Is Troi nobility?
- Thread starter Orphalesion
- Start date
TOS was more alliance of planets. TNG+ was more union of states. Depending on the needs of the story.
Betazed is already a member of the Federation, why would it need an ambassador to an organization it's already part of?
The same reason that there is an American ambassador to the UN.
This is what I always thought. I never took her seriously and just thought of her as someone who has some importance, but completely blows it out of proportion. In today's modern government, she would be like a Senator or something to that effect, but she came up with a really fancy title for herself to make herself seem more important than she really was.
I don't think anybody really cares.
Betazed is already a member of the Federation, why would it need an ambassador to an organization it's already part of?
The same reason that there is an American ambassador to the UN.
The Federation is a state. The UN is not.
That was always the impression I held as well.
Like if Downton Abbey existed today, they would consider themselves nobility, but outside of the castle I doubt there would be little social or political influence.
Troi never took their title as seriously as Lwanaxa, as evidenced by all seasons of TNG.
I don't think anybody really cares.
Betazed is already a member of the Federation, why would it need an ambassador to an organization it's already part of?
The same reason that there is an American ambassador to the UN.
The Federation is a state. The UN is not.
It's never been clear *what* it is. It's likely it is more analogous to the UN than it is a single entity. We know different planets still retain their own cultures, laws, customs, etc. so The Federation isn't ruling in a manner to have a homogeneous way of life. We also know that Federation planets still maintain their own "militaries" or space-based organizations. So planets still have a level of autonomy.
But, yes, we also know there's a number of state-like qualities too. Chiefly there being a "Federation President" who resides in the Federation Seat (Paris on Earth) and that there's some form of ruling body or another. But it's possible this is more of a figure-head sort of set-up where there needs to be a singular face for this large body of people spread out over a large section of the galaxy and that Federation Worlds in some way "elect" this man to make decisions for Federation space while not making any decisions for any of the individual worlds or how they behave. It's also important to remember he's the ruler of the Federation and not of Earth.
There may be no modern-day, Earth-based equivalent we can compare this to because we're talking about an area containing billions and billions of people spread across countless trillions of miles. A territory where it'd take years to cross from one end to the other and contains over 100 entirely different cultures and peoples of very different wants and needs.
So it's absurd to think that there aren't some formal representatives who travel around the Federation to set-up trades and more formal relationships between worlds beyond what's already entitled to them in the Federation. It's also possible there's worlds in the Federation that never deal with one another because they're on opposite ends and have radically different cultures and biological needs. There's no reason for them to communicate. But they both have elected to be part of the Federation for the protections and any aid it provides. These places don't have to maintain a large, powerful, military to thwart off galactic threats. They're protected by Starfleet, who will render help and aid should something happen.
I think likening it to UN makes a bit more sense than to think it's one large, massive, "state" that also has the peculiarities that'd come with having over 100 very, very different cultures with their own sets of customs and laws.
Let me rephrase, then:
The Federation is a government, which has real power over its members (and is elected by them). The UN is not a government - it has no real power. The UN does not set policy which its members must follow, it is not elected by the people, and it doesn't even have a military to enforce its will abroad.
And on that note, I'll just let a professional explain things further.
The Federation is a government, which has real power over its members (and is elected by them). The UN is not a government - it has no real power. The UN does not set policy which its members must follow, it is not elected by the people, and it doesn't even have a military to enforce its will abroad.
And on that note, I'll just let a professional explain things further.
Yes.
As I understand it, only a relatively small percentage of fans read the current novels, so no most fan don't care.
The Federation Council is a governing body of some sort, but that doesn't mean that the Federation is a "state."
Right, the "professional" that continues to insist that a organization composed of (24th century) over a 150 different species is going to have a governing body nearly identical in form to the governments of the United States and European countries.And on that note, I'll just let a professional explain things further.
Mr. Laser Beam, really?
^ Really.
Sci and I have our differences but I definitely respect his knowledge of this thing. He's more of a professional than most of the rest of us are, I'll give him that.
As for the Federation: I think part of the problem is simply that in the early days of TOS, the writers didn't know there would be one. So all those references to the Enterprise being an "Earth" starship are not exactly helping this discussion. Some references to member worlds having ambassadors to each other, might have even predated the first mentioning of the Federation in dialogue...
Of course political systems can and do evolve over time; the Federation in TOS is only a century old, and may not have acquired some of the characteristics it would show in later shows. But the essential facts are still there, even in TOS: The Federation can, and did, declare war. It enforces its policy and law on its member worlds, so it must be a government of some kind. It has a military. (None of which, I might add, the UN has.) In what way is this NOT a state?
As for why the Federation government is so similar to existing governments: Hey, the writers go with what they know (and what fans can relate to). No biggie.
Sci and I have our differences but I definitely respect his knowledge of this thing. He's more of a professional than most of the rest of us are, I'll give him that.
As for the Federation: I think part of the problem is simply that in the early days of TOS, the writers didn't know there would be one. So all those references to the Enterprise being an "Earth" starship are not exactly helping this discussion. Some references to member worlds having ambassadors to each other, might have even predated the first mentioning of the Federation in dialogue...
Of course political systems can and do evolve over time; the Federation in TOS is only a century old, and may not have acquired some of the characteristics it would show in later shows. But the essential facts are still there, even in TOS: The Federation can, and did, declare war. It enforces its policy and law on its member worlds, so it must be a government of some kind. It has a military. (None of which, I might add, the UN has.) In what way is this NOT a state?
