Speaking of fascism...
-
http://www.space.com/entertainment/090507-star-trek-utopia.html[^] I have loved star trek since I was a child. People in my small town actually thought I was strange because I would rather stay home and watch space ships than go out on a friday night with my friends. But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences. Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government. It is no wonder that there were so many human colonies on other planets trying to escape it.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
http://www.space.com/entertainment/090507-star-trek-utopia.html[^] I have loved star trek since I was a child. People in my small town actually thought I was strange because I would rather stay home and watch space ships than go out on a friday night with my friends. But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences. Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government. It is no wonder that there were so many human colonies on other planets trying to escape it.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government.
You're getting the Federation and Star Fleet mixed up. It's made quite clear in a number of episodes from various series and the movies that Star Fleet (as a military organization, it is, indeed militaristic :doh: )is responsible to and responsive to the Federation which seems rather unwarlike. Now I will say that there are strong socialistic overtones to Starfleet, but that's always been true of the military which provides room and board, free medical care, free clothing, etc. in return for having the right to tell you when to get up, when to eat, and when to go to bed. As well as who to shoot. Fascism is practiced by the Romulans as far as I can tell and Feudalism by the Klingons. To see communism taken to the extreme, one has to look no further than the Borg, and capitalism run amuck is, of course the Ferengi.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government.
You're getting the Federation and Star Fleet mixed up. It's made quite clear in a number of episodes from various series and the movies that Star Fleet (as a military organization, it is, indeed militaristic :doh: )is responsible to and responsive to the Federation which seems rather unwarlike. Now I will say that there are strong socialistic overtones to Starfleet, but that's always been true of the military which provides room and board, free medical care, free clothing, etc. in return for having the right to tell you when to get up, when to eat, and when to go to bed. As well as who to shoot. Fascism is practiced by the Romulans as far as I can tell and Feudalism by the Klingons. To see communism taken to the extreme, one has to look no further than the Borg, and capitalism run amuck is, of course the Ferengi.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Actually, in many episodes and series the star ships have civilians and children on board apparently living as 'normal' members of the federation. http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm[^]
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Actually, in many episodes and series the star ships have civilians and children on board apparently living as 'normal' members of the federation. http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm[^]
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Just like civilians can live and work on army bases. You're trying awfully hard here, huh?
- F
Fisticuffs wrote:
Just like civilians can live and work on army bases
Not really the same thing at all.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Fisticuffs wrote:
Just like civilians can live and work on army bases
Not really the same thing at all.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Not really the same thing at all.
You never served on a army base in Germany or anything similar, did you? Even during the hottest period of the cold war, it was possible to bring your dependents with you on a tour in Europe. They lived on base, shopped at the PX, received free housing, medical care, etc. and abided by the UMCJ as enforced by the MPs. That wasn't the way most Americans lived in the 50's and 60's.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
http://www.space.com/entertainment/090507-star-trek-utopia.html[^] I have loved star trek since I was a child. People in my small town actually thought I was strange because I would rather stay home and watch space ships than go out on a friday night with my friends. But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences. Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government. It is no wonder that there were so many human colonies on other planets trying to escape it.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government. It is no wonder that there were so many human colonies on other planets trying to escape it.
I always thought of it as a lassie-fare sort of "government". It never messed with client planets unless requested to do so, usually help in dealing with a disease, a rogue asteroid, or defense against a non-federation treaty planet. Interplanetary commerce was not strictly controlled, you had Ferangi trading with little regulation, freedom to travel, even Klingon s could roam freely. As a matter of fact Klingons were members of the Federation (latter episodes DS9, STNG) but had little toleration for Federation medelling in there affairs. If civil war's broke out between planets in the same system the Federation sends mediation team but does not directly intervene (exception Enon-7). They honor the non-interference prime-directive (non imperialistic) except for civilizations that have warp capability and even then only in a minimalist way. No "Federation" Reserve bank is observed, indeed one could trade in Fed Standard (Standard referenced in ST books) currency (exception, Piccard makes reference to no need of money in First Contact) or in Latnum(DS9) (what ever that is) Indeed the Federation's biggest enemy were the Borg, the perfect collectivist society (in communist terms). The Federation, should not be confused with "The Aliance" of Firefly or the "Empire" of Star Wars. 2 cents.
-
http://www.space.com/entertainment/090507-star-trek-utopia.html[^] I have loved star trek since I was a child. People in my small town actually thought I was strange because I would rather stay home and watch space ships than go out on a friday night with my friends. But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences. Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government. It is no wonder that there were so many human colonies on other planets trying to escape it.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
I think "What's our problem? Besides human nature, the main hurdle to peace is bad government, some scientists say." is a very interesting point. Most often, terrorism aside, it's nations that wage war. Nationalism fuels this does it not? There is a lot of money to be made from other people suffering rather than having complete solutions aka treat the disease, but not cure it. Flame away. :|
-
http://www.space.com/entertainment/090507-star-trek-utopia.html[^] I have loved star trek since I was a child. People in my small town actually thought I was strange because I would rather stay home and watch space ships than go out on a friday night with my friends. But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences. Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government. It is no wonder that there were so many human colonies on other planets trying to escape it.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences.
