The Royale. Picking one sentence to pieces.

[T'Girl]

"The Royale"
DATA: "Is this significant, sir?" (Holds up a spacesuit on a hangar)
RIKER: "American."
DATA: "Fifty two stars sir. Places it between 2033 and 2079 AD."

What can we draw from this short scene?

Well, at least Riker recognizes the flag. How many of you would recognize a flag from three hundred years ago?
Data uses 2079 AD, not 2079 CE. Indicating that "CE" is a passing fad.
From Data's statement there was only one time period when America had fifty-two states.
In 2079 the state count rose above (or dropped below) 52.
I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?
How big will America ultimately be in the future?
Picard indicates during "The Defector" that in the 24th century Riker is a American. Is that how Riker identified the flag?

 

[Ziz]

I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?

Guam?

 

[Timo]

Data uses 2079 AD, not 2079 CE. Indicating that "CE" is a passing fad.

Or that AD is what they used in 2079, whereas CE may have been in use before and after.

From Data's statement there was only one time period when America had fifty-two states.

Or then only one time period where America had both 52 states and a stars-and-stripes flag. Or, since this is Data we're talking about, there might have been a time when a subtly different 52-star stars'n'stripes was in use, but our android immediately spots the differences.

In 2079 the state count rose above (or dropped below) 52.

Or stayed the same, but stars'n'stripes was abandoned as the flag style.

I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?
How big will America ultimately be in the future?

One might postulate a 86-state United States that has not changed in terms of square mileage. There simply happens to be a South Oregon now, and an Upper San Angeles, and Cleveland DC...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Admiral Shran]

I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?

Maybe San Francisco secedes from California and becomes its own state. That might explain why it eventually becomes so important in the United Earth, and later the UFP, government.

 

[Arix]

"The Royale"
DATA: "Is this significant, sir?" (Holds up a spacesuit on a hangar)
RIKER: "American."
DATA: "Fifty two stars sir. Places it between 2033 and 2079 AD."

What can we draw from this short scene?

Well, at least Riker recognizes the flag. How many of you would recognize a flag from three hundred years ago?
Data uses 2079 AD, not 2079 CE. Indicating that "CE" is a passing fad.
From Data's statement there was only one time period when America had fifty-two states.
In 2079 the state count rose above (or dropped below) 52.
I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?
How big will America ultimately be in the future?
Picard indicates during "The Defector" that in the 24th century Riker is a American. Is that how Riker identified the flag?

I always found it a bit ridiculous (yet understandable) when our main characters would remember our recent history, as if it wasn't over 300 years in their past. I found it especially ridiculous (yet again, understandable) that they always seemed well versed in American history over any other history.

But maybe thats because I'm Australian, so every overt American reference just seemed so unnecessarily ethno-centric. Its like, hang on a minute, Earth has been united for 300 years, why the focus on America?

As I said, given that its an American TV show, it is totally understandable, yet there are times when I wish it'd made more of an effort towards exploring the whole, united Earth idea. Funnily enough, TOS was probably the best example of this, with its diverse crew, of which as I'm sure you all know only two were American.

I think the main 'problem' is that, even though most of the time there are only one or two specifically American characters, they always seem to make reference to their country's history - but none of the others really seem to. Off the top of my head, in TOS its Kirk and McCoy, TNG has Riker, DS9 has the Sisko family, Voyager has Janeway and Paris, and Enterprise has Archer and Trip.

For example, both Uhura and Geordi were from some sort of united African country, if I remember correctly - why do we never hear anything about their history? Or Hoshi and Sulu who are both from Japan.

Another question is why many of the countries are still largely the same even after 300 years... Apart from the addition of a few states, the United States still exists as a nation despite a third World War? Really?

The only reference to Australia that I even remember is that supposed we're the last nation to join the United Earth government, to which I can only roll my eyes and say, yeah, right. As if we wouldn't have jumped in as soon as the US and UK had joined.

... Didn't mean to go on here, I'll go slightly back on topic and say that what we do know for sure is that Starfleet sure gives its officers thorough history lessons!

 

[Pavonis]

For example, both Uhura and Geordi were from some sort of united African country, if I remember correctly - why do we never hear anything about their history? Or Hoshi and Sulu who are both from Japan.

Sulu was born in San Francisco, as he stated in The Voyage Home, making him an American, too, like McCoy and Kirk.

Also, from Voyager, Kim was from South Carolina, so that's another American character.

As for La Forge, I don't recall it being said that he was from anywhere on Earth. He was a Starfleet brat, so he was raised in many different locations throughout Federation territory. Just because he's black doesn't mean he's from Africa.

The only reference to Australia that I even remember is that supposed we're the last nation to join the United Earth government, to which I can only roll my eyes and say, yeah, right. As if we wouldn't have jumped in as soon as the US and UK had joined.

