I think that the reason we see so little of it is that the idea is that Star Trek is supposed to be utopian, and utopias make for dull stories. The actual show gets around this by focusing on interactions between the utopian Starfleet and things from outside of the Federation that aren't part of the utopia - new things to explore, threats from other non-utopian powers, new planets to discover, space anomalies, etc. The worker-owned dilithium mill would be a very poor setting for a story - think about how many workplace sitcom plots would simply fall apart if the main characters had no profit motive, were all tolerant and understanding of each other, could vote out their boss, and were just in charge of the workplace in general.
@kaitlyn__L
Жыл бұрын
I've seen some people suggest the replicator was the means by which everybody owned the means of production. Either by personal replicators for small things or communal larger ones spaced evenly apart. But you're right that that's merely a plausible reading, rather than explicit in the text. It's never made clear exactly how Joseph Sisko gets his ingredients, or why people choose to work there or at Château Picard. I like to think both of those places are worker-owned, one DS9 episode said Sisko's current head chef was set to "inherit" the place, rather than Jake. And I like to think that is the norm, rather than a curiosity. But there's also definitely things called "corporations", such as the Dytallix Mining Corporation, in the Federation. The word doesn't necessarily mean the current meaning, in the UK a century ago corporation only really meant what today would be called a city council. IE Glasgow Corporation, Manchester Corporation, etc. The municipal buses were "Corporation buses", and municipal water "Corporation pop". So the word can really mean anything given how little is said about it. It could be a co-op who just really likes mining. It could be a huge for-profit entity. Who knows. I definitely agree Star Trek keeps itself pretty purposefully vague, and I suspect that's not just for TV censor reasons but also to not limit the other writers too much. But any time it does venture into providing any details, it usually doesn't tend toward neoliberalism or even social-democracy. Early TOS is a total mess, and sometimes has guest writers espousing pretty odd beliefs, and wasn't thought-through in any way besides the general "all of humanity's gotta get along or we won't be out in space". There's definitely a lot of American colonialism baked-into the general setting, after all the "final frontier" line is literally referencing the Western Expansion. The idea that humanity would set up risky colonies on distant planets was just a given for the concept, which wasn't thought-out besides being a space-western. A lot of the specific world-building and humanism is really down to DC Fontana, so I guess you can thank her. It was definitely more thought-out from TNG-onwards.
@highfscore
3 жыл бұрын
There's a few episodes of TNG and DS9 where characters reference things like "I'll buy you dinner", or "buy me a drink" that imply some kind of currency at least. Makes sense in VOY because everybody basically trades energy rations. SInce just about everything can be replicated, I imagine the wider federation works similarly - everybody has a set amount of "energy" that they can use to variously power their holosuite orgies, or replicate food. You can trade that energy to, for example, the creole vinyard or the picard vinyard if you want to experience the "real thing".
@Ryukuro
Ай бұрын
An alternate explanation is it could be language drift. "Buying" someone dinner could just be the way you ask people out without using money.
@TheKartana
11 күн бұрын
I think it's worth noting that the federation seems pretty loose in how the govern the planets within their control. Bolias has the bank of Bolias, a major bank used by people all around, even though it's in the federation, while something like that likely wouldn't fly on Earth. I think people like the Federation president aren't doing stuff like this, and aren't the ones directly controlling the means of production on Earth. There is also the idea that the lives are quite different between the established federation planets and frontier colonies. You don't see people on Earth or Vulcan discussing the idea of getting rich or profits, while you do in other colonies or other places.
@leninbilalexander6754
3 жыл бұрын
When you talk about the USSR, Cuba, China, etc., I think you may have missed the fact that these states never claimed to be Communist, only Socialist, two states which, in the Leninist ideology, are different.
@radicalizeme
3 жыл бұрын
Yes, good point. But a lot of people think of those countries as communist.
@trazyntheinfinite9895
4 күн бұрын
Its irrelevant. Communism ignores basic human behaviour. Its simply not a societal model that can function.
@DavidXanitos
3 жыл бұрын
Great vid! As an adult now, I get minor chills when ever I see Rom say “workers of the world unite! you have nothing to loose but your chains" On your note about seeing more non-federation content in Star Trek I completely agree, I have always wanted to make/see a show that deals with the entire struggle of the Maquis and their values.
@publiusvelocitor4668
3 жыл бұрын
What would Socialism even mean, in a post-scarcity society? If energy appears to be limitless available, and the transporters can make anything at all, exactly what resources need to be pooled, managed, or distributed?
@yimingwang8037
3 жыл бұрын
non replicatable resources I guess?
@radicalizeme
2 жыл бұрын
Good question. At some point they establish certain limitations to the replicators, like you have to fuel it with particular types of matter and it (usually) can’t make finished products, mostly raw materials. They still have to mine dilithium, for one, and I assume they had to build the ships from parts. So there are energy limitations and they couldn’t just build one giant replicator and zap starships into existence. It’s also established that they get replicator rations and transporter credits, at least during Starfleet missions.
