Posted: Sep 12, 2016 1:06 pm
by Thomas Eshuis
igorfrankensteen wrote:Oh, piffle. Star Trek wasn't "communist." Not remotely. It frankly wasn't all that well thought out, when it came to socio-financial-political stuff. I saw it as it was being originally broadcast, and recognized then, all the usual things we see in both future-based, and history-based dramas. That is, that the stories told are always reflections and or fantasies of the times they are written during.

I recall in particular, one episode wherein the Klingons and Federation folks were each using one of the primary societies of a certain remote planet, to fight a proxy war with each other. The story was essentially a complete support as possible for the Vietnam War to be continued as long as it could be. Hardly a communist-positive notion.

The Star Trek background ideas, with no more wars at home, and no poverty and so on, were less something that Roddenberry was actively trying to promote, than it was for the sake of making it easy to write outward-facing stories all the time. It had more to do (I think) with the relative wealth of the United States at that time, than to any crafted socio-economic agenda. Same reason why high wages for all workers, and lots of support for welfare and unions was relatively accepted in the same time period.

The closest it got, afaik, is in the First Contact film, where JL explains to Lilly that humans have done away with currency all together as well as the goal of acquiring material wealth.
How they've done this, or how such a society would function, is never explained.
There certainly wasn't anything about the equal division of labour, unions, soviets, etc.