The Final Frontier?

Anyone who knows me well knows that I, Noah Vance, am an avid fan of the television series Star Trek and all of it's subsequent machinations (Star Trek: the Animated Series, the Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise). On the bottom of the page is a preview for the new film coming out May 8th (only 50 days left!) which I have been feverishly anticipating for the past year since reading a rumor about it in a TV Guide. I want to establish that I am an uber-fan before I say what I am about to say; the Star Trek world of the 22nd, 23rd and 24th centuries are based on what I would label a socialist or even communist society, and some of it is somewhat dangerous to Christianity and world religion as a whole. Take a second to let that sink in. A beloved television show that most people have seen episodes of is generally based in socialist thinking. Of course, when Gene Roddenberry envisioned this future time period when all would be equal, where there would be no disease, no war, I know that he did not try to create a communist television show. All he was trying to do was depict a utopian future well within humanity's grasp, but nonetheless, when you take a look at what these people of the future are actually doing, you can get that distinct impression.
I have several sub-points here to help people understand what parts of Trek are socialist in definition.

1. In the world of Star Trek, there is no monetary currency on Earth.

In the Star Trek film, First Contact, Captain Jean-Luc Picard tries to explain future living conditions to a woman from the late 21st century brought onto the ship during a medical emergency. He explains that the Earth of the future does not run on money, but rather the need to do good for the collective society and for onesself. The order of the day is brotherhood, and the furtherment of mankind as a whole. Earth generally has no economy although human members of Starfleet often use Federation currency, called credits, on items when away from Earth (by the late 22nd century Earth is apart of the Federation of Planets, a sprawling political field spreading throughout a quarter of our galaxy that includes hundreds of other species, some even similar to humans. Starfleet is the extension of this government and is the primary military and exploratory group in the Federation. They are very similar to Earth's Navy). Although this sounds good for a TV show or film, the ideas being expressed here are basically socialist.

2. In the world of Star Trek, at one point the entire world came under one government.

After World War III (a bloody war that took place in the mid-21st century that left Earth an irradiated wasteland until Zefram Cochrane made the first warp capable craft at Bozeman, Montana and subsequently drove the Vulcans to make First Contact with humanity), the entire world united under the United Earth government, an action spurred on by First Contact with the Vulcans. The last nation to be involved was Australia, who preferred to remain independent, but eventually gave in to the United Earth regime. Although this sounds externally like a good thing, if you look at this policy in real life, it looks like a totalitarian state.

3. In the world of Star Trek, religion ceases to exist at some point.

In Star Trek: Enterprise, religion does still exist (Dr. Phlox, a Denobulan, states that he attended a Catholic mass and meditated with several Buddhist monks while on Earth) and perhaps it still exists in the Original Series, set 100 years after Enterprise, but by the time we get to the Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager, which are set 100 years after the Original Series, many of these scientifically minded people of the 23rd century state that religion was nothing but foolish myths left behind long ago in favor of scientific advancement. This is one of the more dangerous ideas posed by Star Trek, but it can be related to the fact that Roddenberry himself was a humanist who didn't adhere to any particular religious beliefs. His view was that humanity is basically good and that we have the potential to do great things without God, so his characters reflected this attitude, and we should expect this from a non-believer (believe it or not, non-Christians act like non-Christians. Some folks have a hard time with this). Roddenberry didn't tackle this issue as much as in the Original Series, but the writers for the others went to town with this subject. In what I've seen of the world, science and religion don't butt heads as much as people think they do. I would like to quote Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Professor Travis Kerns; "Science and religion don't disagree as much as we think. It's the scientists and the Christians who have the problems."

In our current political situation, many right-wing politicians cried "socialist" when Barack Obama stated he wanted to "spread the wealth around". This is a socialist idea by definition. The definition of socialism, as defined by the Microsoft Encarta Dictionary is "a political system of communal ownership". "Spreading the wealth around" is a form of communal ownership, but Mr. Obama does not believe this way. President Obama has the same facile grip of an idea of a society where we all help one another and there is a communal sense of unity, as Gene Roddenberry did. The point is, it was OK for Mr. Roddenberry to have these ideas. They didn't have to be perfect politically. All his ideas were designed to do was inspire hope and they caused people to innovate new things in technology. Star Trek inspired the cell phone, the personal computer, even the iPod. What's dangerous is when politicians promise to meet these lofty heights when the ideas themselves, when put into real context, are really not optimum for a functioning government. Recently Zachary Quinto, the actor playing the past version of Spock in the new Trek movie, said that if Barack Obama was president when this movie came out, that it would be wonderful because people could actually hope to live in the future of Star Trek. He may be right, but, is this world, minus the neat-o spaceships, transporters and exploration, really a world we want to live in? Just a thought.

So, even though Star Trek is merely a TV show (I am, and always shall be a huge fan), some of the ideas put forth may not be so workable in a real socio-political environment. As always feel free to give me any comments. This blog is not set up for me to merely rant, but also for me to learn from others. That's one of the great things about the Internet... which was also inspired by Star Trek.

Live Long and Prosper,

Noah