a future where economic necessity is bypassed through technology, and individuals contribute based on personal fulfillment rather than class-driven labor dynamics.
Yeah, however not all higher Maslows can be replicated, so obviously a fair bit of (popular or bureaucratic) meritocracy is incorporated into the redistribution and/or accesses to finite resources.
(But the main point is that if individuals have the option to pursue personal fulfilment that is a huge net plus for the society & everyone can get more out of their life & life within that society - imagine only having people in the food industry that fully enjoy the work or the huge selection of artists not pre-smothered by the daily grind for basic human needs.)
As you said, much data is missing, but I assume if I wanted a nicer office or an apparent with a better view I could get to it via contributing something of merit to society (eg a successful career, notable art contributions, maybe some hero stuff, etc).
How come the Picard real estates remained in the family though all those generations, I can’t fully explain. Tho there basically was a revolution (a world war, but same diff) that facilitated initial systematic changes (I assume a much decimated/irrelevant previously-elite class).
MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Marx never considered replicators much like he never considered sorcery as an option because he worked within the framework of the reality of his time. He was engaging in practical philosophy not fantasy which is why you see the focus on a class struggle as in his time.
The federation has no money and everyone has what they need according to their needs how isn’t that Marx’ ideal? If you could achieve socialism without revolution IRL he would have backed that but in reality you cannot hope for the privileged to give up their power.
mechoman444@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I literally stated how it’s not Marxist… I’m pretty sure that I even proved it in my statement originally.
How do you read this and go no it is Marxist I’m right.
MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Again this is because Marx was concerned with reality. Science Fiction wasn’t even a genre to speak of in his lifetime. He might have considered non-violent tech driven communism had that been remotely conceivable at the time but during his time electrical power was rare.
Marx was a huge influence on Roddenberry’s views of The Federation.
mechoman444@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
just a quick gpt query. So no… He wasn’t.
While Star Trek reflects some Marxist themes—such as the abolition of poverty, class struggle, and money—there is no direct evidence that Karl Marx was a foundational inspiration for Gene Roddenberry. Roddenberry was more influenced by mid-20th-century liberal humanism, secular progressivism, and the optimism of the Space Age rather than Marxist theory.
The Federation’s post-scarcity economy resembles aspects of Marxist thought, but it arrives there not through revolution or class conflict but via technological advancement and social evolution. Moreover, Star Trek retains hierarchical structures (e.g., Starfleet’s chain of command), which contradict Marx’s vision of a classless, stateless society.
While Marxism and Star Trek share some overlapping ideals, Roddenberry’s future is more in line with utopian socialism, liberal progressivism, and even elements of American exceptionalism rather than strict Marxist doctrine.