Right wing cultures in Star Trek

[Robert Maxwell]

Painting an entire group of people as predatory, militaristic, and xenophobic is extremely unfair and completely incorrect. You're completely missing the point of conservatism if that's what you think of all of us. I'm a conservative and classical liberal, and the 2 ideologies are completely compatible. There's so much complexity to Star Trek, and that's part of what I love about it.

Conservatism is inherently a retrograde ideology--it's right there in the name. It is about preserving an illusory status quo and/or returning to a romanticized past.

"Classical liberal" is another way of saying you'd like to ignore the last century or so of economics--we tried "classical liberal" economics. It didn't work.

Star Trek was always an aspirational universe. "Look where we could be in the future". To me, the 24th century is what it is because of technological innovation that transformed society. And that transformation made socialism actually sustainable. Replicators can make anything you need. Transporters can move you anywhere you need to go. The only way to actually develop those technologies is in a capitalist economy, since innovation is more highly valued and rewarded. In some ways, I like element of socialism as an ideology, but its economically unsustainable without a balance of capitalism.

Emphasis mine. This is not true--do you realize how much essential pure research is publicly funded? Meanwhile, capitalism gives us... boutique mattress delivery services and an iPhone where they just moved the fingerprint sensor around. Capitalism doesn't drive innovation for its own sake, it pursues innovation only in avenues where investors believe there is profit to be made. This is inherently short-sighted and is why a robust public sector is necessary to fuel research and development that the private sector doesn't value. (Then the private sector ends up benefiting from it.)

The problem with socialism in the modern world is that its fundamentally immoral.

And letting people go homeless, letting them starve, letting them die from treatable medical conditions... that's moral? Because that's capitalism.

The government gets to take the money I've worked hard for and gives it to someone else.

The government takes a share of what you earn to help ensure you live in a functioning society where you won't get knifed just for walking out your front door. Americans are all about "freedom." Well, freedom isn't free.

In any other context, someone taking money/property from one person is called stealing.

You agree to pay your taxes by living here. You benefit from being surrounded by a stable society. If you don't want to pay for that, you are welcome to leave.

Charitable giving is completely different, since its my choice to give. And IMO, everyone has a moral and ethical obligation to engage in charitable giving.

Charitable giving is insufficient to meet existing needs; people who tout charitable giving as a solution always ignore this. Yes, even if we just didn't make people pay any taxes, charity wouldn't be enough.

Star Trek has always had a bit of an anti-communist streak to it, whether its "The Omega Glory" or the 24th Century fight against the Borg. They all look the same. They're all driven by the same goal. They must wipe out all individuality in service to the Collective. Star Trek is about individuality in so many ways, and how that must be preserved. And that is a very conservative POV. This article goes into this in more detail.

Please. Conservatives are all about "individuality" up until someone challenges existing norms. If someone is gay, transgender, not white, not Christian (or one of the other "good" religions), or a woman decides how to live her own life, all of a sudden conservatives turn a blind eye, or even charge in with the torches and pitchforks.

What if I told you it's possible to favor an equitable society that is also truly individualistic?

On the topic of the Cardassians. They were meant as representations of the Nazis. Contrary to common belief, Nazi philosophy was one of socialism.

That's weird since the Nazis routinely imprisoned and killed socialists and communists.

Oh, right. Nazis weren't actually socialists. That's why.

Germans has to submit any personal interests in service to the common good. It was pro-worker and lower class and subscribed to the idea of class struggle. Social policies included a national labor service, national healthcare, & guaranteed pensions. Farmers couldn't sell their land and marketing boards controlled prices & production. Private property ownership was only ok if it was in service to the national good. Hitler himself said "every activity and every need of every individual will be regulated by the collectivity represented by the party" and that "there are no longer any free realms in which the individual belongs to himself".

And yet the Reich also decided who got to be the "true Germans" and who didn't, and set about wasting tremendous amounts of resources (to say nothing of the moral cost) going around mass murdering people.

Counterargument: the Nazis adopted whatever socialist language suited their agenda while nationalizing as much of the country as possible to support an expansive war of conquest. People love to play "no true Scotsman" with socialism/communism, but when it comes to the Nazis it's completely apt. They hated socialists and saw them as enemies--Nazis weren't socialists.

The races you mention, Cardassians, Klingons, Ferengi and Romulans all represent facets of humanity. Cardassians represent the dangers of National Socialism.

