Star Trek goes full Communist - Declares it openly

[Woodsman]

Check it out...

From the official Star Trek site:

The Star Trek Communist Hopes Star Trek Can Inspire A Real Revolution

"Workers of the World, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains." - Karl Marx, and Rom

ca.startrek.com

"The Star Trek Communist Hopes Star Trek Can Inspire A Real Revolution"
"Workers of the World, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains." - Karl Marx, and Rom


No wonder the last few years of ST have been such a bizarre, off-putting parade.

 

[bjorb]

Picard says:

“The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity.” - Jean-Luc Picard, Star Trek: First Contact

There is no economics at play. Just imagine, having a replicator for food, beverages, and items (clothes etc.) in every household. Whatever they need. Anything you need can be materialized by a machine. It kind of changes the rules.

 

[bjorb]

Picard says:



There is no economics at play. Just imagine, having a replicator for food, beverages, and items (clothes etc.) in every household. Whatever they need. Anything you need can be materialized by a machine. It kind of changes the rules.

Nonetheless, I get his point.

But it is separate from communism. Without personal responsibility, you cannot create a better world. A concept these people often do not understand. They just see the wealth gap in society and want a bigger piece of it. In addition, this communist utopia is nothing more than a lie and an attempt at a vulgar power grab. OSIT.

 

[bjorb]

In the article:

Most Star Trek fans agree that the Federation would be a nice place to live. It’s got unlimited food, no wars, friendly holographic medical care on-demand, and regular classical music performances on deck 10. It’s great, in short, and hope springs eternal amongst Trek faithful that the future represented on-screen is a future we’ll one day achieve.

“In the earth of the future, [we] eliminate poverty, hunger, homelessness, all the stuff that's hard to still talk about; it’s paradise on earth,” Nguyen says,

''We don't have money''
''We have a thing called replicators''

That's why, it has nothing to do with communism.

 

[Deleted member 4737]

In the article:





''We don't have money''
''We have a thing called replicators''

That's why, it has nothing to do with communism.

I have watched many episodes of every version of star trek. If anything, I always felt it promoted democracy. I didn't ever get the feeling it was communist, but maybe that's just my perspective.

 

[Ennio]

Sounds to me like he mostly wants to be provocative but comes off sounding like a dilettante. Also, he lacks imagination. Why only look to communism as a means for social and economic betterment (especially when it has such a dismal track record)?

Star Trek has had some terrific episodes about right wing totalitarianism (Mirror, Mirror for one). I wonder if its ever critiqued communism or left wing totalitarianism? I ask because I'm not up on most of Deep Space 9, or much of what's come after. Maybe a question for PopHistorian...

Just for the record, I think there is a suggestion of some kind of economy that people are engaged in. Since the stories mostly take place aboard vessels financed by the Federation, its a bit like the military where food and provisions get subsidized. But occasionally the issue of paying for things with 'credits' is mentioned on space stations or on a planet.

The question of what an STO economy and society may be like is an interesting one though. Some time ago I think Laura started a thread called (and I'm paraphrasing) 'Building a Better World' that got into this subject.

 

[bjorb]

I have watched many episodes of every version of star trek. If anything, I always felt it promoted democracy. I didn't ever get the feeling it was communist, but maybe that's just my perspective.

I've always gotten the sense that that the Federation of Planets functions as a democracy. With the very high degree of autonomy that the Federation leaves each member planet.

 

[United Gnosis]

Well, this is a puff piece about a communist fan, i only sped-red through but saw no declaration of the staff or writers or anything, so I would find the title of this thread to be a bit of an overreaction. There was nothing formal or a statement of direction, although i do not contest that the Star Trek fanbase is replete with the worst types of communist ideologues. Yet Star Wars was not about communism at all, that's what the Borg was. The Federation was much more than that.

Either way, it's uncontestable that the identitarian/alinskyite fifth column has infested hollywood, games, comics, media. Star Trek is part of that, the last season was a dumptruck of identitarian/deconstructivist writing. I don't watch it, but keep aware of those cultural spheres through a few creators Nerdrotic. ComicArtistPro Secrets (Ethan Van Scyver), TheQuartering.

For instance, here's a (hilarious, but fair) review of Discovery Season 3:

 

[bjorb]

Gene Roddenberry, creator of Star Trek had this to say about the vision he was trying to share with the series and the audience.

A message from Gene Roddenberry to the world

Comment: The following is a short excerpt of a transcript of a live talk given by Gene Roddenberry, creator of Star Trek, to an audience. Today, his words are still as relevant as, if not more than, in his own days. I think probably the most...

www.sott.net

We believed that the often ridiculed mass audience is sick of this world's petty nationalism and all it's old ways and old hatreds, and that people are not only willing but anxious to think beyond most petty beliefs that have for so long kept mankind divided.

So you see that the formula, the magic ingredient that many people keep seeking and many of them keep missing is really not in Star Trek.

