Human society in TOS and TNG/DS9/VOY

[Lapis Exilis]

Further thing on the money... let's just imagine at some point money ceases to exist. The why is not important at the moment, think of some technobabble if you will. But what happens to your society once you can't make any profit anymore because all the money you have is suddenly totally worthless?

It would automatically turn into something we call communism today. When people can't drive towards profit, they need a new direction, a new goal. And it depends on the nature of humans, but I think it would be a positive goal. Like "we work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity" like Picard said.

Again, I protest this idea that the only thing human beings are motivated by is greed. I, and everyone I work with, willfully choose to work in non-profits because we think the work is far more important than money. Every one of us checks half our market value at the door when we walk into work. A friend of mine just quit her job so she could stay home and raise her kids. She and her husband gave up a car and several other luxuries because having a parent to be with their kds was more important.

Many people already work for something besides profit and do things because they believe it betters themselves and the rest of humanity. The society depicted in Star Trek is not capitalist and it's not communist and it's not socialist - those are all definitions of modern day economic systems that are based on scarcity of resources. The society postulated in Star Trek has no scarcity of resources and these words would have nothing to do with its economic system.

No offense, but you guys need to stop swallowing the propaganda of capitalism that people are so base and low that the only thing they care about is getting more and more money, and without that motivation we would all sit down and stare at a wall. Most people today choose jobs not simply based on how much money they can make, but based on how much they like doing the work, or how much it means to their family that they do that particular kind of work, or because their mom or dad did that kind of work, or because that was the opportunity that came down the pike at the time. And millions upon millions of people create works of art or do creative things as hobbies - spending their hard earned resources for something that provides satisfaction for them, and usually them alone, even when it is hard work and they could do nothing. Why do we make fabulous gardens, and quilt and paint and knit and sew and do woodwork, or rebuild old cars or cook amazing meals? Because as human beings we like to work at things, regardless of whether or not we get paid for it.

 

[Anwar]

Or at least that's what Kirk used to believe and TOS seemed to suggest (see "This Side of Paradise"), and in TOS and DS9 you see that Earth society is much better in many ways than it was in 20th century

Not really. Both TOS and DS9 were pretty much "Things haven't gotten any better, we're just in space now and have other enemies than each other."

, but that it is not perfect. But apparently TNG is somehow being "more faithful to Gene Roddenberry's vision" - whatever the heck that means - by implying completely the opposite. [/QUOTE]

All TNG did was show that humans had changed due to all the new stuff around and didn't all act exactly like 20th century people, and that people in the future would look back at us as primitive people just like we look back at our own past as primitive. Of course rather than appreciate the irony/inevitability of this most viewers just were insulted that modern humans weren't treated with divine reverence.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The society postulated in Star Trek has no scarcity of resources and these words would have nothing to do with its economic system.

We don't know that.

And don't talk to me about replicators, because not everybody has one. Robert Picard and his family refused to allow them in the home. So how do you think they got by? Why, through selling wine from the family vineyard, that's how.

The Risans look like they are those uberevolved citizens. They seem to practice free love all day and are only interested in psychedelic, mind-expanding stuff. And we also see the reactions to that: Trills like Jadzia have no problem with that, Ferengi like Quark are only after the sex, and Klingons like Worf have huge problems with that entire attitude.

And of course in that episode Worf is made out to be some kind of obsolete throwback Neanderthal who dares to question it. If I didn't know any better I'd think Gene himself wrote the ep. It sure seemed like one he would write. Kind of like that line in 1984 about "Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc"...

 

[alicelouise]

Star Trek in all of its incarnations has a human society where there is no hunger, homelessness, rampant disease, or any of the other ills that have plagued us. When everyone is that high up on Maslow's Pyramid; it's easy to be kind, tolerant, and enlightened. If those conditions were present during the Roman Empire, it would have been a kinder and gentler Rome. I would say humans have not advanced beyond CroMagnons. We're just better fed.

300 years in the future, I think the same will be true as well. It's arrogance to think that someone in 1709 was less evolved than a person in 2009. The same will probably hold true in 2309.

