Why is a socialist Federation supposed to be a bad thing?

[Praeothmin]

Mr. Oragahn, we do see a lot of mentions of people travelling aboard civilian freighters as well in Trek, so the military isn't present in everything.

And as you pointed out, we do see a lot of Planets who rule themselves even thought they are members of the Federation.

The Federation doesn't only have Military advisers, they also have a lot of Diplomats.
For such a Military oriented government, they use Diplomats a lot.
They are even made fun of because of this by many people, so I really don't think they are the future incarnation of the Soviet Union.

[Who is like God arbour]

Roondar and Praeothmin

• thank you very much.
  
  You took the words right out of my mouth.

[Mr. Oragahn]

There are examples of purely civilian craft going on research missions, there are examples of civilians flying from Earth all the way to DS9 on non-military transports (ok, they where non-federation citizens but they did book passage from Earth). And there are examples of civilian interaction in the goverment. However, because we're watching a series about a bunch of people with military roles we don't see too much of the civilian lifestyle. DS9 shows us a bit more thanks to the Sisko family angle but even that is focussed mostly on a military family.

Here lies the issue. When will we see a major exploration ship under civilian control, with its own UFP military force responding to highly ranking civilians?
We cannot deny the fact that exploration and first contacts are largely achieved via the military, and by military personnel who have the final say when they're more or less on their own.

(It also shows us that civilians in ST get away with quite a bit for a military run state. They sure as hell don't seem intimidated by Starfleet officers and they would have every right to be if the military ran things. Heck, there is even a DS9 episode where the entire point is that a mad admiral tries to impose military control and is fought of by Sisko who basically tells him he's an idiot for trying to do that)

But Sisko is in charge of the station, and was a military man. Of course, the geopolitical importance of DS9 warrants the presence of a military force. DS9 is not a good example, nor represents the majority of Trek.

In short: just because the shows focus on the military doesn't mean the military run things in the ST universe. Compare this with other shows focussing on the military. If I watch M.A.S.H. and base my ideas of USA politics on it I'm going to feel the exact same way - the military must be running the place!

This is not the argument I am making. What I'm saying is that there are places where I'd have expected a lesser military presence.

As too the whole 'weapons monopoly' bit, there are plenty of states all around the world who have the same or even heavier restrictions. Lots of them are considered democracies (The UK plus most of Western Europe for example).

But they still must answer to the civilian government. When ships are sent, they're pure military ship, with a large contingent of military personnel.
Trek messes with that notion by putting whole families and groups of scientists on the line onboard starships under military order when on their own.
The saving grace being that military officers have respectable ethics.

[SailorSaturn13]

Ok. Some Anti-Ignorance Units:
1). Section 31 is NOT security service. It is basically an ILLEGAL GROUP within Starfleet, with no ties to government, comparable to those secret self-justice organisations seen in movies. And it is small, and most people never heard of it.
2). Admiral Ross was NOT judging Bashir's father, he was deciding Bashir's fate. Augments are usually not allowed into Starfleet. Bashir's father however pleaded for him by Ross, and Ross agreed that in exchange of the full guilty plea, Bashir will be allowed to serve further. We don't even know who actually judged Bashir. What we DO know is that a antisocial oerson on Risa can go free because the LOCAL governtment won't try him - implying that Starfleet lacks jurisdiction here.
3) Starfleet is NOT military. Starfleet personnel are scientists, explorers, diplomats and militiamen simultaneously. Chakotay onle tells an OGLA kid that to become a Starfleet officer he studied many things, most non-military. And such a merging is logical, given that most explorations occur into possible hostile territory. When european fleets travelled to new lands they also were often under military command.

[Who is like God arbour]

Here lies the issue. When will we see a major exploration ship under civilian control, with its own UFP military force responding to highly ranking civilians?
We cannot deny the fact that exploration and first contacts are largely achieved via the military, and by military personnel who have the final say when they're more or less on their own.

• It's no ship but a space station: Regula I
• It's also no ship, but a Reserach stattion: Darwin Genetic Research Station at Gagarin IV.
• That's a ship: USS Raven
• And you want a starfleet personel responding to civilians: USS Prometheus

It seems, that there ar enough examples of civilian researchers and explorers.

On the other side, Starfleet is not only the military of the UfP. That's only the secondary task. They understand them self primarily as diplomats, researchers and explorers. Maybe one should consider that. It's not necessary to have a strict disjunction between such organizations.

But Sisko is in charge of the station, and was a military man. Of course, the geopolitical importance of DS9 warrants the presence of a military force. DS9 is not a good example, nor represents the majority of Trek.

