As far as I can remember science fiction always fascinated me. At the same time, I was never really fond of pop-culture due to it's impact on the masses. This odd combination put me in a difficult position when I discussed Star-Trek with friends. Being highly critical about something that I genuinely enjoyed wasn't easy. Although it is only a TV show, I believe it's message has a strong underlying political and cultural effect.
If one cat get passed through the cliche heroics, Star-Trek teaches valuable concepts about race, friendship, sacrifice, strategy and commitment. When I was young, I was fascinated about how the crew of the space ship worked together to solve problems. Every encounter with another species was a valuable lesson about something that was long resolved on Earth. Even so, if one starts thinking critically about how the entire show tied up together, the outlook, at least to me, turns out to be disturbing.
With those not familiar with the tv-show here is a brief summary: Somewhere in the far future, the earth has been united under a resource based economy. Humanity also developed the technology to travel through the galaxy. Nobody had to work. Life on earth was pretty mundane so everybody dreamed of joining the military in order to explore, fight and possibly die in the name of..earth. There were no financial rewards other than military distinguishment. All human needs were getting molecularly manifested from what it seemed Karl Marx's wet dream:" The Replicator".
Exploration was the single unifying factor for the Trek crew and was treated much like a religion. Everybody tend to wore a military uniform and most carried a weapon. Humans were the good guys (as always), peculiarly finding themselves "on the defense". All alien races carried a unique characteristic of assholery that was long overcome on earth. For example, the Klingon race were a highly aggressive and militaristic while the Ferengi, the space Jews, were greedy and only cared about money. Everyone tried to disturb humanity's safe-space-bubble with their "primitive" ways. At least when it came to the conceptualization of money, Star Trek and North Korea were pretty much identical.
So far, here on our Earth, the idea of utopia has probably been the biggest demise for humanity. Every single ruler that ever lived, every dictator, every prophet and big talker, all aimed for perfection. Nonetheless, as we all know, their dreams for a better world brought torture and death to millions of people. Utopic ideologies are de-facto unreachable because they demand massive, unsustainable tribalism. This leads to grave consequences. Big groups tend to collapse under their own weight, taking under millions with them.
In the Comic "The Watchmen" humanity had to turn against a common enemy in order to save itself from extermination. North Korea for quite some time chose the West as the "enemy" in order to unite it's people under a common purpose. The Earth on Star Trek kept getting in trouble with alien races, thus shifting the attention off the borders. As long as the attention is shifted off the group the cult remains sustainable
In order to understand further how Star Trek ties up with North Korea we need to understand the premises upon which Star-Trek flourished. The tv series started in the midst of space race that lasted from 1957 to 1975. United States and the Soviet Union engaged in a technological duel that aimed to control the skies. Bringing up society up to speed with pop culture references was of great importance. This is how the mid-century futurism was born and propagated.
The Soviet Union seemed to have had the upper hand with Satellite Sputnik. As a result, the U.S poured massive amounts of tax payer money into the space program in order to conquer the moon. The whole world was hanging from a threat and as it later turned out, we avoided a nuclear disaster due to the insubordination of a single soldier that refused to press "the" button.
The masses where enthusiastic about space but also fearful. The second Red Scare in 1957 gave an extra push to the situation. United States had to unite against the "communist common enemy". The propaganda was ridiculous then as it is in North Korea today. Mysterious "science" kept the public at bay surrounding both their will and minds for the "greater purpose".
In Star-Trek, much the same happened. Humanity on earth knew very little about what was going on with the space explorations and rather had their hopes invested in the whims of a womanizer dare devil (Captan Kirk) that oddly had everything turn out in his favor. Kim Jon Il and Captain Kirk could have been great buddies indeed.
In North Korea money means very little. Everybody is being treated when it comes to financial matters. Much like with Star-Trek, the military ranking is the only measure of a human being. Much like in Star Trek, social recognition comes only from a military career.
Both Star-Trek and North Korea embrace the ideals of extreme socialism. Individuality is lost. Even the "logical" guy from the series, Captain Spock used to say "The Needs of the Many Outweigh the Needs of the Few". If that isn't a national socialist quote, I don't know what is.
source
Every single culture that embraces the masses over the individual is doomed to perish. Star-Trek reflected the nationalistic tendencies of America against the Soviet Union. In the West, political propaganda comes from Hollywood. Vested political interests control most of the media. This is no secret nor something irregular. This is how Star Trek and the futuristic culture came to be after all. In North Korea, the only supreme leader does this rather harshly so we get to criticize him as lowly and oppressive individual. After all, look at us. How could we ever draw parallels between the imperialistic west and Kim Jong Il?