@karry299
Жыл бұрын
@@radicalizeme >They still have to mine dilithium Who knows, maybe they dont HAVE TO, it just takes more energy than it returns. If you really have proper molecular constructors, you can just park it next to the sun with some solar panels and it's done, your species is set forever basically.
@internetdumbass
3 жыл бұрын
Loved the video, love from the communalist gang Does "worker ownership" make sense once private property (read: productive property) and money are gone? It makes sense in our situation, it's a clear contrast to private ownership. It may be an irrelevant question in the 23rd century, because private property no longer exists.
@econenby7076
3 жыл бұрын
The Serfs sent me :) great video!
@slipstick985
10 күн бұрын
In Bar Association, what benefit do they get from working for Quark? If they get food, clothing and housing for free and all that matters is personal fulfillment, why stay?
@radicalizeme
4 күн бұрын
The Federation oversees the space station but not all Federation or Earth rules apply. Bajor is not Federation and neither is Ferenginar, so they probably make wages.
@bob-lk5et
Ай бұрын
I have a couple issues with how you define "communism", all communists understand classes as being divided among your relationship to the means of production and distribution, IE capitalists vs workers, this has nothing to do what so ever with the quality of life everyone experiences. Startrek IS a classless society due to the ownership of the means of production and distribution being literally at the finger tips of everyone to use in the form of the replicator, its never talked about how the federation organizes its heavy industry, most likely done through plans. on the topic of the state, communists define the state as being a MONOPOLY on organized violence for the purpose of securing and controlling the SURPLUS of labor, does the federation ever have a purpose built military/police force for this express purpose? no because of what i said about the MoP above. your take on money was on point but your knowledge of actual Marxism is founded within liberal paradigms, this is evident with how you dismissed examples of AES due to needing to engage in siege socialism to defend itself from the west. "socialism is worker control of their workplaces" no, socialism is the worker control over the means of production AS A CLASS, market socialism or "coop socialism" is a regression that would always reproduce conditions for capitalism to take over again, you CANNOT have socialism without a planned economy where the work places must produce along national plans and NOT for their own profit. "authoritarian" read on authority by Engels, "authoritarianism" isn't a personality trait that leaders just happen to have and thus just do things for the fuck of it classes have interests and organize to achieve those interests. There's no point to a violent revolution if you don't have the balls to actually protect it afterwards. please read parenti, or watch ML youtubers such as finnishbolshevik, socialism, Marxist project for all or Paul Cockshott
@SerLava
3 жыл бұрын
Found the reupload!
@jackskellingtonsora
2 жыл бұрын
I did a rewatch of TOS recently and I was pretty surprised by just how CONSERVATIVE it is. Not just by the standards of our time, but by the standards of the time it was written in. It was pro-Vietnam, anti-hippie, clearly anti-socialist (that episode that you were talking about, Devil in the Dark, ends with the miners exploiting the natives for profit in a very colonial way), anti-utopian, colonial in general, and even (weirdly) pro-Nazi. It had the common myth at the time that the Nazi government and society was extremely efficient and that a historian, of all people, would want to recreate it with himself as the furher because of how efficient it was. There's a number of examples of its conservative leanings, you mentioned one of them. Another is The Apple, in which Kirk interrupts a utopian society in which these natives are living in peace and harmony and have eternal life and Kirk destroys their god and forces his own values of hard work and having children on them and forcing them to not have eternal life anymore. And, of course, there was the episode where there was a duplicate earth that had gone into nuclear war and had native Americans completely with an American flag and Constitution and Kirk just enthusiastically praises America. Watching TNG after it was really a breath of fresh air. TNG and the shows after it are where the idea of Star Trek being socialist or at least some form of leftist comes from because they actively tried to have a better ideology. I genuinely don't think Roddenberry was a socialist. I don't know about Nimoy either. Regardless, TNG and DS9 are spectacular shows whether they're socialist or socdem or something else. They give hope for a better future. I don't much care for any of the other shows after or before them to be honest. Except maybe Lower Decks. I did like that one.
@radicalizeme
2 жыл бұрын
Damn, I didn't even think of that colonialism bit in DITD. And yes, despite all their flaws, it's incredible how much anti-capitalism DID make it into TNG, DS9, and even VOY at times, given that that era of Trek started when the Cold War was technically still happening. I could have sworn I saw a quote from Nimoy somewhere saying that the Vulcans must be socialists because of their values like "The needs of the many..." etc etc. but I can't find it anymore. I might have imagined it lol. Thanks for your comment!
@jackskellingtonsora
2 жыл бұрын
@@radicalizeme Oh yeah, I didn't think of Devil in the Dark as colonial either until I saw it again. It really struck me. The settlers are exploiting the behaviors of these sentient creatures for profit. It's not even that they're like cattle or chickens. They are explicitly sentient. I thought that TNG would probably not have this ending. And then on my rewatch of TNG after it, I saw an episode in season 1 that reminded me of it. The episode Home Soil has a terraforming project and potential colony abandoned because a sentient lifeform already lives on the planet.
