Editing FederalSpace:Peoples (section)

== The Federated Worlds ==

'''Brainstorming'''
* AI-assisted cyberdemocracy, with a Council and a President. 
* Individual worlds have lots of freedom, so long as they hew to "universal principles" of the rights of lifekind, e.g. human rights, environmental conservation, etc. 
* While our economic definitions don't exactly apply in an interstellar society with AI, fusion power, and rapidfacturing, the Feds are socialist-ish. 
* Suggestion: people draw some sort of basic living stipend (a stock holding?), lots of public housing, etc.; colonists reinvest into developing a new world, then have the option to buy back into the core system, or retain economic independence. 
* Division between "Core" worlds, which are developed and settled, and have technologized luxury (well, lower-middle-class comfort, at least), and "Frontier" worlds, which have sacrificed that to try to build their world into ''their'' way of doing things. (Isolates are an extreme example of this.) The Fed permits and even encourages this, so long as you're reasonably democratic and play well with others…
* Constant tension between the sheer weight of Earth's history and population, and everyone else.
*  Current arts and culture are in a phase of rediscovering and reclaiming "traditional" pre-Empire art; a lot of emphasis on personal performance and hobbies. 
* The Starfleet is an arm of the civil government (albeit a heavily-armed one), and associated with the other stellar organizations; analogous to Japanese SDF. Something like this:
** Federation Council.
*** Justice Administration. 
*** Diplomatic Administration.
*** Worlds Welfare Administration.
*** Federal Space Administration.
**** Department of Colonization and Terraforming.
***** Colonial Rangers.
**** Department of Transportation.
***** Merchant Space Fleet.
***** Bureau of Starports.
**** Department of the Star Fleet.
***** Core Fleets.
***** Frontier Fleet.
***** Star Fleet Marine Corps.
***** Strategic Space Command.
***** Fleet Surgeon General.
**** Department of Survey.
***** Deep Space Scouts.
***** Scientific Survey Bureau.
* Federation controls or tightly regulates most interstellar capacity, but is required by law to provide access to the citizenry. System ships can be privately owned. There should probably be interstellar carriers… Explains why a starcruiser may get passenger or cargo duty now and then. 

'''Random Action Table (1d6)'''
# Consider old Terran philosophy.
# Try to reach a compromise.
# Beam down a probe.
# Check the database again.
# Set phasers to stun.
# Offer to help.

=== Commentary ===

'''Albert:''' Set it up so that to be a "Core World" it has to be fairly simple to get a modest amount of shareholder stock. Perhaps it's something you're given by the government at the age of majority, perhaps one of the requirements for a child permit is setting aside a large enough seed investment that by the time the child grows up the portfolio can be expected to be big enough.

Your Core Portfolio cannot be taken from you or given up. It's enough to live off of, if you're willing to live simply. Very simply. If you want more, figure out a good you can help produce or a service you can help provide.

There's a government ministry dedicated to making sure Core Portfolios remain able to do what they're supposed to do. When the economy is good, they investigate cases of abuse. When the economy tanks, it's their job to see that people don't starve while things work out.

People are less willing to tolerate shitty working environments, and more people are willing to try out career experiments. Overall effect is that the economy tends to be far more stable and growth-capable.

Out on the frontier, groups that exploit the existence of local poverty dread the day when a world decides put itself in order and join the Core Worlds. How do you arouse proletariat passions/exploit the working classes/represent the downtrodden/preach forced humility when "being poor" means that their food is on the bland side and that their internet connection isn't quite up to handling streaming video? Do you mutter about the complacent bourgeois/lazy bums/cultural traitors/fallen apostates and move on to the next world, or do you try to do something to stop it?


'''Shadowjack:''' Veeeeeeeeery interesting. And promotes interesting, realistic, and sympathetic conflicts between different classes and worlds, without providing obvious "good guys." "Come on, guys! We agreed to build this colony the way we like it, and now you want to give up and join the Core? We gotta stick to it!"

The idea of child permits actually feels a little outdated in a setting with easy transport to other worlds… on the other hand, a world's ecology is delicate to manage. It ''is'' a way to emphasize responsibility for one's offspring—and presumably, if there are commercial bioroids, the engineering company has to provide them a portfolio as well, held by the government in trust until the period of indenture has passed. The politics of this will no doubt be strange…

'''Albert:''' It's one possible solution I've come up with to the whole "how do you provide a safety net without it turning into bread and circuses" problem. (Because this grumpy sorta-conservative is well aware that a safety-net is needed. "The poor you will have with you always" and all that.) Hmmm . . . it probably has to be a thing of "would-be parents must have enough to seed a Core Portfolio before having a child", because otherwise you could run on a platform of promising a really high Core Portfolio minimum, all paid for by the government. 

The other solution is a deal where you trade X months of labor (with free room and board) for a self-powering mobile home that can grow food, clothing, and basic medicine, and it's up to the government to make those months of labor do something useful. It's for a more libertarian/independant setting, though.

['''Shadowjack:''' A government labor arrangement is another thought for the mix. There's a lot of necessary scut work for a society, even after automation; it could be treated like jury duty. "Time for your week of service!" "Aw, crap, again?" "It's a civic duty!")]

Anyway, one implication is that people must be prevented from having children until they seed the Core Portfolios. Probably via long-term contraceptive implants. Could be a reason for otherwise prosperous worlds to avoid Core membership, if there's widespread resistance to that level of social control over the consequences of life.

'''Shadowjack:''' It is a bit creepy, or at least feels so from my cultural background… but is it too creepy for the Federated Worlds? I'm not sure. It ''is'' fair play for all the cultures to have some alien warts. 


