Starfleet military culture--"navy" in name only?

[Nerys Ghemor]

The more I watch Star Trek, and the more I think about the comparisons of Starfleet's culture to the modern-day military services, the more I start thinking that while they serve on "ships" and have a Navy-inspired rank structure, the actual culture within Starfleet is much more reflective of the Air Force.

I don't see the extreme separation between officer and enlisted, for starters...O'Brien has no reservations about coming into Ten-Forward, so it's not like 10-F is strictly "officer's country." That reminds me more of what I have seen on a few Air Force bases where the enlisted club was converted to a base-wide facility that anybody could use, regardless of rank.

There also appears to be a much higher number of officers (at least, if we take situations like AR-558 as indicative of a combat situation) compared to enlisted than what you see in the Army or Navy. Furthermore, there's a very technical bent to a lot of the people in Starfleet that you tend to see if you're dealing with the Air Force (that is NOT to say there aren't in the other services, of course!). Also, the living situation on starships and stations (though granted, we have not seen a lot of junior officers or enlisted personnel accomodations) seems a little less jam-packed than you would expect on a Navy vessel or submarine.

Finally, things just seem much more relaxed than they do in the Navy or Army--yeah, there's tradition, but it doesn't seem to be the be-all, end-all. And that reminds me a lot of the Air Force.

I would especially be interested in hearing the observations of anyone who has served in the military, but all opinions are welcome.

 

[john titor]

I would imagine star fleet evolved out of the aeronautical division/industry so it would probably inherit more cultural traits from it than the navy.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Good observation.

Roddenberry's asserted intention during the making of the series (as opposed to his tendency to revise these things later) was that everyone on the Enterprise was an officer, "the equivalent of a modern astronaut."

The show itself contradicted that assertion of "no enlisted", of course, but it indicates that while the Naval frame of reference was there he was thinking as well in terms of more modern and technical organizations.

 

[captcalhoun]

it holds court martials. it enforces martial law. Leyton taking over would be a military dictatorship. it defends the state in time of war. it is THE MILITARY!

sorry...

 

[Mistral]

During the time travel story in TOS when the A.F. pilot questions "Starfleet" Kirk refers to it as "combined forces".
The various court-martials all looked, well, martial, but let's keep in mind the opening words, which are Starfleet's stated primary mission-"To explore strange, new worlds..."

 

[JNG]

it holds court martials. it enforces martial law. Leyton taking over would be a military dictatorship. it defends the state in time of war. it is THE MILITARY!

sorry...

It's not their primary duty, so it is definitely not the military in the modern-day sense. However, it is definitely paramilitary in nature, and appears informed by multiple traditions. In terms of what informs the writing, a synthesis of aeronautical and regular-nautical styling with a high-tech spin seems to make good sense.

 

[Nerys Myk]

During the time travel story in TOS when the A.F. pilot questions "Starfleet" Kirk refers to it as "combined forces".
The various court-martials all looked, well, martial, but let's keep in mind the opening words, which are Starfleet's stated primary mission-"To explore strange, new worlds..."

"...and kick their asses." Maybe that was a rough draft.

 

[CoveTom]

What was it Ira Steven Behr said about the Defiant on one of the DVD special features? "It's on a five year mission to kick ass."

I think the problem is that trying to pigeonhole Starfleet into one category just doesn't work. Clearly, Starfleet is the Federation's primary defense force. Therefore, they can definitely be said to be the Federation's military. However, their responsibilities go far beyond that as well. They are also one of the Federation's key diplomatic organizations, scientific organizations, and so on. In short, there's simply nothing today that's analogous to what Starfleet does.

 

[Jefferies]

The Federation is meant to be a far more egalitarian society than ours. The stratification between officers and non-coms today is based on traditions that are rooted in class discrimination and elitism. In the 24th century of the Star Trek universe this type of mentality has waned greatly. All people have similar wealth and all people have good education.

O'Brien didn't attend the Academy, but there is no question about his academic abilities, for example when it comes to making use of the scientific method. Proof of his academic credentials is the fact that he goes on to be a lecturer at the Academy after his posting at DS9.

