Star Trek "Utopia" Doesn't Work Without Slavery

[W!nston]

The utopian future of 'Star Trek' doesn't work without extreme inequality and some slavery

The 10th edition of New York Comic Con boldly went where no one has gone before by hosting a panel discussion on the economic issues of "Star Trek."

Held Sunday, October 11, "The Amazing Economics of Star Trek" panel examined the concepts of scarcity and post-scarcity as portrayed in the classic science-fiction franchise.

The physics and political and religious themes of "Trek" have already been tackled in books, but not the universe's economic aspects.

The main talking point in the panel was whether or not the post-scarcity universe of "Trek" is as utopian as it's portrayed on TV and in film.

The panel consisted of "Trek" writer Chris Black; Manu Saadia, author of the book "Trekonomics"; Annalee Newitz, founding editor of the culture site io9; moderator Felix Salmon, of Fusion; Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist; and Brad DeLong, an economics professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

"Star Trek" is a sci-fi universe with a positive outlook of Earth's future. The United Federation of Planets uses its Starfleet armada of spaceships for humanitarian and peacekeeping missions. Many of the storylines are allegories of contemporary culture.

Some of the main talking points were the portrayals of scarcity and post-scarcity in "Trek," whether the show's concept of economics makes sense, and whether a post-scarcity society is utopian.

"Gene Roddenberry tried to paint our future," said DeLong, noting that we've gone far down that road. "We're now, in fact, approaching post-scarcity in food and products."

But, as Newitz pointed out, because "Trek" is a future where money no longer exists, people work because they want to but are therefore supported by other economies. To prove her point, she cited as an example "Measure of a Man," an episode of "Star Trek: The Next Generation" that centered on the character of Lt. Cmdr. Data, an android.

Even though Data is a crew member of the starship "Enterprise," unlike his fellow crewmates, he's a robot. But does that make him a person or Starfleet property?

"We're constantly being reminded that slavery and low wages support the comfortable, 'Enterprise' living," Newitz said.

Krugman said that the replicator machines in "Trek" can make objects appear out of thin air, but there's a difference between goods and services. This is especially true when, currently, people use 30% of goods but 70% of services.

And if that's the case, then something — or someone — else is going to have to be put to work.

SOURCE

I know there are a few members who are Star Trek fans. I thought this might be an interesting read and maybe a discussion as well.

 

[gb2000ie]

I was hoping body of the article would justify the click-bait headline, but it doesn't.

Maybe the headline is true, but noting in the text even comes close to convincing me of it. The idea that people do nothing unless there is money in it for them doesn't stack up, and the assumption that the federation is reliant on slavery to function isn't justified at all.

In the Star Trek world, all the mundane stuff is automated. Their society does not rest on slaves, or exploiting other races, it rests on machines. Those machines need people to run them, and those people are engineers and scientists, and we see them all the time on Star Trek. They are not slaves, and they are not being exploited.

The Star Trek economy makes no sense in a 21st century mind-set, but that's kinda the point of the show! It asks the question of what we could be if we left that mindset behind.

B.

 

[W!nston]

Good points B.

The use of androids such as Data for labor doesn't really equate to slavery but if the android is self aware like Data it would pose ethical questions. Would it not?

Also, in many episodes the Enterprise or other Star Fleet vessels encounter civilizations in all states of development. The 'Prime Directive' prohibits interference with their development.

The trade between civilizations also raises questions about 'equality' similar to First World countries on earth who trade with Third World countries. Does the United Federation of Planets feel guilty about their 'advanced' state to the point they level the playing field by providing assistance and open 'immigration' or economic refugees?

Interesting stuff - at least to me it's interesting - I've been a fan of Star Trek since the first episode of TOS. I'm not a "Trekkie" to the point I have a costume to wear or anything. Just an avid fan...

 

[gb2000ie]

The use of androids such as Data for labor doesn't really equate to slavery but if the android is self aware like Data it would pose ethical questions. Would it not?

That was the point of the episode - but the guy who thought he owned Data was out of step with his time - the point of the episode is that slavery is not OK.

Also, in many episodes the Enterprise or other Star Fleet vessels encounter civilizations in all states of development. The 'Prime Directive' prohibits interference with their development.

This is very important, I can't think of an attitude to less developed civilisations that is less like the slavery mind-set than the first directive.

The trade between civilizations also raises questions about 'equality' similar to First World countries on earth who trade with Third World countries. Does the United Federation of Planets feel guilty about their 'advanced' state to the point they level the playing field by providing assistance and open 'immigration' or economic refugees?