They represent the dangers of fascism, which is what so-called "National Socialism" is. For what it's worth, too many conservatives are comfortable with exalting state power in fascist fashion when that power is being exerted against demographics they don't like.

Klingons, in many ways, represent feudalism and militarism, both the good and bad of those philosophies. Ferengi represent the dangers of pure capitalism, unchecked by compassion. Pure capitalism is bad.

All true.

Pure socialism is as well.

Not an issue since no "pure socialism" has ever existed. Then again, neither has "pure capitalism," because that would require a state that somehow maintains individual property rights while not collecting taxes and not regulating worker/capitalist agreements whatsoever. Would be a strange beast, to be sure, and hardly a utopia.

Successful economies must have a balance of both capitalism and socialism.

Probably the most sensible thing in your whole post.

Romulans were modeled on the Ancient Romans.

I mean, it's basically right in their name...

 

[Spot261]

Ever since we, as a civilization, found the right balance, we've been on a velocious path of development as a species and of the consequent eradication of poverty. The goal now is to maintain and preserve this status quo and we will reach this (see below) before this century is over.

Are you for real?

 

[Tesophius]

Are you for real?

Of course, for us, as a species, to disrupt the current semi-global economic model right now would be borderline suicidal. Which makes the rise of Libertarianism and Socialism all the more alarming.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Of course, for us, as a species, to disrupt the current semi-global economic model right now would be borderline suicidal. Which makes the rise of Libertarianism and Socialism all the more alarming.

I hate to break it to you, but the model's being disrupted pretty hardcore all over the place right now, and that's only going to increase. The current status quo is gonna make the planet unfit for human survival, and that's only the absolute worst part.

 

[Tesophius]

Right now we have a slight danger of disruption from the likes of Trump, Putin and other accidental idiots in power. As awful as they are, all key indicators of the law of accelerating returns are on track and accelerating, just follow cost efficiency of photovoltaic energy production.

You can keep hiding behind patronizing idioms, but you can't alter reality. Also, judging by your arguments presented to another poster as per National Socialism, you're not very good at this

 

[Doom Shepherd]

Welp, spanking incoming...

Seriously, unironically suggesting that the Nazis were actual socialists? Just might be the quickest way to earn a one-way ticket to the Idiot Box. Again, a thing that resembles another thing the way I resemble... well, forget Batman, try Galvatron.

 

[Tesophius]

Kraft durch Freude, my Arbeitsbuch carrying comrades

 

[GabyBee]

And we've arrived at the Reductio ad Hitlerum stage of internet "debate". I'm out.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Right now we have a slight danger of disruption from the likes of Trump, Putin and other accidental idiots in power. As awful as they are, all key indicators of the law of accelerating returns are on track and accelerating, just follow cost efficiency of photovoltaic energy production.

You can keep hiding behind patronizing idioms, but you can't alter reality. Also, judging by your arguments presented to another poster as per National Socialism, you're not very good at this

I don't see how we'll ever have a Singularity at the rate your posts murder brain cells.

And I'm way better at this than you. Everybody needs a hobby. Now go make that Singularity happen. You might want to hook up with @RAMA.

 

[Tesophius]

I don't know how I'll recover from insults made by a stranger on the internet... and such clever ones at that.

What's next, people are going to start race wars in the YouTube comments section?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I don't know how I'll recover from insults made by a stranger on the internet... and such clever ones at that.

You believe Nazis were socialists; I think that insults you sufficiently.

What's next, people are going to start race wars in the YouTube comments section?

Jeez, where have you been?

 

[Tesophius]

Ouch, another clever one. A few more and my ego is going to be destroyed and you shall come out victorious!

Nazis were socialists, it's not a matter of opinion - Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. They had state sponsored programs that benefited the working class, established regulations for the safety and protection of workers, created the same arbeitsbucher that other socialist countries had all the way through the collapse of the USSR. Workers went on lavish vacations at the state's expense, had all kinds of subsidized living arrangements and more.

 

[Spot261]

Nazis were far from being socialists, the use of the the word and the programs you describe were a fob to the militant left elements Hitler knew he needed to win round and unite the country. Once they were in a strong enough position those elements were scourged.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Ouch, another clever one. A few more and my ego is going to be destroyed and you shall come out victorious!

I don't like your avatar! I hope that clinched it.