If North Korea had the economic and technological power it would lead the world much like in the Star-Trek universe. The ideals and values when it comes to individuals vs "the greater purpose" are pretty much identical. Right now, there is another space race brewing. It involves, yet again futuristic empty promises about colonies on Mars, meteor mining and all cool things "science". The question is: Will we buy into the meme once again?If so, at what cost?
I have to disagree, as one of your main points is simply not true:
"Both Star-Trek and North Korea embrace the ideals of extreme socialism. "
The hypothetical society in Star Trek was defined in the show as being beyond material want. Using the definition of socialism here is non-sensical: "means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole." Star Trek had no means of production, distribution or exchange. You simply said "Replicator: Chicken Soup" or "Replicator: Jaguar XK8" and you had it. There was no means of production, thus no socialism.
You say other things that are patently false in the show:
"Much like with Star-Trek, the military ranking is the only measure of a human being. Much like in Star Trek, social recognition comes only from a military career."
This is simply not true. There are tons of respected scientists, artists, merchants and other character in Star Trek. Ben Sisko's own son became a famed author. Soong was a famed robotocist. This premise is provably false. I'd concede that in the original show only, there was a lesser focus on non-officer, but there were still plenty of "respected" scientists.
Ultimately, I don't think Star Trek can be a very useful hypothetical scenario, because some of the premises are so far removed from our reality - particularly, the unlimited energy, unlimited materials one.
I find it hard to believe you've watched much Star Trek, if you think North Korea is the country that makes the best analogy.
All the resources of Star Trek were controlled from the united government of earth. There were no private entiries or corporations. That's the definition of socialism. The replicator is more like a metaphor here in the larger content.
They all work for the government and the greatest aspiration was to join one of the Space ships crews. It is pointed out in the show several times. Even if they joined missions, they were ranked accordingly. The highest authority of earth was the military assemply. Another textbook national socialism btw.
The "unlimited material" factor is rather no relevant. It could be equal rashings.
Again, I watched the show several times. You just want to pick up debates because you are still sour from the last time. You can keep going on though and I can bring more evidence.
Again, think before you reply to my threads. Don't let your emotions get the best of you. It shows.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/18/star_trek_economy_federation_is_only_mostly_post_scarcity.html
OK, I see what you are trying to say. But the inaccuracies in the facts from the show are holding you back.
"All the resources of Star Trek were controlled from the united government of earth."
This isn't really true. Every private citizen had their own access to free power. Yes, that was maintained by the government, as you noted, but there was no taxation. It was just given away due to the extremely low cost of producing power. Basically, the premise of the Star Trek society was that huge advances in energy generation created the freest society ever known. It was so easy to generate power, people would just do it privately if the government ever messed with it.
"They all work for the government and the greatest aspiration was to join one of the Space ships crews. It is pointed out in the show several times. Even if they joined missions, they were ranked accordingly."
Ok, this isn't true either, but I know why you may think so. It often was true. Many scientists, diplomats, etc would join for missions and they would often be given acting ranks. But, it is provably false that they all were. I already gave several examples of characters who were not, like Noonien Soong. They were private individuals pursuing their own interest with absolutely no government interference or directive.
Now, the government could have cut the power, sure. They had the capability to interfere. But in the Star Trek hypothetical, they rarely did (few interesting exceptions by rebels in DS9).
"Again, I watched the show several times. You just want to pick up debates because you are still sour from the last time. You can keep going on though and I can bring more evidence.
Again, think before you reply to my threads. Don't let your emotions get the best of you. It shows."
You are literally projecting onto me exactly what you are doing. The entire comment thread went against you last time, because you were wrong and relying on falsehood and fallacy, as well as appealing to the authority of non-credible sources with questionable leanings.
You are the one who has, yet again, resorted to ad hominem (implying I was stupid in the other thread). You are the one arguing from emotion, while I cite fact after fact that you dodge and do not dispute.
If all members of the ST universe work for the government, then explain how Jake Sisko becomes a famous independent author? That is a fact in the show, and the two are incompatible.
Stop projecting your faults onto me.
A free self sustaining system doesn't need a government. Also it was noted in a couple of episodes that some inhabitants were depressed since there was nothing to do. Basically they were all more or less on welfare and they wanted to escape by joining the military.
Soong was disgraced and flet away after he underdelivered. He was hiding in a colony. After he was rescued he wan't given a status due to his complicated past. But please, do bring another example. Let's see how many exceptions to the rule you can find :) .
not a single one. In fact you started watering down your arguments with "not entirely true". Don't worry though. Keep going, keep going..
