The Fascist Ideology of Star Trek
POSTED BY: citizen
UPDATED: Sunday, June 7, 2026 16:12
VIEWED: 22000
PAGE 6 of 14
all I have to say is whoever wrote that article has entirely too much free time on his/her hands. This is reminiscent of the time there was such a controversy over Ernie and Bert on Sesame Street possibly representing the "gay" lifestyle...I felt Brian Henson's response was accurate and funny. " Madame, if you have time to worry about the sex lives of felt, you have far bigger problems than I can deal with." The same should be said of anyone who is busily disecting the underlying "nuances" of Star Trek's sociopolitical underpinnnings. Oh come on it's a t.v. show not the guide to life in the future!
I choose to rise instead of fall- U2
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The article is here:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Trek-Marxism.html
Not only is their definition of Communism wrong, but they've also ignored any evidence that runs counter to their supposition that the Federation is communist. For instance, no private property, we know people have their own restaurants, farms and vineyards. No private Starships, there's episodes in TNG and every other series I think that clearly shows private ownership of transportation.
"It is a popular misconception that communism eliminates class distinctions." No it's entirely true that Communism is supposed to be a stepping stone to a classless society, it's also true that at the state level it doesn't work.
The author in one breath says we can't assume certain things, since those things run counter to their argument, and then makes even greater assumptions in the support of their argument. I guess they saw what they wanted to see, and since the author was writing an article on a site that aims to prove why Star Wars would kick Star Trek’s arse...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not familiar with the methods used in Brave New World, but My impression of the Star Trek transformation was a combination of the worst world war in human history (civilization collapsed, most nations ceased to exist, about two-thirds of Earth's population corpsified and gross), First Contact (the realization of exactly how little a crap the universe gives about you and anything you believe is worth fighting over), replicators (as already examined), and a society in which virtues are rewarded more than vice (bringing in the "nature/nurture" debate).
Originally posted by Cavalier:
This means that to create Utopia you must first remake human nature. The Federation seems to have achieved this, as did the World State in Brave New World. For all we can tell, they used the same methods.
It's this last one that is the most interesting to me. One of the important (if not the important) life lessons I've learned from Star Trek is that there are no bad guys. Everyone who commits atrocities does so in the name of (a greater) good. From Hitler, to Dolim, to Dukat, to the Borg, to random gun-wielding psycho, the problem isn't that they're "Evil," it's that they've become convinced that violence/cruelty/whatever is either justified or neccessary to acheive their goals. Let's face it, everything that we see in modern society suggests that this is true. The Federation OTOH, represents a world which selects for benevolence, compassion, and integrity.
As Captain Archer said: "History changed when a handful of very brave people realized that they could make a difference." This alone runs counter to everything society teaches us about strength in numbers, majority rule, and that individuals should live in fear and allow the "professionals" to handle things.
-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I’m afraid when I try your link , it does not work for me – hence the slightly indirect route I had to provide. Still, it does get you there via one of the most wonderful pages on the net.
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
The article is here:
http://www.stardestryer.net/Empire/Essays/Trek-Marxism.html
Not only is their definition of Communism wrong, but they've also ignored any evidence that runs counter to their supposition that the Federation is communist.
...
I guess they saw what they wanted to see, and since the author was writing an article on a site that aims to prove why Star Wars would kick Star Trek’s arse...
I think the guy who wrote it calls himself Darth Wong. (Comment would be superfluous.) The identifying features he provides for communism do seem to work for real-world communist states - fascist states strike me as being slightly less extreme. And a certain amount of private farming etc existed in even the most extreme communist states – otherwise, everyone would have starved to death. But it all existed in the margins against the will, or at best with the grudging acceptance of, the state.
It occurs to me that Socialists/ Communists etc should be keen to have his arguments accepted, as they turn the Federation into by far the most attractive description of such a society on screen…
BTW – you mentioned The Road to Serfdom earlier. You should try to read it sometime. Its very interesting, and (IMHO) well written.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It seems an 'o' went on holiday from the link, which is bizarre given that I copied and pasted it from the address bar...