@JamesTaylor-bo8cv
3 жыл бұрын
9:03 "so chill, comrades" lmao
@Transform108
20 күн бұрын
Ehhh the military here is you are hanging out with your squad is very uniform like the ships in trek. They have high ideals on the ships. But whether it be the Trill mine in DS9 or Vash seeking profit Starfleet seems to be the higher idealized people versus other people.
@jaimis5377
3 жыл бұрын
this is great stuff 700 people just watched this on the serfs twitch while he took a piss. looking forward to watching the rest of your vids :)
@Mrsonicboom343
3 жыл бұрын
Great video, really enjoyed your insight
@TheCourtsofChaos
3 жыл бұрын
Live Short and Eat your Dogs
@radicalizeme
9 ай бұрын
Solid burn not gonna lie
@maxbarth3784
3 жыл бұрын
great shit !
@publiusvelocitor4668
3 жыл бұрын
15:50 "Socialism and Communism seek to de-centralize economic power." Waaaa??? Kind of the opposite, really... planned economies, with wealth distributed by the State.
@heinzie5
3 жыл бұрын
yep. these idiot "activists" don't even know what they are activists for
@radicalizeme
3 жыл бұрын
Sure bud, when Lenin distributed land ownership to peasant farm workers that was about giving less power to less people. There might be an argument that a state-run model isn't the best way to do this, and I've talked a lot about the problems with world leaders and state power, but the goal of socialism is to distribute profit FAIRLY, not "equally" or in a way where everyone is poor. I'm sorry if that bothers you but you don't understand the difference between socialist thought & activism, and a state that says "we are socialist" but also has a lot of the same problems associated with any state.
@publiusvelocitor4668
3 жыл бұрын
A Stalinist-apologetic Star Trek video. Oh, what a mystery you are, KZitem algorithm!
@radicalizeme
3 жыл бұрын
I literally said Stalin was authoritarian, and I know you listened at least that far based on your other comment. Keep trying though.
@jackskellingtonsora
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah no, I didn't get that. I just got that he was trying to keep the tankies from tuning out by saying that it's entirely possible that some things we attribute to Stalin were CIA propaganda. But he's very clearly anti-Stalin. As you should be if you're a socialist or any kind of leftist at all.
@reetgman153
3 жыл бұрын
No. Starfleet uses the galactic dollar! All position are payed similar to military pay scales
@runbychews134
3 жыл бұрын
I love that the socialist video is beginning by begging on Patreon.
@angryangryalice
3 жыл бұрын
"We should improve society somewhat." "Yet you participate in society. Curious! (I am very intelligent.)"
@hoominbeeing
2 жыл бұрын
@@angryangryalice Abolitionist: "Slavery is wrong!" Slave owner: "I agree!" Abolitionist: *confused look* Slave owner: "What? You can participate in something and still criticize it."
@radicalizeme
2 жыл бұрын
Yes If the slave owner doesn’t like it he can free his slaves, like some did. And if the abolitionists don’t like it they can fight to change society, like they did. Along the way, they still lived in a slave owning society. Do you think abolitionists could always avoid eating slave grown food or wearing slave grown clothes? Of course not, and that was exactly the problem, so they spoke up. I just want to make videos, but I also need to eat. I don’t think food should cost much if any money, and I think that world is possible. But for now, that’s not the world we live in. Asking for viewers to donate if they can is not equivalent to owning a business that underpays workers.
@hoominbeeing
2 жыл бұрын
@@radicalizeme The issue here is not the fact that you benefit from capitalism while criticizing it, the issue my response to the first reply was highlighting is the hypocrisy of some socialists to not just participate or benefit under capitalism, but literally start a (non worker coop) business while believing that doing so is immoral. For example, a KZitemr or streamer hiring an editor or manager and then not allocating a certain amount of profit or control over their business to their workers. Here, it is not an abolitionist who buys goods made by sl@ves, but the sl@ve owner criticising sl@very while owning people! Another example is those who believe in wealth redistribution yet not lifting a finger to redistribute their own wealth. Although it's not a criticism of socialism itself, one can still point out hypocrisy in such actions.
@danielv6906
15 күн бұрын
Well, as I see it, a comrade put effort into creating something useful and entertaining. Effort that could have been spent earning money. So it would be an act of solidarity and socialist organisation to contribute a small amount of the community earnings to compensate since we do not have a, system that provides basic necessities. Is it hypocritical to remind viewers of this fact? No, I don't think so. This is not product produced by exploitation, it is not a forced transaction. Calling a plead for aid to create through Patreon hypocritical is not, IMHO, not valid criticism in this case. Compare it to the old tirade "why do you use an IPhone if you're a socialist, it's a capitalist invention, don't you know?"
Пікірлер: 48