He was the son of the Captain on a remote space station that had a questioning body of governance to begin with. Nepotism for one thrived in there and it was the main point for 2 seasons.
anything else sunshine?
There are literally hundreds of examples.
Look for yourself, there are thousands in the list, only some are not officers:
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Humans
I disagree that the citizens were all on welfare by default. I don't know how you can call near unlimited abundance welfare. If boredom is the complaint, than a repressive regime is not the problem.
How many people do people in NK do you think would cite "boredom" as their #1 problem? I'm betting not many, which would point out another key difference between them, based on your own facts.
PS - Late update on this reply, mispasted a link.
it was since it was made known on earth that the highest value, the only value that existed was that of exploration. They only way to get it was through excellency in a given area and after through the military.
:)
never made that parallelism. Nonetheless, we can't know how many are bored in NK. considering the massive government leeching system ..i bet many.
it was since it was made known on earth that the highest value, the only value that existed was that of exploration.
Oh, ok, so before it was "working for the military", now you've moved the goalposts to "exploration". Shall I remind you of this quote of yours?
""there was no value in people's ability other than moving ranks in the military."
Further debate with you is pointless. Your antics are embarrassing.
Fix for my mistaken previous citation:
I believe this qualifies as a civilian, non academy, original Star Trek. Just doing his own thing (we'll ignore he was a bad guy). Note that it says he was a civilian, which means he did not enter the academy.
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Tristan_Adams
"Dr. Tristan Adams was a male Human civilian in the 23rd century. He was a psychologist and director of the Tantalus Penal Colony in 2266.
Starting around 2246, Adams began work that revolutionized prisons and the treatment of prisoners. His theories transformed prisons from cages into clean, decent hospitals for sick minds. Captain James T. Kirk believed Adams' work had done more than the rest of Humanity had done in the previous forty centuries."
You are picking up civilians from space stations or earth. They don't count. Not everybody was military. Everybody was rules by military..sigh. How many times do i need to point this out?
Hi steemit users i thought i would share how steemit is doing against reddit its competition
https://steemit.com/steemit/@newmarket65/steemit-is-stealing-traffic-from-reddit#@tournego/re-newmarket65-steemit-is-stealing-traffic-from-reddit-20170625t125733050z
follow me i will follow you
Once again, the implications are terrifying.
Everytime one reads @kyriacos' posts:
Well done!
Follow: Done.
Upvote: Done.
Resteem Done.
Kindly follow
your now upvoted and followed great
lol. oooohh. so cute
You made my day.
Glad to hear that! Thank you :D
The progress of sciences and adventures into the unknown made me marvel at the possibilities what's out there. Great article, I never had seen it from that perspective.
thank you man
Follow: Done.
Upvote: Done.
Resteem Done.
Kindly follow
I think you've missed the ultimate significance of the replicator for their economy. It's true that Star Trek is a kind of space communism, while North Korea is very obviously an earth-bound communism. What you're missing, though, is the fundamental difference between the two: Star Trek has universal abundance, while North Korea is poor as shit. (I'll premise this by saying that I know the original series only a bit; my view of Star Trek is MUCH more about The Next Generation series.)
If replicators provide whatever people want or need at any given moment, then what you have is universal abundance. Supply and demand become meaningless because scarcity is effectively gone. In that situation, material objects themselves would have far less significance than they do now. Socio-economic class would disappear; there would be no reason to accumulate more material wealth than others, because in theory everyone could just replicate whatever they want. There's no need to have a big house, expensive clothing (nothing would have prices!), fancy food--except in so far as you wanted to have more space in your house, clothing that had certain use or aesthetic qualities, or food with certain flavors or nutritional value. And yes, if you have replicators to do all your work for you, then there is no need to work--or, at least, there's no need for a wage labor market, since there is no scarcity of labor that can be met by trading material objects or exchange value for people's time. There's no incentive to work, and no incentive to employ people.
If we accept that premise of the Star Trek universe, then we also need to adjust our expectations and view of things like what humans actually do with their time. What would be meaningful, desirable, "good" in a universe with abundance? Well, it would be whatever people chose to do at any given moment. Since replicators don't appear capable of making the complex decisions and value judgments required for space exploration, interstellar diplomacy, or art (notice how any chance they get to show leisure time, people are painting, or doing other forms of creative activity?), then humans are free to pursue those. Indeed, it is the pursuit of knowledge itself, or of artistic achievement, or interpersonal relationships that seem to drive human activity in this universe--and that makes perfect sense. If people no longer need to work for wages or basic material survival, then why not set up institutions to allow people to pursue personal happiness and social harmony? What reason could there be for NOT doing that?