Immigration policy hasn't come up in Star Trek, so I have no idea how the federation feels about non-asylum immigration.

Unlike a country on a planet, the federation doesn't have rigid borders. Dotted between the federation members are planets that are not members. I imagine migration from federation planet to federation planet would be like migration within the EU - no questions asked. But if you were on a planet that is surrounded by federation planets, but not a member of the federation, could you also just move in?

For security reasons, that kind of immigration couldn't be automatic, there would have to be a process of some kind. There would have to be rules. So, the big question is, what would those rules look like?

Would it be the case that you could only come in if your civilisation was at a similar level of technical development? Or, would you be allowed in if you promised to go to school and get up to speed? Would you have to have a skill the federation thought was valuable? Would it even be up to the federation at all? We know federation members, like EU members, retain planetary governments of their own, and the federation is not allowed to interfere in their internal matters. Maybe immigration is not a federation policy at all, but determined planet-by-planet. Perhaps some are welcoming, while others are xenophobic?

What ever policy you had, it would have to take culture shock into account. Imagine we discovered warp drive tomorrow. Could we integrate into a federation-like system? Would letting us in no questions asked be kind or cruel?

I doubt the federation's policy deliberations would be about money, but that doesn't mean their decisions would be easy!

Interesting stuff - at least to me it's interesting - I've been a fan of Star Trek since the first episode of TOS. I'm not a "Trekkie" to the point I have a costume to wear or anything. Just an avid fan...

That sounds familiar - though my first Star Trek was TNG - it was on between 5pm and 6pm on week days, so I watched it after school and before dinner every day.

B.

 

[brmstn69]

Who says it's a "Utopian Society" where people only work because they want to?

Almost everyone on the ships are military so of coarse things like housing, food, and clothing are provided. Every body else on board from the various scientist to the bartenders, are civilian contractors or diplomats and government officials.

Really the only version of Star Trek to actually give so much as a glimpse of civilian life in the Federation was "Deep Space 9" which showed people actually working real jobs (waiters, tailors, card dealers in the casino, etc) to make a living and people, including the military staff had to pay for everything in the civilian run businesses.

 

[skyward]

If we do encounter alien lifeforms 'out there', which is exceedingly unlikely anyway, then I have a feeling that it won't be like Star Trek but more like that other universe, the one with Sigourney Weaver...



But hey the Trekkies sure have some good ideas: a world without billionaire banksters... anyone here object to that one?

 

[gb2000ie]

Really the only version of Star Trek to actually give so much as a glimpse of civilian life in the Federation was "Deep Space 9" which showed people actually working real jobs (waiters, tailors, card dealers in the casino, etc) to make a living and people, including the military staff had to pay for everything in the civilian run businesses.

But the whole point of DS9 is that it's NOT a regular part of the federation. It's a border outpost that actually belongs to the Bajorans, and the traders we see are Ferengi and Cardasian, neither of which are in the Federation.

Personally, I think the fact that DS9 is a rough out-of-the way place on the frontier is what makes the series so enjoyable. But it's definitely not a look at ordinary people in the federation!

B.

 

[gb2000ie]

If we do encounter alien lifeforms 'out there', which is exceedingly unlikely anyway, then I have a feeling that it won't be like Star Trek but more like that other universe, the one with Sigourney Weaver...



But hey the Trekkies sure have some good ideas: a world without billionaire banksters... anyone here object to that one?

I think that's the appeal of Star Trek - there are so many pessimistic views of the future in scifi, it's nice to get a positive one, even if reality will probably be somewhere in between the two.

B.

 

[Dendood]

It's a TV show.

The reality of the thing is some writer sits and writes... Producers have writer conferences with staff writers... They buy scripts on spec... Staff writers submit plots and accepted plots are filled out by other writers or themselves.

There's a loose bible to the series, but hell, anything the top corporate execs approve of gets the green light. There is no slavery in the STU because there are no approved stories of slavery in the STU. Should a story 'need' slavery, it'll be written in in a hot half minute. And if it's usefulness is limited, it will be forgotten in half that time. If it proves to be popular, critically acclaimed or monetarily beneficial, the story can become canon. But short of that, if they haven't burned it to a DVD, it doesn't exist.

They have on occasion replicated currency to 'fit in' with alien cultures... so the Federation does condone counterfeiting as a lesser of two evils.