That was a hypothetical situation that Crusher raised in a discussion with Picard regarding planetary unity and Federation membership. It wasn't meant as a realistic historic event. IIRC, the line was "What if one of the old nation-state, say, Australia, hadn't joined the United Earth?" She just picked a country at random.

 

[Doug Otte]

[I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?
How big will America ultimately be in the future?

My predictions:
51 = DC;
52 = Puerto Rico.

I don't think America will become bigger, or have more states beyond 51 or 52, to be honest. This might seem fatalistic, but the last few decades have shown that America as an empire has peaked, and is on a slow decline. Right now, we're still the world power due to inertia, and we're being propped up by the rest of the world due to the world economies still being tied to the US dollar.

Every empire in history eventually overextends itself, and America is no exception.

Doug

 

[RAMA]

"The Royale"
DATA: "Is this significant, sir?" (Holds up a spacesuit on a hangar)
RIKER: "American."
DATA: "Fifty two stars sir. Places it between 2033 and 2079 AD."

What can we draw from this short scene?

Well, at least Riker recognizes the flag. How many of you would recognize a flag from three hundred years ago?
Data uses 2079 AD, not 2079 CE. Indicating that "CE" is a passing fad.
From Data's statement there was only one time period when America had fifty-two states.
In 2079 the state count rose above (or dropped below) 52.
I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?
How big will America ultimately be in the future?
Picard indicates during "The Defector" that in the 24th century Riker is a American. Is that how Riker identified the flag?

I'm thinking in 2079 there was a stirring of world government (ok I don't have an official timeline handy) and that nation-states my have become obsolete...at least in their previous form.

RAMA

 

[Captain Rob]

I believe Puerto Rico is the best candidate for state number 51, any thoughts on state number 52?

Guam?

Non-French speaking Canada. (just kidding)

 

[Timo]

..they always seemed well versed in American history over any other history.

One might speculate that Starfleet follows the old (and already many times abandoned and revived) military tradition of forming a unit out of people from a specific geographical region. Not just all (or 90%) from the same planet, but from the same region on that planet as well. And we just happen to follow the adventures of American ships, although it may be that a ship from Andor's Upper Hibernia had equally colorful and important adventures in the 2260s, or a ship from Vulcan's Kapok Surplains exceeded the historical significance of Picard's commands.

OTOH, I don't think it's a just accusation that our American heroes know "too much" about the history of their own region. Kirk seemed quite lost with the 20th century, for example - his expertise on Americana was very narrow, centered on the late 19th century with its Lincolns and Earps and cowboys and injuns. Paris was the 20th century expert, but in turn unfamiliar with Civil War details. One doesn't need to be an expert historian to have such an interest and competence in a timespan of one or two past generations: being an average amateur "history buff", or versed in parts of one's family history, shoud suffice.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Admiral Shran]

The only reference to Australia that I even remember is that supposed we're the last nation to join the United Earth government, to which I can only roll my eyes and say, yeah, right. As if we wouldn't have jumped in as soon as the US and UK had joined.

Crusher was, in that scene, playing Devil's Advocate with Picard. She was arguing that full planetary unity might not be required for Federation membership. She asked him if Earth would have met the membership requirements if one of the old nation-states hadn't joined the United Earth government when it was formalized in 2150. Picard said that the analogy wasn't correct, but was cut off before he could finish his thought (he probably would have said that it wasn't correct because Earth was a founding member of the Federation).

Crusher simply picked a country at random. It wasn't intended to mean that Australia was in fact the last nation to join the UE government. It was just a hypothetical argument. It would be like me, as an American, asking if this country would have been allowed to be formed if Pennsylvania hadn't ratified the Constitution. That doesn't mean that Pennsylvania was the last to ratify; it's just a hypothetical situation.

FYI: Pennsylvania was the second state to ratify the Constitution. The last of the orginial thirteen colonies to do so was Rhode Island.

I've seen this issue of Australia pop up from time to time. I just can't understand why so many people continue to believe that Australia was the last to join.

Sulu was born in San Francisco, as he stated in The Voyage Home, making him an American, too, like McCoy and Kirk.

Also, from Voyager, Kim was from South Carolina, so that's another American character.

As for La Forge, I don't recall it being said that he was from anywhere on Earth. He was a Starfleet brat, so he was raised in many different locations throughout Federation territory. Just because he's black doesn't mean he's from Africa.

Correct about Sulu and Kim.

TOS had three Americans - Kirk (from Iowa), McCoy (from somewhere in the South), and Sulu (from San Francisco).

TNG had one American - Riker (from Alaska).