'''Shadowjack:''' If anyone remembers the video game ''Flashback'', there's an amusing sequence where the main character—to get cash—applies to a series of "job terminals". Show up, do a day's work (which in his case involves lots of running and shooting), get paid. I could see a computerized government like the Federation having open contracts for a lot of work: "Wanted today—six people to do garbage pick-up in the San Francisco area. Will train. Pay, etc." So if you feel like working today, you take the contract, download the instructional module to your comm, and set to it. Tomorrow you may do something else. Jobs that require ''training'' are for people who want to do something full time.



'''simontmn:''' I think for a "real humans in space" setting it's a good idea to consider the general political ethos. I appreciate you wish to avoid the Communist-totalitarian implications of a non-utopianist Next Generation setting; I think that's easy enough to do by simply ignoring all TNG-on Trek material… The politics of TOS was broadly liberal-humanist, so that gives a baseline; Democratic and Libertarian ideas of the 1940s through 1960s. The Federation is Good; Abraham Lincoln is a folk hero*; less advanced cultures should be protected from hostiles (eg Klingons), but not forcefully colonised. Political questions will likely concern the degree of centralisation in the Federation vs planets' rights to govern their own affairs. Questions like the rights of androids and regulation of mind-body transmission also seem reasonable. But only use stuff that seems like fun, of course.

*Also, America and the American political tradition must have continued to be dominant in your future Earth timeline; while also returning to a more traditionalist (pre 1968) ethos. That seems a bit unlikely to me right now starting from where we are today, but should be workable.


'''Shadowjack:''' Assuming American dominance in the setting—"Earth" culture might be a broad mix of many cultures. Though American ''is'' easy for me to import, being one myself. :D 

Though it's not necessary to go alternate history; the political pendulum ever swings back and forth, and maybe the groups that helped found the Federated Worlds had similar ideas. 

Some of my sketches, I've been basing Terran civilian clothing on Chinese and Indian designs—when it's not the universal "trousers and t-shirts" kind of outfits. 


'''John Morrow:''' Re: White Man's Burden complaint. 

That was actually pretty common in the original series, where it wasn't uncommon for them to talk about how they solved problems like racism long ago in the Federation. In fact, part of how the original show maintained the optimism was that they illustrated the social problems of the period less as internal problems of the Federation than as external problems that other civilizations encountered by the Federation had problems with and needed help with. Your skepticism about the "White Man's Burden" is why that perspective is so difficult to recreate without turning into a parody. People who are confident in their society and way of doing things do feel justified in helping others who are less fortunate but in a world that values multiculturalism and lacks confidence in its own authority and nobility, it seems antiquated and silly. Where Kirk once lectured both Bele and Lokai about racism in ''Let That Be Your Last Battlefield'' from an "above it all" perspective, how many people would now argue that Kirk doesn't have the authority to tell an oppressed minority to get over their hate?

So maybe if you want to recapture the optimism, you need to consider embracing the "White Man's Burden" perspective without less cynicism and make your Federation a place where people have worked out most of their differences and have gotten over them, either by all agreeing on the same thing or by learning to live and let live. And by virtue of having solved those problems, they have the moral authority to lecture others about them and to take an idealistic stand. Think of Star Trek as a sort of post-angry culture where people don't worry about small risks and quirks but about big issues and problems and where they believe others can do the same. There is a section in Space 1889 that talks about Victorian values as both virtue and vice (e.g., valuing "Progress" produced both the virture "Concern for improvement" and the vices "Disregard for foreign values, tendency to meddle"). I think that could be a useful way to look at the Star Trek attitude, as well.

'''Shadowjack:''' Food for thought.

'''John Morrow:''' It may not have been clear but my point is that I don't think the current tone of the United States is one of the sort of self-confident optimism seen in the original series. Your own skepticism about the "White Man's Burden" approach to solving problems (despite the fact that Kirk frequently took exactly that approach in the original series) illustrates that. So that runs up against your point about how Star Trek "''often functions best as analogy for and social commentary upon our own times.''" The two are no longer in harmony with each other, which means you are going to have to pick one or the other or find some middle ground between them that's simultaneously both but neither. 



'''JohnBiles:''' Given the whole 'mining past culture' thing, I'd suggest that Federation atheists refuse to answer to the term 'atheist' but insist on being identified by the philosophical tradition they've adopted which guides their action in a secular manner. So on their census forms, under 'Religion', they'd put 'Stoic' or 'Epicurean' or 'Cynic' or 'Platonist' or 'Enlightenment' or 'Neitzchean' or 'Existentialist' or 'Nihilist' or 'Capitalist' or 'Communist' or 'Hippy' or 'Saffron-Brodiest' or 'Transhumanist' or whatever. After all, 'Atheist' tells you what someone doesn't believe in, but not what they DO. And I'd expect lots of people to be reviving and experimenting with older philosophies. Lots of older religions would also be revived; the religions which dominate the 20th century would still exist, but not be so dominant as today. 

The Alliance would be similar, but all the philosophies would be more up to date.


'''Shadowjack:''' Genetic engineering: …I'd add in the issue of ''responsibility''. If you splice up a race of bioroids programmed as sex-slaves, who need special pills from you to survive… you're an ''asshole'', because what happens to all those people when you die, or get bored of them? So the Federation in particular has a lot of these offshoot minorities from the fallen Empire—parahuman colonists, obsolete bioroids, and odd traits which happened to breed true—because they'll make the extra effort to see that these people can survive and find something to do with their lives. Gengineering of new species is disliked, because you'll be held responsible for the newbies…


'''Shadowjack:''' While the Federation Diplomatic Corps should be far more competent than the Corps Diplomatique Terrestriene (they'd ''have'' to be), I do think that Retief is the one they all secretly wish they were.