Exactly!

This is not the argument I am making. What I'm saying is that there are places where I'd have expected a lesser military presence.

But the problem is, that you are seeing these places only because there are Starfleet personel. The president of the UfP for example may have 99% of his time no Starfleet personal around himself. But we were not shown such times because the cameras is only around Starfleet personal. (Furthermore, it would not be interessting to watch the president to discus financial matters or similar boring things.)

Take Independence Day or Air Force one for example. All the time we see military in the White House. Shall we conclude, that the USA is a military dictatorship? Or may that have to do with the specific situation?

But they still must answer to the civilian government. When ships are sent, they're pure military ship, with a large contingent of military personnel.
Trek messes with that notion by putting whole families and groups of scientists on the line onboard starships under military order when on their own.
The saving grace being that military officers have respectable ethics.

No, Starfleet has not only military purposes. As I have said, that is only the secondary purpose. You should try to think of Starfleet less as military and more as a multi purpose organisation (Diplomacy, Research, Exploration and Military).

Another problem is, that warp capable ships - with or without weapons - have the potential to be realy dangerous. Do you really want, that every Tom, Dick and Harry has a ship with a warp core? It may be necessary to restrict the acces to such ships to people, who have proven to be reliable. After all, also today it is not allowed for everone to drive a car, fly a plane or steer a ship. You have at least to get a license. And you can bet, that even in the most democratic states, the standards will rise, if everyone, who would get a license, would have a potential atomic-bomb under his butt.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Here lies the issue. When will we see a major exploration ship under civilian control, with its own UFP military force responding to highly ranking civilians?
We cannot deny the fact that exploration and first contacts are largely achieved via the military, and by military personnel who have the final say when they're more or less on their own.

• It's no ship but a space station: Regula I
• It's also no ship, but a Reserach stattion: Darwin Genetic Research Station at Gagarin IV.
• That's a ship: USS Raven
• And you want a starfleet personel responding to civilians: USS Prometheus

It seems, that there ar enough examples of civilian researchers and explorers.

On the other side, Starfleet is not only the military of the UfP. That's only the secondary task. They understand them self primarily as diplomats, researchers and explorers. Maybe one should consider that. It's not necessary to have a strict disjunction between such organizations.

Mh, a note about the USS Prometheus. Aside from the horrible wiki links which were invented by the devil, the page says that once again, the ship is under command of a lieutnant commander.
A scientist was assigned to the ship temporarily, for a given mission. I suppose that is where you jump by saying that for this mission, the crew of the USS Prometheus had to obey that scientist?
This would be conceivable.
Really, the problem is that we could go on for hours on this, but the fact remains that ships equipped with weapons are under the direct control of the military, and that civilian influence is, at best, indirect, since it can only come from long range calls from some UFP minister or whatever.

Of course, with so much blurring going on, at some point, you might even wonder what military really means, especially in Trek.

But the problem is, that you are seeing these places only because there are Starfleet personel. The president of the UfP for example may have 99% of his time no Starfleet personal around himself. But we were not shown such times because the cameras is only around Starfleet personal. (Furthermore, it would not be interessting to watch the president to discus financial matters or similar boring things.)

Yes, that I got it, but I moved past this point to adress the microsystem of a ship's populace and who has the final say.
Of course, you could say it's a Starfleet ship, so it's normal that a military officer sieges at the top of the pyramid.

What I'm asking is when did we see a heavily armed spaceship under the command of an UFP civilian, who him/herself may have some military officers to take care of the weapon parts?

No, Starfleet has not only military purposes. As I have said, that is only the secondary purpose. You should try to think of Starfleet less as military and more as a multi purpose organisation (Diplomacy, Research, Exploration and Military).

I don't really think Starfleet is all about military. But I find it awkward that such a society still uses a large percentage of military ships and personnel for exploration and first contact purposes.
Generally, when the army gets involved at some point, it's because something has failed previously.

But, again, the military in Trek seem to have more to do with captains with high ethics commanding sailing ships within a romantic context.

Another problem is, that warp capable ships - with or without weapons - have the potential to be realy dangerous. Do you really want, that every Tom, Dick and Harry has a ship with a warp core?

This is not a good argument. Trek, even more than our contemporary world, is riddled with dangerous stuff largely handled by scientist. We could mention Genesis, but you can also simply look at the use of antimatter.
There's no reason to have the army exclusively keep the main control of this.