Remember, the philosophers such as Aristotle, Socrates, Moses, Paul, Marcus Aurelius, and Erasmus were not knuckle draggers. Even before them people did have opposable thumbs.

 

[alicelouise]

The society postulated in Star Trek has no scarcity of resources and these words would have nothing to do with its economic system.

We don't know that.

And don't talk to me about replicators, because not everybody has one. Robert Picard and his family refused to allow them in the home. So how do you think they got by? Why, through selling wine from the family vineyard, that's how.

The Risans look like they are those uberevolved citizens. They seem to practice free love all day and are only interested in psychedelic, mind-expanding stuff. And we also see the reactions to that: Trills like Jadzia have no problem with that, Ferengi like Quark are only after the sex, and Klingons like Worf have huge problems with that entire attitude.

And of course in that episode Worf is made out to be some kind of obsolete throwback Neanderthal who dares to question it. If I didn't know any better I'd think Gene himself wrote the ep. It sure seemed like one he would write. Kind of like that line in 1984 about "Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc"...

Worf had his childhood end/change in an instant when he was 5 years old. He understood that an easy life could end more easily than the destruction of a spider's web.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

And of course in that episode Worf is made out to be some kind of obsolete throwback Neanderthal who dares to question it. If I didn't know any better I'd think Gene himself wrote the ep. It sure seemed like one he would write. Kind of like that line in 1984 about "Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc"...

Worf had his childhood end/change in an instant when he was 5 years old. He understood that an easy life could end more easily than the destruction of a spider's web.

See, that's we, the viewers, talking about it. We know that Worf has reasons for why he acts the way he does. Good reasons, I might add. I mean, he *killed* a kid during a soccer match without even realizing it!

But the episode still does not seem to be treating him fairly. It looks like just a lot of "look how evolved we all are, and look how pathetic this guy is because he doesn't fuck everything that moves". I see that attitude quite a lot, sometimes even on this very board.

 

[DevilEyes]

All TNG did was show that humans had changed due to all the new stuff around and didn't all act exactly like 20th century people, and that people in the future would look back at us as primitive people just like we look back at our own past as primitive. Of course rather than appreciate the irony/inevitability of this most viewers just were insulted that modern humans weren't treated with divine reverence.

No, TNG implied - e.g. in Troi's conversation with Mark Twain in "Time's Arrow" - that there was no absolutely no poverty, social inequality or econominic and social problems in 24th century Federation society. This is the kind of thing that makes me roll my eyes and say "Oh come on, are you kidding me?!" Society has evolved and improved in the last 300 years for sure, but it has never, in 3000 or 6000 years, come even close to eliminating social inequality, poverty and economic and social problems. The development of tehcnology, medicine etc. as well as the social changes, have improved many things, but there have also been new problems created. To imply that people will actually eliminate social inequality, and in just 300 or 400 years no less, falls under the category of unbelievable and naive utopia, rather than a simply positive and hopeful, but at least somewhat realistic idea of the future.

 

[Timo]

Wow, what a backlog of interesting ideas!

Oh come on, you can't be serious.

But I am. Read again: I said human-to-(almost) human racism has evidently disappeared exactly because there's all sorts of new racism to replace it. Which is quite futuristic in itself, because (as an example) the introduction of niggers or injuns or ragheads or japs to the British culture never stood a chance of alleviating racism towards the Irish... It would be quite a novel development if new racism indeed made old racism disappear.

From the fact that our human heroes are openly racist about certain aliens, and that our Vulcan heroes are openly racist about humans and certain other aliens, one might deduce that racism has become an accepted part of the civilized society in the 23rd and 24th centuries. That is, no merit is found in pretending that all species are created equal, while merit surprisingly is found in highlighting the significant differences at every turn.

...let's just imagine at some point money ceases to exist.

Let's forget the "thought experiment" nature of this statement for a moment, so that I can present my angle on this. Namely, I would like to stress that the "disappearance" of money was probably a very gradual and graduated process, one that has already begun hundreds of years ago when things like bills and stocks were invented, and is now proceeding through a phase where cash is likely to disappear.

