Is Starfleet a military organization?

[Krupp]

I think a point raised in this thread bears thinking about... What constitutes a military has changed often over the span of human history. During many periods many nations had no standing military and levied one at a time of war. Military forces are also fashioned out of different organizations. In both the UK and US during WW2, the "core" military became the backbone of a citizens army of vastly larger size and composition. Indeed, most of the generals of the US in WW2 were generals of the Army of the United States fighting the war, while holding their lower rank in the army proper they came from (the much smaller prewar org). And non-warfighting organizations are often put into military service as required, such as the merchant marine.

Then look at the missions Starfleet regularly undertakes in peacetime: Border patrols, escort, reconnaissance, intelligence... They are at the very least a paramilitary organization.

What's very hopeful for the future, is the idea that a military organization would consider peaceful exploration to be its primary mission. But when the time comes, having those engineers "who can turn rocks into replicators" goes from exploration and colonization to beating your ass back across the galaxy.

 

[BK613]

What constitutes a military has changed often over the span of human history.

And the meaning of the word itself has been broaden by use to include a nation's whole armed forces when it used to exclusively refer to land forces.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

You're overthinking this.

"Military" = "the organization charged by the state with using large-scale violence in defense of the state."

That's clearly Starfleet. Nothing about that definition precludes Starfleet from also being the UFP's primary exploratory and scientific research service, or from also being a secondary diplomatic service to back up the Federation Diplomatic Corps. But it is clearly also the Federation's military.

When a Trek war needs to be fought you don't call Starfleet 'occassionally', you call them every damn time! And the last time fire service duties included combat and defending a sovereign state was.....

Both of these post summed up everything I was going to say.

In Archer's time: Starfleet was there for the Xindi and Romulan Wars.

In Kirk's time: Starfleet was there for Klingon wars, Romulan incursions and Augment incursions.

In Picard and Sisko's time: Starfleet fought the Cardassians in a war (pre-TNG), two Borg invasions, the Klingons (when Gowron suspended the Khitomer Accords), the Dominion, and the Reman/Romulan coup attack on the Enterprise and Earth.

Starfleet is the space defense force for the UFP. They are also the exploratory crew and diplomatic envoys for new planets.

If Starfleet is not a military. They sure spend a lot of time fighting wars.

 

[fireproof78]

If Starfleet is not a military. They sure spend a lot of time fighting wars.

That is the most confusing part. If Starfleet is not a military organization then where is it for the Federation? They too good to have one?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

That's definitely an oddity, my best guess is the categories are for "those who control the ship," "those who do science," and "everybody else."

Keep in mind, pretty much the only reason Starfleet uniforms even HAVE color in the first place is to sell color televisions (which were in their infancy when TOS was on). So that's why Starfleet only used three colors: green, red and blue. The most basic colors you can get.

And yes, I'm firmly of the mind that the real command color in TOS was green, and nobody's changing my mind on that.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I'm actually rather fond of the 29th-century "Relativity" uniforms. About time BLUE got its due as the command color!

 

[Sci]

Side-note:

I'm always amused at the idea Starfleet isn't a military given that they operate a system of courts-martial in which they can try you for violations of the Starfleet Code of Justice and then throw you in a Starfleet penal colony.

Last I checked, organizations that were not military forces cannot do that. If you get a job at Subway and violate your shift manager's orders, Subway can't arrest you, throw you in a Subway jail, charge with in a violation of the Code of Subway Justice, try you in a special court-Subway, and then sentence you to five years in a Subway prison.

 

[Dumbbell]

What's very hopeful for the future, is the idea that a military organization would consider peaceful exploration to be its primary mission. But when the time comes, having those engineers "who can turn rocks into replicators" goes from exploration and colonization to beating your ass back across the galaxy.

What does it tell you about a people who assign its military organization the task of making first contact?

It is just another reason that I do not think that Starfleet should be the Federation's military arm.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

What does it tell you about a people who assign its military organization the task of making first contact?

It tells me that Starfleet is GOOD at it.

 

[Tim Thomason]

Side-note:

I'm always amused at the idea Starfleet isn't a military given that they operate a system of courts-martial in which they can try you for violations of the Starfleet Code of Justice and then throw you in a Starfleet penal colony.

Last I checked, organizations that were not military forces cannot do that. If you get a job at Subway and violate your shift manager's orders, Subway can't arrest you, throw you in a Subway jail, charge with in a violation of the Code of Subway Justice, try you in a special court-Subway, and then sentence you to five years in a Subway prison.

You never worked for Disneyland, I see.

 

[Kor]

Having Starfleet do first contact is a throwback to the Age of Sail, like a lot of other stuff in Trek.

Kor

 

[Dumbbell]

Having Starfleet do first contact is a throwback to the Age of Sail, like a lot of other stuff in Trek.

Yes.

The Federation is very much like the developed imperialistic nations of Europe during the Age of Sail. These nations had their ships of the line and their armies. The leaders of these nations were desperate to gain an economic advantage over their competitors and recognized the value of financing a taskforce in hopes of shortening existing trade routes and opening up strange new ones.

The primary difference between the imperialistic nations of Europe and the United Federation of Planets is that extreme wealth was limited to the aristocracy in Europe but unlimited in the Federation.

I should think it best if Starfleet disassociated itself from this first contact history. It is another reason why I think Starfleet should not represent the military arm of the Federation, just like it should not represent the economic fist of the Federation.

