Is there still a Remembrance Day in the 23 & 24 centuries?

[Shaka Zulu]

As I was watching the Remembrance Day celebrations on TV, I wondered if there are still Remembrance Day celebrations for any of the various wars that the Federation's fought (as well as for the Starfleet people who've died on missions.) Does anybody else think so, especially considering what we saw at the end in the new movie?

 

[Nerys Myk]

I would think so.

 

[BigJake]

I get the sense that the Federation is meant to be above defining its civic identity through war, and that this is the pitfall Admiral Marcus is meant to represent, so I'd have to lean no on this one.

 

[R. Star]

So in essence you say they'd be above honoring those who served the Federation because of ideology? That's kinda morbid.

 

[BigJake]

"Morbid" is a loaded choice of words that I would avoid assigning to any particular answer to this question. I'm just saying the Federation is typically portrayed as a society not forged, driven or defined by war. Civic holidays devoted to war are typically features of societies that -- even if they are currently relatively peaceable or non-militaristic -- have a historical identity strongly tied-up with war. Given that the new Trek movies also seem to contend that Starfleet is not a military* and the Federation is not supposed to be militaristic by inclination, the likelihood of its building holidays entirely around military achievements does seem more remote to me.

Having a civic holiday "honoring those who served the Federation" would by no means be off the cards. I could see there being such a day devoted to the brave men and women who give their lives in Starfleet service, for instance, no matter the circumstances. It would probably be different from Remembrance Day, though, which is very specifically about the military and war dead.

(* Yes, this is at odds with the fact that Starfleet has always quite obviously been the Navy in Space. Still, one must account for the fact that Starfleet not being really a military is a persistent theme in Trek, often portrayed as the organization's signal virtue, and it's a theme that has come up in the new films.)

 

[R. Star]

Well I'd disagree with you, but I could definitely see this as yet another contradiction in the entity that is the Federation.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Having a civic holiday "honoring those who served the Federation" would by no means be off the cards. I could see there being such a day devoted to the brave men and women who give their lives in Starfleet service, for instance, no matter the circumstances.

Yes, I definitely think the Federation would have a day honoring all those who have died in its service, regardless if it was during a war or not.

 

[T'Girl]

I'm just saying the Federation is typically portrayed as a society not forged, driven or defined by war.

There is a belief among some fans that the Federation is a direct result of the Romulan war, that one lead to the other (although the exact sequence of events is unclear), and that without the Romulan War the initial stimulus to form the Federation would have been lacking.

The Federation was forged in war.

From the history of the Federation, especial what we learned in TNG, war and warfare are a constant. Protracted conflicts, border wars, Starfleet's responsibility to act as the Federation's protectors is an on-going task.

Civic holidays devoted to war are typically features of societies that -- even if they are currently relatively peaceable or non-militaristic -- have a historical identity strongly tied-up with war.

Holidays such as Veterans Day and Memorial Day (different names in different countries), are acknowledgements and expressions of gratitude to military personnel (past and present) who either served or sacrificed their life's in the defense of others within their societies.

Given that the new Trek movies also seem to contend that Starfleet is not a military* ...

If you take the twelve movies as a group, they show Starfleet as the Federation's military. The beginning of TWoK with Starfleet cadets engaging in a combat simulation, and the beginning of FC with the fleet battling the Borg, show Starfleet in a military role. ST: Eleven also had cadets in a combat simulator, in ST: Darkness when a ship was needed to fire torpedoes on the Klingon homeworld, a Starfleet ship was sent.

... and the Federation is not supposed to be militaristic by inclination

But the Federation is repeatedly shown to be willing to employ violence as a means of protection.

 

[Shawnster]

It just may not be the same date by the 24th century.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Given that the new Trek movies also seem to contend that Starfleet is not a military* ...

If you take the twelve movies as a group, they show Starfleet as the Federation's military.

It's not so much a case that Starfleet isn't a military, as it is that it's primary mission was that of exploration. At best, really, Starfleet is shown more throughout Trek's history as a multipurpose service that serves the Federation in whatever capacity is needed, be it as a defense force, an exploration & scientific fleet, a cargo service, or a diplomatic agency.