TOS no doubt had some vestigal elements of a monetary system left, while TNG had fewer of those. Doesn't mean TOS had money and TNG didn't - but it does seem that people in TOS already felt the need to deny that they were using money (hear Kirk in ST4), and people in TNG are adamant about it.

Okay, back to the "thought experiment".

It's a very utopic idea, but once money vanished (for whatever reason), any society would adapt to that change, wouldn't it?

Well, the easiest way to adapt would be to reinvent money.

Which is why I suppose money was declared evil and sinful at some point (according to whichever religion or social code was prominent at that point - we have little idea about that, alas). So people would have had to invent something different, more innovative, to cope with the loss.

Kirk & Co still had Federation credits to "buy a boat"

To nitpick, Kirk & Co were never said to have Federation credits. Kirk sold a cabin, Scotty bought a boat, but credits or currency were never mentioned in the context. So "selling" and "buying" might have some futuristic meaning there.

Canonically, credits first emerge in TNG "Encounter at Farpoint", where they are used as a means of a UFP/alien financial transaction. We never quite hear of credits being used for internal UFP/UFP transactions, although we do hear that Janeway bought an item at a price on Vulcan, suggesting that "buying" and "price" still exist within the 24th century UFP in addition to being a continuing feature of UFP/foreign transactions.

He lived a life, in a way, as Benny Russell, a man faced with racism in the 1950s.

Which begs the question "WHY?", with capital letters. That's quite a severe mental illness for somebody from the 24th century... Perhaps comparable to somebody today thinking he should care about inquisition victims, and living a vivid second life in a medieval torture chamber.

It sounds pretty implausible that Sisko, otherwise a relatively stable man, would get his bouts of Benny Russell because something from his real life was steering him torwards those. Then again, Benny Russell was probably the doing of the Prophets anyway, and they could have taken fairly neutral memories from Sisko's well-educated head and turned them into personally significant nightmares, for their own devious purposes.

Or then Sisko really was something of a freak to begin with.

And don't talk to me about replicators, because not everybody has one. Robert Picard and his family refused to allow them in the home. So how do you think they got by? Why, through selling wine from the family vineyard, that's how.

As you said, we don't know that.

It could just as well be that they got everything for free, plus grew some wine on the side. No financial side to the operation was ever mentioned, after all.

It's arrogance to think that someone in 1709 was less evolved than a person in 2009.

That would probably depend on the choice of that someone.

It should IMHO decidedly count as evolution when a person has a multifaceted education and free access to almost all information, and the ability to interact beyond his or her immediate tribal surroundings. In this sense, people from 2009 are an entire new species compared with most people from 1709. Not to mention better fed.

But the episode still does not seem to be treating him fairly. It looks like just a lot of "look how evolved we all are, and look how pathetic this guy is because he doesn't fuck everything that moves". I see that attitude quite a lot, sometimes even on this very board.

So perhaps the Trek 24th century really is just around the corner?

To imply that people will actually eliminate social inequality, and in just 300 or 400 years no less, falls under the category of unbelievable and naive utopia, rather than a simply positive and hopeful, but at least somewhat realistic idea of the future.

Why? Poverty could be viewed as absolute rather than relative; it would be entirely realistic to increase the living standards of people above the current poverty limit, thereby making Troi true to her word.

The world population today is probably at its absolute happiest, and at the height of its standard of living, including darkest Africa and the soggiest slums of Chicago. This development has taken place, and even if/though it's not a continuing trend in our universe, it could well be in the Trek one.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[MNM]

Or at least that's what Kirk used to believe and TOS seemed to suggest (see "This Side of Paradise"), and in TOS and DS9 you see that Earth society is much better in many ways than it was in 20th century

Not really. Both TOS and DS9 were pretty much "Things haven't gotten any better, we're just in space now and have other enemies than each other."

TOS maybe, but DS9? Didnt Sisko say in an episode that Earth was a paradise? And that everyone behaved well there because "it's easy to be a saint in paradise"?

While it may not be a paradise on every Federation world, the person you were replying to was talking about Earth society specifically, and those quotes by Sisko make it perfectly clear that Earth society is much different and in a better state than just "things havent gotten any better".

 

[Anwar]

He was being metaphorical when he said that, and he meant the Federation as a whole not just Earth. The whole "easy to be a Saint in Paradise" line was just his way of trying to justify the Maquis' behavior and all that. And when Troi was talking to Twain she was trying to explain it to a guy from the past who probably couldn't conceive most of the tech and things they encounter in their lives, to him there WOULDN'T be those problems anymore. Not to say there AREN'T any, just not ones that a 19th/20th Century person would conceive of in their daily lives.

Like I said, not acting exactly 100% like 20th Century people is what turns off the more cynical Trek fans and has them label everyone in TNG+ as "worthless useless hippies" with no redeeming qualities.

 

[SpaceLama]

In other science fiction, human society is almost unrecognisable - everyone is transhuman, made of nanomachines, or embodied in a starship, with chemical stimulants being used to overcome every anxiety or personal problem.

In Star Trek, it seems that there is a strong anarcho-primitivist streak in human(oid) society - most worlds in the Federation are depicted as having small settlements, built with traditional materials, who farm their own food - rather than hyper-automated megastructures (like arcologies).

This may be an indication that in Federation times, there is a strong philosophical scepticism toward technology - it may be that people feel traditional upbringing leads to greater psychological welfare, and that the industrialised/urbanised period of the 20th century was an abberation, that detracted from the wholesomeness of human life.

Starfleet is of course maintained to defend the Federation, and scientists still explore the universe - but on the ground, most people seem to prefer traditional lifestyles, fresh food, strong local community, personal development, etc. In other words, the medittereanian lifestyle, or zen lifestyle, is popular.

 

[JarodRussell]

In other science fiction, human society is almost unrecognisable - everyone is transhuman, made of nanomachines, or embodied in a starship, with chemical stimulants being used to overcome every anxiety or personal problem.

In Star Trek, it seems that there is a strong anarcho-primitivist streak in human(oid) society - most worlds in the Federation are depicted as having small settlements, built with traditional materials, who farm their own food - rather than hyper-automated megastructures (like arcologies).

This may be an indication that in Federation times, there is a strong philosophical scepticism toward technology - it may be that people feel traditional upbringing leads to greater psychological welfare, and that the industrialised/urbanised period of the 20th century was an abberation, that detracted from the wholesomeness of human life.

Starfleet is of course maintained to defend the Federation, and scientists still explore the universe - but on the ground, most people seem to prefer traditional lifestyles, fresh food, strong local community, personal development, etc. In other words, the medittereanian lifestyle, or zen lifestyle, is popular.

That's a very interesting point. Thanks!

 

[Myasishchev]

Yeah, now we're talking! Thanks so much guys!

Another is the "we hate money, we don't have money, and even if we use things a bit like money, we refuse to call them money" issue. For all we know, it's 90% propaganda and 10% new economics. But it could just as well really be 10% propaganda and 90% new economics. Trek is famous for lacking references to salaries, except as ambiguous sayings ("I'll bet real money" etc.) in the TOS era; we could consider that "new society" all right.

Could it be that in TOS society still used money, yet 100 years later in TNG they got rid of it?


Further thing on the money... let's just imagine at some point money ceases to exist. The why is not important at the moment, think of some technobabble if you will. But what happens to your society once you can't make any profit anymore because all the money you have is suddenly totally worthless?

It would automatically turn into something we call communism today. When people can't drive towards profit, they need a new direction, a new goal. And it depends on the nature of humans, but I think it would be a positive goal. Like "we work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity" like Picard said.

Well, there would have to be a command economy, just for the economy to function and the resources of society be organized. Money is indispensible in a decentralized free market society. A moniless economy is de facto a command economy, and in the Star Trek universe an effective and apparently fair communist one.

Ownership of real or personal property practically requires money, since alienability is an essential feature of ownership. Pretty much the only way to alienate property outside of a money economy is by trading it for other property or labor, colonizing it, or giving it away--and this is absolutely no way for an advanced economy to function.