DS9 had two Americans - Sisko (from New Orleans) and Jake Sisko (most likely born on Earth's moon, but raised in New Orleans).

VOY had two, maybe three, Americans - Janeway (from Indiana), Kim (from South Carolina), and Paris (we don't know where he was born, but considering that his father was a senior Starfleet official, most likely San Francisco).

ENT had two Americans - Archer (from upstate New York) and Trip (from Florida).


Just for fun, here's where they were all born....

TOS:
Kirk - Iowa
Spock - Shi'Kahr, Vulcan
McCoy - somewhere in the American South
Scotty - Scotland
Sulu - San Francisco
Chevok - Russia
Uhura - never established on screen

TNG:
Picard - La Barre, France
Riker - Alaska
Data - Omicron Theta
Worf - Qo'nos
LaForge - the African Confederation
Beverly Crusher - Earth's moon
Wesley Crusher - never established on screen
Troi - near Lake El'nar, Betazed
Yar - Turkana IV
Pulaski - never established on screen

DS9:
Benjamin Sisko - New Orleans
Kira - somewhere in Dahkur Province, Bajor
O'Brien - Ireland
Odo - never established on screen (though most likely the first Founder homeworld)
Quark - Ferenginar
Jake Sisko - never established on screen (though most likely Earth's moon)
Bashir - never established on screen
Ezri Dax - New Sydney
Jadzia Dax - Trill
Worf - Qo'nos

VOY:
Janeway - Bloomington, Indiana
Chakotay - an unnamed Federation colony near the Demilitarized Zone
Torres - Kessik IV
Kes - Ocampa
Paris - never established on screen
Neelix - Rinax
The Doctor - Jupiter Station
Tuvok - Vulcanis Lunar Colony
Seven - Tendara Colony
Kim - South Carolina

ENT:
Archer - upstate New York
Trip - Florida
T'Pol - Vulcan
Sato - Kyoto, Japan
Phlox - Denobula
Reed - never established on screen
Mayweather - ECS Horizon, halfway between Draylax and Vega Colony

 

[Timo]

I've seen this issue of Australia pop up from time to time. I just can't understand why so many people continue to believe that Australia was the last to join.

Well, while Crusher's wording doesn't mean Australia was the last to join, it does confirm that Australia made the decision about joining in 2150 and not earlier. However, we have evidence of something dubbed United Earth prior to 2150, including the United Earth Space Probe Agency operating almost a century before that date, in "Friendship One". So it does appear that many nations joined this United Earth before Australia did - and possibly also that few nations joined after Australia did, as Crusher feels 2150 was a crucial date in separating Earth from the divided KesPrytt in terms of political unity.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[RegFan]

But maybe thats because I'm Australian, so every overt American reference just seemed so unnecessarily ethno-centric. Its like, hang on a minute, Earth has been united for 300 years, why the focus on America?

As I said, given that its an American TV show, it is totally understandable, yet there are times when I wish it'd made more of an effort towards exploring the whole, united Earth idea. Funnily enough, TOS was probably the best example of this, with its diverse crew, of which as I'm sure you all know only two were American.

As a Finn, I completely agree. I think they should make less references to American history or, alternatively, make more references to non-American history. I'd prefer the former, as it would be more realistic.

It also doesn't make sense that races still exist so clearly after over three centuries of interracial breeding. Shouldn't more of them have more or less brown skin?

 

[T'Girl]

^^^ Even with 300 years of interracial breeding (and there's a lovely phrase) that wouldn't be enough time to turn the human species into a single "race." Men will still marry the girl next door.

 

[MeanJoePhaser]

As a Finn, I completely agree. I think they should make less references to American history or, alternatively, make more references to non-American history. I'd prefer the former, as it would be more realistic.

It also doesn't make sense that races still exist so clearly after over three centuries of interracial breeding. Shouldn't more of them have more or less brown skin?

Back in the mid-80's, I'm sure they were gobs of mixed race actors that would've been cast in a mainstream sci-fi show designed to largely appeal to white males.

^^^ Even with 300 years of interracial breeding (and there's a lovely phrase) that wouldn't be enough time to turn the human species into a single "race." Men will still marry the girl next door.

And the girl next door in China is still likely to be Chinese 300 years from now. People are talking about the show being too USA centric, well, currently "interracial breeding" is happening more USA and Europe than, say Mongolia or Ghana or North Korea.

Also, take Trek "future" history in consideration. World War 3 or whatever, left the nations of the Earth in a fractured state, where people just wanted to hang out in the backwoods and get drunk while making fun of eccentric scientists trying to develop warp drive. Lack of migration and interaction with other cultures may have delayed racial mixing on a global level. It's after United Earth "utopia" is established that such demographic changes will increase.