One of Roddenberry's alleged dislikes of Star Treks II-V (and maybe VI had he lived to see it) was that it depicted Starfleet as being first and foremost a defense force, with exploration being more of an afterthought.

In a real sense, the frequent debates about whether Starfleet is military or not is really an issue of personal labeling (which hat do we want it to wear above all others), either to make Starfleet more like a historical/current day service or more like a futuristic one.

 

[R. Star]

One of Roddenberry's alleged dislikes of Star Treks II-V (and maybe VI had he lived to see it) was that it depicted Starfleet as being first and foremost a defense force, with exploration being more of an afterthought.

Yeah, the organization was so much more realistic in the movies. Probably part of why I liked them more than TOS itself. I'm sorry, I don't care how utopian humanity gets, in a galaxy full of hostile powers... you're going to have a standing military. That doesn't mean they can't be exploring, doing scientific missions, diplomatic missions and so on, but to say Starfleet isn't a military is spin doctoring at it's best. Not to say the Federation as depicted isn't above that sort of thing...

 

[C.E. Evans]

One of Roddenberry's alleged dislikes of Star Treks II-V (and maybe VI had he lived to see it) was that it depicted Starfleet as being first and foremost a defense force, with exploration being more of an afterthought.

Yeah, the organization was so much more realistic in the movies. Probably part of why I liked them more than TOS itself. I'm sorry, I don't care how utopian humanity gets, in a galaxy full of hostile powers... you're going to have a standing military. That doesn't mean they can't be exploring, doing scientific missions, diplomatic missions and so on, but to say Starfleet isn't a military is spin doctoring at it's best. Not to say the Federation as depicted isn't above that sort of thing...

That's goes back to what I said in the rest of my post about it being an issue of personal labeling and what hat do we want it to wear above all the others it wears. Roddenberry was well within his right to call (or spin doctor as you put it) Starfleet as being first and foremost an exploration fleet and to downplay its more militaristic aspects. But never once did Roddenberry have defense not being part of Starfleet's overall mission, he just didn't want it to be it's primary mission as it was largely depicted in the TOS movies after TMP, and I can actually agree with him on that. I do disagree with him that Starfleet isn't militaristic at all, though, which is why I think a multipurpose (or combined) service is the best and most accurate description of Starfleet of all as it covers all the bases, including Roddenberry's.

 

[BigJake]

I'm just saying the Federation is typically portrayed as a society not forged, driven or defined by war.

There is a belief among some fans that the Federation is a direct result of the Romulan war, that one lead to the other (although the exact sequence of events is unclear)

And it's an interesting theory that I personally quite like. But it's speculative in canon terms. (And who knows how ENT fits into everything, since its Temporal Cold War effectively makes it an alternate reality.) About all we really know is that first contact inspired humanity to Stop Sucking and Become Awesome and go out and form the Federation.

From the history of the Federation, especial what we learned in TNG, war and warfare are a constant.

Bad example, because we're also hit over the head like a sledgehammer by that series that none of these wars define the Federation's civic identity, which consists of being utopian and chilling out in paradise and chasing your dreams and stuff. (Which, not that that makes huuuuge amounts of sense given the amount of war apparently going on, but it is what they constantly tell us, particularly through the mouth of Picard.)

Holidays such as Veterans Day and Memorial Day (different names in different countries), are acknowledgements and expressions of gratitude to military personnel (past and present) who either served or sacrificed their life's in the defense of others within their societies.

In war.

Other situations might be tacitly included, but at least here in Canuckistan nobody dances around the main point of the occasion with euphemistic phrases. It's about war dead: the First and Second World Wars, Korea, Afghanistan.

If you take the twelve movies as a group, they show Starfleet as the Federation's military.

The whole of Trek shows Starfleet as the Navy in space. That's the main conceit of the entire franchise. Nevertheless, we are constantly told that despite looking and acting like a military, it is distinct from a military.

(Originally in TOS the idea was that Starfleet should be military, but not so much so that the civilian viewership would find it off-putting. Personally I think later writers got confused about this and that the "Starfleet is not a military" conceit is one of the bad ideas of the Berman era. But we're stuck with it.)