It is in the audience. There is an intelligent life form out on the other side of that television too.

The whole show was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but to take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms.

We tried to say that the worst possible thing that can happen to all of us is for the future to somehow press us into a common mould, where we begin to act and talk and look and think alike. If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there.

And I think that this is what people responded to.

The result of that was that seven years after being dropped by the network because of saying those things, there are now more people watching it than ever before.

And if you ascribe those things to any mystic or scriptural brilliance in Star Trek, you miss the entire point.

For Star Trek proofs, as faulty as individual episodes could be, that the much-maligned common man and common woman has an enormous hunger for brotherhood. They are ready for the 23rd century now, and they are light-years ahead of their petty governments and their visionless leaders.

 

[SubnetUnMask]

Picard says:



There is no economics at play. Just imagine, having a replicator for food, beverages, and items (clothes etc.) in every household. Whatever they need. Anything you need can be materialized by a machine. It kind of changes the rules.

Exactly. Within Star Trek, basically unlimited amounts of energy are able to be created through matter/anti-matter reactions, and then that energy is converted to matter with replicator technology. We don't live in that kind of realm, so the entire argument is pointless. Indeed, Star Trek has gone down hill rapidly the past 10 years or so. I only watch the old stuff from the 90's.

 

[Woodsman]

Sounds to me like he mostly wants to be provocative but comes off sounding like a dilettante. Also, he lacks imagination. Why only look to communism as a means for social and economic betterment (especially when it has such a dismal track record)?

Star Trek has had some terrific episodes about right wing totalitarianism (Mirror, Mirror for one). I wonder if its ever critiqued communism or left wing totalitarianism? I ask because I'm not up on most of Deep Space 9, or much of what's come after. Maybe a question for PopHistorian...

Just for the record, I think there is a suggestion of some kind of economy that people are engaged in. Since the stories mostly take place aboard vessels financed by the Federation, its a bit like the military where food and provisions get subsidized. But occasionally the issue of paying for things with 'credits' is mentioned on space stations or on a planet.

The question of what an STO economy and society may be like is an interesting one though. Some time ago I think Laura started a thread called (and I'm paraphrasing) 'Building a Better World' that got into this subject.

Some of the old Kirk, Bones and Spock episodes dealt with communism head on, I seem to recall, though it's been a long while since I've watched anything from that era.

In the Next Generation end of things, while not specifically referencing communism, Collectivism has definitely been dealt with: the Borg represented such an iconic face of a society stripped of individualism that people understand quite well what you mean when you use the word today, more than two decades on.

 

[Woodsman]

Well, this is a puff piece about a communist fan, i only sped-red through but saw no declaration of the staff or writers or anything, so I would find the title of this thread to be a bit of an overreaction. There was nothing formal or a statement of direction,

In retrospect, it was a bit clickbaity, though not by much.

While not necessarily surprised, I find myself grinding my teeth to see the official Star Trek website running such an article without a hint of irony. The SJW side of the culture war aren't so much letting the mask slip as they are simply acting in the confidence that masks are barely necessary.

 

[Ina]

Star Trek stories have been invariably written from bridge crew perspective, aka starfleet officers, lowest rank, Ensign. The most common thread as the base of function is the hierarchical command structure, military in nature which is ideology free or anti-ideology, any ideology being counterproductive to the chain of command seen as vital for the survival of the crew. That aspect is detailed in Star Trek Voyager around merging the maquis and strafleet crews.
The human society at large is seen as being governed by the Federation Council, for security, diplomacy and trade, science and culture aspects, following Starfleet Regulations, or not at times (The Voyage Home).

Will Nguyen, has an ideological infatuation with both communism and Star Trek and as such his mind driven by high ideals, ignores many significant details ( by lack of assimilation most probably ) that actually define his objects of infatuation, thus proving a total lack of repect for any of them, in any shape or form.

 

[Ennio]

In the Next Generation end of things, while not specifically referencing communism, Collectivism has definitely been dealt with: the Borg represented such an iconic face of a society stripped of individualism that people understand quite well what you mean when you use the word today, more than two decades on.

That's right, in fact the Borg is such a good metaphor for what we're seeing that it would make great MEME material for any number of radical left leaning movements, among other things. Reminds me a bit of these even though Gates is less vocal about ideological movements than he is about other agendas:

 

[United Gnosis]

In the Next Generation end of things, while not specifically referencing communism, Collectivism has definitely been dealt with: the Borg represented such an iconic face of a society stripped of individualism that people understand quite well what you mean when you use the word today, more than two decades on.

That is an interesting point. Having watched as a young teen i didn't really make a distinction between communism and collectivism. Maybe because there is no demarcation in-between - it rather seems like a continuum, with collectivism as the distilled 'will' of the Party - technocratically enforced communism. Compared to the Borg, the Federation felt positively libertarian.