From: Dickey, Michael F (michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com)
Date: Wed Feb 27 2002 - 14:39:59 MST
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lorrey [mailto:mlorrey@datamann.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 8:55 PM
To: extropians@extropy.org
Subject: Re: Humor/Star Trek linguistics
"Dickey, Michael F" wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Lorrey [mailto:mlorrey@datamann.com]
> >
> > http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Database/index.html
>
> No wealth: Counsellor Troi and Captain Picard have both boasted about how
> the accumulation of wealth is no longer an incentive. What they don't
> explain is why. Humans have always been territorial (and so have our
> evolutionary ancestors), so our desire to accumulate more assets seems
more
> like a basic facet of human nature than a temporary cultural phenomenon.
It
> can be suppressed or modified through education and social conditioning,
but
> such methods are hardly 100% effective. Some greedy people should remain,
> but not in Star Trek. So if humans in the future no longer desire wealth,
> then why not? Do they use extremely advanced brainwashing techniques, so
> sophisticated that no one can resist them? Or have they made the
> accumulation of wealth illegal, as Marx advocated? The latter seems more
> plausible.
Mike Lorrey - "No, it doesn't. The advent of replicator technology has
eliminated the
drive for fulfillment of basic needs through labor. Furthermore, the
federation citizens you generally only see in TNG are Starfleet
officers, trained at Starfleet Academy. These are scientists whose every
need is supplied by Starfleet from the moment of their induction. If
they need personal items, they are replicated, so the concept of 'cost'
for personal items and consumables is obsolete."
------------------------------
He makes a good argument on the site that the replicators require a feed
stock (some sort of raw materials) since in numerous episodes they state
that many compounds are too complex to synthesize. Which would still place
high value on those materials that could not be replicated, never mind the
exhorbitant cost in energy to replicate them (unless the majority of matter
comes from feedstock) In either case, TOS also had replicators on board, yet
they seemed to still have a market based economy.
Here are his comments about replicators with quotes from each episode
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Database/TNG-Replicators.html
Mike Lorrey - "However, it is far more telling to watch the future life of
the TNG
teleport officer, who is a non-commissioned officer, who worked his way
up through the ranks, and later works at Deep Space Nine, where we see
his wife and child on a regular basis."
-------------------------------------
The author of this particular site focuses mainly on ST:TNG. Perhaps many
other bits of evidence surface in later series, like DS9 and Voyager, which
contradict what was observed in TNG, or suggest that the federation has
changed somewhat since then.
Mike Lorrey - "Now, you may claim: but any world that joins the Federation
must adopt
communism. This claim is directly contradicted by the Prime Directive.
Individual worlds are free to develop as they wish."
The prime directive, as far as I can tell, usually applies to pre-warp
societies. Afterwards the federations approaches them and asks if they want
to join, then they must conform to the federation rules to get membership.
>
> Ma Bell is back: The entire subspace relay system is owned by the
Federation
> government, as described in the DS9 tech manual. There is no private
> competitor. Since all interstellar communications must use this relay
> network, this effectively gives the Federation government total control
over
> long distance communications. Furthermore, it appears that local
> communications systems are government-operated as well, since the
government
> was able to effortlessly impose a complete local news blackout during the
> attempted coup in "Paradise Lost." As another monopolistic Microsoftian
> measure, all communications start and end with the ubiquitous Federation
> logo, even on mixed civilian/military stations like DS9. Quark once ran
> afoul of this monopoly when he wanted to broadcast advertisements for his
> bar, and had no alternative but to break into DS9's communications system.
Deep Space Nine is located in Bajoran space, which is treated as a DMZ
or UN Protectorate equivalent following the Cardassian War. Furthermore,
it is a station that is owned by the Federation, so it is obvious that
they would control their own communications systems. You only see the
federation logo on comm screens because the only comm screens you ever
see are federation owned screens.
Mike Lorrey - "Now, lets say that God has either been proven to be
non-existent, or
else federation technology has allowed private individuals to have a
direct comm line with the universes sysop. In either case, chapels would
be unnecessary, but what, exactly, does this have to do with capitalism?"
---------------------------------
I think its more the fact that the TNG stayed away from any religious
implications of any kind in the federation (probably cause the writeres
didnt know how to handle it and paramount didnt want to offend anyone) yet
most every alien race encountered has a religion. In the federation, it
seems to be strangely absent (with the exception of Picard's brothers
comments apparently) I think the lack of a god has a lot to do with
communism (not capitalism) as marx said 'religion is the opiate of the
masses' If the author is arguing that the federation is communist, it seems
a good line of evidentary support to show the lack of religions in the
federation, since communist nations typically avoid or actively persecute
religions. Whether you agree with the authors conclusions or not, its hard
for me to imagine that you didnt see why he used that piece of evidence.
>
> Mike Lorrey - "There are many incidents in Star Trek history of
businessmen
> operating
> openly, even if some are depicted in a rather typically
> biased-Roddenberry fashion (Harry Mudd, of "Troubles with Tribbles" and
> other episodes of ST:TOS featuring him, including the one with the
> beauty pills and dilithium miners, and the one where Harry meets his
> apparent end at the hands of an android that appears as his ex wife....)"
>
> --------------------------------------
>
> If you check the site out, he starts off (at some point) by saying that
TOE
> was mostly a free enterprise system, and joked that there must have been
> some kind of coup in the intervening years.
Mike Lorrey - "Note that replicators did not exist in the TOE period, but
did exist in
the TNG era, supporting my theory."
---------------------------------------
Replicators werent in the original series? What were those little
cubbyholes that they would walk up to, say something, a door slides open,
and out comes food. Is there a kitchen back there? Or was I hallucinating?
They had transportors, why not replicators?
Mike Lorrey - "This is inaccurate. Note how farms in Japan still use
primitive hand
labor, hand polishing apples while still on the tree, etc and as a
result command a far higher market price than mass produced American
products, even of the same species. Note that 'authentic' french
champagne produced using traditional methods commands higher prices than
mass produced American "champagne" which is produced by the same method,
but automated, though is not allowed to be called 'champagne'. Note also
the organic farming movement, which commands higher prices for its
produce than non'organic' produce."
-------------------------------------
I certainly wouldnt go so far as to say it is 'innacurate' as it is merely a
different interpreation of an observed phenomena, Fact, they have a low
tech hand worked farm. Explanation, could be in a memory or throw back to
the 'old days' in a communist society, or it could be a high priced organic
farm for technophobes. Why is your interpretation more correct then his?
There is not any more evidence to suggest either explanation more clearly,
with the exception of the rest of the anecdotal evidence from the series,
which you interpret as being evidence of a free market society, and he
interprets as being evidence of a communist one (at least in TNG) Seems
that to determine which explanation is a simpler one for the observed facts
you should take the debate up with him, as you (as he) seems (IMHO) to have
some good points.
In either case, you should probably not be arguing with me about it as A) I
am not the author of the site and B) not a very big star trek fan. Perhaps
you can email the author, he seems to be very rational and scientifically
minded and enjoys intelligent debates. Id like to see the discussion if you
do...
Regards
Michael
LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:41 MST