It’s a common theme. There are a lot of conservatives who are still somehow fans of Star Trek because they the lack media literacy needed to figure out that they’re values are not shared by the good guys on the show.
It’s not about values, it’s about image and symbolism. And the fact that a white dude got to go all over the universe telling aliens they’re wrong and they need to accept the American… uhhm Federation way!
Yep. The whole utopian future of Star Trek is mostly off-screen. They talk about how they don’t need money anymore and have abolished hunger, etc. but we never see that in the actual episodes. What we do see is people who are absolutely certain that their way of life is superior to everyone else’s, that the status quo must not be questioned and that the military represents the pinnacle of society.
What we do see is people who are absolutely certain that their way of life is superior to everyone else’s,
I’d say we see a hell of a lot more than that. We see within the named characters their drive to become better versions of themselves. We see people doing cheesy acts of self sacrifice for the good of others without an expectation of payment, gifts, etc. We see terraforming doing their job for the sake of it. There is a multitude of scenes that take place on earth and various colonies, all in which people are well fed, and live in walkable communities in which quality of life is the primary purpose of production.
I’ve only read two of the Star Trek books at this point (The first two in the Picard series), and we see humanitarian aid missions. We see how production facilities on Mars/Earth operate.
that the status quo must not be questioned
Could you give an example?
and that the military represents the pinnacle of society.
Star Fleet is definitely a military organization, but it is not solely a military organization by a long shot. It seems few people join for the military aspect of it, it always seems to be a decision based on family tradition, or exploration. And when they’re jerking themselves off over the values of Star Fleet, it’s never about the military aspect.
But all of this is either compatible with a conservative reading, or requires more analysis than most conservatives are putting in. I mean I doubt Musk read the Picard books.
But then you go on to mention stuff like family tradition, which is literally a key value for conservatives, especially when it involves joining the military.
Or people being well fed, or valuing self-improvement? Think about all the rightwing grifters who go on about self improvement all the time, or how they claim that communism killed 15 vigintillion people from starvation and only CAPITALISM can feed the world. Conservatives don’t want people to be starving, starving citizens are the sign of a poor society. It’s okay that the Federation doesn’t use money because it is post-scarcity thanks to replicators, a technological solution to the issue of feeding the poor. This is perfectly compatible with the techbro mindset that tech is the solution to all our problems, and isn’t challenging to those who believe that socialism is impossible without advanced post-scarcity technology.
What I’m trying to get at is that all the aesthetics are there for a conservative to read it in a way that is compatible with their ideology, in much the same way that a liberal will read it as a triumph of liberalism or a leftist can interpret it as socialist. It isn’t challenging to those ideologies, because it’s vague enough and alien enough to not map 1-to-1 onto any modern political system.
Conservatives don’t want people to be starving, starving citizens are the sign of a poor society.
Starving citizens are required. They’re there to keep those that aren’t currently starving terrified of becoming that person. (And also to be someone to look down on.)
Okay, but that’s capitalism. There’s the classic cope of “this is simply a requirement because scarcity exists.” They think it’s necessary and unavoidable.
The conservative read of Star Trek is that feeding all its citizens is a sign of the Federation being so rich that it can feed all its citizens without the need for capitalism as we know it. True post-scarcity.
It doesn’t challenge their belief that starving citizens are required in the modern day. If anything, to a conservative techbro like Musk, it reaffirms their beliefs because it’s all about how rich the Federation is and how feeding the whole world would require massive advances in technology like replicators. It’s even a common plot point how other civilizations want access to Federation replicators and other tech.
What I’m trying to get at is that all the aesthetics are there for a conservative to read it in a way that is compatible with their ideology
I agree that’s the case. What I disagree on is the vagueness of the values of Star Fleet/The Federation, and how much of it we see in effect. There is plenty both on screen and off screen to see.
vague enough and alien enough to not map 1-to-1 onto any modern political system.
Sure, it doesn’t map one to one. But it also makes it very clear that conservatives values are wholely incompatible with Federation philosophy. It’s a psuedo democratic socialist state.
I agree that democratic socialism is probably the closest IRL system, I just think it’s fairly vague about it and any assertions are easily glossed over or disregarded as fiction, or attributed to the advanced tech.
It comes back to the disconnection of tech, the vagueness, the allegory. You don’t see queer people, you just see allegories for queer people that are either safer to accept or just aren’t acknowledged as allegories. You don’t see Federation imperialism being questioned that much, they’re pretty much always right. The only meaningful people who question it are the Maquis, and Sisko loses himself in his vengeance and pursuit of them (but is never humbled for it—from the audience’s perspective, he’s right). And then there’s S31, which is fascist to begin with.
And I’m just talking about canon here. Not the books or anything like that.
Technically money was abolished prior to the invention of the replicator, but we never hear any details about that. The most detail we get is a one off line in Voyager about a “New World Economy”.
They don’t flesh out what the economy actually looks like, or how we got here without replicators. The “without replicators” is an important bit, which might seem like a random thing for me to be focusing on but I’ve talked to conservative fans who will often cite replicators as something that would be required for the Federation’s socialism. Even liberal fans often think that. The message of the show is about post-scarcity, not workers owning the means of production. It’s not socialism in the ways that it exists on earth, and so conservatives don’t hate it.
