In The 24th Century, How Did They Do It?

[Gary7]

One thing often overlooked is the human status check. Where are we now, relative to where we have been?

Sci-fi depicted societies usually step VERY far ahead from where we are in social development today. And as such, when we get wrapped up in it, it's hard not to think that we could be closer to that ideal.

The sad truth is that we're much more primitive and savage than we're willing to admit. The claim that government gets in our way and should be reduced to practically nothing is pure folly. We need a referee. The recent financial meltdown was due to greedy business practices allowed to flourish due to lax governmental policies and watering down of oversight. We had wealthy, highly educated individuals operating together, to milk the system in the most optimal manner, such that they would get super rich at the sacrifice of the general population's financial health. They DID NOT CARE.

Also... remember that World War II ended in 1945. That's less than 70 years ago. Think of all the atrocities that were committed by human beings. Think of what continues to happen all around the world even today.

Humanity is still struggling to make the "large scale civilization" experiment work. And unfortunately, our industrial exploits have gotten so large scale that we're changing the Earth's ecosystem in the process, adding more stress to an already stressful environment.

We've got a lot to learn and a long way to go. Unfortunately, we can't seem to shift into being more proactive, instead remaining reactive for the most part. The trouble is, some problems arise to attention where they are past the point of a feasible solution. All of the glaciers are going to melt within the next 80-100 years. Sea levels will rise, taking away massive stretches of heavily populated areas, at a time when the world population will have become too large to be sustainable. Anybody who is past their 20's will likely miss out on seeing that horrible stage of human existence. For those of you younger than 30, I feel bad for you... life is gonna suck in your so called "golden years".

My prediction is that we will see a massive decline in the quality of life. People will look back on the days of the 1970's through the 2250's and wish they could have lived during that time. The standard of living for the industrialized nations was so great. The people of the 22nd century will be tasked with making the most out of very little. They will have learned the hard way of how unbridled exploitation is the bane of human existence. They will forge new ways of living... IF they can flourish at all in that toxic and uncomfortable environment. Then maybe by the 23rd century, things will be better again, enough to resume space exploration. I really believe that humanity will have lost a century or two of technology and will need to start over. This is all based on the trends that have been happening with significant momentum. It's not what any of us want to hear. It goes against all we've come to love about the worlds depicted in positive minded sci-fi. But... I just don't see humanity evolving fast enough to deal with the seriously pressing issues we're facing today. We're going to have to fall down before we can get back up and learn to live properly.

 

[O'Dib]

I don't think humanity of Star Trek is different at all. Warp technology made peace on Earth possible, at the expense of unleashing humanity on the stars. Anyone who craves war need only spend a week on a Starfleet vessel. As far as crime, machines that read your mind are probably a good deterrent. Oh, and everyone being atheist is pretty huge. I don't think it can be argued that atheism is an evolved trait though.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Okay here's the way I see it:

First contact with aliens and Earth becoming included in a larger galactic "family" is what killed off nationalism, religion, and other outcroppings of tribalism. To be cynical, what really happened is that humans found new "others" to hate. Why hate Arabs when you can hate Klingons?

The invention of the replicator killed off capitalism by giving everyone an easy way to have all their needs met for free. People still work, just at jobs they like: Starfleet, restaurants, journalism, etc.

I don't think WWIII had anything to do with making humans "better" because wars haven't been known to usually have a healthy effect on societies. Sometimes, but far from guaranteed.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Pfft, doubt it. Besides, being in a world where military/defense gets the biggest chunk of money/resources...

Last time I checked, "the world" was more than just America.

I'd have more faith in McCoy or Crusher or Phlox as opposed to some guy who's essentially a salesman in a white coat and in a drug industry that makes more money with everyone sick as opposed to a healthy world...

You don't know many doctors, do you?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Okay here's the way I see it:

First contact with aliens and Earth becoming included in a larger galactic "family" is what killed off nationalism, religion, and other outcroppings of tribalism. To be cynical, what really happened is that humans found new "others" to hate. Why hate Arabs when you can hate Klingons?

The invention of the replicator killed off capitalism by giving everyone an easy way to have all their needs met for free. People still work, just at jobs they like: Starfleet, restaurants, journalism, etc.

I don't think WWIII had anything to do with making humans "better" because wars haven't been known to usually have a healthy effect on societies. Sometimes, but far from guaranteed.