This, though, is why you're totally wrong about the comparison to North Korea. It's true enough that money is not particularly important in either the Star Trek universe or the North Korean economy. But while Star Trek has solved the problem of scarcity, North Korea manifestly has NOT. So the motivations, nature, and effects of doing without a market economy are about as different as you can possibly get. I agree that there's a superficial similarity, but all it is is superficial.
Let me acknowledge that there's a fundamental contradiction, or perhaps a misrepresentation or ambiguity, in how the Star Trek universe's economy works. On the one hand, you have replicators, which apparently provide universal abundance. On the other hand, everywhere you go, you see commerce, and various kinds of work: farming, mining, and the like. These ARE contradictory, because if every society has replicators, then in theory each society would have all the things it could possibly want, and there would be no scarcities of items to create demand. Certainly there'd be no reason to transport goods from one planet to another, since replicators in each place could just produce whatever you wanted. So, the Star Trek economy is an awkward mixture of things that make sense and things that don't.
Finally, you dropped some casual anti-semitism in your post: "the Ferengi, the space Jews, were greedy and only cared about money." You moan at the end about people believing "the meme," whatever that's supposed to mean; the meme of Jews as uniquely money-grubbing is one of the oldest memes of European society. So you've apparently bought that one. And, since casual anti-semitism is based on bullshit, you can take that and shove it up your ass. Don't be a prick needlessly.
This guy gets it. I want a reply to this post, @kyriacos.
Both of you need to understand that it is a militaristic body of governance that has control over all resources. It is the etymology of totalitarian dictatorship under a socialist political system.
Every country claims its army is for "defence" purposes, even today, much like in Star Trek. What one country "SAIS" it is or represents and what it "DOES" are entirely different things. Everyone is judged from their actions, not their words.
I know, its hard to digest but do it. It's pathetic to lose every single argument you enter.
"has control over all resources. "
This is the problem. The hypothetical star trek world (which, again, I concede is unrealistic and saccharine in this regard) has little more control over all resources than the US government has control over all grains of sand. Energy is so plentiful that economy is not needed. Energy is the grains of sand.
"What one country "SAIS" it is or represents and what it "DOES" are entirely different things."
Yeah, except, the Federation DOES WHAT IT SAYS in the show with few exceptions, making this point meaningless.
"It's pathetic to lose every single argument you enter."
Desperate projection. These comments will embarrass you later, and reflect on you in the block-chain forever.
But it is needed. It controls literally everything. If it was not needed it would not have existed. We even see abuse of power plenty of times in many episodes (even in the recent movies).
Not really. The Federation in many instances had militaristic ambitions and the crew intervened. Picard and even Janeway got arrested and/or got in trouble for intervening with the federation's ambitions.
maybe but so far you are appearing desperate. you decided to enter this debate on false grounds based on your sourness from last time. Anyways. do go on.
"We even see abuse of power plenty of times in many episodes (even in the recent movies)."
True, but I don't see how it proves your article true. In fact, it sort of does the opposite. The abuses of power are so rare, and so neatly wrapped up with a happy ending (like only a TV show can provide), that it really just shows how far the Federation is from NK. It's the least banana-republic government of all time.
It is worth noting that the new movies take place in an alternate universe (I think), so they would be a separate discussion from the main Star Trek series, which is all in one universe. I don't know the new movies so well, it is possible everything you say is true in the movies, but I am only discussing the TV show.
"you decided to enter this debate on false grounds based on your sourness from last time. "
More projection. Take this discussion to 10 third parties and they will tell you that you are losing badly because you refuse to respond to the cited facts, and instead rely on unsupported ad hominem. You ignore the fact that I praise your artwork, or your comments that are good, and reduce your data size to fit your preconceived feelings.'
You should focus on your art, as you are much better at that than civil discourse.
Again I ask you to reconcile your statement that all Federation civilians must go through the academy. It is provably false. I have given you several counter examples that are not debatable. Respond or retract.
I said plenty of times. No need to list the all. It nearly destroyed the planet once. also, they had absolute power on earth. hard to be challenged by anyone. NK has a banana republic as well. I mean, who is going to go against it?
responded to each and every one. Btw, your assumptions are not facts. They are just assumptions that they have been proven false. :)
nonetheless. do try again.
never said that. I actually dare you to copy-paste where I said that. I simply said that everybody who wanted to join the explorative missions had to join the academy and that it was the highest ground of recognition.