Originally posted by Cavalier:
I’m afraid when I try your link , it does not work for me – hence the slightly indirect route I had to provide. Still, it does get you there via one of the most wonderful pages on the net.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Trek-Marxism.html
Quote:They do, but as was pointed out earlier there hasn't been a true communist state. Communism simply doesn't work in the real world with real world people, it can work with small groups, but for the sake of shorter posts I'll not mention why I think that is unless asked.
The identifying features he provides for communism do seem to work for real-world communist states - fascist states strike me as being slightly less extreme.
Quote:There's plenty of states that are at least partially socialist and working better for it. Why not accept those? But the communism of Star Trek? I just really don't see it. Most of what we see is state owned star ships, but for a show based around a state owned vessel that's hardly surprising.
It occurs to me that Socialists/ Communists etc should be keen to have his arguments accepted, as they turn the Federation into by far the most attractive description of such a society on screen…
Even if everyone rents, well it's kind of like that now on Earth, how many people do you know with private jets and boats? House prices, at least in my country are getting stupid, most people have to rent, maybe the federation is actually a corporate entity? The United Federated Corporation of Planets
.A thought occurs though about the Militarism of Star Trek. Is it all that militarised? Starfleet is first and foremost a scientific organisation; it's called to war as a last resort. Especially in TNG, where Picard attempted to solve situations diplomatically before subsequently thoughtfully analysing the day’s events and possibly lamenting the fact that someone cut their finger.
In a similar situation Kirk would have jumped in feet first weapons blazing before cracking a joke at Spock’s expense and getting fat.
Quote:I intend to, but there's so much to read, so little time
BTW – you mentioned The Road to Serfdom earlier. You should try to read it sometime. Its very interesting, and (IMHO) well written.
. Though from earlier comments I still wonder if the Author hasn't confused Fascism with Totalitarianism.More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
They do, but as was pointed out earlier there hasn't been a true communist state.
Hmm, I suspect we may be talking slightly at cross-purposes. I would say that a ‘true communist state’ is what you get when people try to truly build communism. If they do not get exactly what they expected, that simply demonstrates why you should be a little careful about believing advertising.
And from that point of view, it is not much of a surprise that of two articles, one thinks the Federation Fascist, and the other thinks it Communist. Because in practice, both systems work pretty similarly. “Heil Stalin”, as postwar East Germans said…
This is why Road to Serfdom came to mind: it is not so much about what governments might want to do, but the limits to what they can do, and what happens if you try to ignore those limits. A country completely controlled by the state must tend to end up like communism or fascism, whatever the identity or motives of the rulers.
In reality, the Federation is not a society at all, just the collective daydreams of its scriptwriters. It was created by Act of Scriptwriter, by simply not writing about anything that might make things difficult for its characters. All the moments when you have to pick between mutually contradictory virtues have been edited out. That's why it's so boring...
And this finally allows me to segue to Firefly, because if you actually tried to build something to look the TNG Federation you would probably, if you were lucky, end up with something like the Alliance.
Quote:
A thought occurs though about the Militarism of Star Trek. Is it all that militarised? Starfleet is first and foremost a scientific organisation; it's called to war as a last resort. Especially in TNG, where Picard attempted to solve situations diplomatically before subsequently thoughtfully analysing the day’s events and possibly lamenting the fact that someone cut their finger.
But then, turning civilian functions over to the military is itself Militarism.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No really, Communism is a stepping stone to a stateless classless society, not the Totalitarian regimes of the Soviet Union and China. The fact that in the real world it ends up as Totalitarianism just proves that it doesn't work in the real world. It's in good company though; the Capitalism of the US is nothing like the small competing business model that Capitalism is supposed to be. Capitalism is just fortunate enough to fail a little more insidiously than Communism.
Originally posted by Cavalier:
Hmm, I suspect we may be talking slightly at cross-purposes. I would say that a ‘true communist state’ is what you get when people try to truly build communism. If they do not get exactly what they expected, that simply demonstrates why you should be a little careful about believing advertising.
Which, incidentally, is why I think the best systems we can currently create would marry Capitalism and Socialism, because both are trying to 'fall over' but each is trying to fall in an opposite direction, each has weaknesses that are opposite to the others so can prop each other up.