But the Federation is repeatedly shown to be willing to employ violence as a means of protection.

Only when all else has failed. And TNG-era Trek especially was quite serious about the "all else." Yes, probably because it saved on the effects budget, but still.

 

[T'Girl]

Bad example, because we're also hit over the head like a sledgehammer by that series that none of these wars define the Federation's civic identity ...

While we do see civilians in the show, because the show is centered on Starfleet and it's activities our knowledge of Federation society and it's civic identity is thin.

People of the future could celebrate and glory in Starfleet's military victories openly in the streets. Or, the people could go about their lives largely oblivious to Starfleet very existence.

... not that that makes huuuuge amounts of sense given the amount of war apparently going on, but it is what they constantly tell us, particularly through the mouth of Picard.

I have found amusement through the years that the episode where Picard clearly states that Starfleet isn't a military, is the same episode where Starfleet Command "suggests" that the Enterprise engage in a military war game exercise.

In war.

Partially, memorial day is a day set aside to honor the nation's war dead, however veterans day is celebration of all former (and current) military personnel. I have relatives (in four countries) who are military veterans who have never directly fought in a war.

If you take the twelve movies as a group, they show Starfleet as the Federation's military.

The whole of Trek shows Starfleet as the Navy in space. That's the main conceit of the entire franchise. Nevertheless, we are constantly told that despite looking and acting like a military, it is distinct from a military.

Not constantly, in fact more often than not we're told (through Starfleet actions) that it is the military. It would have been hard for a character to have stood up during the Dominion War and have loudly declared that Starfleet isn't a military.

But the Federation is repeatedly shown to be willing to employ violence as a means of protection.

Only when all else has failed.

I would disagree here, Starfleet has been shown not to back down from adversaries in situations where they could. So not "only when all else fails."

 

[C.E. Evans]

But the Federation is repeatedly shown to be willing to employ violence as a means of protection.

Only when all else has failed.

I would disagree here, Starfleet has been shown not to back down from adversaries in situations where they could. So not "only when all else fails."

I think there is a case to be made that Starfleet only does resort to armed force once diplomacy fails or against an well-established threat. This doesn't mean that Starfleet vessels won't shoot back if fired upon--especially if with deadly force--but if Starfleet captains can negotiate a peaceful solution with an adversary commander, they tend to do so, even after an initial exchange of hostilities.

Wartime is a different situation but even that represents when diplomacy has failed big time, IMO.

 

[BigJake]

In fact TNG Federation took diplomacy to an extreme. It signed treaties not to develop basic military technologies that other powers in the quadrant were using. It gave away territory to the Cardassian Union that left some of its own colonies in Cardassian hands (hence all the Maquis storylines). It really bent over backwards to avoid war of any kind, though of course sometimes as with the Dominion there was no choice.

It's also hinted at some points that the Federation does have some kind of army that's in some way distinct from Starfleet or perhaps a separate section of it. Miles O'Brien is referred to as having formerly been a soldier, although it's unclear what exactly this means.

 

[C.E. Evans]

It's also hinted at some points that the Federation does have some kind of army that's in some way distinct from Starfleet or perhaps a separate section of it. Miles O'Brien is referred to as having formerly been a soldier, although it's unclear what exactly this means.

I always took that as O'Brien's time during the initial Cardassian Border War. Some probably would think of him as being a soldier during the Dominion War too.

 

[galad2003]

Whether Starfleet is military is irrelevant. People serve in Starfleet and I believe the citizens of the Federation would hold at least one holiday to celebrate them. serving in Starfleet is seen as a noble occupation and I believe the people would honor them somehow. Also, service members might die exploring an unknown planet, rendering medical aid, a shipboard industrial accident and in war. A holiday would remember all of these sacrifices for the UFP.

 

[BigJake]

Hi galad2003: You'll note we discussed just that earlier in the thread.

 

[T'Girl]

Wartime is a different situation but even that represents when diplomacy has failed big time, IMO.

Wartime is proof of what some of us are saying.

If Starfleet isn't "the military," then in times of war wouldn't all Starfleet vessels be pulled out of the combat areas?