As for why the Federation government is so similar to existing governments: Hey, the writers go with what they know (and what fans can relate to). No biggie.
Last edited:
Nope, never did. We had a thread about that a few years back, while the Federation does engage in warfare, at no point has it ever declared war.
And I believe that his PolSci degree and his political ideology has locked him into a mindset that preclude seeing possibilities other than "their's is like ours."
And as late as the third (or forth?) season of ENT the Federation was called an alliance.
While having a few of the attribute of a state, the Federation was never directly referred to as one.
Last edited:
^ Never seen "Errand of Mercy," have we?
In which there was no declaration of war. Negotiations with the Klingon were about to break down and Starfleet anticipated a surprise attack.
In TUC, there's a scene where Sarek is called the Vulcan ambassador and Spock is called the Federation envoy. Meaning?
I don't know, I kind of like the idea that some of the Federation's Members would have ruling royal families, royal systems of government. Ardana was ruled by (imo) a aristocracy, so not all Federation Members are democracies.
Lwaxana Troi would be a peer in the of the Betazed nobility. And because she is the holder of a sacred object, she might also be a part of the religious hierarchy.
The closest thing we get on this planet to what we think the United Federation of Planets might be like is the United States of American before the US Constitution was in place. Under the Articles of Confederation, the former 13 colonies were more like 13 countries within a country. They all operated on there own with their own laws, taxes, tariffs, and militia. The United States was still the one that was suppose to deal with international problems and potentally raise an army if needed to fight. Most of the power was with the states, not the central government.
What about the EU?
As far as I know, the European Union does not have primary right to enage in war rather than their member counties. Nor does it hold the primary right over international diplomacy over its members. It seems to be working towards that eventuallity.
It may be closer to the United Federation of Planets, but my knowledge on what the EU is and is not at present it out of date. They've modified since I was in college.
It may be closer to the United Federation of Planets, but my knowledge on what the EU is and is not at present it out of date. They've modified since I was in college.
I have to admit I don't know that much about the EU either though I looked around a bit and it seems like the EU has at least some sort of armed forces and is pushing towards a greater unification there. Smart move. considering that many European countries simply can't afford a military.
The problem with the EU system (and, indeed, with federalised systems in general) is that you either get a sitation where the most powerful/largest/economically powerful states have a much greater say than those in the sticks, and therefore put their own interests above (perhaps) more needy constituents; or else you get the exact reverse situation, where the smallest states have a power that is much too great for their apparent stature. As a fellow Aussie, Orphalesion will understand what I mean when I talk about Tasmania, which is a small state in terms of any kind of economic and societal measure (let alone geography 
), but which punches far above its weight because the Australian central system means that its representatives in the senate (in the current case Jaquie Lambie, but previously Brian Harradine) are able to use their votes as a means of leveraging the central power to give special concessions to them, which other more prosperous states do not often get.
The EU is flawed on the same kind of level (but grander). Each of the country-states has got a certain autonomy, but that leads to the likes of Greece being able to, in effect, hold Brussels to ransom, because the only alternative is to set them adrift from the union, which of course Brussels doesn't want to do. So, you end up with the situation where an economically dire country does not feel the need to boost their own economy, because they can just sit on their hands and ask for a pay check any time they need it... and they'll get it every time.
I guess the analogy to the Federation would be that a small rock on the very edge of explored space, upon becoming a UFP member, would have as much clout as powerhouses like Earth, Vulcan or Andoria. Which looks nice and utopian on paper, but which doesn't make a bean of sense in the way any real union could work. Our current world proves that.
), but which punches far above its weight because the Australian central system means that its representatives in the senate (in the current case Jaquie Lambie, but previously Brian Harradine) are able to use their votes as a means of leveraging the central power to give special concessions to them, which other more prosperous states do not often get.The EU is flawed on the same kind of level (but grander). Each of the country-states has got a certain autonomy, but that leads to the likes of Greece being able to, in effect, hold Brussels to ransom, because the only alternative is to set them adrift from the union, which of course Brussels doesn't want to do. So, you end up with the situation where an economically dire country does not feel the need to boost their own economy, because they can just sit on their hands and ask for a pay check any time they need it... and they'll get it every time.
I guess the analogy to the Federation would be that a small rock on the very edge of explored space, upon becoming a UFP member, would have as much clout as powerhouses like Earth, Vulcan or Andoria. Which looks nice and utopian on paper, but which doesn't make a bean of sense in the way any real union could work. Our current world proves that.
Indeed, it would be nice to know. It generally sounds as if "Vulcan Ambassador" is some sort of a medal Sarek wears to formal occasions, rather than any practical attribute or position he would hold as regards the job at hand. He rarely represents Vulcan (although he may represent Vulcans, especially himself), and when he does in "Journey to Babel", we don't know to whom he represents Vulcan. He seems to be on a fact-finding mission, and he is asked for the official Vulcan stand on Coridani membership, but it's Vulcan that is going to cast the vote, not Sarek: perhaps Sarek just checks the facts, then chitchats with the Vulcan Councillor, and she then delivers the vote?
Clearly, Spock lacks ambassadorial status at that point. But it also seems Sarek lacks the means or will to represent the Federation: he works from behind the curtains, then sits down next to his Romulan counterpart and apart from the Federation delegation. We might just as well deduce that the UFP doesn't have a unified foreign policy, and that's why every member has Ambassadors busily working not only on bilateral negotiations, but also on UFP-wide negotiations where bilateral interests need to be protected.
Timo Saloniemi
