Star Fleet Dictatorship

[Tommy J]

Did it ever bother you that Starfleet seems to permeate virtually every part of Earth's society as depicted on Next Gen forward?

Starfleet was:

-- The only advisor's that the Federation President seems to have was SF personnel. Except for on ST VI, the Romulan Ambassador of all people.

-- The only police force as shown on Paradise Lost was SF personnel in the streets.

-- Starfleet is the only body responsible for building orbital habitats.

-- Starfleet is the sole arbiter on what happens to pre-warp societies.

-- Starfleet decides on how weapons are deployed without civilian over-site.

-- Admiral Leyton was able to take over the 'civilian' government with one Excelsior class ship and disrupt the the entire planet's power grid with cadets.

-- Starfleet even seems to control the court systems.

This just seems like a lot of power that is given to a military organization with little civilian over site. They would have us believe that JW Bush being the only elected civilian would be surrounded by General, Admiral, Col.'s etc. wielding unbelievable autonomy over power from everything in society from building homes to making strategy during wartime.

Personally, I'd be very uncomfortable with a single organization with that much uncontrolled authority and lacking check and balances.

[Darth Wong]

There is never any sense of checks and balances on Starfleet except for the President as depicted in ST6 (and who seems to be able to make unilateral decisions with no input from any other governing body). The people who write Star Trek don't seem to get the whole idea of checks and balances.

[Stravo]

There is never any sense of checks and balances on Starfleet except for the President as depicted in ST6 (and who seems to be able to make unilateral decisions with no input from any other governing body). The people who write Star Trek don't seem to get the whole idea of checks and balances.

The people in Star Trek don't have any idea how a government works at all. In the TNG era and beyond there is a staggering lack of simple political concepts. Its al about ultimate power in the hands of a few, hell a Starfleet Captain was able to trash the Klingon Federation alliance in a single act without reprecussions.

In the TOS there was a definate tension between the military and the civilian branches of Starfleet represented best when a diplomat was brought on board or in Trouble with Tribbles when a civilian beauracrat ran roughshod over the Enterprise and Kirk's command.

In TNG there is no sense of civilian government. Any coup attempt by Starfleet would be automatically successful and in fact it seems that the only balance to Starfleet's power is its own sense of honor not to simply topple the civilian government. There's no balance at all - for instance There's never any mention of pursestrings controlling the flow of starships into the fleet. When ships are lost at Wolf 359 there's only the concern of lives lost no thought to "Holy fuck that's 16 trillion credits floating out there. How will we pay to rebuild those lost ships?" Never any thought "Why are we constantly building new ship classes? The Federation can't afford that - upgun a Galaxy class and be done with it."

Imagine B&B trying to portray the politcal machinations in Neo BSG using their Trek logic. It would appalling to say the least.

[Tommy J]

In TNG there is no sense of civilian government. Any coup attempt by Starfleet would be automatically successful and in fact it seems that the only balance to Starfleet's power is its own sense of honor not to simply topple the civilian government. There's no balance at all - for instance There's never any mention of pursestrings controlling the flow of starships into the fleet. When ships are lost at Wolf 359 there's only the concern of lives lost no thought to "Holy fuck that's 16 trillion credits floating out there. How will we pay to rebuild those lost ships?" Never any thought "Why are we constantly building new ship classes? The Federation can't afford that - upgun a Galaxy class and be done with it."

Imagine B&B trying to portray the political machinations in Neo BSG using their Trek logic. It would appalling to say the least.

The writers, at least until DS9 with Paradise Lost or Insurrection with the Baku would have us believe that StarFleet is comprised with completely benevolent military leadership and one elected civilian, the President [excluding the Federation council which doesn't seem to meet on a regular basis and regardless isn't representative by 100% of Fed members]

I don't know what the writers were thinking. They don't portray an even quasi realistic society. At least in SW, there is a Senate of elected civilians.

[Darth Wong]

I like the way the President in "Paradise Lost" somehow ceded all control of the entire Federation over to Admiral Leyton the instant he enacted martial law. How the fuck does that work?

[Montcalm]

In TNG there is no sense of civilian government. Any coup attempt by Starfleet would be automatically successful and in fact it seems that the only balance to Starfleet's power is its own sense of honor not to simply topple the civilian government. There's no balance at all - for instance There's never any mention of pursestrings controlling the flow of starships into the fleet. When ships are lost at Wolf 359 there's only the concern of lives lost no thought to "Holy fuck that's 16 trillion credits floating out there. How will we pay to rebuild those lost ships?" Never any thought "Why are we constantly building new ship classes? The Federation can't afford that - upgun a Galaxy class and be done with it."

