this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
51 points (88.1% liked)

Star Trek

10584 readers
163 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episodes, as well as previews for upcoming episodes. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-07 LD 5x04 "A Farewell to Farms"
11-14 LD 5x05 "Star Base 80?"
11-21 LD 5x06 "Of Gods and Angels"
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (2025)

Section 31 (2025-01-24)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)

In Development

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.


Allied Discord Server


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Hi there, I'm not trying to start a political argument or anything, I'm just curious what people here think about this often repeated claim that the Federation is a socialist or even communist utopia? I know Strange New Worlds did say in dialogue it is socialist but I was wondering if people here think that's accurate? I'm not a communist or a marxist or anything like that, but I've had people who identify as such tell me the Federation basically is communist. So anyway, what's your thoughts?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 67 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (16 children)

The federation is a post-scarcity socialist utopia. They don't even have money. Every single human being has ensured healthcare, housing, food, and education of their choice guaranteed from birth. Rise among ranks of the few hierarchical power structures is based on merit, performance, experience and training. I can't recall anything specific about the productive sectors that allow this to happen, but since they have access to virtually infinite amounts of energy and everything can be done by machines and matter replicators, there's no motive for hoarding means of production or wealth, so one would assume that most productive endeavors and enterprises are collectivists by default. Same with political institutions as hoarding power doesn't guarantee anything significant beyond what the average person already posses. They also have wide social openness, tolerance and acceptance as the most common sources of intolerance and bigotry (wealth, religion, power, prestige, etc.) have been regulated or removed. So there's no logical point on slaving, discriminating, oppressing or exploiting any particular class of people, some classes of people might not even exists, as there's no concept of poverty, nor race or sexual discrimination in the culture of the federation.

As a result people don't have to work, but most probably choose to involve themselves in some sort of productive activity as a form of hobby. Members of the Starfleet for example, aren't doing so for any particular material incentive. But do it because they think space exploration is neat, or because they seek glory and honor on the Starfleet mission, or because they really really like fusion cores.

They are as socialist as it comes.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Does the term "socialist" make sense in a post scarcity world?

I guess the question is who controls the replicators and other things needed to provide what people need to live? Can it be taken away from them?

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 31 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Post-scarcity is a socialist term. It came about from futurist elaborations on Marxist materialist ideology. The reduction of labour to the minimum necessary in a society is one of the tenets of communism in order to reach post-capitalism. Certainly by technology, but also by diverting the products of labour, not for the profit and enrichment of the capitalist class, but for the provision to the needs of all society via free distribution of goods and services to all. According to Marx socialism is a necessary stage to reach communism, but communism doesn't mean the disappearance of socialism.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Hmm, I guess there is post scarcity - everyone works and everyone has what they need, there is no scarcity of resource.

But then there's post-scarcity - everything you need to live is created instantly by replicators so no one even needs to work unless they want to. Maybe that has a different term.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 27 points 3 months ago

It's the same thing. Post-scarcity doesn't mean no scarcity. The point is, though, that people are not compelled to work under risk or threat of death, hunger, poverty, cold, homelessness or illness. If you can't or don't want to work, you are not doomed or socially shunned. Even if you do work, that's no guarantee that you'll not suffer from the occasional hardships of reality like there's not enough chocolate this month due to a drought, or avocados went extinct or whatever, but you won't die of starvation with millions of tons of food hoarded on a warehouse because a capitalist pig decided to rack up the price of rice.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What I don't understand is how some of them are obviously better off than others, like Picard. His family owns a sweeping vineyard and a huge house, and other people are living in trailers in the desert.

[–] Yes@startrek.website 4 points 3 months ago

My head canon for this is that the only way tptb allowed such socialism without sabotaging it was after reserving a looot of rights and property, especially on Earth, for themselves. There was probably some excuse along the lines of 'maintaining and respecting traditions and cultures' that let them keep the bulk of their estates, without having to let the poors (who are welcome to their own vineyards anywhere else) take it over.

