I'm trying to figure out what he means, too. They'll have to have offices, organizations and people to staff them. Its not going to be self serve.
USA and UK surviving into the Trek era
- Thread starter Noddy
- Start date
I meant, there'd be no need for those government offices to have their own district.
You know, I don't see any evidence that the US and UK governments did exist in the Star Trek future. Just because a country decides to maintain it's traditions (which explains the Union Flag being visible in London in Star Trek Into Darkness) doesn't necessarily infer they aren't part of a world government. And has there ever been a mention of the UK Prime Minister in Star Trek's time? No. Likewise the United States. No Star Trek story ever revolved around the President Of The United States. Plenty of stories have involved the Federation President, but no White House, no national congress.
My own view is that countries still exist in Star Trek's future, but their individual governments are more like local councils. The traditional sovereign borders probably still exist "on a map", but movement between them is free because the planet is united under a single government, and territorial imperitives are no longer a going concern. So things like the Union Flag in STID are more about a country maintaining it's cultural identity, in a world where the 'United Kingdom' doesn't practically exist per se, at least not in the form that it does in our own current world.
My own view is that countries still exist in Star Trek's future, but their individual governments are more like local councils. The traditional sovereign borders probably still exist "on a map", but movement between them is free because the planet is united under a single government, and territorial imperitives are no longer a going concern. So things like the Union Flag in STID are more about a country maintaining it's cultural identity, in a world where the 'United Kingdom' doesn't practically exist per se, at least not in the form that it does in our own current world.
In ENT, Malcolm Reed's father and uncle served in the Royal Navy. Also, in the scene where Malcolm goes to meet with his Section 31 contact, a USA address is given (and identified as such).
^ Ah, well, I admit I am less familiar with Enterprise than the other Trek shows, so I stand duly corrected sir. 
Of course, we might therefore theorize that in ENT, existing as it does during an 'earlier phase' of the great United Earth experiment (and by its own admission definitely before the formation of the UFP as it is seen in other versions of Star Trek), individual governments and sovereign borders were still maintained in a fashion not dis-similar to how they exist today.
Of course, we might therefore theorize that in ENT, existing as it does during an 'earlier phase' of the great United Earth experiment (and by its own admission definitely before the formation of the UFP as it is seen in other versions of Star Trek), individual governments and sovereign borders were still maintained in a fashion not dis-similar to how they exist today.
There's an easy explanation why we rarely see other countries in Trek's time: There's no need for it in the story. Hell, most Trek hardly even visited Earth at all.
And United Earth has been around for 30 years by the time ENT comes into play, so I'd assume the experimentation was over by that point.
FWIW, the novels do go into more detail on this point: Countries still exist, and always will. There's a SNW story set shortly after the Breen attack on SF, for example, where the city is visited by the Federation President, the United Earth Prime Minister, and the President of the United States.
And United Earth has been around for 30 years by the time ENT comes into play, so I'd assume the experimentation was over by that point.
FWIW, the novels do go into more detail on this point: Countries still exist, and always will. There's a SNW story set shortly after the Breen attack on SF, for example, where the city is visited by the Federation President, the United Earth Prime Minister, and the President of the United States.
This is the nub of the matter and is certainly very true. We have little evidence of how Earth goverments work in Star Trek, not because it is stated outright on screen, but precisely because it isn't stated on screen. Part of Roddenberry's original format states (I think) that the series should not make a habit of returning to Earth, which is precisely why we know so very little about how the 23rd/24th century Earth governments operate. The appearance of a Union Flag in STID is therefore not a contradiction, it's simply that we've not seen that kind of "on the ground" detail of Star Trek's future Earth ever before.
Because of hitech communication?
^ Because of the end of the antiquated notion that such districts need to exist in the first place. Just put them in a city like any other and be done with it.
And yes, DC should be a state.
And yes, DC should be a state.
What's wrong with the concept and why is it "antiquated"? Obviously there is a problem with the status of DC, but why would every Federal District have to be like DC?
^ There shouldn't be a need to have 'federal districts' at all.
I mean, U.S. state capitals are just normal cities, aren't they? Same story here.
I mean, U.S. state capitals are just normal cities, aren't they? Same story here.
Still not seeing your point. Why can't there be a Federal District? Because US State capitals aren't? That's all you got?
There should only be federal districts if they're needed. Why are they needed?
You're not cleared for that information.
State capitals are in the state that they serve, the federal capital is in the nation that it serves, the federal capital shouldn't be in any state, not even it's own.
Transfer all residential areas from DC to Maryland, the US federal government should never be in a state.
They were in a two-part episode and had brief appearances in two movies.
But a collect of sovereign nations could assemble a international governing body for specific purposes, while still remaining sovereign nations.
In the episode Cause and Effect, LaForge's medical records appear on screen in a scene in sickbay. LaForge was born in the African Confederation on February 16th, 2335. African Confederation sounds more like a political union of nations, rather than a "ceremonial" pretend nation.
Agreed. I don't think one city should get two senators. Let them be part of Maryland instead of in limbo like now.
No, the current novels actually place both the Federation Council and the President in Paris. Both are based out of a single capitol building, called the Palais de la Concorde; the Council Chambers are on the first floor, and the President's office is on the 15th floor.
Personally, I don't like that idea. It unintentionally re-enforces the idea of European preeminence over humanity. I much prefer the idea that the capital city of United Earth is located in what we would today think of as Second World or Third World countries. I've occasionally mused that it would be a wonderful thing to imagine the U.E. capital as being in Mogadishu, Somalia, given that nation's current reputation as a failed and lawless state.