We also got to see him to be in command of officers, which comes as no surprise because he is a department head. The fact that he is enlisted is more descriptive of the route of training he took rather then of its quality and grade. In contrast, we often get to see officers who are much older then O'Brien, but who are still ensigns or lt. jrs. and seem to have rather limited responsibilities.

As a result, I feel that Starfleet uses a merit based system with two main tracks of recruitment and training. Neither of them is regarded as superior to the other. If you are enlisted but really good at what you do, there is nothing stopping you from becoming a senior member of the crew. However, this also means if you are an officer and you aren't a top performer you will not advance and your responsibilities will remain limited, leading to a situation where your superior might be a non-commissioned officer of greater ability and merit than yourself.

Thus, all things being equal, choosing a problem based model of training (enlisted) over a traditional academic one (the academy) shouldn’t make a difference in your privileges and prospects.

 

[captcalhoun]

Starfleet may not be militant, but it is military. there is a difference.

 

[Jefferies]

Starfleet may not be militant, but it is military. there is a difference.

I agree with you. Starfleet is the Federation's military, albeit with a paramilitary structure. It has different traditions, protocols and attitudes and most of all many additional responsibilities, compared to the militaries that we have wittnessed over the course of history. But, in the end, this is the military, for the simple fact that if it isn't, the Federation would have no military (an idea that many seem to embrace).

In the end its a matter of definition. Is the military an organisation with a very specific traditional structure (which Starfleet follows only partly) or is it the organistion responsible for national defense? In my opinion its the latter.

 

[Sci]

it holds court martials. it enforces martial law. Leyton taking over would be a military dictatorship. it defends the state in time of war. it is THE MILITARY!

sorry...

The OP wasn't talking about that. The OP was saying that Starfleet's culture is more akin to the US Air Force's than the US Navy's. Totally different topic.

it holds court martials. it enforces martial law. Leyton taking over would be a military dictatorship. it defends the state in time of war. it is THE MILITARY!

sorry...

It's not their primary duty, so it is definitely not the military in the modern-day sense.

Yes, it is, because a "military" in the modern-day sense just means, "the armed forces of a state." In other words, the organization the state calls upon to defend itself in times of war. Well, the Federation is a state, and we've seen that Starfleet is the organization that defends the Federation in times of war. Ergo, Starfleet is a military in the modern sense of the term.

Further, a military is also distinguished from other organizations by the capacity to use courts-martial to enforce an internal code of discipline upon its members and take their liberty away if they violate that code. No other organization may do this -- in any other organization, the most that an organization can do is force a person who violates their internal code out of that organization and/or appeal to the state for criminal charges to be pressed. Hungry Howie's Pizza cannot operate a prison in the back in which to place misbehaving delivery guys -- but the Royal Navy certainly can operate a prison for misbehaving officers.

Heck, the very name -- "court-martial" -- means "military court." We've seen Starfleet referred to as a military numerous times, including "Homefront"/"Paradise Lost" from DS9, the quote in my signature in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, in "Valiant" where Nog calls himself a soldier, and in "Errand of Mercy" where Kirk refers to himself as the same. Starfleet is a military according to all but one reference in "Peak Performance," and given that Starfleet's military nature fills the requirements of deductive reasoning -- "If an organization has X trait and Y trait, it must be a Z organization; Organization A has X trait and Y trait, therefore it must be a Z organization - it is guarnateed" -- then we have to disregard that line from "Peak Performance." Starfleet is far more than para-military -- it IS military, even if it is not militant.

It's important to remember, also, that even today, a military's missions encompass more than just combat. Militaries engage in humanitarian aid, reconstruction efforts, peacekeeping, and scientific research, and, in the past, were the primary agents of exploration for their states. Heck, the primary mission of the United States Coast Guard is not combat -- it's more of a seaways police force -- but it's still considered a military organization. So it's a misconception to talk about a military having other missions besides combat as though that marks a difference from modern militaries.