Well as Picard says to Lilly in FC *The economics of the 24th century is different*......i wonder how different

[Alyeska]

It would appear that the Federation is industrialy and resource rich. Their primary problems stem from politics. The federation has the ability to use relatively vast power, but not the capability to use it. Just look at what their bloody first flight Galaxy class could do compared to dedicated warships in the Klingon and Romulan empires.

[Spacebeard]

My speculation is that Starfleet gained vast political power between TOS itself and the TOS movies due to an increased Klingon threat and never relinquished it.

Notice that in ST VI, when the Commander in Chief (who isn't the Federation president, of course) announces the disarmament of Starfleet's border outposts, he is asked if this means "the end of Starfleet"; he nervously replies that their "scientific programs" will ensure their continued existence. Later on, of course, we learn that a cabal of Starfleet and Klingon officers plans to disrupt the peace negotiations. Preserving political power for Starfleet would be a plausible motivation for their plots.

I'd guess that after ST VI, they used "scientific programs" as an excuse to continue pouring resources into ship construction, producing huge ponderous space hotels like the Galaxy class and issuing propaganda praising their great explorers (wasn't Picard supposed to be something of a celebrity during TNG?).

This is only based on tenuous interpretation of dialogue, of course, but it's consistent with the fact that we see near-total military dominance of the Federation starting with the TOS movies, and with ST VI's implication that Starfleet's primary mission is to hold back the Klingons, which is not an impression we get from TOS.

[Uraniun235]

Given that Roddenberry speculated a mere six Galaxy class starships with another six spaceframes held in reserve, I would suspect that probably all of the Galaxy commanders were celebrity captains to some degree.

We know that the Federation Council holds at least some authority over Starfleet, as the Briar Patch operation was supposedly sanctioned by them, and the Warp 5 speed limit was imposed by them.

I don't know what the writers were thinking. They don't portray an even quasi realistic society. At least in SW, there is a Senate of elected civilians.

TOS Journey to Babel suggests that the Council is less like a legislative body and more like a bunch of Ambassadors that get together every so often to discuss Federation-wide issues.

I think the Federation makes more sense if we consider it less as a strong federal government and more as a close alliance with a common defense force that all members contribute to either directly (i.e. they can put up their own ships for their defense and to patrol their local space-lanes) or through contributions to a fund that Starfleet draws from for power-projection forces. Starfleet starship schematics may be available for use by member worlds, and outdated starships like the Miranda may be available for purchase.

This would help to explain such issues as... (speculation follows)

...how Starfleet itself can get away with having such a small standing fleet (as seen in TNG),
...why force projection is such an issue for them: the Cardassians seemed to be positioned near a border of the Federation with mostly colonies which would be unable to adequately defend themselves, which other worlds would not desire to contribute ships to the defense of, and to whom the over-stretched Starfleet could barely afford protection themselves.
...how the Feds managed to pull together large fleets so quickly for the Dominion War (member worlds contributed their starships - which I suspect would include the Steamrunner as a newer ship and the Mirandas as older ships) while Picard was unable to rally more than ~20 ships IIRC for his Klingon border blockade and when the best Starfleet could offer against the Scimitar was a paltry six ship task force.

Also, while it is utterly non-canon, I think the game Klingon Academy made a very interesting speculation that the Federation may not be so closely-knit, that it in fact would be vulnerable to being politically split apart (or at least politically crippled) by a properly executed war campaign.

Note that this is a plausible outcome of the Federation's past; the Federation was formed back when star travel was expensive and limited, and when member worlds would remain very autonomous. It's entirely possible that, even though advancing FTL technologies made the Federation members "closer" to each other, they would elect to remain largely autonomous, retaining as much sovereignty as they could.

[SCVN 2812]

It was the Federation council though that handled the trial of Kirk and crew after that little international incident in ST III and IV.

You know one meeting with what is likely to be the Federation equivalent of the Joint Chiefs doesn't automatically mean the President has no advisers for non-military matters. The officers in question were meeting with the President specifically to pitch their rescue plan for Kirk and McCoy. Advising the President to send in troops and blow stuff up is generally what military advisers do.