I am responsible for what I say, not what you think I say so you can make an argument. Better get back to studying basic economics. Try Thomas Sowell.
"militaristic body of governance "
Define this term. Is it any governing body with a military? Because, if you don't define it that way (and I sure don't), the Federation is not one. It has a civilian president.
All the resources and decisions are taken from a governing body that controls everything. They have all the weapons. All the power.
Which was time after time irrelevant. The decisions were taken from the military. In one episode he couldn't even Veto without some majority support.
"These ARE contradictory, because if every society has replicators, then in theory each society would have all the things it could possibly want, and there would be no scarcities of items to create demand. Certainly there'd be no reason to transport goods from one planet to another, since replicators in each place could just produce whatever you wanted. "
I think I can clear this up as written, but I'm not saying that makes them credible possibilities in real life.
The reasons for what you pointed out are that only the Federation (and some other races, independently) have replicators. Most do not, so they still have more typical economies. All races have pretty strict rules about sharing technology. The Federation in particular does not do it because of the "prime directive"; they do not want to alter the normal evolution of other societies. Other, more hostile, races do not do it out of power.
It's probably also worth pointing out that replicators are more like ultra-cheap energy, rather than free. They do create an energy drain on the reactor of anywhere they are used. You can see this in the Voyager series, when they often need to shut them down due to being unable to refuel the ship.
Anyway, that's the explanation given that resolves the issues you point out.
Money, oddly enough, you mostly see with the Ferengi, despite them having replicators. I suppose they felt that was necessary to create a caricature race to use as a foil for the Federation. You occasionally see Starfleet officers using currency, but only with other races. Sort like how US paratroopers had foreign currency and gold in their drop packs.
I may watch too much Star Trek...
Ah, okay, that makes a lot more sense! Yes, you've definitely watched more Star Trek than I have, and probably more recently as well.
I recall that energy was a problem, but what about the manufacture of replicators themselves? Do we know if replicators could make more replicators?
They had these things called industrial sized replicators that were necessary for constructing super large objects (or even moderately sized ones, like other replicators, which were sort of appliance-sized). They had these at Earth, on shipyards, etc. They were powered off of reactors that may have been too large to fit on a ship, I'm not sure.
In some cases, ships had to replicate huge stores of items for emergencies, like medical supplies. This would lead to power drains that required them to refuel with "dilithium crystals" at a port. Under normal operation, a ship wouldn't need to refuel more often than...I dunno, maybe a year or two, but serious replicator load could cut that time substantially.
Given that replicators produced items almost instantaneously, the only advantage to making more replicators was to slightly speed that process up. They still need to be attached to something like a reactor. I never saw a portable replicator in any of the series, they are always attached to a ship or a reactor at an installation.
That's super interesting--so what we have, then, is an economy in which there are just a few potential bottlenecks: dilithium crystals for energy (for both production and transportation), the large size, limited number, and limited locations of industrial replicators, and then the fairly minor limitations of small replicators for meeting everyday human needs. And, as long as those limitations are overcome by securing a supply of dilithium crystals and managing industrial replicators, the rest of human needs are met: space communism, indeed.
Presumably there are also some things that replicators couldn't do. I recall Whoopi Goldberg having to mix cocktails with a particularly delicate touch, because (apparently) replicators couldn't produce something so volatile. So it did still make sense to have "service" jobs. I don't recall things like haircuts or childcare coming up much, but I suppose those would also be things that relied on humans, and thus would have to be organized in some way.
This has been a great conversation, by the way. Thanks.
Yeah, you can't really replicate a "Flaming Moe" too well. It's all about the process, not the result.
Dilithium crystals also seem to be so hyper-efficient that acquiring them only seems to be a problem if a ship is stranded far from a port for literally years.
By the way, there's another good comment thread going below.
Interesting analogies here. But I disagree that North Korea would be able to lead the world, even with resources and power. North Korea is a dysfunctional state that can barely afford to feed its own people. They also can't seem to develop reliable missile technology, as the last few months have shown. Nonetheless, interesting concept. Props!
North Korea is a tiny, poor and hungry country. America need North Korea and terrorists to scare the shit out of their own people and steal taxpayers money for military spending. And sheeple are happy.
exactly
Well, if they had resources they would be able to feed their people.
or so our news wants us to believe.
Yeah, just news, politicians already know.
Where is your evidence that they are not, technologically, 50 years behind us or more?
there is no sufficient evidence either way but if they can make USA take them seriously, I suppose they are not.
