Why is there resistance to the idea of Starfleet being military?

[The Wormhole]

Off the top of my head:

TNG: Peak Performance
Star Trek Into Darkness: By Scotty before he quits.
Star Trek Beyond: Scotty again, talking about Edison.

You're only missing two from Enterprise: The Expanse and Home, in both cases characters discussing the MACOs and referring to them as "the military." So yeah, there are five references in all Star Trek saying Starfleet isn't military. It should also be noted that fourteen years go by in the real world between Peak Performance and The Expanse during which we see Starfleet fighting a war, so it's debateable how seriously the writers even took the line during those years. Even the Abrams movies at first tried to dance around the issue in Trek XI with the line about Starfleet being a "humanitarian peacekeeping armada" (which still sounds like a military) before flat out calling it non-military in the next two movies.

Because the people who made the show say that it isn't.

I swear to God, you cast an actor to play Kirk whose eyes aren't the same color as Shatner's and fans lose their shit because it contradicts something they call "canon" - but you take things said on the shows seriously and people want to dismiss them because they don't like them.

If we're just going to say "Starfleet isn't military because canon" how then do we avoid the simple fact that Starfleet officers are disciplined in a court martial? The term literally means "military court" and not only has it always been used throughout all Trek, it's the title of an episode.

Besides, Starfleet only stopped being a military because Roddenberry wanted to try to discredit Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer. If the Great Bird can dismiss things simply because he doesn't like them, so can the fans.

From a strict in-universe view, somehow I always picture 23rd century Klingons and 24th century Romulans and Cardassians laughing their a….s off when they hear that Starfleet isn't military.

IIRC, the novels do play with that. I can't remember which it was, but there was one where two aliens are conversing. One says something like "Starfleet isn't military" and the other responds "only they think so." Pocket Books does realize Starfleet is military, and while licensing agreements may require them to tow the party line, they do frequently work in little in-jokes as a way of winking to the fans and saying "we know, it is really is a military."

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

You're only missing two from Enterprise: The Expanse and Home, in both cases characters discussing the MACOs and referring to them as "the military."

Remember, the Earth Starfleet - which exists during ENT's time frame - is different from the Federation Starfleet. Despite the similar name, they are completely separate organizations.

Earth Starfleet is not military, but the Federation Starfleet is. This is because in ENT's time, MACOS provide all needed military functions. But by the time the Federation is formed, and the Federation Starfleet is created, the MACOS have been merged into the greater whole.

 

[Lance]

One of the most important people aboard an 18th century naval vessel was the botanist, the mission wasn't all battles on the high seas.

May I ask what that refers to? Except for a naval vessel sent on a scientific mission with civilian researchers aboard, "natural philosophers" played no part in an 18th century navy.

British colonialism in the 18th century, in particular the Australian experience. I was taught in history that the cataloging of flora & fauna was among the important parts of the mission. Indeed, Darwin (yes, the Darwin, "Theory of Evolution" Darwin) was a botanist aboard the earliest ships to arrive here. The British Navy was a tactical force, yes, but exploration and adding to our scientific knowledge was very much a part of their mission as well. Admittedly for the enrichment of their government pay masters, but the end result is the same.

The movie Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World probably. And even in that, the botanist was actually the ship's surgeon!

You may laugh, but Master & Commander got it from an established historical prescedent.

 

[M.A.C.O.]

You're only missing two from Enterprise: The Expanse and Home, in both cases characters discussing the MACOs and referring to them as "the military." So yeah, there are five references in all Star Trek saying Starfleet isn't military. It should also be noted that fourteen years go by in the real world between Peak Performance and The Expanse during which we see Starfleet fighting a war, so it's debateable how seriously the writers even took the line during those years. Even the Abrams movies at first tried to dance around the issue in Trek XI with the line about Starfleet being a "humanitarian peacekeeping armada" (which still sounds like a military) before flat out calling it non-military in the next two movies.