Considering Kirk had been arrested and accused of assassinating the executive of a nation the Federation had been in a cold war with for decades, can you blame the President for not having his agricultural or commercial advisers present? Sarek, a civilian, seems to be the Federation's Secretary of State, seeing as he is their ambassador at large and routinely advising pretty much everyone on what to do diplomatically.

[Spacebeard]

Sarek, a civilian, seems to be the Federation's Secretary of State, seeing as he is their ambassador at large and routinely advising pretty much everyone on what to do diplomatically.

I thought that Sarek's official title was Vulcan Ambassador to the Federation; which supports the interpretation of the Federation as a loose alliance. Either way, he's never explicitly identified as a part of the central Federation government, only as a Vulcan diplomat. Considering that the Romulan ambassador was also present at some meetings during ST VI, seeing Sarek in the same room as the Federation President doesn't mean that he holds a ministerial or cabinet post.

[Darth Wong]

Considering Kirk had been arrested and accused of assassinating the executive of a nation the Federation had been in a cold war with for decades, can you blame the President for not having his agricultural or commercial advisers present? Sarek, a civilian, seems to be the Federation's Secretary of State, seeing as he is their ambassador at large and routinely advising pretty much everyone on what to do diplomatically.

You're missing the point. It's not a matter of having "advisors present"; that would do nothing to alter the fact that he makes decisions like this unilaterally. There is no voting process, no political dispute, no intrigue, nothing. Just one man whose word is final.

[TheDarkling]

You're missing the point. It's not a matter of having "advisors present"; that would do nothing to alter the fact that he makes decisions like this unilaterally. There is no voting process, no political dispute, no intrigue, nothing. Just one man whose word is final.

That isn't really different to how we see the US president often portrayed in film or on TV, in a crisis situation the executive makes the decisions.

If the President was unilaterally amending laws and the like I could understand but setting foreign policy and declaring martial law off his own back is nothing I haven't seen a fictional US president do many times.

[Darth Wong]

You're missing the point. It's not a matter of having "advisors present"; that would do nothing to alter the fact that he makes decisions like this unilaterally. There is no voting process, no political dispute, no intrigue, nothing. Just one man whose word is final.

That isn't really different to how we see the US president often portrayed in film or on TV, in a crisis situation the executive makes the decisions.

I haven't seen that many movies in which the US President made a completely unilateral binding decision unless the country was under martial law. Could you provide an example?

If the President was unilaterally amending laws and the like I could understand but setting foreign policy and declaring martial law off his own back is nothing I haven't seen a fictional US president do many times.

In ST6, the state was not under martial law. And my point about martial law in "Paradise Lost" was not that he could declare it, but that for some reason, declaring martial law automatically made Admiral Leyton the unilateral ruler.

[Alyeska]

Almost as if Martial law automaticaly gives the senior military commander authority.

Chalk it up to writer ignorance.

[Uraniun235]

The Roddenberry edict in TOS that speculation on the precise nature of the government of Earth was forbidden probably did not help the current situation either.

[TheDarkling]

I haven't seen that many movies in which the US President made a completely unilateral binding decision unless the country was under martial law. Could you provide an example?

The President in the Day after Tomorrow decides upon an evacuation plan, on his say so (although he does listen to about 3 minutes of advice from various people he makes the call).
The President in Independence Day decides what the US response to the invaders will be off his own back (first to not evacuate, then to evacuate, after that point it becomes beside the point because the bulk of the government is dead but initially he is calling all the shots).
The President on 24 orders military action then suspends it off his own back.
He also directs events when a biological threat presents itself.
The current President on 24 orders military action (including the potential death of his Secretary of Defence) off his own back.
The President on Stargate decides upon Earth's response to an alien attack (including the vaporisation of an Aircraft carrier battle group).

All these people are doing is directing foreign affairs and the military which is all we seen the President in Trek do (the President decides what to do with the Klingons, whether to give the go ahead to a military mission, whether to declare martial law, what to do in an environmental crisis and so on).

In ST6, the state was not under martial law. And my point about martial law in "Paradise Lost" was not that he could declare it, but that for some reason, declaring martial law automatically made Admiral Leyton the unilateral ruler.

It didn't, Jaresh Inyo was still commander in Chief of the military and could issue orders, what gave Leyton his power was that he had troops deployed across Earth and he was overseeing their disposition.

