For all its vaunted egalitarian democracy, no one on the USS Enterprise ever cast a vote in an election -- at least not in any episode I can locate. The Federation Council just seems to have its delegates appear out of nowhere, listen to people talk, stop assassinations and censure captains. Never once are proceedings of merit displayed.
For all we know, the shape-shifting, evil Founders appoint the Federation Council then manipulates it to do their bidding. STAR TREK never once shows us government in action. Rather it shows Star Fleet waging war at every turn with a "fire at will" attitude.
At least STAR WARS shows government happening. In fact, we know from episode one, that the body politic can take out a Chancellor (related to the German government-type chancellor rather than University of La Dee Dah type) with a vote of "no confidence". We also know that on at least one world queens are elected officials rather than ascendant (though in OUR galaxy, queens become monarch either by marriage or birth and are typically rulers for life).
In STAR WARS, for all its mercenary vigilantism and heavy breathing sorcerers, emperors make some attempt to let us know that government works -- however poorly and no matter how prone it is to coup d'etat and corruption.
STAR TREK talks democracy but exhibits a face that is military junta in all but name with members wearing military uniforms as often as not. If not junta, then it's clear from the movies and shows that Star Fleet is the be-all and end-all of Federation civilization. Even Memory Alpha, the STAR TREK trivia site has trouble pinning down the actual location of the Federation Council Chambers -- stating that they're either in Paris or San Francisco (my guess is that there was a transporter accident and the Council resides in both places...)
STAR TREK's vague Federation Council sounds as if it's a situation ripe for abuse. At least in the STAR WARS' Republican Senate, even the bad guys have to cut through the red tape of bureaucracy.
Which one sounds more realistic to you?
April 20, 2008
STAR TREK vs STAR WARS: Who Mourns for Democracy?
Guy Stewart is a husband; a father, father-in-law, grandfather, friend, writer, and recently retired teacher, and school counselor who maintains a SF/YA/Childrens writing blog by the name of POSSIBLY IRRITATING ESSAYS
that showcases his opinion and offers his writing up for comment. He has almost 70 publications to his credit including one book (1993 CSS Publishing)! He also maintains blogs for the West Suburban Summer School and GUY'S GOTTA TALK ABOUT DIABETES, ALZHEIMER'S & BREAST CANCER!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Ugh Guy! All right, this time you have simply gone down lala land. You blithely make statements diametrically opposite to any even remotely eye-open interpretation of these two universes.
I know a thing about this. Salon Magazine ran my extended essay: "Star Wars" despots vs.
"Star Trek" populists" some years ago.
http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/1999/06/15/brin_main/
It later inspired the popular nonfiction "debate" called STAR WARS ON TRIAL - in which I (the prosecutor) and Matt Stover (the defense attorney) called many witnesses for and against SW on a variety of issues.
If folks are interested in exploring these issues at-depth, those are some sources.
But Guy, this posting of yours is simply weird. Not only is Star Wars the most anti-democratic screed in all of SF history, George Lucas doesn't even pretend it isn't! He openly told the NY Times that he despised democracy and thought the best form of government was a "benign dictatorship!"
Oy.
But with warml regards,
David Brin
http://www.davidbrin.com
Post a Comment