 

[Timo]

...Or then people will get all excited about preserving their "natural heritage" and will fight for their dark skin or big nose or high cheeks or oddly colored hair more fiercely than ever before.

Even if a yellow guy marries a blue girl, it may turn out that the couple will undergo genetic therapy to ensure their kids won't be sickly green but, if possible, even more radiantly yellow and blue than their parents...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Pavonis]

Well, while Crusher's wording doesn't mean Australia was the last to join, it does confirm that Australia made the decision about joining in 2150 and not earlier. However, we have evidence of something dubbed United Earth prior to 2150, including the United Earth Space Probe Agency operating almost a century before that date, in "Friendship One". So it does appear that many nations joined this United Earth before Australia did - and possibly also that few nations joined after Australia did, as Crusher feels 2150 was a crucial date in separating Earth from the divided KesPrytt in terms of political unity.

Timo Saloniemi

The actual quote from the episode is

BEVERLY
Think about Earth -- what if one
of the old nation-states, say
Australia, had decided not to join
the World Government in twenty-one
fifty? Would that have
disqualified us from being a
Federation member?

I don't agree that the wording implies Australia joined the World Government in 2150 and not earlier. I read it as indicating that the year 2150 was a significant one for the World Government, but with no more detail than that.

Since we have indications of the existence of something called United Earth prior to 2150, I can imagine that 2150 may have been the year that a major change in the structure of the World Government was made. Perhaps a new constitution for the World Government was ratified that year? Much like the U.S. existed before the Constitution was ratified, the U.E. may have operated under their own "Articles of Confederation" that wasn't quite working.

 

[Cicero]

Every empire in history eventually overextends itself, and America is no exception.

Doug

Is the former true? The two most notable examples of Empire in world history - i.e. the most broadly and thoroughly powerful empires recorded - are the Roman and British.

The Roman empire's fall cannot be traced to overextension; with two exceptions (Trajan's conquests, and the conquest of Britain, both of which took place early in the Empire's history), the Roman border was essentially fixed after the death of the second emperor, Tiberius.

The fall of Britain, meanwhile, stems not from overextension, but from becoming involved in a war in which it had no interest as a belligerent. Britain entered the First World War - which nearly bankrupted the empire - for romantic reasons pertaining to the defense of Belgian neutrality. Britain had no territorial or other imperial interest in the war, and was not obligated to become a belligerent. A series of diplomatic errors following the war (most notably involving failures to check the revitalization of Germany) weakened its worldwide position, and then the United States insisted upon the disintegration of the Empire as a condition of alliance in World War II. Faced, in Germany, with an existential threat, Britain had no choice but to accede.

I'm unclear where the idea of overextensive doom originates. Could it be from Alexander (his empire collapsed largely because he purposefully named no successor), or from Eastern empires of some nature? It's not my impression that the Chinese Empire was destroyed by overzealous expansion. A case could be made for Spain, but its decline resulted from attempted political unification with another major power (France, through a French claim on the Spanish throne), not overextension in the usual sense. Could this all stem from Napoleon and the Axis mistakes in World War II?

 

[T'Girl]

[Britain ... was not obligated to become a belligerent

There were over-lapping treaty obligatons that all but force Britian into the war on the side of France and Belguim. Pretty much what brought Russia into the war.

Prior to 2150 United Earth may have been more of a movement than a government. 2150 may have been the year all the various governments approved the amalgamation document.

 

[Cicero]

[Britain ... was not obligated to become a belligerent

There were over-lapping treaty obligatons that all but force Britian into the war on the side of France and Belguim. Pretty much what brought Russia into the war.

By treaty, Britain had a right to intervene to protect Belgian neutrality, but no obligations to any of the belligerents, including Belgium and France (its earlier responsibility toward Belgium had actually been a guarantee to the Netherlands), until it entered the war. The British prerogative toward Belgium had been acknowledged as wholly voluntary as early as 1887; the Foreign Secretary in 1914, Sir Edward Grey, took this position before Parliament shortly before Britain decided to go to war:

"We do not construe anything which has previously taken place in our diplomatic relations with other Powers in this matter as restricting the freedon of the Government to decide what attitude they should now take, or restrict the freedom of the House of Commons to decide what their attitude should be."
​

Prior to 2150 United Earth may have been more of a movement than a government. 2150 may have been the year all the various governments approved the amalgamation document.

The real-life United Nations has a history much like this. The first United Nations (the World War II Allies) operated under the principles of the Atlantic Charter, but was a loose, semi-ad hoc affiliation more than a formal organization. The second UN, which is regarded as legally distinct from it, came into being upon ratification of the Charter of the United Nations by the permanent members of the Security Council. The failure of the Charter would have been a serious blow to efforts to create a the more formalized organization.