[Stark]

Its a fascinating idea - the Federation so dominated the AQ that the military sponsors, designs and builds huge quasi-scientific warships for their 'scientific programs'. The Enterprise is the flagship, an explorer, certainly not a battleship they say to the Federation civilians. Their technological and economic advantages allowed them to build larger, less focussed designs while still maintaining hegemony.

It would have gone wrong somewhere though - the lie was believed by Starfleet personell in the TNG era, and Starfleet started actually becoming a scientific arm. It's still a compelling rationale for SF during the ST6-TNG era, however.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Does the Federation have a version of the Bureaucratic Civil Service?

[Setzer]

Usually military juntas allocate a lot of resources to the military. That just goes to show, in the UFP even the military dictators are anti-war.

How pathetic is that?

[Tommy J]

The President in the Day after Tomorrow decides upon an evacuation plan, on his say so (although he does listen to about 3 minutes of advice from various people he makes the call).
The President in Independence Day decides what the US response to the invaders will be off his own back (first to not evacuate, then to evacuate, after that point it becomes beside the point because the bulk of the government is dead but initially he is calling all the shots).
The President on 24 orders military action then suspends it off his own back.
He also directs events when a biological threat presents itself.
The current President on 24 orders military action (including the potential death of his Secretary of Defence) off his own back.
The President on Stargate decides upon Earth's response to an alien attack (including the vaporisation of an Aircraft carrier battle group).

All these people are doing is directing foreign affairs and the military which is all we seen the President in Trek do (the President decides what to do with the Klingons, whether to give the go ahead to a military mission, whether to declare martial law, what to do in an environmental crisis and so on).

You realize this is Hollywood right? Even during 9/11 GW Bush was surrounded by civilian advisers; Cheney, Rice et al. For all intensive purposes NY City was under martial law as well yet Guiliani was still in charge. In ST however it would seem that even during non-crisis periods Starfleet has complete and unchallenged authority with little or no civilian oversight. Would you want to live in such a society where ONE organization is so pervasive throughout the culture, infra structure, entertainment, and society at large?

[TheDarkling]

You realize this is Hollywood right?

That isn't really different to how we see the US president often portrayed in film or on TV, in a crisis situation the executive makes the decisions.

Even during 9/11 GW Bush was surrounded by civilian advisers; Cheney, Rice et al. For all intensive purposes NY City was under martial law as well yet Guiliani was still in charge.

You're missing the point. It's not a matter of having "advisors present"; that would do nothing to alter the fact that he makes decisions like this unilaterally.

Tommy J: Do try to keep up, what you are raising has either been discussed already or isn't relevant because you are taking posts out of context.

In ST however it would seem that even during non-crisis periods Starfleet has complete and unchallenged authority with little or no civilian oversight.

Would it?
The President runs the show, the Federation council can set policy limiting Starfleet and directs foreign affairs, and the Federation Supreme Court can overrule Starfleet by declaring Starfleet’s actions illegal.

When Picard wants to assemble his blockade, Starfleet has to consult the federation Council for approval, the Cardassian treaty was drawn up by the Federation council and when Picard wishes to look into the issue of not moving them he ask for the Federation Council to convene, the Federation council decides whether to give the Founders the cure for their disease, The Federation council decides which new members can be admitted, the Federation council sets the warp speed limit, the Federation council convenes an emergency session to debate the matter of a Romulan defector and so on… it seems to me that Starfleet has to seek approval form the council and is thus subordinate to them.

Would you want to live in such a society where ONE organization is so pervasive throughout the culture, infra structure, entertainment, and society at large?

Given that it works for them and they seem to have a very high standard of lving I wouldn’t mind living on Earth in the 24th century.

Although I'm not sure Starfleet is all pervasive (certainly more than a modern military but it isn't all controlling).

[Mange]

Well, we have discussed similar issues before (I remember that I've discussed this with The Darkling quite well). One thing that I find remarkable is that we're never told of any organization that is independent from the Federation. It's the Federation Science Council, the Federation News Service etc., no independent interest groups or organizations seems to exist.

[CX]

Hey Tommy J, the next time you start an arguement on your little anti-Trek crusade, try and come up with your own arguement instead of rephrasing from someone else and claiming it as your own.

[Tommy J]

Hey Tommy J, the next time you start an arguement on your little anti-Trek crusade, try and come up with your own arguement instead of rephrasing from someone else and claiming it as your own.

huh? That is a strange coincidence. But that's all it was. I got the idea for this after re-watching Paradise Lost.