 

[Sci]

Yes.

The Federation is very much like the developed imperialistic nations of Europe during the Age of Sail. These nations had their ships of the line and their armies. The leaders of these nations were desperate to gain an economic advantage over their competitors and recognized the value of financing a taskforce in hopes of shortening existing trade routes and opening up strange new ones.

The primary difference between the imperialistic nations of Europe and the United Federation of Planets is that extreme wealth was limited to the aristocracy in Europe but unlimited in the Federation.

I should think it best if Starfleet disassociated itself from this first contact history. It is another reason why I think Starfleet should not represent the military arm of the Federation, just like it should not represent the economic fist of the Federation.

For better or for worse, Star Trek is on a foundational level a fantasy of a moral version of colonialism. Making Starfleet "not military" won't change that -- it would just make Starfleet correspond to the East India Company instead of the Royal Navy.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

For better or for worse, Star Trek is on a foundational level a fantasy of a moral version of colonialism. Making Starfleet "not military" won't change that -- it would just make Starfleet correspond to the East India Company instead of the Royal Navy.

And... that would not be a good thing.

However, ironically, as I've noted previously on this thread, the "not a military" thing makes most sense in the above context as "military" back then largely meant war-fighting land forces (infantry, cavalry, artillery) and even excluded ship's marines. Which fits with what we see most if not all of the time in Star Trek (occasional references to large troop units during the Dominion War could refer to federalised personnel from system defence forces ala the Bajoran Militia).

 

[oberth]

stem defence forces ala the Bajoran Militia).

makes no sense as bajor is not a federation member - the boots on the ground in homefront and paradise lost are starfleet and not some earth defense force

 

[dupersuper]

Is the status quo working?

Dramatically? I mean, 11 (soon to be 12) series, 13 movies and uncounted novels/short stories/fan productions/video games/audio adventures/comic books seem to imply yes...

 

[CptKirk]

Gene Roddenberry appeared to spend a lot of his time writing letters to executives and how they really need to stop turning his Star Trek into a military outfit. The executives wanted more action. Roddenberry wanted more emotional "family" matters on the Enterprise. However even Roddenberry was forced to accept that in many of the episodes already aired, some of which controlled mostly by himself had already laid the groundwork and expanded upon it with behavior consistent with these officers also being part military ready and able. So I think he had to resign himself to story arcs involving Star Trek engaged in military pursuits more than strictly scientific ones. However never the aggressor. So he seemed to make his peace with it given he did like Star Trek after all.

It is also obvious that Communism at the time was something Hollywood didn't want to be vehemently against and alienate the socialist viewers. It is clearly apparent that Star Trek has heaps of socialism going on. If you talk to anyone who has been through Marxist Communism in their country, they will tell you straight that Star Trek TOS and TNG were both pretty close to Communist-type structures. So I think underneath it all Hollywood said, let's go military, and that way we absorb all politics under the one umbrella of a science vessel that can defend itself and the military might back at Starfleet if encounters got more hostile.

I think Roddenberry is right. A science vessel isn't a military outfit and being that war ready makes her a threat. If a UGO turned up on our planet's doorstep and we detected that capability, there would probably be nuclear warheads lining up the world global as it spins. However a purely science-type show, I think it would end up more like Seaquest DSV and not quite as exciting.

 

[oberth]

It is also obvious that Communism at the time was something Hollywood didn't want to be vehemently against and alienate the socialist viewers. It is clearly apparent that Star Trek has heaps of socialism going on. If you talk to anyone who has been through Marxist Communism in their country, they will tell you straight that Star Trek TOS and TNG were both pretty close to Communist-type structures.

whereas the federation is kinda socialist the so called socialist states were not - more like feudalism painted red. i have yet to meet someone grown up in a so called socialist state who has a problem with the federation's socialsm

 

[Sci]

It is also obvious that Communism at the time was something Hollywood didn't want to be vehemently against and alienate the socialist viewers.

Socialism has certainly seen a revival in recent years, but I don't think you have a realistic assessment of how unpopular socialism was and how small the socialist movement in the U.S. was post-Red Scare and into the 2010s, if you think Hollywood didn't want to alienate socialist viewers. TNG's socialist subtext was very much out of the ordinary. Red Dawn and Rocky IV were far more representative of Hollywood's attitudes towards socialism.

It is clearly apparent that Star Trek has heaps of socialism going on.

On this I would agree.

If you talk to anyone who has been through Marxist Communism in their country, they will tell you straight that Star Trek TOS and TNG were both pretty close to Communist-type structures.

I mean, not really. There's no indication that the Federation is a single-party state controlled by an absolute dictator who claims to operate in the name of the proletariat. I would characterize the Federation as much more in the vein of Western socialist parties than in the tradition of the Soviet system, at least the Soviet system as it existed after Stalin.

 

[Tim Thomason]

There may be a thesis somewhere to argue about the communistic or socialistic tendencies of The Original Series, but whatever is there is definitely hidden deep under the surface. Star Trek came out ten years after the Red Scare, just a few years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and during very tense times with the Soviet Union.

Hollywood (and by this I mean NBC or Desilu) wouldn't hesitate to cancel Star Trek, in all meanings of the word, if there was any hint of it depicting successful communism in the future. It was made for US audiences, primarily and directly, unlike any series after it (except perhaps TAS), and their closest thing to a communist (Soviet) character was a comic relief stereotype.