Being the organization charged with engaging in combat by the state is the common denominator of all militaries, but militaries are certainly able to encompass far more.

In terms of what informs the writing, a synthesis of aeronautical and regular-nautical styling with a high-tech spin seems to make good sense.

Agreed, and perfectly logical. A space force would necessarily encompass the traits of both a navy and an air force.

In the end its a matter of definition. Is the military an organisation with a very specific traditional structure (which Starfleet follows only partly) or is it the organistion responsible for national defense? In my opinion its the latter.

The dictionary agrees with you. The thing that makes a military the military is its being legally obligated to defend the state. So long as that is true, it is a military, irrelevant of any other missions it also encompasses.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Starfleet seems to be a combination of things:


NASA ("Peaceful exploration")--of course

Navy (Ranking System & Ship Registry, Defense, etc.)

Air Force (Relatively lax discipline)

Cost Guard (Distress missions)

CIA (Starfleet Intellegence)

NSA and Homeland Security (Internal Affairs)

Red Cross (Planetary Development, Medical Relief)

Peace Corps (Diplomacy)

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Starfleet seems to be a combination of things:


NASA ("Peaceful exploration")--of course

Navy (Ranking System & Ship Registry, Defense, etc.)

Air Force (Relatively lax discipline)

Cost Guard (Distress missions)

CIA (Starfleet Intellegence)

NSA and Homeland Security (Internal Affairs)

Red Cross (Planetary Development, Medical Relief)

Peace Corps (Diplomacy)

Kirk did say it was a "combined service."

 

[C.E. Evans]

Starfleet seems to be a combination of things:


NASA ("Peaceful exploration")--of course

Navy (Ranking System & Ship Registry, Defense, etc.)

Air Force (Relatively lax discipline)

Cost Guard (Distress missions)

CIA (Starfleet Intellegence)

NSA and Homeland Security (Internal Affairs)

Red Cross (Planetary Development, Medical Relief)

Peace Corps (Diplomacy)

Kirk did say it was a "combined service."

Best definition.

 

[Myasishchev]

What was it Ira Steven Behr said about the Defiant on one of the DVD special features? "It's on a five year mission to kick ass."

I think the problem is that trying to pigeonhole Starfleet into one category just doesn't work. Clearly, Starfleet is the Federation's primary defense force. Therefore, they can definitely be said to be the Federation's military. However, their responsibilities go far beyond that as well. They are also one of the Federation's key diplomatic organizations, scientific organizations, and so on. In short, there's simply nothing today that's analogous to what Starfleet does.

Indeed, Starfleet appears to reflect the duties and powers of the executive branch of the U.S. government as a whole. Defense? Check. Funding research? Check. Interstellar policing? Check. Diplomacy? Check. Even maintaining the Future's Internet seems to be Starfleet's job.

 

[alicelouise]

I'm a former enlisted person. I was in a detachment that had a Lt. Cmdr. as the official CO. It was only in name. The person who was the de facto CO was a Senior Chief Petty Officer.

Why? The official CO was marking time to retirement. He/she wasn't evil or stupid, just running out the clock. The Sr. Chief had not only the ability but, the hands on knowledge and earned everyone's respect.

The official hierarchy was:

Lt. Cmdr
Ens.
Sr. Chief
Po 2nd Class(3)
Techs (E-2 to E-4)

The real deal:
Sr. Chief
Ens. PO 2nd class
Techs

It was not done through mutiny or a coup d etat. It was pragmatism. During inspections or special events even a visiting Admiral knew who was the go-to person.

Some have written that today's military is bound by classism or elitism. This may have been the case during the 18th and 19th century in Europe. I think it is less true in the 20th and 21st centuries. There were trust fund babies in the enlisted ranks and housing project babies in the officer ranks during the 1980s. I'm sure that's the case today. My son is in the Marines. What was true in the 80s applies more to today's situation.

BTW I had read somewhere that Gene Roddenberry was in the Us Air Force.

Another question were the MACOs in "Enterprise" the equivalent of Marines? Watching DS9, the MACOs must have played a part in the Dominion War.

