A place for me to pour out my rants without clogging the inboxes of my friends and family. Also a place to give info on myself and Mary, our family news and events.
Everyday life in Gene Roddenberry's Utopia
Published on May 6, 2005 By Rightwinger In Misc
I'm re-posting this because it somehow got posted in the wrong forum.---RW


As an avid and longtime Trekker, I have often wondered what the average person back on Earth is doing while brave people like Jim Kirk, Jean-Luc Picard and the other incarnations of Gene Roddenberry's Starfleet nobly expand the borders of the Federation and the limits of knowledge.
I'll tell you what they're doing: they're sleeping all day, getting up at 4pm and cracking open another bottle of Romulan Ale (yes, it's illegal, but what the hell.....) and getting bombed, or shooting up with Denebian Whacky Cracky.

Gene Roddenberry was a devout liberal, and envisioned a future with "no greed, no hunger". There was no need for money, as technology had advanced to the place where there was enough of anything for anybody. Nobody needed to work because nobody needed money; all they had to do was go to the replicator and ask for whatever they wanted, and it would be made for them right there and then. Of course, who built the replicator and how they were paid for their effort was never explained.
There was plenty of food, since any schmoe could simply stagger over to the food slot and say "I'll have a 20-ounce prime rib, medium rare, three lobster tails infused with butter and some truffles," and it would appear.

The main thing wrong with Roddenberry's vision of this future is that, if you remove hunger and greed, you've pretty much removed any motivation for humans to do pretty much anything. Those two things have been the engines behind a lot of history, good as well as bad. What he saw as a Utopia of plenty would actually be a technology-driven and based welfare state.
Roddenberry, as a stereotypical, and very hedonistic, I might add,liberal, saw a future where people, no longer having to work, just sat around reading poetry or the works of Shakepeare, or somehow found motivation to dedicate their lives to the betterment of humanity because there was no longer any need to struggle (of course, if there were no longer any need to struggle, what would be the point of dedicating your life to its aleviation?) . Those of us who are realists can clearly see that anything as efficient and disciplined as a Starfleet or Federation could never actually grow and be sustained in such an environment. No one, having no reason to get out of bed in the morning other than to sit in the sun and revel in life itself, is going to be motivated to do much of anything. Period. We can see this for ourselves in those who make a living from playing the welfare system. If you hand them free food and money, you take away their desire to do more than get stoned or drunk and lay around doing nothing.

One thing that always struck me as odd was the dichotomy in the tastes of the heroes in Trek.
They lived in a society where everything was instantly manufactured for them by machine, yet both Kirk and Picard, especially, favored antique this and hand-crafted that. Why should they so appreciate these things, created from the sweat and struggle of someone for whom such things were a way of life, when that was clearly not the right way of thinking? Isn't it better that no one has to work anymore? No one has to get out of bed to get to a job on time to simply be exploited and made to work to produce things instead of being able to do as they wished? Welcome to Roddenberry's future.

The future is now, people. You just have to be able to play it right.

Comments
on May 06, 2005
Bump...sorry
on May 06, 2005
It's not true that no one worked in the Star Trek Universe. The spaceships weren't built by machines.

As for money, there's a conflict. What about the Ferengi? Gold-Pressed Latinum?
on May 06, 2005
What about the Ferengi? Gold-Pressed Latinum?


I'm talking about Roddenberry's vision for life on Earth...the Ferengi were a charicature race that dedicated itself to the very ideal of greed, something we avoid.

The Federation itself did not use money....they did have some kind of vague system known as "credits", but it was never fully explained. In "Star Trek IV", though, Kirk tells Gillian Taylor that they don't use money in the 23rd century.

The article pertained to the average joes and janes in every day life on Earth, not those obviously more ambitious people in Starfleet, who built the ships (and who probably help maintain the techno system that supplies everything to everybody else).
on May 06, 2005
In one episode (I don't recall exactly which now) their socio/economic system was explained to some extent. People did actually work, but in fields they chose and were in line with their interests and talents. Menial tasks were eliminated by automation and everyone was encouraged to persue "higher interests".

Ok, realistically, with the society, values, technology, and education system we have today this type of Utopian Socialist society couldn't work. But then, we are talking about several hundred years of additional social and technological evolution.

Besides, it's called fiction for a reason.
on May 06, 2005
Besides, it's called fiction for a reason.


I know this...the article shouldn't be taken as a serious treatise on future civilization.
Roddenberry had a fabulous vision, no doubt, and we can hope for and work toward that vision....I just don't agree with his optimistic views on humanity.
on May 06, 2005
I just don't agree with his optimistic views on humanity.


I'm not sure I really do either, and I did take your article to be a bit tongue in cheek as was the final line in my comment.