It may be necessary to restrict the acces to such ships to people, who have proven to be reliable. After all, also today it is not allowed for everone to drive a car, fly a plane or steer a ship. You have at least to get a license.

Any civilian can do it if shown apt to do so.
Otherwise taxi cabs would be exclusively driven by military personnel, because, you know, cars are dangerous.
Actually, this is a funny thought. Within a society that gets more and more anal retentive and politically correct, you could put a pinch of bad faith here and write a short story like that.

And you can bet, that even in the most democratic states, the standards will rise, if everyone, who would get a license, would have a potential atomic-bomb under his butt.

This is a double standard, because Trek loves to say how their power cores are extremely reliable and durable.
Being in command of a whole ship powered by antimatter shouldn't be the affair of a single person anyway, in that there should, and there will always be a vast array of personnel to condone or condemn certain thoughts or decisions.

The difference with army men and civilians is that the army has that whole chain of command going on which is more stable than a group of civilians bickering on and on. On the other hand, no one really disputes the orders of a president, so I suppose this could be a model replicated to a smaller scale onboard civilian ships, be they powered by antimatter and equipped with a minimal amount of weapons.

[Who is like God arbour]

Mr. Oragahn:

1. I think, that we are basically agreeing. Our differences aren't so big. Correct, Starships with weapons are usually commandeered by trained military personnel. I agree.
   
   But I don't see, where that is bad. I wouldn't want, that every Tom, Dick and Harry can have a tank or a warplane. I think, that ist something only the military should have.
   
   And I'm convinced, that even the most liberal state on this earth has regulations about war weapons.
   
   Where is your problem?
2. The same applies here. Why should civilians have access to war weapons? There are civilian ships. But those with weapons should be under the command of the military.
   
   I don't see a problem.
3. Starfleet is not only not all about military. That's only the secondary role. They use Starfleet ships for exploration and first contact purposes because its the primary role of Starfleet to explore and have first contacts.
   
   That's not awkward but absolutely logical.
   
   Unless one thinks, that it is bad to unite such tasks in one service.
4. And as we have seen, if scientists do handle dangerous stuff, they do it far away from the next settlement. They have not developed Genesis on Earth but in a space lab orbiting a dead planetoid.
   
   A warp capable star ship is with its warp core a potential hazard always and anywhere. And if every civilian could have a star ship, the sky above Earth would look like the sky above Coruscant. And now imagine that each ship would have a warp core.
   
   Even if no accidents are happening, there is still the danger, that some terrorists are using such ship as weapon.
   
   Ask yourself, why is not everybody allowed to fly a plane? Because the hazard it too big.
5. That's stupid. Self-evidently there are many hazards. But the question is, how big the hazard is. If a taxi driver has an accident, maximal a few persons are dying. If a plane crashs, a few hundred persons are dying. If it crashs in a congested area, a few thousands persons are dying.
   And if a warp core breachs in orbit of Earth or even on the surface, a few million persons are dying.
6. Fact is, that warp cores are able to breach. And they may be safe, if they are maintained regularly and from trained personnel. But you can't assure it, if each civilian can have a warp core equipped ship.
   
   I don't understand, what you are suggesting furthermore.

[SailorSaturn13]

The difference with army men and civilians is that the army has that whole chain of command going on which is more stable than a group of civilians bickering on and on. On the other hand, no one really disputes the orders of a president, so I suppose this could be a model replicated to a smaller scale onboard civilian ships, be they powered by antimatter and equipped with a minimal amount of weapons.

In real life, ship-grade weapons are prohibited on non-military vessels, adnd for a good reason - even "minimal" weaponry can wreack big havoc. This is even more true for Trek, with even "minimal" phasers capable of great destruction.
And Starfleet, as I said , is not simply military. The are explorers and diplomats mostly.
Why no civilian explorers? Any big exploration mission:
1) Is State-founded, especially in a world there are no big corporations.
2) Requaries heavy weapons in a relatively hostile galaxy

So there would be military personnel present in any case, in addition to civilian buerocrats. Obviously, a better structure is melting military and civilians together, just like Starfleet.

[Tyralak]

I know a lot of it is that its being broadcast in capitalist countries and some people will try to find anything to criticize it but why is the idea of a perfect socialist state so looked down on? I mean, we should be PRAISING it for having the guts to show what a perfect system would look like!

I mean, everyone is happy, religion is nonexistant and money no longer exists as a means to create social inequities by the oligarchical elitists.

I suppose that's why they call it "Science Fiction". :P To believe that could exist, you have to have the same suspension of disbelief you have when accepting all alien races speak English. :D