Some people are happy living in trailers in the desert. Not everyone wants a big house in a lush environment... And some people just like a bit of misery.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] TC_209@hexbear.net 21 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Capitalism was eliminated on Earth by the New World Economy, which was likely a Dictatorship of the Proletariat as envisioned by Marx, Engels, Lenin, Roddenberry, etc. The Federation appears to be a classless, moneyless post-DotP society that still has one primary state apparatus (the Federation itself) that oversees many smaller state apparatuses (the Federation's many member-worlds). You'll notice a contradiction, though: If a state "is a system by which the ruling class maintains and perpetuates its dominance within the social formation... by subjugating the other class(es) within class society" then how can the Federation be a classless society? I propose two solutions:

  1. Star Trek is fiction and fictional worlds are often incomplete and contradictory. Everything I've said about the New World Economy, the Federation, etc. should be taken with a grain of quadrotriticale.
  2. No society has established a DotP, and there are certainly no examples of post-DotP societies. Marxism is a scientific and materialist worldview -- it has evolved since the 19th century and it will continue to evolve into the 23rd century and beyond.

EDIT: My answer is "Yes, but it's Advanced Sci-Fi Communism."

[–] MrSaturn@startrek.website 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Was Roddenberry a Marxist?

[–] TC_209@hexbear.net 17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Most sources on Roddenberry's political beliefs are people who knew him, and they didn't open up about those beliefs until after his death. Here's an article that I've skimmed:

According to his last wife, Majel Barrett, he identified as a communist. But we know from the many accounts of his unethical business practices that he was also obsessed with making money. He preached peace and love but was infamously difficult to get along with. And he flew the flag for feminism while being a notorious womanizer.

Gene was a delightful man with great creativity and talent, but he was also a deeply flawed man who often failed to practice what he preached.

[–] MrSaturn@startrek.website 3 points 3 months ago

Interesting, he was an actual communist. Had no idea

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 17 points 3 months ago

Yes, obviously. The Federation is a postscarcity socialist society

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You can look up the definition and see if it applies. I'd argue it isn't a classless society. Especially with all the military ranks and hierarchies. And socialism is kind of a broad term. I'm pretty sure you can apply it to this case without starting a debate.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (6 children)

Classless societies and justified hierarchy aren't mutually exclusive, however. That's the entire point of anarchist strains of political ideology, the only hierarchies that should exist are ones that can be justified for the good of everyone. The hierarchy of Starfleet is justified because it's still syndicalist in nature while requiring a person to ensure the survival of everyone on board.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Corgana@startrek.website 13 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Neither, since they are moneyless and post scarcity. We honestly don't have a word for whatever they are.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 25 points 3 months ago (4 children)

The most textbook definition of communism as a political-economic organization (rather than an ideology) is that of a "stateless, classless, moneyless society."

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nublug@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago

Google doesn't, didn't and likely won't implement communism, so calling Google communism is as Marx said...

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 5 points 3 months ago

I did and it didn't say anything about replicators

[–] BrightCandle@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

There are capitalist elements. The Picard family still owns a farm and farm house and pass it down generations. There is still some concept of money being used by humans who are pursing payments for rare and stolen goods. Most of what we see around Starfleet is merit driven people working in starfleet out of self interest but the ships appear to be owned by Starfleet and they seem to have some democractic structure. Since most basic needs are met via replicators it seems they are post scarcity and trips to the doctors seem free but is not really socialism in the sense of people owning the means of production, there doesn't seem to be much of anything said about how these ships get built and the implication is its a lot of automation but there seem to be a lot of facilities on Earth with people in them like Starfleet academy and in bars. We have no idea how factories work in this world other than on other planets and people work in them.

I don't think its brilliantly clear, there are a mix of ideologies on display and what makes it hang together is the humans are all behaving well, which isn't very human nature like at all. People don't seem to own what they are working with in all cases but they do in some of the smaller settlements so its a bit of a mix dependent on circumstances.

load more comments (3 replies)

inhaled very deeply about to talk about activitypub and techrights idealism then noticed this is star trek dot website

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (4 children)

It's absolutely not a communist anarchy. There's a government, and it controls all those ships, science stations and mining operations. It doesn't look like URSS-ish communist either, as it's clearly democratic.

Besides, there exists some form of capitalism in it. It's just not very intense on the human worlds. And it's clearly socialist, as everybody is included on the society... So, my guess it's social-capitalist just like every advanced society today, just way richer than anything we know.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›