I would be interested if we could locate some credible evidence here, as I distrust the media by default. However, I do not have boots on the ground in Asia so I know my limitations of knowledge in this area.
It does seem pretty clear they are strongly regressive in NK, and we have plenty of first-hand reports that do not contradict it. Heck, we're even sending Dennis Rodman over there.
Nobody knows what goes on there. Nonetheless a nuclear missile, is a nuclear missile.
Agreed. Any country's threats should be taken seriously. Who knows who could have a bomb?
Follow: Done.
Upvote: Done.
Resteem Done.
Kindly follow
Will we buy into the meme once again?
I have no idea what "we" will do.
Sure we will. We always do.
nobody does
Follow: Done.
Upvote: Done.
Resteem Done.
Kindly follow
I thought this was in the tag "funny" then saw fiction! Still laughing!
North Korea is Best Korea
i run out of tags :)
Finally someone who understands me...lol!
I've been a big Star Trek fan all my life, but the older I get, the more I find I cannot stomach the socioeconomic setup it presents as desirable. I find it easy to forgive a tv show or a movie when it simplifies things (it isn't easy to depict a society in all its subtlety and sofistication), but I can't stand it when they ignore human nature or abolish it by some tv decree!
There's a bigger chance of selfish cowboys in space as depicted in Firefly than of a clean cut, uniformed civilization of leftists intervening benevolently (and efficiently?!) throughout the universe.
Thx for a great post!
P.S. When it comes to economics and socio-psychological insights and realism, Battlestar Galactica kicks Star Treks butt! :)
Yeap, BG is red-pilled as fuck
True dat!
Star Trek definitely plays a role in the modern day world. I mean, how many of us are just like the characters on Star Trek, but in a metaphorical way? For example, the clingons are like people from other countries who come here and try to start new lives. Referencing the leader of North Korea is kinda like the rulers of other planets getting into it with Captain Kirk.
Are we all just waiting to be beamed up by the starship enterprise? Maybe..
I think the author might know a lot about Star Trek but very little about North Korea. North Korea is a totalitarian state organized in a socialist way. It's sole purpose is to continue the Kim dynasty into the future against what it calls aggressive outside interference. Socialism might have been the primary goal of society in the 1950s under the first Kim, but now it's a military first society. It would be better to compare and contrast the Next Generation series with modern day North Korea in my opinion. However it's an excellent thought experiment. Thanks for posting! :)
Isn't Star Trek a military first society that arms space ships for "defensive" purposes? :)
Perhaps later it was military first although I can't find direct mention of it online. (Always open to correction of course) The Prime Directive would seem to prohibit most types of militarism at least in the earlier shows. I'm not quite as familiar with more recent shows though. :P
Did you ever watch the show? It explicitly states they are for EXPLORATION purposes and they only fire if fired on first. That's literally the definition of defensive.
Do you just prefer to avoid facts whenever you write posts?
Yeah, watched it many times actually, over and over again.
I did mention in the post that they claimed they were doing it for exploration purposes. Thing is, their actions showed otherwise. E.g deep space nine was not about exploration. Also the earth central ministry often has other plans and had to obey due to the militaristic nature.
Also. Elephant in the room. Defensive people don't need to wear uniforms. :)
Do you have it a mission to just rant against all my posts just because you lost a debate? It's kind childish to chase me around.
The Star trek universe is completely unrealistic. Look at the technology we have today and the technology we are currently developing.
People are not going to be flying around the glaxay in spaceships. They're not going to be Captain Kirk or Captain Picard or even any other crew member, they're going to be the ship's computer.
The direction of technological progress should make this evident. We're working towards virtualising society and are at least half way through that process. That's the pen-ultimate stage in a larger transition from biological humans to synthetic humans that are capable of living in any environment with adequate shielding and power. The first thing those synths (which will also include AGIs) are going to do is build a Matrioshka brain around the Sun to harvest the solar energy to power themselves.
We'll spread to other stars and build a network of Matrioshka brains which will ultimately connect the entire galaxy.
Further evidence of how unrealistic Star Trek is, Holodecks exist yet people don't live in them.
too much science fiction still mate :)
It about as much science fiction as claiming that homes will become self-sufficient energy wise as people install renewable technologies and batteries.
