• 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!

Germany exclusive Star Trek trilogy "Prometheus" coming in 2016

What I'm referring to is that STID specified "Ketha" to be the name of a political division in addition to a physical geographic feature.

I take it you're going by Memory Alpha, which only cites STID in its "Ketha Province" article and describes "Once More Unto the Breach" as referring only to the Ketha lowlands. But Martok's actual line from the episode was, "When I was a boy, my family still lived in the lowlands of Ketha Province." So DS9 did, in fact, establish that it was a political division.
 
For the political subdivsion of Earth, IIRC one of the novels has the president of the United States tour Sisco after the Breen attack of '75.
 
For the political subdivsion of Earth, IIRC one of the novels has the president of the United States tour Sisco after the Breen attack of '75.
That line in Tales of the Dominion War - "Eleven Hours Out" is weird to me. I understand the desire to draw connections with modern-day real life, but "United States of America" makes no practical sense in a global polity. I would be happier if that line included something like: "President of the United States is the ceremonial title for the Governor of Earth Province so-and-so, which grew out of the pre-warp United States of America." North Am makes sense to me because it's logical that a continent would become a major political division of United Earth. But that's just my take. To each their own.
 
^I don't see why a nation within a federal union couldn't retain an internal federal structure of its own. After all, if United Earth and the United Planets of Tellar can be member states of the United Federation of Planets, why couldn't the United States of America be a member state of United Earth? (And some tie-ins have asserted that Uhura was from the United States of Africa.)
 
Yeah, having the United States exist within a federal body is no stranger than having counties/parishes exist within a state. There's no reason why a federal organization has to only have a single level of subdivision. Especially given that one of the major reasons why smaller subdivisions exist in a federal body is for ease of organization and governance; there simply isn't the time or attention for a higher level of government to spare on usual local concerns, so you delegate those to a finer level of subdivision, to people that are more aware of the specific needs of a smaller area. California doesn't suddenly have the exact same concerns and needs as Florida just because United Earth exists. I'd imagine that the federal subdivisions of Earth's formerly independent nations would still exist across United Earth if only for greater ease of management: states, provinces, oblasts, districts, what have you.
 
Last edited:
What I mean is that "United States" seems to be a misleading name when it is not the first level below the federal level of the Federation. Would the Independent Republic of Australia retain that moniker upon joining United Earth?
 
What I mean is that "United States" seems to be a misleading name when it is not the first level below the federal level of the Federation. Would the Independent Republic of Australia retain that moniker upon joining United Earth?
Probably. Perhaps it was to make sure they could keep that name that made them the hold out to joining United Earth, as is implied in Attached.
 
Oh, aha, I see. Hmm. That is a good question, but the problem with the US is what would they call themselves as a member of United Earth otherwise? There's not a good way to trim or modify the name in its place (since just "America" would have similar issues, after all), and there's no real historical alternatives that have any cultural connection to the people of the US today, let alone by the point that United Earth was formed. Closest I can think of is "Columbia", but with the existence of Colombia, and with the baggage associated with Columbus, that doesn't really feel like a viable alternative either.

And for your mentioned thought of just breaking it down into North America, even outside the logistical troubles breaking down and replacing whole hog existing governments arbitrarily when you don't have to would bring into play, that seems like a bad idea to me for the same reasons that Sykes-Picot was and is a bad idea. Just arbitrarily changing long-standing cultural divisions like that by outside imposition never goes well with a populace.
 
Last edited:
If I could create my own science fiction featuring a future Earth, I would call the future U.S. something like "Washingtonia", after George Washington. I dunno if anyone in real life would agree with me, but I like said idea because George Washington was the only President who was elected unopposed because Americans trusted him that much. Though there is the problem of a similar name to Washington, D.C. and the State of Washington.
 
He also explicitly wanted not to be remembered as some sort of deific figure, though. He would've hated being the namesake for the entire nation.
 
He also explicitly wanted not to be remembered as some sort of deific figure, though. He would've hated being the namesake for the entire nation.

Well, Jesus Christ probably would've hated being the namesake for an entire organized religious institution, but they did it anyway. Maybe that sort of thing is for history to decide.

Really, though, if I could rename the USA, I'd be inclined to favor a name of Native American origin, like how they finally stopped pretending that Denali was named Mt. McKinley. But then, there was never a single uniform name for the entire region, as far as I know, since there were various different indigenous nations occupying it.
 
Really, though, if I could rename the USA, I'd be inclined to favor a name of Native American origin, like how they finally stopped pretending that Denali was named Mt. McKinley. But then, there was never a single uniform name for the entire region, as far as I know, since there were various different indigenous nations occupying it.
Yup. It's too bad not a single Amerindian group ever held continent-spanning influence. It would be awesome if some cool name like "Apache" was fitting for an entire modern nation.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top