And lets not count how often they will 'take no prisoners' when engaged in battle. For a non hostile organization, they've blown many an alien ship into mere trace particulates.

"Fun will now commence."

 

[W!nston]

Of course it's a TV show. We know it is the product of writers, producers, corporate execs etc etc. For the sake of this discussion that fact is a given and is also irrelevant.

There were episodes of all the ST series that dealt with civilian situations where wealth was a major factor in one's standard of living as it is in todays society.

For example: "Mudd's Women". Harry Mudd acts as an agent for women seeking a better life than the one they had on their home planet where life was hard with little reward. They wanted to marry rich men and have it easy. He manages to find some men who are Lithium miners and as a result they are rich beyond avarice according to Mudd. The women are excited to marry these rich miners and the miners are eager to enjoy the riches they have worked hard to amass.

In my mind this suggests there is a Consumer Society at work for at least some of the civilian citizens of Federation planets.

Another example is the episode: "The Cloud Minders". A planet with a class system. The people of Ardana are divided between the labor-class Troglytes, who work hard in the dangerous mines, while the elite city-dwellers reap all the profits and live in luxury. The Federation apparently has no problem trading with Ardana since they sent the Enterprise on an emergency mission for the Zenite.

There are other examples in all of the ST series.

I know it's a TV show.

So ... 'Let the fun commence'

 

[Dendood]

Hi Sniffit,

What I mean by 'just a TV show' was intended to make a more nuanced argument than simply suggest, "It isn't real, it's just TV.' I believe one of the essentials of working within a franchise is the need to respect the core Conceits of the concept. It is possible, as in the case of Battlestar Galactica, to re-imagine a franchise and give it a fresh update. But transformations come at a risk of missing the very concepts that hold the narrative together. (As in the case of Prometheus...)

It is one thing to project 'real world' speculation to fantasy constructs, but not at the expense of core conceits that make the thing work. -It might be easy to visualize the idea that just on sheer luck or chance Charlie Brown would kiss the little red head girl. Or Lucy would let him kick the football. But if those things happen, Charlie Brown would no longer be Charlie Brown.

Given the fact that Mary Richards was a sexual active career woman, it is reasonable to imagine at one point she faced the issue of having an abortion. Maybe even had an abortion. But to write her character as having had an abortion simply because it is logical.... It may be logical, but Mary Richards having an abortion would no longer be Mary Richards.

It is possible to write an episode of Star Trek where they have to confront a situation where Slavery may be an issue. But that is a far cry from the idea that the Federation survives on, or tolerates Slavery as part of its status quo. That runs completely against the conceits of Gene Roddenbury's vision. Boring as it may be, his vision of the future is one of boundless optimism that humanity -and its alien compatriots- have moved past the issues typical of real world cirstances. There may be slavery 'out there', but not as part of the Federation. And in the long run, or by the end of an episode, Federation ideals would win out. It is Wagon Train in space... run by Boy Scouts. Take away that premise and you'd be writing 'something', but that something would not be Star Trek.

At least not your dad's Star Trek.

 

[W!nston]

I am the 'Dad' in this case, lol. I was 13 when Star Trek premiered. I've watched every episode of every version of Star Trek TV series except the Animated Series. I've watched most of them at least 3 times each and TOS, I'd be embarrassed to estimate how many re-runs I've watched over the past 50 years.

I understand your point. I do. But I disagree that there is no room for a discussion about the economic reality of any of the Star Trek Universe Time Lines.

Roddenberry's dream of an egalitarian utopia was the goal of the Federation but not the reality. That is at least in my opinion.

Someone said in an earlier post that the stories are told from the Captain's Chair of an exploratory military expedition. The economic reality of Star Fleet personnel is not necessarily the same as civilians on earth or least of all other 'Third World' planets. Your supposition that there are no Third World planets in the Star Trek Universe just doesn't hold up, again, in my opinion.

No disrespect intended. My opinions are more fluid than static and you may yet convince me your assessment is more likely than mine.

 

[Dendood]

I agree, there are 'third world' planets in the Star Trek Universe. We need them in order to tell stories. No conflict, no drama. I think we agree far more than we disagree on this topic.

From my perspective, the Federation has, by and large, created a Utopia within the boundaries of the Federation. Assuming Diana Troy is correct when she rolls off the litany of sufferings that no longer exist in the STU of the Next Generation run. And I think it's important to keep in mind the wide swath of time here. We're talking about a Federation that has been in existence for hundreds of years. Enterprise. The Original Star Trek. Next Generation star Trek. DS9. Voyager. And now the 're-imaged' early years of the Original Star Trek.

