

Doesn't have much to do with the 23rd-century future we saw on TOS back in the sixties, where human beings were still very human, warts and all. Heck, we never even saw 23rd century Earth on TOS, only the wild-and-woolly final frontier.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I think it was made canon in a TNG S2 episode that this is the official anthem of United Earth:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Written by Don Draper.

 

[Silvercrest]

But, that's not what Gene Roddenberry tells us 23rd century Earth is like. According to him humans have cast aside ALL their negative qualities, even children are no longer naughty! Humans don't feel envy, jealousy, anger....etc all these things must be psychoanalyzed out of them. This is what he said.

When / where did he say this about 23rd-century Earth?

 

[Timewalker]

That's much more of a TNG thing, referring to the 24th century, according to Roddenberry in his later years.

Doesn't have much to do with the 23rd-century future we saw on TOS back in the sixties, where human beings were still very human, warts and all. Heck, we never even saw 23rd century Earth on TOS, only the wild-and-woolly final frontier.

We caught a glimpse of it in The Motion Picture, but of course that was a Starfleet location. I think the closest we got to 23rd century Earth in TOS was that picnic that Pike had with Vina. Yes, it wasn't real, but since it was taken from Pike's memories, it was probably reasonably close to somewhere on Earth he had been, with his horse (if not with a date ).

 

[Silvercrest]

Whoops, I didn't see Greg's post until now.

 

[Citiprime]

Sisko's description of Earth in DS9's "The Maquis" states that on Earth "there is no poverty, no crime, and no war." If you then add in that humanity on Earth has (from everything we've ever seen) overcome racism, sexism, and tribalism, then, yes, it's as close to a utopia as we probably can think of achieving.

Roddenberry, and by extension Star Trek's, central thesis is that humanity essentially grows up once it pulls itself back from the brink of destruction and discovers new possibilities through warp drive and first contact. In Roddenberry's vision, the struggle for excitement and adventure is still there, but used to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Gene Roddenberry: "As you know, one of the joys of Star Trek, for me, has been the variety of our fans. When I go to conventions and I see people of all sizes and shapes and abilities, and when I see people with nerve disorders that can’t really sit properly and so on, I still know what’s in their mind. They are saying, "In a better world, I can do anything. I’ll be there in a better world. In a better world, they will not laugh at me or look down their nose at me."​

 

[fireproof78]

That's much more of a TNG thing, referring to the 24th century, according to Roddenberry in his later years.

Doesn't have much to do with the 23rd-century future we saw on TOS back in the sixties, where human beings were still very human, warts and all. Heck, we never even saw 23rd century Earth on TOS, only the wild-and-woolly final frontier.

The evolved sensibility presented in the 24th century definitely rubs wrong. DS9 started it back down a more interesting path and even Voyager decreased the haughtiness. But the 23rd century is my preferred spot for Trek.

 

[Imaus]

'Utopia' sounds great, actually.

A Earth that is managed well, a democratic government, and basically a strong welfare state. Education seems universal, ignorance is gone, intolerance is at most personal, disease, poverty, and war are things of the past.

That is a world that required a LOT of work to get to and a lot of work to maintain, but that is still a world that has allure. There is SO much bullshit on Earth right now it's not even funny. You can - and do - have millions of people for a thousand issues in politics, NGOs, lobbying groups, activists, charities working their lives off just to shave off a sliver of the slavery, abuse, racism, sexual assault, greediness, corruption, injustice, environmental degradation, terrible education, extreme poverty, animal abuse, child abuse, mental illness, war, and so on that still exists in this world.

And yea some of that still boils to the top in Trek Humanity, but for the most part it is tackled, it is fought against, it is pointed out, it is snuffed out. And a Earth where those things are rare to non-existent, where all citizens and denizens of Earth can just enjoy the planet and their lives in a just and secure system on a healing world is great, and sometimes I feel Trek needs to actually muse on what a utopia for Earth and the Core Worlds and hell just most worlds of the Federation entails, cause it's a damn good deal, even if it means competition for resources against hostile alien powers as seen in the TOS era or the Federation getting a bit arrogant, to the point of throwing people under the bus like Yar's planet or the Maquis, and both of those have some context (Yar's worlds left the Fed, but that still rubbed me the wrong way, and the Maquis are also arrogant to the point of wanton bloodshed - what is so damn good about the Badland worlds that they HAVE to stay there and can't just pack their tin can habitats and move to another world across the quadrant) by the TNG era.

It doesn't need to immediately spiral into a corrupt, terrible, horrible, Federation as Pic and so wants to insinuate all the time, cause while it's not perfect, it's still better than what we got and will probably have for our natural lives.

 

[fireproof78]

It doesn't need to immediately spiral into a corrupt, terrible, horrible, Federation as Pic and so wants to insinuate all the time, cause while it's not perfect, it's still better than what we got and will probably have for our natural lives.

It spiraled? The only thing that happened as infiltration and a fear response. The only thing terrible was the synth ban and that was fixed by the end of Season 1.

The Federation isn't perfect, and it puts mental health patients in colonies at times. So it has bumps to work out. Utopia compared to the current world, but hardly perfect. And that's the allure; it's not perfect.

 

[FredH]

Taken as a whole, the Federation’s Earth is a utopia by comparison with present-day Earth. I don’t think it can be taken as a given that this is true Federation-wide; and canonically, we’ve seen that by way of Section 31, the Federation has occasionally committed war crimes.

 

[SJGardner]

I think the main problem with describing Star Trek's future Earth as a utopia is that the term is intentionally vague. It describes a perfect place or environment, but that will inevitably be filled with what the individual viewer thinks of as their own perfect world. Even with Star Trek offering some pointers about describing a place with no poverty, war or tribalism, one viewer's interpretations of the actual content might be fundamentally different from those of another, often conforming to their own personal political views all over the political spectrum.

 

[Vger23]

Utopia is for weaklings and lazy-asses.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[fireproof78]

Utopia is for weaklings and lazy-asses.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Arpy]

“I mean, what would you, on your fancy computer or smartphone, well fed and generally healthy, educated, and safe, think is a better future for humanity, in keeping with our nature as you see it?”

I mean, pick up a newspaper.

 

[valkyrie013]

Well, Utopia is different for every individual, I would context Earth as "Utopian" as in its like a Utopia, with no war, disease, etc. or as the thread starter said "define it as a society where every need and want is provided for practically free of effort work or charge"
Now, every need and want is vague, I could want/need Scarlet Johanson in my bedroom most nights, but that wont happen. so in there context is needed.
Every BASIC need and want in a general term of, A roof over your head, a full belly, etc. not a 60ft yacht in every garage.
And have a basic minimum income if one desires to just sit back and eat bon bons all day.
Then yes, it is utopian from what we have now. All the basics of life are taken care of and there is no worry over them as it is now.
In that sense, i would LOVE Utopia, It would free me up to do what I would WANT to do, not NEED to do to make a living to pay various bills. Do you thing people in Mid Africa WANT to go mine cobalt for electric cars?? Nope.. but they need money to, well live, family too.

Now, just because its Utopian, doesn't mean its Static, Stagnate There is still progression in various fields, science, medicine etc. You can jump aboard a Starfleet ship and have adventures and learn, etc. Its not a stagnate AI controled planet that there is no progression, nothing happening.

 

[Ragitsu]

Hey, guys, the futuristic society of Star Trek functions just fine 99.99% of the time; we are witnessing the "interesting" (i.e., tumultuous) bits...because television needs to be exciting. Just a thought.

 

[Voodoowoman2]

Sisko's description of Earth in DS9's "The Maquis" states that on Earth "there is no poverty, no crime, and no war." If you then add in that humanity on Earth has (from everything we've ever seen) overcome racism, sexism, and tribalism, then, yes, it's as close to a utopia as we probably can think of achieving.

Roddenberry, and by extension Star Trek's, central thesis is that humanity essentially grows up once it pulls itself back from the brink of destruction and discovers new possibilities through warp drive and first contact. In Roddenberry's vision, the struggle for excitement and adventure is still there, but used to boldly go where no one has gone before.

Gene Roddenberry: "As you know, one of the joys of Star Trek, for me, has been the variety of our fans. When I go to conventions and I see people of all sizes and shapes and abilities, and when I see people with nerve disorders that can’t really sit properly and so on, I still know what’s in their mind. They are saying, "In a better world, I can do anything. I’ll be there in a better world. In a better world, they will not laugh at me or look down their nose at me."​

Hmmmm. I don't see humanity even in this fictional universe as overcoming tribalism, racism, or sexism. Kirk hates the Klingons. Spock is subjected to bigotry. All I'm saying is that Utopia is a bore. Kirk and the others LEAVE earth to go explore space because that's where the challenge is.
If there is NO CRIME why is there a penal colony in New Zealand? If there is no money (means of exchange) why is Sisko's dad running a restaurant for charity? Why is Picard making wine? Running a restaurant as a chef is grueling hard work. Men and women do it for the PROFIT not for the satisfaction of it. They are driven to achieve financial success. Most work is not that satisfying. It pays the bills.
Now in this fictional universe you can only achieve some kind of success only if you are a brilliant scientist or artist. Telling me "they do whatever they want" is a misnomer. They can't start their own business for money because there isn't any and that's frowned on as "greed" so no, you can't do whatever you want. You have to leave earth to experience challenge, good stress, achievement. Earth just sounds like a dopey bore to me. No wonder the series takes place on a Starship and not planetside.

 

[Voodoowoman2]

It depends on what you call utopia. Really. If it's a place where the excesses of our worst traits are systemically addressed and ameliorated, then yes it is. It's a place that looks like paradise and in which it's easy to be a saint. Where 'there is no hunger, no greed, and all the children know how to read.'

Beyond that, it is not "perfect" in the stagnant, antiseptic, oppressive, repressive, and suppressive way that are dystopias presented as utopias.

It is exciting and vital and good and generally a place that you would want to be...or it wouldn't be a utopia. Or it wouldn't be a place from which humanity evolves over eons to perhaps surpass even the Q, as was their concern in "Hide and Q."

If that isn't tantalizing, I don't know what is.

I mean, what would you, on your fancy computer or smartphone, well fed and generally healthy, educated, and safe, think is a better future for humanity, in keeping with our nature as you see it?

You can't evolve without environmental stress. Even the weather on Earth is controlled. There is NO financial stress so you don't have any incentive to go and achieve that. Earth is boring and the inhabitants will slowly begin to die off of boredom. Go to a colony and create something. Any person who might have an idea that they might go into business must be deemed "greedy" because people only do things for internal motivations. This is a bunch of high falootin" propaganda. What do ordinary people do? You know people with IQ's of 120 or so? I think the mouse colony analogy may be accurate. Earth may just die off of boredom and asexuality.

 

[Arpy]

You can't evolve without environmental stress. Even the weather on Earth is controlled. There is NO financial stress so you don't have any incentive to go and achieve that. Earth is boring and the inhabitants will slowly begin to die off of boredom. Go to a colony and create something. Any person who might have an idea that they might go into business must be deemed "greedy" because people only do things for internal motivations. This is a bunch of high falootin" propaganda. What do ordinary people do? You know people with IQ's of 120 or so? I think the mouse colony analogy may be accurate. Earth may just die off of boredom and asexuality.

Existence itself is stressful. The stresses the Federation removes are those that are suffocating. You work or play or do something to mitigate that. You look around you and see people happy healthy robust and fruitful living their best lives, the challenge is to get in on that. Hell, children tend to have some of that until the world often beats it out of them. They wake up, and go play. They want to see their friends. They have girlfriends.