 

[Sci]

BTW I had read somewhere that Gene Roddenberry was in the Us Air Force.

Well, sort of. He was part of the United States Army Air Corps during World War II, which was an ancestor organization to the United States Air Force.

Another question were the MACOs in "Enterprise" the equivalent of Marines?

Well, the Military Assault Command Operations officers were specifically described as a special operations division, so presumably they're the equivalent of the Navy Seals or some such. They're specifically identified as being military, but we're never told which of United Earth's military services it's a part of.

Watching DS9, the MACOs must have played a part in the Dominion War.

No. The United Earth Startfleet (UESF) and Federation Starfleet (FSF) are separate organizations. The UESF is specifically described as a non-military space organization formed some time after the establishment of United Earth to serve as an exploratory arm. Only later did they realize that United Earth would need spacebourne defense forces, and so divisions of the UE MACOs were transferred aboard Enterprise NX-01 and Columbia NX-02 following the Xindi Attack of 2153.

The Federation Starfleet, by contrast, was founded in 2161 with the founding of the United Federation of Planets (a federal republic consisting of the formerly independent planetary states of United Earth, the Andorian Empire, Vulcan, and Tellar, and, if you accept the novels, Alpha Centauri). The Federation Starfleet was founded from the space forces of the UFP's founding members, including the UESF, Vulcan High Command, and Andorian Imperial Guard, and it combines both exploratory and defensive functions, even though it is still a military.

There is no evidence that MACOs even still exist after the founding of the Federation, anymore than the UESF does, though it's fair to say that the deployment of MACO divisions aboard UESF ships represents a step in the evolution of space forces that combine exploratory and defensive functions.

 

[Jefferies]

I'm a former enlisted person. I was in a detachment that had a Lt. Cmdr. as the official CO. It was only in name. The person who was the de facto CO was a Senior Chief Petty Officer.

Why? The official CO was marking time to retirement. He/she wasn't evil or stupid, just running out the clock. The Sr. Chief had not only the ability but, the hands on knowledge and earned everyone's respect.

The official hierarchy was:

Lt. Cmdr
Ens.
Sr. Chief
Po 2nd Class(3)
Techs (E-2 to E-4)

The real deal:
Sr. Chief
Ens. PO 2nd class
Techs

It was not done through mutiny or a coup d etat. It was pragmatism. During inspections or special events even a visiting Admiral knew who was the go-to person.

Some have written that today's military is bound by classism or elitism. This may have been the case during the 18th and 19th century in Europe. I think it is less true in the 20th and 21st centuries. There were trust fund babies in the enlisted ranks and housing project babies in the officer ranks during the 1980s. I'm sure that's the case today. My son is in the Marines. What was true in the 80s applies more to today's situation.

Its good to hear that this is now possible. But if the Sr. Chief was more qualified why not have him officially in command? Also would it be possible in today's navy or air force to have a highly competent and decorated non-commissioned officer in a prestigeous executive position, say as chief engineer on an aircraft carrier?

 

[Colonel Midnight]

^ I seriously seriously doubt if the latter would ever happen in either today's USN or USAF. I know in my service (USCG) it wouldn't -- the billet structure on a ship is pretty much fixed.

The EO (Engineer Officer, equivalent to the ChEng on a USN ship) is just that -- an engineer who is also an officer. The nearest 'pure' enlisted billet to that would be on an 'EPO' (Engineering Petty Officer), but on a smaller cutter.

(I use the term 'pure' to indicate a position that's meant 100% to be an enlisted billet.)

The closest you'd find to what you're describing would be someone who "came up through the hawsepipe' as an enlisted person, do one or two tours as an EPO, then got selected for Warrant Officer, do a couple of tours on bigger cutters as MPA (Main Propulsion Assistant), then compete and make O4 / LCDR (Lieutenant Commander) rank. THEN he/she could be an EO of one of the larger ships -- but at that point, he or she is an commissioned officer.

Hope that makes sense,
Cheers,
-CM-