I see no reason to imagine that the capital of United Earth need be separate from any pre-existing nation.
No, but the ENT episode "Silent Enemy" establishes that Malcolm Reed's father was deeply disappointed in him for not pursuing a career in the Royal Navy per Reed family tradition. This establishes that the Royal Navy existed at least into the 2130s. The novel Articles of the Federation establishes that United Earth was founded in 2130; if we accept that novel's information, this would imply that the Royal Navy may have continued to exist after the formation of United Earth.
The President of the United States of America has appeared in the novel Spock's World and in the short story "Eleven Hours Out" from the anthology Tales of the Dominion War. In Spock's World, the U.S. Presidency is established to be a mostly-ceremonial office that remains deeply loved by Americans on Earth. In "Eleven Hours Out," the U.S. President joins the Prime Minister of United Earth and the Federation President in touring the devastated City of San Francisco after the Breen attack in 2375.
I'd agree with that. Much the same way that, say, the provinces of Canada still exist, yet are more concerned with technocratic issues than anything else.
Why not? It seems to work just fine for Ottawa to be part of the Province of Ontario, or for Berlin to be its own state. Nor, for that matter, does housing the United States Department of Defense in the Commonwealth of Virginia seem to hinder it in its mission of protecting the entire Union. I see no compelling reason for a Federal government not to be housed within one of its constituent polities.
We don't want to be part of Maryland, and Maryland doesn't want to take us in. Your proposal lacks the consent of the peoples whose rights to self-determination it would affect. Meanwhile, why should Wyoming get to be a state but not D.C. when Wyoming has fewer residents?
Nope. Power accumulates. It would be impossible for any such body to effectively represent Earth -- and would be impossible for Earth to be effectively represented by the Federation -- if the constituent nations of United Earth were not to yield their sovereignty to U.E., and if U.E. were not to yield its sovereignty to the Federation.
On the other hand, perhaps the African Confederation is as real and relevant within United Earth as the State of New York is within the United States, and it practices an advanced form of federalism within its own borders.
So why should fewer people spread out over a wider area (Wyoming) get two senators? Should statehood come with geographic requirements now?
Meanwhile, I'd argue that those portions of Maryland and Virginia constituting the Washington Metropolitan Area should be separated from their states and join with D.C. to form their own, 51st state. It's absurd that someone living in Silver Spring, whose life is far more closely affected by the leadership in D.C. than in Maryland, should have to send delegates to Annapolis instead of the James Wilson Building.
Depending on what you take as the starting date, the European Union is somewhere between 20-40 years old, and the experimentation here seems like it may go on for decades still.
^ I was going to bring up the EU. 
Even outside the realms of it's viability, or the continuing debate even now after more than 40 years that it just plain doesn't work, it is pretty much an encapsulation of what I was trying to say earlier in the thread: there are people who have always assumed that in the Star Trek future individual countries do not exist and that Earth is united under a single government; rather than assuming, logically, that each country would of course still retain it's own individual identity, even within a world-wide government structure.
And the EU is the perfect example of why that would be more likely than not. Europe is (in theory) all united under a single banner, a single 'government', but each individual country still retains their full sovereignty, their individual identities, and their own cultural traditions. France does not stop having a national flag just because it shares a common currency with Germany, although both also share a second, EU banner. I imagine that 'United Earth' works along similar grounds, which is why the UK still has a flag in Star Trek's future. It isn't so much a reflection on the UK in Star Trek's time, but more a retention of a cultural tradition.
Even outside the realms of it's viability, or the continuing debate even now after more than 40 years that it just plain doesn't work, it is pretty much an encapsulation of what I was trying to say earlier in the thread: there are people who have always assumed that in the Star Trek future individual countries do not exist and that Earth is united under a single government; rather than assuming, logically, that each country would of course still retain it's own individual identity, even within a world-wide government structure.And the EU is the perfect example of why that would be more likely than not. Europe is (in theory) all united under a single banner, a single 'government', but each individual country still retains their full sovereignty, their individual identities, and their own cultural traditions. France does not stop having a national flag just because it shares a common currency with Germany, although both also share a second, EU banner. I imagine that 'United Earth' works along similar grounds, which is why the UK still has a flag in Star Trek's future. It isn't so much a reflection on the UK in Star Trek's time, but more a retention of a cultural tradition.
Well, that's not strictly accurate. For one thing, the European Union is not a government or sovereign state in its own right; it is, rather, a new kind of supranational union to which some of the responsibilities of the sovereigns have been delegated.
And what's happening in the E.U. is a prime example of why this kind of arrangement will never work in the long-term. Dividing monetary policy and fiscal policy -- giving the E.U. control of monetary policy while the national governments retain control of fiscal policy -- has been a disaster. It means that countries that really need to devalue their currency in order to recover from the economic crash, such as Greece, haven't been able to. Instead, those governments have been forced to accept demands from the German government that they dramatically slash government spending as a condition of E.U. bailout loans, even if this is against the express will of their publics and causes greater economic contraction. This in turn leads to the rise of xenophobia, nationalism, and right-wing fascist movements in the countries so victimized.
It's a really terrible system, and it's a threat to democratic governance. The E.U. is a prime example of why such a union needs to itself be sovereign, or needs to be expressly non-sovereign in nature; pooled, delegated sovereignty does not work.