Speaking of wars. In TNG, the Federation and Cardassian War had recently ended sometime before season 4. A war we didn't see but we know Starfleet fought (see Captains Maxwell, Jellico and I believe Picard). The Dominion War was the big war we saw in DS9. There's also Kirk's line from "Errand of Mercy", where he states that he is a soldier.

I'm sure there are more instances of people in Trek confirming and disconfirming that Starfleet is a military, but I can't think of them all.

 

[The Wormhole]

Remember, the Earth Starfleet - which exists during ENT's time frame - is different from the Federation Starfleet. Despite the similar name, they are completely separate organizations.

Earth Starfleet is not military, but the Federation Starfleet is. This is because in ENT's time, MACOS provide all needed military functions. But by the time the Federation is formed, and the Federation Starfleet is created, the MACOS have been merged into the greater whole.

That may have been the intent, but there's still plenty of times during Enterprise in which Starfleet behaves like the military. They talk about court martials, they operate their own penal facilities, and in Broken Bow they actually intentionally kill the Suliban who board the ship.

Speaking of wars. In TNG, the Federation and Cardassian War had recently ended sometime before season 4. A war we didn't see but we know Starfleet fought (see Captain's Maxwell, Jellico and I believe Picard). The Dominion War was the big war we saw in DS9. There's also Kirk's line from "Errand of Mercy", where he states that he is a soldier.

I'm sure there are more instances of people in Trek confirming and disconfirming that Starfleet is a military, but I can't think of them all.

Hell, one need look no further than the infantry guys we saw on DS9, and O'Brien's backstory as a Starfleet infantryman established in TNG. Even Janeway spent time with the Starfleet Infantry. If Starfleet isn't military why does it have its own infantry?

 

[Jetboogieman]

Starfleet is clearly the military arm of the United Federation of Planets.

It's just that it is ALSO practically a diplomatic corp in its own right and had science and exploration subduties.

 

[The Wormhole]

It's just that it is ALSO practically a diplomatic corp in its own right

If Starfleet is a diplomatic corps, why is there a separate Federation Diplomatic Corps?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Because you can't be too careful.

Hell, one need look no further than the infantry guys we saw on DS9

Yeah, I dare anyone to tell those guys from "Nor the Battle to the Strong" and "The Siege of AR-558" that they aren't military.

Even Janeway spent time with the Starfleet Infantry.

Okay, now you have my attention. When did she say this?

 

[The Wormhole]

Okay, now you have my attention. When did she say this?

Admittedly, I'm conflating things a bit. In the episode Prey she talks about doing ground combat duty in the conflict with the Cardassians. I'm assuming that meant she was with the infantry.

 

[Spot261]

Or an away team?

 

[Lance]

Starfleet is clearly the military arm of the United Federation of Planets.

It's just that it is ALSO practically a diplomatic corp in its own right and had science and exploration subduties.

And like I said, having science and exploration subduties has got historical precedent within real-life militaries, and therefore is not a reasonable explanation for fandoms' unwillingness to accept Starfleet as a military.

 

[Ithekro]

Unless there is a Federation military and Starfleet gets absorbed into it during times of war? This technicality being overlooked as it would be boring?

 

[Tenacity]

Despite the similar name, they are completely separate organizations.

No not completely separate. While there are some differences, it essentially is the same organization.

Remember, the Earth Starfleet - which exists during ENT's time frame - is different from the Federation Starfleet.

Even after the creation of the Federation, Starfleet was obviously heavily tied to Earth.

The Headquarters, the Admiralty, the Academy, large percentage of Humans, culture, measurement system, English language.

MACOS provide all needed military functions.

Only in the area of small arms combat, we neither saw nor heard of MACOs being employed as large scale armies and employing heavy weapons.