It’s a common theme. There are a lot of conservatives who are still somehow fans of Star Trek because they the lack media literacy needed to figure out that they’re values are not shared by the good guys on the show.
Remember how conservatives think that Rage Against The Machine is on their side. There’s no delusion too great after that.
It’s not deusion. It’s a cooption narrative. ‘All the cool things came from us!’ Because they don’t create anything of worth of their own
It’s not about values, it’s about image and symbolism. And the fact that a white dude got to go all over the universe telling aliens they’re wrong and they need to accept the American… uhhm Federation way!
Yep. The whole utopian future of Star Trek is mostly off-screen. They talk about how they don’t need money anymore and have abolished hunger, etc. but we never see that in the actual episodes. What we do see is people who are absolutely certain that their way of life is superior to everyone else’s, that the status quo must not be questioned and that the military represents the pinnacle of society.
I have to disagree a little bit on some of that.
I’d say we see a hell of a lot more than that. We see within the named characters their drive to become better versions of themselves. We see people doing cheesy acts of self sacrifice for the good of others without an expectation of payment, gifts, etc. We see terraforming doing their job for the sake of it. There is a multitude of scenes that take place on earth and various colonies, all in which people are well fed, and live in walkable communities in which quality of life is the primary purpose of production.
I’ve only read two of the Star Trek books at this point (The first two in the Picard series), and we see humanitarian aid missions. We see how production facilities on Mars/Earth operate.
Could you give an example?
Star Fleet is definitely a military organization, but it is not solely a military organization by a long shot. It seems few people join for the military aspect of it, it always seems to be a decision based on family tradition, or exploration. And when they’re jerking themselves off over the values of Star Fleet, it’s never about the military aspect.
But all of this is either compatible with a conservative reading, or requires more analysis than most conservatives are putting in. I mean I doubt Musk read the Picard books.
But then you go on to mention stuff like family tradition, which is literally a key value for conservatives, especially when it involves joining the military.
Or people being well fed, or valuing self-improvement? Think about all the rightwing grifters who go on about self improvement all the time, or how they claim that communism killed 15 vigintillion people from starvation and only CAPITALISM can feed the world. Conservatives don’t want people to be starving, starving citizens are the sign of a poor society. It’s okay that the Federation doesn’t use money because it is post-scarcity thanks to replicators, a technological solution to the issue of feeding the poor. This is perfectly compatible with the techbro mindset that tech is the solution to all our problems, and isn’t challenging to those who believe that socialism is impossible without advanced post-scarcity technology.
What I’m trying to get at is that all the aesthetics are there for a conservative to read it in a way that is compatible with their ideology, in much the same way that a liberal will read it as a triumph of liberalism or a leftist can interpret it as socialist. It isn’t challenging to those ideologies, because it’s vague enough and alien enough to not map 1-to-1 onto any modern political system.
Starving citizens are required. They’re there to keep those that aren’t currently starving terrified of becoming that person. (And also to be someone to look down on.)
Okay, but that’s capitalism. There’s the classic cope of “this is simply a requirement because scarcity exists.” They think it’s necessary and unavoidable.
The conservative read of Star Trek is that feeding all its citizens is a sign of the Federation being so rich that it can feed all its citizens without the need for capitalism as we know it. True post-scarcity.
It doesn’t challenge their belief that starving citizens are required in the modern day. If anything, to a conservative techbro like Musk, it reaffirms their beliefs because it’s all about how rich the Federation is and how feeding the whole world would require massive advances in technology like replicators. It’s even a common plot point how other civilizations want access to Federation replicators and other tech.
I agree that’s the case. What I disagree on is the vagueness of the values of Star Fleet/The Federation, and how much of it we see in effect. There is plenty both on screen and off screen to see.
Sure, it doesn’t map one to one. But it also makes it very clear that conservatives values are wholely incompatible with Federation philosophy. It’s a psuedo democratic socialist state.
I agree that democratic socialism is probably the closest IRL system, I just think it’s fairly vague about it and any assertions are easily glossed over or disregarded as fiction, or attributed to the advanced tech.
It comes back to the disconnection of tech, the vagueness, the allegory. You don’t see queer people, you just see allegories for queer people that are either safer to accept or just aren’t acknowledged as allegories. You don’t see Federation imperialism being questioned that much, they’re pretty much always right. The only meaningful people who question it are the Maquis, and Sisko loses himself in his vengeance and pursuit of them (but is never humbled for it—from the audience’s perspective, he’s right). And then there’s S31, which is fascist to begin with.
And I’m just talking about canon here. Not the books or anything like that.
Technically money was abolished prior to the invention of the replicator, but we never hear any details about that. The most detail we get is a one off line in Voyager about a “New World Economy”.
They don’t flesh out what the economy actually looks like, or how we got here without replicators. The “without replicators” is an important bit, which might seem like a random thing for me to be focusing on but I’ve talked to conservative fans who will often cite replicators as something that would be required for the Federation’s socialism. Even liberal fans often think that. The message of the show is about post-scarcity, not workers owning the means of production. It’s not socialism in the ways that it exists on earth, and so conservatives don’t hate it.
Also they seem to have gotten rid of the enlisted portion of the ranks. Everyone in Starfleet is an officer.