Nazis were socialists, it's not a matter of opinion - Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. They had state sponsored programs that benefited the working class, established regulations for the safety and protection of workers, created the same arbeitsbucher that other socialist countries had all the way through the collapse of the USSR. Workers went on lavish vacations at the state's expense, had all kinds of subsidized living arrangements and more.

Well shit, the US must be fully socialist with criteria like that.

But no, sorry. Hitler and the Nazis weren't socialists.

Try this on for size.

Pin the ideology on the Führer is a fun game. Actually, it’s quite a tasteless game. But we can all play it. “The government will not protect the economic interests of the German people by the circuitous method of an economic bureaucracy to be organised by the state, but by the utmost furtherance of private initiative and by the recognition of the rights of property,” Hitler told the Reichstag in 1933. Not exactly the words of a man about to break into a rendition of “The Red Flag”.

But does it matter? Yes, it does, actually. Hitler wasn’t a socialist, nor was he a conservative. He was a political mutation. And to try to place him anywhere on the conventional political spectrum is not just to abuse history but to play a dangerous game with the future.

This is why, if Nazism is to be compared to anything, its closest kin lie in fascism, which is inherently made up of mishmashed political ideas and half-baked policies.

 

[Tesophius]

Yes, very good, United States is also socialist to some extent. There's a spectrum of socialism and virtually every country in the world is socialism to a different extent today. In 1930's Germany was on the more extreme side of socialism, today United States is less socialist than some northern European countries and more socialist than most countries. It's an evolving, fluctuating spectrum.

Fascism has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism, it can co-exist with either, although since capitalism is inherently less authoritarian, it's harder for fascism to flourish under capitalism, but not impossible, as witnessed in modern Russia and China. Although one could argue how capitalist those countries are.

 

[Spot261]

Hitler wasn’t a socialist, nor was he a conservative. He was a political mutation.

Sound familiar?

A political opportunist riding a populist wave regardless of the ideological alliances he must make in order to reach power...

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Yes, very good, United States is also socialist to some extent. There's a spectrum of socialism and virtually every country in the world is socialism to a different extent today. In 1930's Germany was on the more extreme side of socialism, today United States is less socialist than some northern European countries and more socialist than most countries. It's an evolving, fluctuating spectrum.

"Everything is socialist!" is a fun way of making "socialist" not mean anything at all beyond serving as a marker to indicate something you don't like. Which is fair enough, but impossible to take seriously.

Fascism has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism, it can co-exist with either, although since capitalism is inherently less authoritarian, it's harder for fascism to flourish under capitalism, but not impossible, as witnessed in modern Russia and China. Although one could argue how capitalist those countries are.

Doesn't sound like you know what fascism is--or even what capitalism is, for that matter. Or socialism. I'm sensing a pattern.

It's fine if you don't believe words mean things, and they can just be slotted in every which way. But it certainly forbids meaningful communication with other human beings, so good luck on that one.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Nazism is a hodgepodge of ideas and alliances. Hitler hated communism and capitalism. His objection to both seems to be rooted in Antisemitism. He saw Nazism as a third way. Like many politicians he tailored his message to his audience. The "socialism" aspects played well with the working class. Though eventually he purged most of the "left-wing" of the party in the Night of the Long Knives when they started going after conservatives and capitalists. Others, like Goebbels, he turned to full supporters after he made them "see the light". Many major industrialists gave him their support in exchange for the Nazis cracking down on trade unions, Social Democrats and communists. Plus they gained slave labor and Jewish owned properties. If their businesses benefited the Reich, the Nazis were okay with them. I've even read an group of German Industrialist financially bailed out the Nazis in the early 30's. The Nazi's were also social conservatives with an anti-Jewish, anti-woman and anti-gay agenda. Which of course is at the core of their totalitarian, nationalistic and racist ideology.
Hitler actually regretted using "socialism" in the party's name.

 

[Doom Shepherd]

"National Socialism" is Socialism in exactly the same way that "People's Republics" are Republics run by the People.

Why this is so hard for Tesophius, I do not understand. Just because something CALLS itself something, does not mean that it IS something.

PROTIP: I am not a shepherd.

 

[Tesophius]

Read beyond that first sentence and all shall be revealed to you.

I assume the lot of you are socialists, because you seem to take personal offense to this obvious truth. Fear not, to be a socialist does not mean to sympathize with the Nazis or the Soviets, you can always argue "that wasn't the right kind of socialism" and be within your rights.