historical materialism moment

Comments

• ChicagoTransplant@midwest.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Mao is pretty much the opposite of what the federation stands for in almost every respect.

  source

  • muddi@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Earth and the Federation was communism. Admittedly an idealist version of it, came about because it was voted in by enlightened voters. But even then the Bell Riots showed that it was capitalism that caused conditions to arise in which the oppressed rose up against the failures of capitalism, and finally end it.

    Not sure if you specifically meant something about Mao, but at least be aware of this. It’s the most basic theory of communism that capitalism fails, turns into barbarism, and the working class have no option but to revolt to resolve the crisis.

    source

    • nxdefiant@startrek.website ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Star trek doesn’t really have a working class though, they achieved Marx’s earlier hypothesised state of the deprecation of manual labor. Interestingly, most of the philosophy is around how to get to Star Trek, where Star Trek itself is kind of the biggest thought experiment we have for what we would do once we’re there.

      Marx later evolved to believe only a revolution would destroy capitalism, and that’s what Mao focused on, the getting there. Through violence.

      Mao took that to heart, and succeeded, despite his best efforts, in ultimately setting the stage for a China that’s more capitalist than it’s ever been.

      That’s kind of the magic of star trek. Theres a violent past, a billion deaths, and it isn’t a new political system or a different economy that changes everything, it was a newfound hope that things could be better if they were better, and they worked together to make that happen.

      I think younger Marx would have loved Star Trek. I’m not sure about older Marx or Mao.

      source
  • UlyssesT@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Do you have any argument to back that up that isn’t GOMMUNISM VUVULZULA GORILLION DEAD? morshupls

    source
  • Flyberius@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Lol. Ok buddy.

    source
  • CyborgMarx@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You literally don’t know anything about Mao

    source
  • StalinistTransition@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    literally how

    source

    • ThePyroPython@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Well I don’t think the federation government would be idiotic enough to try and make every farmer into an industrialist by forcing them to meltdown their own tools in the hopes of creating mechanised farming equipment only to end up with piles of unusable pig-iron slag, and thus contributing to another famine.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • TC_209@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    The U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 comes across a lost Earth colony during a survey beyond Federation space; a few generations after its establishment, a group of religious zealots take over the operations of the colony, creating a feudal society in which power is held by a select few “holy” families and the vast majority of colonists are little more than slaves. How would Kirk and crew handle this situation?

    source
  • buckykat@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    PIGPOOPBALLS

    source
  • bigboig@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Lol really ticked off the tankies. Don’t tell them starfleet hq is… in America!

    source

    • StalinistTransition@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      woah crazy totally not because THERE IS NO STATE YOU MORON

      ITS A UNITED WORLD GOVERNMENT

      god you libs are the most ignorant animals on the planet

      source
    • Catradora_Stalinism@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      the USA is definitely an entity that still exists in star trek

      100 percent

      have you even watched the show?

      source
    • Flinch@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The Star Trek Understander has logged on

      source
    • TC_209@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Where’s the Office of the President of the Federation?

      source
• ummthatguy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The Red Alert 3 DLC we were denied.

  Image

  The Rise of Agamus

  source

  • agimus@startrek.website ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    This picture is heavily photoshopped. Maybe an AI modified it.

    source
• kbal@fedia.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  There is a kind of political power that grows out of the barrel of a gun. That thing must be destroyed.

  source
• possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Is that someone I should know?

  source

  • Zorque@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the USS Enterprise.

    source

    • possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I know that one what’s the other guy

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• HelixDab2@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  …And yet, the Enterprise is armed. If power does not come from the ability to effectively use violence, but from some other means, then why would the Federation arm it’s flagship?

  source

  • LoamImprovement@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Devil’s advocate, but parts of the Trek universe have shown that there are non- or quasi-sentient creatures capable of endangering starships like the Enterprise, in addition to the usual spacefaring hazards like asteroid belts and debris fields, and the potential to encounter, for lack of a better term, space pirates. It makes sense to arm the ship for a number of reasons not necessarily related to the power of coercion via the threat of violence. The Enterprise’s weapons are also frequently outclassed by other ships of similar size designed for combat. It feels more akin to packing bear spray or a noisemaker to scare off wildlife, and the bear spray gets used to drive off a robber.

    That said, the threat of violence against a better-armed foe in order to prevent combat is a trope the shows rely on frequently, so you have a point.

    source

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Aside from an episode of Strange New Worlds (and possible in Wrath of Khan, depending on your perspective), space pirates aren’t brought up as a risk to the Federation starships, presumably because they usually aren’t. Shields alone should be sufficient for debris and asteroids, since shields appear to stop physical objects as well as certain forms of energy (obvs. not certain bands of light though, or whatever bands their sensors use). Non- and quasi-sentient species shouldn’t pose any risk to a starship at all (aside from possibly omniscient comets, thank you Stanislaw Lem). The weapons on a starship are appropriate to direct against planetary settlements, bases, and other starships.

      Fundamentally, I believe Mao was correct on this; the ability to use violence effectively is the lowest common denominator for all power. Everything else is a veneer of civility intended to disguise the violence that is inherent to all forms of coercive rule.

      source
• Kolanaki@yiffit.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  “The pen is mightier than the sword.”

  “But is the pen mightier than photon torpedos?”

  source
• usernamesaredifficul@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  then where the hell does it come from

  also even if (and it’s a big if) Ireland does unify next year it won’t be through violence

  source
• Gabu@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Every capitalist is a nazist, is what you’re saying?

  source