We've already created synthetic neurons that replicate the functionality of biological ones and can communicate with them. We've already got life support systems that can keep people alive for decades. We've already got neural interfaces that allow people to control technology with their thoughts and send rudimentary communications to other peoples brains and even control their bodies. We've got Elon Musk talking about creating neural laces and creating Neuralink to do so and teaming up Kernel to pursue that goal. We've got Gabe Newell talking about incorporating brain-computer interfaces into VR headsets and we've also got a Russian billionaire who is determined to become a synthetic immortal by 2050. DARPA are also half way through a 4 year project that's going to make neural interfaces 100x more accurate.
Like I said, given our current technologies and the direction of our research, it's quite obvious that were heading for synthetic immortality and we're likely to reach that goal this century.
The only biological humans that will still exist 200 years from now will all be religious fanatics too afraid to step up and become gods themselves.
not nerly a parallelism. you can't just bring up any innovation and claim that if that is done, anything will be done..come on.
In the 1960's we got people speaking about Moon colonies in 20 years. How come it did not happen?
Possibly but we are more or less 300 years away (minimum) . not as close as one might think.
religion is the product of death. once death is conquered religion will perish along with it. same applies to philosophy.
If a species creates the transistor, they're going to create an Internet too if they keep progressing as it's the logical progression of the technology.
Because it was completely impractical and uneconomical to do so. Transitioning to a synthetic species is neither.
If you truly think that, you're going to be utterly gobsmacked by how fast society changes over the next couple of decades. Google this stuff and see what the experts in those fields are saying. It's far closer to being 30 years away than it is 300 years. You think it's 300 years away because you think technology is progressing at a linear rate but it isn't, it's progressing at a exponential rate.
you simply can't know this even if it makes sense logically.
space and immortality are pretty much the same thing. Why explore a deadly void? why live forever? fear of death is a religious concept btw. Q had the right idea.
said every single futurist of every era. You believe too much sci-fi bro.
news are sensational bro. don't be so gullible.
It was. the transistor might have been going on an exponential rate but we kind hit a benchmark now.
Bravo! You came up with this comparison all by yourself? Very interesting mind you have. I would have to say that there seems to be loads of hidden massages all throughout TV and movies or are there really? I do see exactly what you are describing and you could very well be right. Let's hope there's an alternate ending. Enjoyed.
Yeap, been thinking about it for some time now. thank you
Hmm that's a good comparison but at the same time I'd hate to live like that.
well yeah, this is what I am explaining in the article
I'm agreeing with you 😀
I love sci-FI .. best movies..
cucumbers
Interesting stuff :D
which stuff? :D
Fascinating idea to compare North Korea to Star Trek. But I can see the parallels. That was the old North Korea. Kim Joong IL is changing the story to Star Wars though ... followed you to learn more interesting concepts from you.
lol. thank you i guess? :)
star trek will always have a very dear position in my heart, it's sci-fi and promise i've grown up with. it touches so many facets of the ideals and lifestyle i live today.
Indeed it does, but it also touches some ...other things... inappropriately
Interesting article, Thanks 100% upvoted @chanthasam
thank you man
Star Trek might have had something to contribute to the rise of popularity for socialist and communist ideas in the west right now.
It has to do indeed. Collectivist authoritative ideals are always pushed when it comes to "advancement"
Όλα είναι μια συνωμοσια, η κυβέρνηση ευθύνεται για όλα. :0
Είναι μια παγίδα :O
:'D καλώστους
check me post out peeeps <3
https://steemit.com/foodforthought/@dwehji/is-it-though
This stuff will make you think. :)
Oh, no! :0
λολ
Well... until they get to Deep Space 9 and have to trade with the Frengi and then we learn that everyone is a capitalist.
;)
LOL very funny and crazy analogy... Although there is not a supreme god leader in Star Trek like there is in NK, and i think this is the central point in every socialist system in the world... There always have to be a supreme leader...
No supreme leader figure in the way you describe in Scandinavia but man o man are we ever socialist!
It has the central earth assembly. it controls all the resources and orders the militaristic/explorative endeavours.
Yep, but power and fanaticism is not concentrated into one man figure, that is what really fucks up every real life socialism...
one figure..one all power governing body. what's the difference?
Very much difference, you probably never lived in one of this countries (i do), and fanaticism concentrated in one person is highly poisoning, well, at least is what i think from my experience...
Thought provoking post, timely in that I am now watching the series and have had many similar thoughts and other insights into the thought process of the screenwriters.
thank you. what do you think about its political structure?
Socialism and earth figures out all its problems. Never thought about like that.
So some a dream and others a night mirror.
The implementation of a functional moneyless society cannot achieved through central planning thats what I think the society in Star Trek was made to convey.However I don't think we should dismiss the idea of a moneyless society as merely leninist socialist and somehow North Korea is the only example of that.
Humans need individuality. There has to be some kind of measure. otherwise nothing matter. nothing has value.
Human individuality is needed but that does not necessarily mean we need money as a measure of individuality.
I can see the similarities. I could never really get into Star Trek - and I am a huge Science Fiction fan. I do like the movies - which most Star Trek fans hate.
you are seeing through the media induced false understanding of North Korea and i appreciate your sharing it
Everyone in the world can see it, except muricans.
@kyriacos
love the comparison between Star-Trek and North Korea when it comes to money but why do you think so if i may ask...
Nice post as always....love your narratives
Korea runs on coupons...Star Trek on replicators. same thing. Zero value on anything.
That's not even remotely the same thing. One has unlimited energy and has no need to assign value, the other is on a rationing system due to too little value.
They both effectively abolished value in their own way. The end result is the exact same. In the same way if one has all the money in the world, they have nothing. If everyone has the same amount of money/value then nobody has anything.
i can't believe I need to teach you economics as well.
How can you think economics applies in a system with no trade? All items are free in the Federation.
You are the one being misled by applying rules that make no sense (even in today). If you think modern Keynesian economics is some sort of discipline to appeal to the authority of, you're on the wrong website.
If you mean another, saner economics, such as Austrian, then specify instead of applying ad hominem with no knowledge of my expertise. I have a master's in this area - which is enough to say that most modern economics is nonsense, so you had better specify.
Nothing is free, anywhere. Humans have value. Expertise has value. Also, humanity seems to trade with other races. Also we witnessed plenty of times on enterprise people hiding drugs, making handcraft gifts, exchanging things of sentimental value for favors, and ofcourse, like in every other oppressive society, smuggling things in for trade from other races.
I also believe that most economics are nonsense. Economics are not science. We got that on the previous thread.
What I am referring here is the value of human beings as individuals — hence why in the Star Trek universe is measured by military rank. We notice plenty of times that the Enterprise for example was getting renowned scientists, poets..etc..all of whom where distinguished on Earth. They also had to go through the military academy for basic training. all of them.
again. Totalitarian Socialism.
also. please. stop flashing your degree. it is pointless. Papers can be bought. Also something we have discussed.
"They also had to go through the military academy for basic training. all of them."
Ok, this is absolutely false, and that is what I have been saying all along. They DID NOT go through the academy. Look it up. Jake Sisko didn't. Noonian Soong didn't. There are tons more examples. This demonstrates that the claim "they all did" is false. The academy was only for those who WANTED to be Starfleet personnel. Please respond directly to these facts, stop dodging them.
". please. stop flashing your degree. "
Pointing out once, that I have a master's in the area you implied I was an idiot in, is not "flashing my degree". This is intellectually dishonest enough to qualify as ad-hominem.
Literally opposite situations!
Now I get it. Thanks once more. Am learning everyday on steemit!
if you have all the money in the world (e.g abundance of resources through replicator) or have none (North Korea) the end economic and political result is the same. Everyone is treated the same with no value and one can rise only through ranks of the military since it is a functional totalitarianism that cares about the group and not individuals.
you are right and they use brainwashing to subjugate citizens into perpetual servitude...what a shame...
North Korea is a dictatorship wearing a republication coat. The Karl Marx dream maybe realized someday, but only after the tremendous economic development like in Star Trek word, not under the coercive control of a government.
well,...that's a long shot
Follow: Done.
Upvote: Done.
Resteem Done.
Kindly follow
I am holding a device created from the concepts known as nkorea and star trek.
Interesting analysis of Star Trek! I'm going to have to think about this and maybe rewatch the beginning if the series.The comparison does make sence though.
An interesting read, strangely accurate in some aspects, it may be fitting to include the 'conspiracy' tag XD
Great post, I will follow you, hard stuff to find! I hope you keep posting si I don't get bored with all the meningless posts on steemit :P
:) thank you
Hi @kyriacos! I'm curious, where are you from? You have some interesting perspectives.
Cyprus
A big warm Steemit Sunday greeting goes out to you Kyriacos! :-D
Upvoted and High Pawed!
Plus Bonus. :-)
Flatrider
hahhaa. i have a black cat too. good Sunday to you too sir
Thank you dear Sir! :-D
you are welcome!
This is awesome!!!! It is really interesting to see the difference between how something ends up in the imagination compared to how it plays out in real life.
yeap!
Congratulations @kyriacos
You took 55 place in my Top 100 of posts
communism isnt negative how the fuck is infinte abundance for everyone negative? sharing is caring!