Sure the Romulans or Cardassians may embrace Slavery as part of their societal structure. They're the bad guys. But the STU falls on its face when it tries to project a 'moral grey' area into its story lines. They fall so flat. Like, who, who would believe Tom Paris was once a hardened criminal??? Please. The Maquis??? Kittens, every one of them.

The best Star Trek stories are where you make the bad guys bad and the good guys good. Old fashioned for sure, but it is what it is.

At least Kirk will bang anything... wiggling, multiple orifices, green, grey. You have to love a libido like that.

 

[gb2000ie]

From my perspective, the Federation has, by and large, created a Utopia within the boundaries of the Federation.

Another message from Star Trek is that you can't enforce your values on others - that's called tyranny - so the federation looks after it's own house, and offers help when asked. If it was pro-active about going around ending things it disagreed with, it would by evil, not good.

B.

 

[W!nston]

'Third World' planets do not exist in the Federation? Is that what you guys are saying? That is what it sounds like.

Call us when the shuttle lands ... )

 

[gb2000ie]

'Third World' planets do not exist in the Federation? Is that what you guys are saying? That is what it sounds like.

Call us when the shuttle lands ... )

It is what we're saying, because you can't join the federation if you don't have your shit together.

We've seen episodes where planets apply for membership and get told to PFO until you can manage their own affairs properly.

B.

 

[W!nston]

Well, that sounds pretty xenophobic, racist, class-ist and all the other buzz word tags that are applied to anyone who speaks against the refugee crisis in Europe or the race-baiting media blitz in America.

So I take it you think the Federation is a xenophobic, racist, class-ist 'elite-only-need-apply' society. Yep. That is exactly what you describe.

You can't have it both ways. Either you mingle with the 'third world' planets or you are a racist, bigoted closed society. Just like the episode I described earlier - 'The Cloud Minders'.

That is how it is.

 

[gb2000ie]

Well, that sounds pretty xenophobic, racist, class-ist and all the other buzz word tags that are applied to anyone who speaks against the refugee crisis in Europe or the race-baiting media blitz in America.

Actually no - re-read what I wrote!

I said the federation does not barge in UNLESS ASKED FOR HELP.

The federation is not George Bush going around spreading 'democracy', because they get how badly that works. But they offer help when asked, and we know they take refugees because we regularly meet ships transporting refugees away from some crisis somewhere.

So I take it you think the Federation is a xenophobic, racist, class-ist 'elite-only-need-apply' society. Yep. That is exactly what you describe.

No, see above.

You can't have it both ways. Either you mingle with the 'third world' planets or you are a racist, bigoted closed society. Just like the episode I described earlier - 'The Cloud Minders'.

That is how it is.

No - you don't IMPOSE yourself on others, but help when asked.

It's wrong to say you either impose your morals on everyone, or you hate everyone and refuse to help those in need who ask.

B.

 

[W!nston]

It is what we're saying, because you can't join the federation if you don't have your shit together ....

Who decides if they have their 'shit' together? What does that mean exactly? It sounds like the Federation 'judges' them. That means strings are attached to any help given. That means if they don't comply with Federation morals that is when the UFP does

... impose your morals on everyone, or you hate everyone and refuse to help those in need who ask.

 

[gb2000ie]

Who decides if they have their 'shit' together? What does that mean exactly? It sounds like the Federation 'judges' them. That means strings are attached to any help given. That means if they don't comply with Federation morals that is when the UFP does

We know from one episode that you have evolved to the point that you have a single government for your whole planet. If you are still fighting among yourselves, how on earth could you possibly be ready to be a part of an interstellar union?

Every organisation has an ethos - you cannot integrate people into a union if their ethos is incompatible with yours. If you live in a universe with lots of different outlooks on life, it is inevitable that groupings of compatible ideologies will form. Who would it help to admit the Ferengi to the Federation? NEITHER of them!

Having a membership criteria is not Xenophobic. The EU does not let every nation that wants to join join, but we still take in refugees from non-members, and we offer help to non-members when asked.

Assuming some kind of hate against non-members is nuts. That's not how even our little planet works.

Is America Xenophobic because Jamaica can't become the 51st state? Is Europe Xenophobic because it won't let South Africa join?

Your notion that not allowing someone join your union means you hate everyone who is different just does not stack up, either in space, or on earth.

B.