ROTFL. I guess Australia is not a Christian society then.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
-
Fisticuffs wrote:
Just like civilians can live and work on army bases
Not really the same thing at all.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Not really the same thing at all.
Well since you say so without an ounce of explanation, I guess it must be true!
- F
Fisticuffs wrote:
Well since you say so without an ounce of explanation, I guess it must be true!
A base is not a combat unit. A naval vessel is. That would be the comparison.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
http://www.space.com/entertainment/090507-star-trek-utopia.html[^] I have loved star trek since I was a child. People in my small town actually thought I was strange because I would rather stay home and watch space ships than go out on a friday night with my friends. But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences. Still, Star Trek actually presents a rather grim picture of the future. A human race rather completely controlled by a collectivist, militaristic government. It is no wonder that there were so many human colonies on other planets trying to escape it.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Fisticuffs wrote:
Well since you say so without an ounce of explanation, I guess it must be true!
A base is not a combat unit. A naval vessel is. That would be the comparison.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
A base is not a combat unit. A naval vessel is. That would be the comparison.
Naval vessels have relatively short tours of duty and have home ports in the US that they regularly return to. When, as is obviously true by the time of STTNG, power is produced cheaply in unlimited quantities, and tours of duty can last five years, the likelihood of creating a moving base makes much more sense than in would in our times when ships are small, power is at a premium, and quarters are cramped for just the crew.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
kmg365 wrote:
My wife read the plot line of the "new star trek".
But remember: this is a different startrek universe. For instance, Kirk's father lived until Kirk was a grown man in TOS - and that is the way the Nimoy-Spock remembers it happening.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
A base is not a combat unit. A naval vessel is. That would be the comparison.
Naval vessels have relatively short tours of duty and have home ports in the US that they regularly return to. When, as is obviously true by the time of STTNG, power is produced cheaply in unlimited quantities, and tours of duty can last five years, the likelihood of creating a moving base makes much more sense than in would in our times when ships are small, power is at a premium, and quarters are cramped for just the crew.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
the likelihood of creating a moving base makes much more sense
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
Oakman wrote:
the likelihood of creating a moving base makes much more sense
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Actually, about the only use left for those carriers is as floating bases a few hundred miles off shore Those cruise-type missiles have a range of less than 500 km. But the modern aircraft carrier (I was lucky enough to get a tour of the Enterprise once) is a great example of what I was talking about - in spite of its great size, the interior - except for the hangar bays - is cramped and space is at a premium. There is no way in hell that it could be used as the equivalent of a land base. Nor is there any need. Tours of duty on those magnificent ships last less than a year.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Fisticuffs wrote:
Well since you say so without an ounce of explanation, I guess it must be true!
A base is not a combat unit. A naval vessel is. That would be the comparison.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
A base is not a combat unit. A naval vessel is. That would be the comparison.
Many Starfleet ships weren't combat vessels except during wartime IIRC. Annnnnd I believe that exchange has exhausted my nerd credits for the month, I bid you good day sir.
- F
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
But of course, as I belonged to a christian society, I was still accepted dispite my differences.
ROTFL. I guess Australia is not a Christian society then.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )
Christian Graus wrote:
I guess Australia is not a Christian society then.
Don't worry. According to his criteria and my experience, neither is Ohio.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
I'm a proud denizen of the Real Soapbox[^]
ACCEPT NO SUBSTITUTES!!! -
Stan Shannon wrote:
A base is not a combat unit. A naval vessel is. That would be the comparison.
Many Starfleet ships weren't combat vessels except during wartime IIRC. Annnnnd I believe that exchange has exhausted my nerd credits for the month, I bid you good day sir.
- F
Fisticuffs wrote:
Annnnnd I believe that exchange has exhausted my nerd credits for the month, I bid you good day sir.
Go see Trek tonight and they'll give you a whole new pocketful.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Actually, about the only use left for those carriers is as floating bases a few hundred miles off shore Those cruise-type missiles have a range of less than 500 km. But the modern aircraft carrier (I was lucky enough to get a tour of the Enterprise once) is a great example of what I was talking about - in spite of its great size, the interior - except for the hangar bays - is cramped and space is at a premium. There is no way in hell that it could be used as the equivalent of a land base. Nor is there any need. Tours of duty on those magnificent ships last less than a year.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
Tours of duty on those magnificent ships last less than a year.
I think that depends on your rate, unless things have changed a lot since I was in the Navy. I spent three years on the New Orleans (an LPH 'helicopter carrier'), and that was common. Some people spend there entire four year enlistment on one ship.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.