I mostly agree with this, but I don't think it was the Klingons that did it. I think it was the Romulans.

In fact I have privately believed for a long time that Earth was DIRECTLY THREATENED by the Romulans at some point during the Earth-Romulan war (if not invaded, possibly bombarded from orbit) and that final existential threat was what really pulled humanity together in the end. Enterprise kind of screwed this up, but even then it's not too much of a stretch to believe that an entrenched/elitist power structure still existed that may or may not have had everyone else's best interests at heart; all that nationalism/tribalism merely lay dortmant as those elites were mostly getting along during the 22nd century and had no reason to sir up trouble against their respective cliques. But by the time the Romulans were done with Earth, there was no more room for rivalries, humanity had to THINK BIG, and they never stopped.

 

[Nightdiamond]

(The US is supposed to have the highest quality healthcare in the world)

I mean, in what sense do you mean "have?"

It's said all the time. Quotes like, “the best health care system in the world”. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/opinion/12sun1.html?pagewanted=all

It's an automatic assumption.

Sci-fi depicted societies usually step VERY far ahead from where we are in social development today.
The sad truth is that we're much more primitive and savage than we're willing to admit.

But that's when issues of whether we already have the capacity to make 'the world' very utopian-like comes into play. Only do we use it or not..

Okay here's the way I see it:
First contact with aliens and Earth becoming included in a larger galactic "family" is what killed off nationalism, religion, and other outcroppings of tribalism.

I don't think WWIII had anything to do with making humans "better" because wars haven't been known to usually have a healthy effect on societies. Sometimes, but far from guaranteed.

I never got into the scenario in First Contact. The humans were grouped into factions, and seemed relatively well off and organized.

In the meanwhile, there were resources and time to build a warp capable ship. IMO, they should shown humans has being desperate, bickering, some of the ugliness of imperfect humans. It would have made "the change" stand out.

As others mentioned, most of Trek humans merely 'grew up' (until DS9 started degrading them down to the mentality of morons we have in the early 21st century).

Like the admiral who tried to take over earth and started arresting everybody?

But here's the thing; even now some scientist are saying...that closed mindedness, even certain political beliefs, may be hardwired into the brain... some people can't help it????

 

[Nightdiamond]

I don't think humanity of Star Trek is different at all. Oh, and everyone being atheist is pretty huge. I don't think it can be argued that atheism is an evolved trait though.

Except Trek insinuates that humans solved their problems partly becausee of an atheistic attitude. In fact it also implies that whenever anyone embraces religion, or too much of it, they go backwards.

There was an episode of DS9 where a Bajoran thinks he's the Emissary. Right away he brings back the 'old' religion, and starts instituting a caste system. All the Bajorans eagerly accept it.

Suddenly the Bajorans become really dumb and childlike.

One Bajoran is so naive, he pushes another Bajoran off a ledge killing him, because he was from a certain caste, and wouldn't resign from his job..... he was 'impure'.

Not to mention some of things Kirk and Picard and others have said....

 

[Edit_XYZ]

One Bajoran is so naive, he pushes another Bajoran off a ledge killing him, because he was from a certain cast, and wouldn't resign his job because he was 'impure'.

Historically speaking, such events - and much worse - did come to pass, and quite frequently, due to religion.

It is fair game for an episode portraying religion - that is, protraying it, not idealising it.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I don't think humanity of Star Trek is different at all. Oh, and everyone being atheist is pretty huge. I don't think it can be argued that atheism is an evolved trait though.

Except Trek insinuates that humans solved their problems partly becausee of an atheistic attitude. In fact it also implies that whenever anyone embraces religion, or too much of it, they go backwards.

There was an episode of DS9 where a Bajoran thinks he's the Emissary. Right away he brings back the 'old' religion, and starts instituting a cast system. All the Bajorans eagerly accept it.

Suddenly the Bajorans become really dumb and childlike.

One Bajoran is so naive, he pushes another Bajoran off a ledge killing him, because he was from a certain cast, and wouldn't resign his job because he was 'impure'.

Not to mention some of things Kirk and Picard and others have said....

I think you have to take some of Trek with a grain of salt considering the only humans we ever see are all Starfleet officers. You've got to wonder if maybe there's something about space exploration that makes it inherently unappealing to people of great spirituality or religious devotion. If nothing else, it would explain why Chinese officers are so hard to find in Starfleet; Buddhism or some offshoot thereof might have really caught on during the Post-Atomic Horror.

This would also explain the odd fact that Bajor seems to be a very old civilization with a very VERY long history that somehow never got around to space travel (or at least, rarely traveled beyond their own solar system). Deep religious faith probably serves to blunt some of that exploratory zeal, which might explain why Americans and Europeans are also so over-represented in Starfleet.

You might say that the more strongly a man believes in a higher power, the less willing he is to travel into space and risk ENCOUNTERING that power in person. Atheists and agnostics don't believe in divine beings, which -- ironically -- means they are most likely to DISCOVER those beings wandering around the cosmos somewhere.

 

[marksound]

Humans are human. You can't eliminate greed, envy, lust, etc. because they are part of the human condition. Proclaiming that mankind has "grown up" is just Federation diplomatic BS. We've seen repeatedly that it isn't the case.

 

[Arpy]

Well, what does it mean to grow up? You don't change your genetic make-up or do away with the possibility of regression. That's what irks me about the theories that the replicator made utopia possible. No! Without also achieving greater..."psycho-social maturity," the Federation would just be a much fatter and better clothed version of us. And isn't that silly to think that technologies can evolve but societies can't?

Another theory that irks me: "The more things change, the more they stay the same." I don't buy it. Sounds like sentimentalism by one guy or cynicism by another. It's comfortable to think that. But I think the truth in the saying isn't that things don't change but in how well you can appreciate the things that haven't from the perspective of the things that just did. That doesn't mean that some things never change.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Humans are human. You can't eliminate greed, envy, lust, etc. because they are part of the human condition.

Sure you can. You just exile from your society anyone who has any inclination to ACT on those oh-so-human impulses.

That, after all, is the subtext of the Earth-is-paradise meme. Humanity "as we know it" has changed for the better, which includes its representatives in Starfleet. It's just that humanity EVERYWHERE ELSE are a bunch of assholes, and so are the various forehead aliens that resemble (and occasionally cross-breed with) them.

It's a philosophical principle endorsed by "Skin of Evil." If you just take the evil portion of your society and set it free to be itself, everything will be fine. Evil gets to be evil, good gets to be good, nobody has to worry about a thing... until, at least, somebody stumbles onto your discarded evil shell and it brutally massacres everyone.

Proclaiming that mankind has "grown up" is just Federation diplomatic BS. We've seen repeatedly that it isn't the case.

That's just it, humans don't consider extra-terrestrials to be really part of their society, and that ironically includes humans living offworld. Starfleet officers and their families are quoted as saying that they don't use money, but we've never seen a non-Starfleet human make a similar claim, and in fact we've seen a number of Federation worlds and Federation citizens -- even a few humans -- discussing transactions in explicitly monetary terms. Suffice to say that for some reason Earth has a planned economy that no longer uses a recognizable form of currency, but it's inconceivable that the entire Federation works this way, and therefore inevitable that humans living abroad don't enjoy the cashless utopia that Earth has become.

Such humans have either removed themselves voluntarily (due to boredom or social/political isolation) or were removed forcibly as part of a criminal sentence when normal rehabilitation efforts proved ineffective. The galaxy is certainly large enough that Earth can afford to toss its social garbage anywhere it pleases, especially since the most depraved Terrans would probably fit in pretty well at an Andorian bachelor party.

 

[Gary7]

The thing is, on an individual basis and in small collective groups, we've demonstrated the capability for more mature ways of living. To let drop most of the unsavory primal instincts. But on the large scale, it's not yet possible because there are too many participants who indulge and celebrate their primal instincts, like greed and gluttony, which are projected all over the media as something to strive for.

In the Star Trek universe they managed to transcend that problem. WW III certainly helped knock things back a bit as a major wake-up call. Perhaps after this, a more carefully thought out educational system and parental reform policy was instituted to help ensure a higher degree of moral fiber in the average citizen. With that kind of foundation, the crime rates would shrink, corruption would diminish significantly, and technological progress could proceed without all kinds of conflicting nonsensical medieval beliefs from people with influential power.

 

[The Castellan]

You might say that the more strongly a man believes in a higher power, the less willing he is to travel into space and risk ENCOUNTERING that power in person.

Why is that? I believe in higher powers, and I sure as hell want to travel into space and see what's out there.

 

[CaptainMatt]

One positive thing is by the time of the 24th century and Picard's Enterprise is the common cold has been irradicated. Now if they can get rid of the more devestating illnesses. Such a concept would be inspiring to those who suffer from reoccuring diseases.

 

[horatio83]

I don't think humanity of Star Trek is different at all. Oh, and everyone being atheist is pretty huge. I don't think it can be argued that atheism is an evolved trait though.

Except Trek insinuates that humans solved their problems partly becausee of an atheistic attitude. In fact it also implies that whenever anyone embraces religion, or too much of it, they go backwards.

Gotta disagree. I am a hardcore atheist but I fail to see how atheism is supposed to solve any problems. You could even claim that such an attitude would be religious again, atheism as an Ersatz God which brings us out of the valley of darkness (which is the position of guys like Dawkins, Hitchens and so on).

No, the only proper attitude is to acknowledge how flawed we are and to strive everyday to improve. Many people, also in this thread, claim that TNG paints a naive utopia. Nothing could be further from the truth, episodes like The Drumhead show how fragile this paradise actually is and how careful everybody has to be to prevent regression.

 

[Deimos Anomaly]

According to Trek in the 23rd-24th centuries, humans have solved almost all most of our modern problems. They have eliminated poverty. Everybody gets along. There is no sexism. No Crime. No racism at all. People don't get sick.

"A lot has changed in three hundred years. People are no longer obsessed with the accumulation of 'things'. We have eliminated hunger, want, the need for possessions."

It's a complete Utopia. But they've never really explained exactly how they did it.

Does anyone even think it is really possible? Is it possible doing it Trek's way, or is it too unrealistic?

Is it a weird communist society as some claim? Can it be done without religion the way Gene claimed? Do we need a certain political ideology to make it happen?

How did they do it?

Drugs in the replicators?

Maybe the Vulcans ran some sort of deep black op on the human race, where they tweaked the genome a little and enmasse without mankind knowing, resulting in a kinder gentler utopian humanity. This might have been done with some sort of invisible nanites in the food, water, air, whatever.

I'm kinda thinking of what Smith said in the Matrix, about how mankind mentally rejected the "first matrix" which was designed as a utopia. See here:

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxKYfTvZFb8[/yt]

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You might say that the more strongly a man believes in a higher power, the less willing he is to travel into space and risk ENCOUNTERING that power in person.

Why is that? I believe in higher powers, and I sure as hell want to travel into space and see what's out there.

Not, I suspect, as much an avowed atheist who doesn't believe there is any organized pattern to the universe other than what nature may provide. More to the point, as a westerner you are probably far less devout than, say, a fundamentalist Muslim who is more likely to devote most of his intellectual/spiritual energy inwards in a quest to obtain inner purity and/or enlightenment as opposed to an external quest to glimpse the wonders of the universe.

That's really what it boils down to, after all: deep religious devotion carries with it a tendency to turn spirituality inwards and seek the truth of one's own soul, while the more atheistic belief systems turn that energy outwards to see the truth of the cosmos itself. Both are seeking the same thing, but using very different methods to find it. The irony is that in the Star Trek universe the atheist is a lot more likely to discover the truth about those once-worshipped deities, while the religious devotee is less likely to care about their absence.

 

[Ian Keldon]

The Federation was not, and is not atheistic. Nor is it theiestic. The religious/spiritual beliefs of a person or a culture are their own affair, and there are plenty of examples of Federation citizens demonstrating religious and/or spiritual practice.

 

[Nightdiamond]

The Federation was not, and is not atheistic. Nor is it theiestic. The religious/spiritual beliefs of a person or a culture are their own affair, and there are plenty of examples of Federation citizens demonstrating religious and/or spiritual practice.

Ah, true. But here is the thing. Trek is saying that humans solved their problems and created Utopia on their own, without the aid of religion.

If anything Gene almost certainly wanted to project this.

It was done through hard work, reasoning, responsibility, and a desire to eliminate bigotry and class-ism, prejudice, etc.

So ironically, 24th century humans have the complete freedom to be religious, as a benefit of that hard work.

But I'll bet that once humans realized that they solved their most stubborn problems with their own intellect, a good majority of them held an atheistic attitude.

Picard seemed to have thought that religion=superstition and dark ages.

And we all know how the TOS episodes sees it--"what's that behind the veil? That's no god, that's just a computer!"