Quote:I'd say it's more limits to ideology, since Capitalism can and has turned into dictatorship, despite being an ideal that promotes limited government. If you let business do absolutely anything it wants it becomes the big government, it's not simply a question of limiting government power, it's a case of striking a balance between individualism and collectivism, Socialism, Communism and Capitalism all push towards collectivism, but they do it in different directions. Socialism/Communism attempts to hand power to the state, Capitalism to the corporations.
This is why Road to Serfdom came to mind: it is not so much about what governments might want to do, but the limits to what they can do, and what happens if you try to ignore those limits. A country completely controlled by the state must tend to end up like communism or fascism, whatever the identity or motives of the rulers.
That is why I think marrying of the divergent ideals is best, they'll be playing tug of war trying to get collectivism thereby keeping us in Individualism.
Okay I'm getting a bit preachy now, sorry.
Quote:Not sure I agree with that. There are plenty of times where the crew are put into difficult situations. The mutually contradictory virtues are there a lot, having to choose between saving lives and the prime directive seems like fairly contradictory virtues and comes up a lot
In reality, the Federation is not a society at all, just the collective daydreams of its scriptwriters. It was created by Act of Scriptwriter, by simply not writing about anything that might make things difficult for its characters. All the moments when you have to pick between mutually contradictory virtues have been edited out. That's why it's so boring...
.Quote:Maybe the Alliance isn't so bad? I certainly don't see it as more oppressive than any modern westernised nation. You may bring up the question of Miranda, but there are numerous skeletons in the closet of modern nations. Off the top of my head the UK invented concentration camps, the UK firebombed Dresden and other cities, the US is the only nation to use nuclear weapons in anger, the US sent anyone of Japanese decent to concentration camps. Most westernised nations flirted with the practice of Eugenics during the early twentieth century.
And this finally allows me to segue to Firefly, because if you actually tried to build something to look the TNG Federation you would probably, if you were lucky, end up with something like the Alliance.
I could go on; point is we see the Alliance as this evil empire because we only see it through the eyes of criminals. I wonder how people on death row view the United States. We also know that people have similar views against the Federation, the Marquis for instance.
Quote:It's more like removing the military and giving t
But then, turning civilian functions over to the military is itself Militarism.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Heh. Starfleet Academy: The Best and Brightest.
Thank God we've got the Vulcans to back us up.
-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think that reading such lofty and broad ideals into Star Trek, or seeing it as something akin to Fascism, is a bit of a stretch, quite honestly, except in seeing them as a rather naive idealistic socialism.....socialism in its best form on paper, where everything looks all kinds of shiny, yet whose practice is confounded by the fundamentally selfish nature of humanity.
Utopia, like a socialist state where everything is all shiny, is an impossibility. People in general want the right, ability and opportunity to screw things up as much as they can, while at the same time trying to do the right things.
We are selfish by nature, which is why capitalism lasts and thrives, with everyone trying to make as big of a pile for themselves as possible.
Firefly never made any effort to shy away from this, even embraced it in the fact that the security companies employed in the outer moons would not work for Alliance credits, but rather for hard currency.
Was star trek fascist? No, it was not. It was a product of another era, where new things were happening, new threats had emerged, and the furture was uncertain. Are we so different now? Not really, but we have lived with these things long enough now to be able to face up to more of reality than desired fantasy.
WE'RE GONNA CRASH? I DON'T WANNA CRASH!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There will always be opposition to the force of willof the larger group, it is one of the cornerstones of human nature. Understand, I am a child of the punk revolution, Johnny Rotten was much like God in His Heaven to me.
Whether it be the Marquis or the Browncoats, people, for the most part want either one of two things in their life: the majority want a big enough authority source to tell them what to do without having to think too much on their own, or they just want to live out their own lives, for better or worse, on the merits of their own existence, away from the prying eyes or medlesome fingers of society.
I tend to think that the people who fal into the latter, and obviously smaller, group prefer coats colored brown.
WE'RE GONNA CRASH? I DON'T WANNA CRASH!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME