Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
advertisement
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit Sabastian Palpatine's column >>

SABASTIAN PALPATINE

Home Page
Constantly seeking knowledge. Nosce Te Ipsum
Articles Posted: 85  Links Seeded: 35
Member Since: 7/2008  Last Seen: 1/26/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Gene Roddenberry: The Star Trek Philosophy

Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:06 PM EST
entertainment, us, tv, movies, people, art, philosophy, sci-fi, star-trek, space-travel, jj-abrams, futurology, dvd-release
By Sabastian Palpatine

Live Poll

Will the human race ever be unified as it is in Gene Roddenberry's vision?

View Results
  • 68719
    Yes. We'll learn to live together or die alone
    69%
  • 68720
    No. Human unity sounds nice but it'll never happen
    31%

VoteTotal Votes: 45

Pavel Chekov, James T Kirk, Montgomery Scott, Bones, Lt. Hikaru Sulu and Nyota Uhura

advertisement

In celebration of the DVD release of J.J. Abrams' reboot of the classic Star Trek
franchise I thought that it would be cool to share some thoughts from the creator
of the original Star Trek.....

"I think probably the most often asked question about the show is: "Why the Star
Trek Phenomenon?" And it could be an important question because you can ask:
"How can a simple space opera with blinking lights and zap-guns and a goblin
with pointy ears reach out and touch the hearts and minds of literally millions of
people and become a cult in some cases?" Obviously, what this means is, that
television has incredible power.

They're saying that if Star Trek can do this, then perhaps another carefully calculated
show could move people in other directions, as to keep selfish interest to creating
other cults for selfish purposes, industrial cartels, political parties, governments.
Ultimate power in this world, as you know,
has always been one simple thing: the control and manipulation of minds.
Fortunately, in the attempt however to manipulate people through any "so called
Star Trek Formula" is doomed to failure, and I'll tell you why in just a moment.

First of all, our show did not reach and affect all these people because it was deep
and great literature. Star Trek was not Ibsen or Shakespeare. To get a prime time
show "network show" on the air and to keep it there, you must attract and hold a
minimum of 18 million people every week. You have to do that in order to move
people away from Gomer Pyle, Bonanza, Beverly Hill Billies and so on. And we
tried to do this with entertainment, action, adventure, conflict and so on.

But once we got on the air, and within the limits of those accident ratio limits, we
did not accept the myth, that the television audience has an infantile mind. We had
an idea, and we had a premise, and we still believe that. As a matter of fact we
decided to risk the whole show on that premise.

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 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, is 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."

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Sabastian Palpatine's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: GeekVine, Lost in the Vines, Movies, Etc., Newsvine Futurists, Science Fiction, Star Trek
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (55)
Santino42

I can only hope that humanity unites one day like it did in Star Trek First Contact. Unfortunately I do not believe this will be the case...it will be more like a natural catastrophic event that will bring humans together.

  • 8 votes
Reply#1 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:37 PM EST
Sabastian Palpatine

One can only hope. I think that Man has made progress over time. I've got faith that Mankind will overcome.

  • 8 votes
#1.1 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:46 PM EST
redphish

It's going to be a race between learning to get along with each other and destroying ourselves.

  • 9 votes
#1.2 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:18 PM EST
blindsided-1194485

I agree. It will take some kind of catestrophic event on a global scale to make ALL of humanity work together and put aside our petty diffrences.

  • 2 votes
#1.3 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:01 AM EST
Santino42

I agree. It will take some kind of catestrophic event on a global scale to make ALL of humanity work together and put aside our petty diffrences.

And this catastrophic event (if we survive) will finally eradicate the importance of money which is the current killer of humanity.

Reminds me of Star Trek 4 The Voyage Home when they travel back to '86 and Kirk has to explain to the crew about money (which they know nothing about)...then proceeds to pawn his glasses.

  • 4 votes
#1.4 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:44 AM EST
pcbynature

I can only hope that the next movie will be better than this one. I did not like the actor playing Kirk and I did not like seeing Nimoy. Many references from the series were explored, so this was a good flick for some fans.

I do wish that Star Trek would get away from time stories and sholograms. The conundrums from time travel never are answered...

    #1.5 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:18 PM EST
    Reply
    Sabastian Palpatine

    I've always been a huge fan of Star Trek. Not to the point of going to conventions dressed as Lt. Wharf and speaking Klingon however I've always been a fan of the writing, philosophy and ideas being presented. Giving the Reigns to J.J. Abrams was the a great move as it grossed $257 million at the box office.

    I think that both Roddenberry and Abrams have this in common: they both have tried to disprove the myth that the American audience can't handle intelligent and thought provoking television programs. Both with Star Trek and J.J. Abrams with ABC's Lost.

    The more I watch Lost the more I am absolutely amazed at how ABC has allowed the creators of this show to cram so many ideas (religious, sci-fi and philosophical) into this modern day myth. I'm pretty sure that no other modern TV show has a fan base that has researched things such as ancient Egyptian mythology, numerology and alchemy just to attempt to figure out where Abrams and company are taking us in 2010.

    Back to Star Trek, I can't wait to see it in High Def from the comfort of my own home and for the Sequel to hit the theaters.

    ;)

    • 6 votes
    Reply#2 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:43 PM EST
    Santino42

    I've never watched Lost but have heard similar compliments about the show. Had no idea these two programs were written by the same guy (Abrams).

    Back to Star Trek, I can't wait to see it in High Def from the comfort of my own home and for the Sequel to hit the theaters.

    I'm a huge Star Trek fan as well but have never been to any conventions either. But I will defend myself in any social situation when I get made fun of for my love of ST. I was so blown away by the latest movie...the script, cast selection, special effects...you name it. I too cannot wait to see this at home on my 50" HD and am eagerly awaiting a sequel.

    • 5 votes
    #2.1 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:58 PM EST
    Adrian Thorn

    Worf*

      #2.2 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:27 PM EST
      Darreth01

      Funny story: OFF topic maybe... but I had never been to a convention either... one weekend I heard there was one in Sioux City (Iowa) so I called a nephew that lived in my hometown (I was living about 80 miles to the Northeast at the time) and I went and got him...

      We show up at this convention and there is a little boy about 8 or so in FULL KLINGON REGALIA... Bat'leth and ALL!!!! I held my fist up and said "QAP' LAW" (SORRY if the spelling is off!!!) (I think it translates to "Much success")

      I always heard the Klingons greet each other this way on ST:TNG...

      Anyway... the kid looks at me confused and says "HUH" *GRIN*

      "Never mind"

      LOL

      • 3 votes
      #2.3 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:30 AM EST
      Reply
      Yosho

      Let's not forget that in it's saying we could get past our differences, the writers for Star Trek have had no trouble in addressing current obstacles to that idealistic image of the future.

      • 3 votes
      Reply#3 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:56 PM EST
      Sabastian Palpatine

      I think that Roddenberry said it best....

      ".....The result of that was that seven years after being dropped by the network 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, is 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."

      We may not have words for it but when we catch a glimpse of our potential, what we could be through art, music, a good book, tv show or movie then it resonates with something deep within.

      • 6 votes
      #3.1 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:49 PM EST
      Reply
      Jivatman

      I think another interesting aspect is the "Prime Directive", Starfleet General Order #1, dictating that no interference can be made in the affairs of civilizations that have not yet achieved Faster-Than-Light travel.

      It's also consistent with the modern idea of Westphalian Sovereignty of individual nation-states... which later became incorporated into modern libertarian philosophy, which bases itself off of the non-aggression, non-interventionist principle.

      Anyways, I always found the Prime Directive fascinating because to me it answers the question of why, when probability dictates that our galaxy should be teeming with intelligent life, have we not (publicly at least) been contacted?

      (Also, if you watch StarGate, note how the god-like ascended beings called The Ancients also aren't allowed to directly interference with events)

      Take yet another step back and consider all of this from the perspective of Free Will... and there's some very fascinating philosophy you can get into...

      • 6 votes
      Reply#4 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:42 PM EST
      Sabastian Palpatine

      I agree. My favorite series of all that falls under the Star Trek mythology would be The Next Generation (TNG). The writing was very good and under rated....

      (e.g.)

      "The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules; it is a philosophy... and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous." - Captain Picard (TNG: "Symbiosis")

      "There are no options. The Prime Directive is not a matter of degrees. It is an absolute..."
      "I have a problem with that kind of abstract intellectualizing. It seems callous and even a little cowardly..." -Worf and Pulaski, debating the Prime Directive (TNG: "Pen Pals")

      "...all of this is just philosophy. Sarjenka is not a subject for philosophical debate, she is a person."
      "He's got a point. The Prime Directive was designed to protect, not destroy."
      "So Doctor, you draw the line at the death of millions."
      "Yes!"
      "Same situation if it's an epidemic rather than a geological catastrophe?"
      "Absolutely!"
      "How about a war? A generations-long conflict that is killing millions. Do we interfere? Now we're less secure in our moral certitude. And what if it's not death? What if it's an oppressive government which is enslaving millions? You see, the Prime Directive has many different functions, not the least of which is to protect us. It keeps us from allowing our emotions to overrule our judgment." - Data, Pulaski and Picard, debating the Prime Directive (TNG: "Pen Pals")

      Thinking of this from the perspective of free will I'm lead to believe that interfering with the universe, it's natural evolution or how it unfolds is usually a bad idea. All life forms need to find their own way.

      • 4 votes
      #4.1 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:37 PM EST
      Jivatman

      Thinking of this from the perspective of free will I'm lead to believe that interfering with the universe, it's natural evolution or how it unfolds is usually a bad idea. All life forms need to find their own way.

      Exactly, if life forms weren't meant to find their own way they would not have been invested with free will. In fact, I argue free will is the most central aspect of existence for all things, but expressed especially in entities advanced enough to gain awareness of self, sentience.

      I will add another thought... I argue that instead of being a Federation as it is in Star Trek... a similar theoretical group would likely be closer to a Confederation.

      A Confederation is the more natural extension of the idea of sovereignty, as it has little or no centralized authority, instead being a voluntary group of independent states that come together voluntarily for common purpose. More Utopia yes, but if achievable it is, in my opinion, the ideal.

      Did you know Switzerland is officially known as "The Swiss Confederation" because it's form of government is close to that ideal? It's neutral, it is also much more free than the U.S. in many ways, such as, for example tax evasion is an administrative offense. It is one of the richest countries in the world. It also has a lot of direct democracy, especially on local levels but also nationally. (For another example of direct democracy, think ancient Athens)

      libertarians tend to view a Confederation as the best form of government, and like to use Switzerland as an example of a country with a lot of freedom. (p.s. many also feel the Articles of Confederation were superior, at least in principle, to the constitution.)

      Whenever authority is vested centrally, it tends to slowly gain power and become more tyrannical... such as our own government. The Federal Reserve, the Supreme Court, (Both opposed by Thomas Jefferson). Recently, Bush disregarded the Constitution entirely. While Obama may restored some of what was lost, he will not restore it to what it was pre-Bush. And thus, the natural course is the loss of liberty. The president becomes ever more powerful.

      • 5 votes
      #4.2 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:42 PM EST
      Sabastian Palpatine

      You've provided a lot of information and there is a lot to mentally digest. I guess that I've never really put a lot of thought into the importance of free will. I've just accepted that it is a natural part of being human. Recently however I've be doing some reading on it and you may be right.

      I'm a big advocate of enlightenment via knowledge of self so you won't get an argument from me against the importance of the individual or group making decisions for themselves.

      I do however also believe in balance and being careful not to deal in "absolutes". I could imagine that any group or government could go too far with "freedom" and before you know it you're smack dab in the middle of anarchy. I do believe in "being my brother's keeper", that what affects you also affects me either directly or indirectly. I believe that we are responsible for intervening in certain circumstances.

      I guess that the question of knowing when freedom must be taken away is not a simple one and should not be taken lightly.

      • 3 votes
      #4.3 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:27 PM EST
      Adrian Thorn

      Star Trek is Socialism....

      • 2 votes
      #4.4 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:33 PM EST
      Jivatman

      and before you know it you're smack dab in the middle of anarchy.

      There's nothing wrong with anarchism, take a look at the amazing success of the depression-era U.X.A. (before the Feds shut it down) or the great success and wide variety of anarchism in pre-civil war Spain.

      It has other implications. For example, under the English common law system we inherited, all crime required intent... I see though, however, a trend where laws are becoming increasingly fundamentalist legally, and an increasing expectation that every individual is required to know them all, while of course the Federal Government cares less and less about following it's own laws.

      Another interesting thing regarding free will. Variations of the phrase "do not do to others what you would not like to be done to you" is perhaps the single most universal ethic in religion, significantly more common than the slightly different golden rule of do.

      • 2 votes
      #4.5 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:44 PM EST
      Adrian Thorn

      I've seen Righties source that single page on seven different occasions, along with this laughably bad video. Is there some sort of website where all you righties go to get your talking points?

        #4.6 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:47 PM EST
        redphish

        Star Trek is Socialism....

        Actually, I think Star Trek would be better described as a Utopian communist society.

        • 2 votes
        #4.7 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:50 PM EST
        Adrian Thorn

        Communism is a form of Socialism.

          #4.8 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:51 PM EST
          TiG.

          Adrian

          Is it more correct to consider communism to be mature (practiced, stabilized, evolved) socialism rather than a special form (a specialization of) socialism?

          • 2 votes
          #4.9 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:08 PM EST
          Adrian Thorn

          It really depends upon what strand you're referring to. Anarcho-Communism is its own end, while religious forms of Communism are largely separate from the more social aspirations of Socialism. Within the realm of Marxist thought it is a bit vague. Marx does treat Socialism as a means to an end but on the flip side he also treats communism as an abstract concept that (from the lens of a historical materialism) would seem to be separate and unique stage all on its own.

          In truth, I don't think the relationship between the two should have the academic rigor I think you'd like to apply to them. I think the relationship between Mercantilism and Capitalism sort of parallels that of Socialism/communism. Are they two distinguishable systems? Yes. Are they inter-related? Yes. Can you pick an exact date in the history of any European nation when they became officially Capitalist? No. Did the people living under these systems even conceive of them as we do today? Definitely not. The truth of the matter is that these terms are more or less pretend - developed to make the enormous amount of change that a society has undergone, over an enormous amount of time, comprehensible to our tiny, limited brains. If we have a revolution, if we have socialism, these things won't matter too much in the end.

          On a practical level (I think) you'd fine that most socialists view communism as the more mature product of socialism; something that will be once all the kinks are worked out of the system and Socialism has become no more extraordinary or revolutionary than the ideas of freedom of speech or representative government seem to us today.

          • 4 votes
          #4.10 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:34 PM EST
          TiG.

          Adrian

          Thanks.

          • 1 vote
          #4.11 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:44 PM EST
          redphish

          On a practical level (I think) you'd fine that most socialists view communism as the more mature product of socialism; something that will be once all the kinks are worked out of the system and Socialism has become no more extraordinary or revolutionary than the ideas of freedom of speech or representative government seem to us today.

          That's kind of what I was thinking when I made my comment, I'm far from an expert in Poli Sci. Thanks for your explanation. I think I actually understood it.

          • 1 vote
          #4.12 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:51 PM EST
          Reply
          TheGrimCreeper

          I'm sorry, but I refuse to watch the new movie. I don't want to see Star Trek 90210. I'm betting Gene Roddenberry would be appalled.

          • 2 votes
          Reply#5 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:19 PM EST
          Longhorn78759

          He would be.

            #5.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:04 PM EST
            Reply
            TheGrimCreeper

            If you guys wouldn't mind, stop by and vote for your favorite Star Trek captain. Thanks!

            • 3 votes
            Reply#6 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:24 PM EST
            Adrian Thorn

            I love Star Trek, but the antisemitic overtones of the Ferengi always bothered me.

              Reply#7 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:34 PM EST
              redphish

              I've never read that into the Ferengi. I just see them as a parody of what would happen if a society took capitalism to an absurdly unscrupulous extreme.

              • 4 votes
              #7.1 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:41 PM EST
              Adrian Thorn

              The Capitalism thing is funny. You've got the egalitarian, classless Federation on the one hand and you've got the Free-Market capitalists on the other. I talk to Right Wingers about the show and it just seems to go over their head.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi#Allegations_of_parodying_Judaism

              • 3 votes
              #7.2 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:54 PM EST
              Randilly

              I don't see any anti-semetic overtones about the Ferengi. To me they are "Pure Opportunism" versus "the goody goody two-shoes School-teacher State"

              • 2 votes
              #7.3 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 11:20 PM EST
              Al 616

              I talk to Right Wingers about the show and it just seems to go over their head.

              I'm not surprised. Except for the nationalistic and battle scenes in classic Trek, most Right Wingers aren't predisposed to the introspection necessary to "get trek." The utopian socialism offends them. There are no clear bad guys (they eat up Star Wars like ice cream because the good and bad guys practically wear labels, no thought involved), and Trek requires and encourages people to think and learn.

              Most of all, Trek teaches that even if you have power -- and lots of it -- it does NOT entitle you to subjugate those who are weaker than you just because you can. The neo-cons will NEVER be able to understand that.

              • 5 votes
              #7.4 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:59 AM EST
              Reply
              PenniD

              I have been watching Star Trek since the original series came on the air. Its message appealed to me as a young teen and still appeals now. Television broadcasters need to seriously rethink their image of their viewers. Record numbers of people no longer watch television very much, simply because there is nothing on worth watching.

              Reality TV? Please, it's so boring watching someone else live out their life -- we all have lives, big deal. Vapid new shows that you can recite the dialog to before they actors even spout it? Fascinating, as Spock would say...

              • 3 votes
              Reply#8 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:51 PM EST
              Sabastian Palpatine

              I hate "reality" shows. I think that the producers of these programs represent a clear and present danger to national intelligence and morality. Narcisism, ignorance and being obnoxious are being rewarded as young folks think that "I can make it if I embarrass myself, my friends and family on national tv.

              I guess that the current state of affairs in regards to American television programing has one upside: I've started reading a lot more due to having almost nothing to watch on the boob tube ;)

              • 4 votes
              #8.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:02 PM EST
              Reply
              rochart

              the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but to take a special delight in
              differences in ideas and differences in life forms.

              Celebrate our differences.

              • 3 votes
              Reply#9 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:27 PM EST
              Spooky Boyfriend

              Nano nano...

              Nice thread.

              I prefer Mr. Rodenberry's poli-sci premise over Mr. Hubbard's.

              Live long and prosper.

              • 2 votes
              Reply#10 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 11:55 PM EST
              Sabastian Palpatine

              I am and shall always be, your friend ;)

              • 2 votes
              #10.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:54 PM EST
              Reply
              Tony Wlliams

              As a fan I just wanted to say THANK YOU.

              That even includes reading the response's. Both he and his wife will be missed. While I am also waiting to see what they will do next I just can't picture the new voice of the ship. May the Legend live on.

              • 2 votes
              Reply#11 - Tue Nov 17, 2009 11:56 PM EST
              Sabastian Palpatine

              Visionaries such as Roddenberry are rare. Art that inspires such as his in the form of the Star Trek mythology, the success of the original tv series and the longevity of "the legend" is a good example of the need for us to have this sense of brotherhood. This is evidence of something deep down in all of us; the desire to not be alone in this infinite universe.

              • 2 votes
              #11.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:53 PM EST
              Tony Wlliams

              Very True. You might already have it but if you don't try to find the sound track cd for the first movie. It has a bonus disk where he talks about the Show and what he went through just t get it on air. Caste member interviews and some of the other shows he wanted to get on the air like Quester. Real eye opener for those that didn't know him but want to get a glimmer of how he viewed life. Gotta remember that when he wrote these people believed in racism so strongly that murder was looked at as the norm. Amazing that he could see what so few could.

              • 1 vote
              #11.2 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:00 PM EST
              Reply
              Pacific Northwest Blogger

              "Double Damn", Still trying to figure out the economic basis for Star Trek so we can implement it today. The stage coach trek in space was generational and profound. Unlike the J.J. Abrams version which was allowed to trash that adventure.

              • 1 vote
              Reply#12 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:34 AM EST
              Sabastian Palpatine

              You may find this interesting....

              Money in the 21st century sense was not used on 24th century Earth. The exact nature of the Federation economy is difficult to describe; while money had not entirely ceased to exist, it did not play the central role in the lives of Federation and Earth citizens that it once did. The descriptions given by various Federation citizens are as follows:

              • Kirk told Spock, about 20th century Earth: "They're still using money. We need to get some." Later on, while Kirk was having dinner witt Gillian Taylor and was unable to pay in the restaurant, Gillian asked sarcastically, "Don't tell me they don't use money in the 23rd century," and Kirk told her "Well, we don't." (Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home)
              • Picard tries to explain to Ralph Offenhouse from the 20th century that there would be no need for his law firm any longer: "A lot has changed in three hundred years. People are no longer obsessed with the accumulation of 'things'. We have eliminated hunger, want, the need for possessions." (TNG: "The Neutral Zone")
              • When Lily Sloane asked how much the USS Enterprise-E cost to build, Picard tells her "The economics of the future is somewhat different. You see, money doesn't exist in the 24th century... The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of Humanity." (Star Trek: First Contact)
              • When Nog suggests that Jake should bid for a baseball card in an auction, Jake says "I'm Human, I don't have any money." Nog replies "It's not my fault that your species decided to abandon currency-based economics in favor of some philosophy of self-enhancement." Jake says "Hey, watch it. There's nothing wrong with our philosophy. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity." Nog then replies "What does that mean?" Jake responds "It means we don't need money!" (DS9: "In the Cards")

              Tom Parisays about the significance of Fort Knox: "When the New World Economy took shape in the late 22nd century and money went the way of the dinosaur, Fort Knox was turned into a museum." (VOY: "Dark Frontier")

              While money on Earth became extint, there was some type of money or credit system throughout the galaxy. Some previous comments have already mentioned the Ferengi...

              The Ferengi were a space-faring humanoid species native to the planet Ferenginar. Ferengi civilization was built on the ideals of free enterprise, where all other goals are subjugated to the pursuit of profit. Their governing body, known as the Ferengi Alliance, was formed over a period of ten thousand years, beginning with the establishment of a system of currency, to their purchase of warp technology, and finally to its state in the 24th century. (DS9: "Little Green Men")

              Source: Memory-Alph.org

              • 3 votes
              #12.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:37 PM EST
              Pacific Northwest Blogger

              Wow... that's a response indeed.

              "To better ourselves and the rest of humanity"

              "Make it so"

              • 2 votes
              #12.2 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:47 PM EST
              Adrian Thorn

              "Still trying to figure out the economic basis for Star Trek so we can implement it today."

              Its communism. Where work is performed for personal pleasure/betterment and services are exchanged through work-vouchers (or federation credits in the case of Star Trek)

              • 1 vote
              #12.3 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:04 PM EST
              Reply
              Dr Fell

              i don't like the way the more recent movies have beeb rewiring the trek history

              • 1 vote
              Reply#13 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:43 AM EST
              Longhorn78759

              most recent movie*

                #13.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:05 PM EST
                Yosho

                It didn't start with the movie, and was my biggest problem with Enterprise. It seems Trek's producers took a cue from the direction Lucas was going with the Star Wars prequels and going "%$#^ continuity."

                  #13.2 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:46 PM EST
                  Reply
                  Andy the giant

                  absolutely wonderful show and movies

                    Reply#14 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:08 PM EST
                    Yosho

                    At least the even-numbered movies.

                    • 2 votes
                    #14.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:47 PM EST
                    Reply
                    Bill Fuller

                    We humans have a long history of dividing ourselves into "us" and "them" with the right to legislate against, persecute, or even kill "them" because "them" ain't as good as "us." I'm afraid Gene's dream will have to wait untill we can get beyond that.

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#15 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:28 PM EST
                    Jivatman

                    Indeed, we only ended legalized racial discrimination a couple decades ago, a lot of people would have trouble with the idea of aliens.

                    Interesting enough though, the Vatican is being surprisingly progressive and held a big 5-day conference on astrobiology, and the theological implications of extraterrestrial life.

                    If Catholics can accept the possibility, it's a big step for possible future exo-political relations.

                    • 2 votes
                    #15.1 - Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:55 PM EST
                    Reply
                    TheGrimCreeper

                    Check this one out Star Trek fans:

                    Who is the Sexiest Lady of Star Trek? Ladies are more than welcome to participate.

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#16 - Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:43 PM EST
                    Tony Wlliams

                    Thanks and will do.

                      #16.1 - Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:25 PM EST
                      Reply
                      Henry Harris

                      Look at it this way. Imagine a civilization that has replaced most human labor with robotics, and energy is freely available through advanced technology. How would our current system fit in such a world? You could say people are born with a debt and they have to work it off with non-productive activity, but that seems extremely unlikely, even cruel. No. Roddenberry has it right. The fact that we have trouble imagining his vision is understandable since we have none of the necessary prerequisites of such a world. Labels such as "socialism" don't apply here since they refer to a world which no longer exists in Star Trek.

                      • 2 votes
                      Reply#17 - Fri Dec 24, 2010 10:48 AM EST
                      Leave a Comment:
                      You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                      You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                      (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                      Newsvine Privacy Statement
                      As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                      FUN STUFF:
                      • Leaderboard |
                      • E-Mail Alerts |
                      • Top of the Vine |
                      • Newsvine Live |
                      • Newsvine Archives |
                      • The Greenhouse |
                      COMPANY STUFF:
                      • Code of Honor |
                      • Company Info |
                      • Contact Us |
                      • Jobs |
                      • User Agreement |
                      • Privacy Policy |
                      • About our ads
                      LEGAL STUFF:
                      • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                      • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                      • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com