Contract law in the Federation must have a decidedly un-American bent to it as well. It's rare here that a court will require anything other than monetary damages be paid by someone in breach, and even in the cases where a court demands specific performance, it's a contract for the sale of land, which is a unique item which cannot be totally reduced to a monetary equivalent. Service contracts are virtually never enforced by specific performance. There are good reasons why we do this, too--someone who's already in breach will probably do a bad job, and, beyond that, enjoining someone who doesn't want to perform the contract smacks of involuntary servitude. But in the absence of money, and the absence of property that would seem to follow, an injunction for specific performance is the only possible remedy I can think of in the case of a breach. You can't go out and purchase a new performance. So, in extremis, aforcing the breaching party to perform seems to be the only option.

Presumably, in the absence of money, a contracting party is only doing the job because he or she enjoys it, but can an economy function based on a well-fed person's whims? What happens when someone says "I don't feel like safety-checking the antimatter reactor today," and they're the only ones on Janus IV or wherever who know how to do it?

Tort law would hardly even exist in a place where you can't sue someone for money. I guess universal health care takes care of injuries, and lawsuits still exist, but based on indignation instead of a pecuniary motive. "Jack didn't safety-check the antimatter reactor and little Bobby got delta radiation poisoned. I represent little Bobby, and we request the court enjoin Janus Power Authority from hiring drunks in the future." And little Bobby blinks his agreement from his wheelchair.

 

[Captrek]

The society postulated in Star Trek has no scarcity of resources and these words would have nothing to do with its economic system.

Yeah, but only some of us have evolved beyond the need for money. We have a post-scarcity society and a scarcity society coexisting in the same space. Try to make sense out of that.

 

[The Castellan]

Further thing on the money... let's just imagine at some point money ceases to exist. The why is not important at the moment, think of some technobabble if you will. But what happens to your society once you can't make any profit anymore because all the money you have is suddenly totally worthless?

It would automatically turn into something we call communism today. When people can't drive towards profit, they need a new direction, a new goal. And it depends on the nature of humans, but I think it would be a positive goal. Like "we work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity" like Picard said.

Again, I protest this idea that the only thing human beings are motivated by is greed. I, and everyone I work with, willfully choose to work in non-profits because we think the work is far more important than money. Every one of us checks half our market value at the door when we walk into work. A friend of mine just quit her job so she could stay home and raise her kids. She and her husband gave up a car and several other luxuries because having a parent to be with their kds was more important.

Many people already work for something besides profit and do things because they believe it betters themselves and the rest of humanity. The society depicted in Star Trek is not capitalist and it's not communist and it's not socialist - those are all definitions of modern day economic systems that are based on scarcity of resources. The society postulated in Star Trek has no scarcity of resources and these words would have nothing to do with its economic system.

No offense, but you guys need to stop swallowing the propaganda of capitalism that people are so base and low that the only thing they care about is getting more and more money, and without that motivation we would all sit down and stare at a wall. Most people today choose jobs not simply based on how much money they can make, but based on how much they like doing the work, or how much it means to their family that they do that particular kind of work, or because their mom or dad did that kind of work, or because that was the opportunity that came down the pike at the time. And millions upon millions of people create works of art or do creative things as hobbies - spending their hard earned resources for something that provides satisfaction for them, and usually them alone, even when it is hard work and they could do nothing. Why do we make fabulous gardens, and quilt and paint and knit and sew and do woodwork, or rebuild old cars or cook amazing meals? Because as human beings we like to work at things, regardless of whether or not we get paid for it.

I agree with you. I mean if money in Trek would be like money is today....worshipped and wanted...sometimes more than life itself, there would be no starships exploring the unknown, there would be none of that.....everyone would be working their asses off 12 hours a day to pay their bills, send Billy to college, and taxes.