And it was Starfleet ships in the 22nd century (including pre-NX-01's) that carried the ship to ship weapons.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

British colonialism in the 18th century, in particular the Australian experience. I was taught in history that the cataloging of flora & fauna was among the important parts of the mission. Indeed, Darwin (yes, the Darwin, "Theory of Evolution" Darwin) was a botanist aboard the earliest ships to arrive here. The British Navy was a tactical force, yes, but exploration and adding to our scientific knowledge was very much a part of their mission as well. Admittedly for the enrichment of their government pay masters, but the end result is the same.

Captain James Cook's voyage to the Pacific Ocean was a dedicated scientific voyage from the start. As was Charles Darwin's voyage aboard the Beagle. They didn't have primary military and secondary scientific missions. It's not like each and every of Admiral Horatio Nelson's ships-of-the-line had dedicated 'science officers' or botanists aboard.

You may laugh, but Master & Commander got it from an established historical prescedent.

You need to watch the movie again then. The 'botanist' was actually the ship's surgeon and an amateur botanist (and also a spy in the novels). And even then the military mission was the first and only mission and took precedent above everything else.

 

[Lance]

Captain James Cook's voyage to the Pacific Ocean was a dedicated scientific voyage from the start. As was Charles Darwin's voyage aboard the Beagle. They didn't have primary military and secondary scientific missions. It's not like each and every of Admiral Horatio Nelson's ships-of-the-line had dedicated 'science officers' or botanists aboard.

I never intended to suggest they did, merely that naval vessels had mission parameters that extended beyond being mere "muscle". A point you seem to be in agreement with me about.

In context, a lot people use the fact that Starfleet explores things first and fires shots across the bow second as reasons alone for it 'not being military', when it's an established fact that the biggest (naval) military in human history had a similarly broad range of mission parameters. Some vessels were part of a protectionist armada, others were devoted to more scientific endeavors, but they were all part of one big happy fleet. This too is true of Starfleet.

To my mind, Roddenberry's complaints that the Trek movies were 'too militaristic' (the basis for "Starfleet is not a military" as suggested only from TNG onwards) simply because Nick Meyer drew inspiration from Horatio Hornblower, was too simplistic, and ignores that Starfleet as it was presented in TOS was already sufficiently close to being the 18th century British Navy In Space that the criticism is perfectly invalid.

 

[Nyotarules]

When The Federation stops using Starfleet to fight its wars I will stop laughing at the 'Starfleet is not military' argument. Maybe reboot Scotty thought he was joining 'The Saurian brandy appreciation society'.

 

[David Strickhouser]

Roddenberry used Naval parlance to make the characters identifiable to audiences in the 1960's. (Instead of Space Commander of Spaceship X-7).
By using those identifiable terms, the crew of the Enterprise gained "some" military bearing; though the characters have ranks, they are still specialists.
Would it have been better if Gene had used NASA-like titles: Command Specialist Kirk, Science and Mission Specialist Spock, and Medical Specialist McCoy?
That may have been lost on '60's viewers.
Keep it quasi-military; explorers with "teeth".

 

[Nyotarules]

Doesn't matter what titles they used, if they act like a military group then they are a military group . They could have called it 'Mary Poppins in Spacefleet' and deny deny deny they are military to the teeth. They are still acting and playing all the roles of a military group. TOS never went down the 'we are just explorers' route. Kirk considered himself a soldier. What fictional Starfleet does in space, armed forces, navies, air forces etc have been doing on Earth for milennia.
BTW there are specialist in the real military.

 

[David Strickhouser]

I have no issue with Starfleet being military, para- or quasi- ; the organization has to have a structure of some form.
Gene didn't seem to have an issue with the jargon in the 1960's; when his personal views changed in the following decades, he seemed to want his characters to be scientists, explorers, etc., and downplay the military aspects (hence the "pajama" uniforms in TMP).
But the format was locked in place.

 

[Nyotarules]

^ Yep it was too late, for the show to be called 'Love instructors in Space' lol