Posted on 07/27/2017 5:14:39 AM PDT by C19fan
H. G. Wellss foundational work of political science fiction, The Time Machine, predicted a future in which a small utopia of sprightly elites is kept running by a subclass that lives below the ground and is reduced to bestial violence. This prediction, carried to a horrifically logical extent, represented the intense wealth disparity of the Victorian England in which Wells wrote the novel. Judging from the major political narratives of the fictions of our era, films like The Hunger Games, Elysium and Snowpiercer, the certainty of a future rendered increasingly barbarous by class division remains essentially the same.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I particularly love how they sneer that money is some kind of antiquated, silly notion from the past. Oh, really? So what are those people shoveling coal in the bowels of the ship (or whatever menial post they have) doing it for? The fun?
It’s just utterly illogical, like everything else the leftists imagine.
I see Elysium as our grand children’s most probable future if we head down the road of socialism.
‘Idiocracy’ appears to me to be where we’re heading.
’ Brawndo ‘, Plants love it.......It has electrolytes!
LOL!
I knew that there was a reason Scotty and the security guys all wore red shirts!
Worst job in Star Trek? Mopping out the holodeck.
They already did, back in the 1920s and 30s.
My immediate response to that particular Star Trek: The Neurotic Generation episode was “Great! One of mankind’s dreams finally realized? Where to do I go to pick up my star cruiser and get some training for it? I am going to spend the rest of my life as a star tourist seeing the sites! What!?! It doesn’t work that way? Then there is scarcity - and where there is scarcity, there is money. Cough up my cash, Baldie.”
I always like how critics portray the Morlocks as victims of the Eloi. Sure, the former labor in dark, subterranean tunnels to enable the leisure of the latter. But the Morlocks own the night, and the Eloi’s freedom comes at a terrible price.
They’re each others’ victims, if anything, in an oppressive symbiosis.
The socialists with their heads up their butts refuse to recognize the foundational truth of mankind. We do not change. Mankind will always be greedy, self centered and willing to do whatever it takes to get ahead because man is greedy, self centered and willing to do whatever it takes to get ahead.
Socialist schemes always fail because they select winners and losers (the politic class wins and everyone else loses). And it is impossible to NOT select winners and loses. Once you place the power into a small groups hands for them to “benevolently” rule over the rest, then that group turns into a dictatorship. Power corrupts.
ONLY true capitalism avoids this by giving each person the power to change their own life by their own achievements.
Socialism works AGAINST man’s nature while capitalism works with man’s nature and shows that what profits each man best is to be profitable to the men around him.
The only way man’s nature can change is by man submitting his will to God and letting Jesus change him. But again, the socialists refuse to recognize that there even is a God let alone that we need to submit to him.

Let us not forget what Riker had to do get information.
Dare I say, use some money? ;)
Star Trek isn’t socialist. The replication technology has reduced the price of things to near zero. Star Trek people compete for positions and personal reputation. There appears to be a very strong honor code. A culture like that is alien to us in the present.
I point this out often. "Socialism" is simply a rebirth of the Aristocracy/Feudal system which the emergence of the United States destroyed.
In the Aristocrat/Feudal system, there are only two classes, Wealthy and poor. There is no middle class. The hallmark of the United States was the creation of a stable middle class, and which thereafter caused the collapse of the Feudal Lord/Peasant system.
Socialism is merely the attempt to reestablish the older system that was ubiquitous before the creation of the United State changed the game to favor a broad middle class.
I am often very amused to see how "Star Trek" portrays a future in which technology (such as targeting control for offensive systems) doesn't even meet the capabilities of stuff they had in World War II.
Star Trek is a moral soap box for people who want to manipulate public opinion, and much of what it presents is simply wrong.
For example, with Transporter technology, you can pretty much insure that nobody ever dies and you could repair damage to your ship as soon as it occurs.
It's a fantasy. It's a liberals idea of a dream future, but one that is very much at odds with reality, much like liberal dreams of the present.
Of course there’s one line in one movie where they say they don’t have money. Meanwhile repeatedly throughout every show they mention various forms of money. But everybody obsesses on that one line. They also forget Trek world has the tech to not need money for most things, it’s a true post scarcity world where work and survival are decoupled.
Weena. What a waste!!
So a lot like the Stalinist SovUn.
Who is capable of self-support? he demanded. There is no such thing in a civilized society as self-support. In a state of society so barbarous as not even to know family cooperation, each individual may possibly support himself, though even then for a part of his life only; but from the moment that men begin to live together, and constitute even the rudest sort of society, self-support becomes
Edward Bellamy, Looking Backward
Here’s some 19th century American socialism for anyone interested in dystopian science fiction. I think his brother Francis is supposed to have written the pledge of allegiance.
Finally, we have a Francis who could say, “Lighten up Edward.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.