Plus the people who work solely for money are some of the most MISERABLE people around...they are depressed, angery, often in poor health, spend more time making money then taking part of the importent things in life. I quit becoming an engineer because I was getting soooo stressed, loosing weight, getting depressed cause I was pretty much living in the classroom, and if I did become an engineer, I'd have to use the money earned from that, in addition to paying off anu debt from education, I'd be spending it on lyposuction, steroids, anti despressents and probably loose women because I was in horrible health and was just miserable...not to mention several promising relationships went sour because of it. I'm in a lower paying, but much more stressfree occupation and my health got back on track and my depression is pretty much gone now. Plus I seen folks who are pretty much Hitler and Corella DeVille in the flesh, and still get respected and even revered because their are wealthy....sorry, but guys like Donald Trump, Vince McMann, Big Oil, Pharmacudicals, and so on are NOTHING I desire to be. Hell...Rockwell ( or was it Rockerfeller? ), was STILL trying to make money while on his deathbed. And the idea of countries, nations and world competing against each other for profit leads to name-calling, sabotage', even violence. Plus people say, "Well...money is what motivates people to do things, to make things!" I feel it's the opposite. For example....Oil....these cowboys and sheiks are making billions in profit...and I hear many stories of people who come up with alternative energy, even free energy ( Read up on hyperdiamensional physics...would make oil and nuclear ancient history. ), or machines that can perpetuate energy....they either get baught out and never see the light of day, or the inventors themselves simply...disappear...or get their lives or families destroyed. Or drug companies....you know how much they would lose if the cures for stuff like cancer, diabeties, the commen cold, or even just plain heartburn were disclosed?

Whatever the society way of living is like in the Trek universe....it's MUCH better than ours, I'll tell you what. And I'd gladly trade what we have now for what the Trek universe has, without hesitation. I'd rather deal with more evolved humanity rather than dealing with what one sees on the streets of New York and L.A. these days.

 

[Captrek]

If the Federation doesn’t use money, which presumably means Starfleet personnel aren’t paid, where do O’Brien and Bashir get the latinum to pay for their drinks and holosuite time at Quark’s?

 

[Myasishchev]

If the Federation doesn’t use money, which presumably means Starfleet personnel aren’t paid, where do O’Brien and Bashir get the latinum to pay for their drinks and holosuite time at Quark’s?

Starfleet expense account, handled by the non-profit Bank of Bolarus. One guesses.

 

[Anwar]

The Federation doesn't use money within the Federation (or at least, Earth doesn't use money). They do have a currency for use outside the Federation, Federation Credits. They are mentioned several times throughout the series.

 

[Falcor5]

The Federation doesn't use money within the Federation (or at least, Earth doesn't use money). They do have a currency for use outside the Federation, Federation Credits. They are mentioned several times throughout the series.

I still never understood how the no money thing would work for ordinary people on Earth. So say you lived on Earth and decided you wanted to move and live in a very desirable location that many other people would want to live like a house in Hawaii overlooking the Ocean. How would you go about doing it if there is no money? Just try and find some empty land and hope no one else builds a house first? Or is there some way to buy the land? Or can you just move right in and build a house anywhere you like even if its right next to someone else and blocks their view? I guess we never really saw any day to day type things like this on Star Trek.

 

[rahullak]

^
I suppose its some kind of first-come-first served basis. Some central authority maintains the un"sold" land and fulfills the "orders" which are basically free. So if Joseph Sisko wanted to open another Sisko's branch in Timbuktu, all he'd have to do is ask the authorities there for unsold land and claim it. I suppose you could also "order to specification", the type of building you want constructed (since I'm guessing materials are replicated and assembled using machines/robots and even some people) and once the materials and other resources are available (which are again free), the construction proceeds. Money as a "middleman" is removed. You get what you ask for, provided it is available. And it usually becomes available after a time. It's a utopian society where resources are practically limitless. Time and space is the only major constraint.

As for the use of Federation credits, I suppose the Federation holds a central account and uses the Federation Credit as a monetary equivalent to enable trade with worlds outside the Federation. I can easily see Starfleet officers getting a yearly quota (something like a salary) of credits (based on their rank) which would either be carried over or be absorbed back into the central account. Most starfleet officers don't need it anyway, except on places like DS9 and Quark's. Most officers also take their shoreleave on Federation planets. I can also see Federation citizens getting these credits, perhaps on request from their respective world governments, or in trading with offworlders.

That's my guess on how it works anyway.