Marx and Star Trek

[GePap]

While reading the Economist's christmas special, I came on an article about Marx's continued life in the academic world, even after political Communism has come to a general end. As one would expect from the Economist, they espoused the view that we now know Marx's basic economic views are wrong, that Capitalism at its appex does not set the stage for the revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat. But is that true? Have we reached the end of Capitalism, the point at which we have maximized its productive capabilities? Feudalism lasted 1000 years, and there are 4000 years of history before that, and capitalism has been around only 300 at most. What about the future? which is where Star Trek comes in.

In Star Trek, one of the basic new technologies is matter-energy conversion, which makes the teleporter and the replicator possible. So lets imagine its the year 2350, and the "Home Replicator" has become a reality. Can the modern form of Capitalism survive a world in which any individual with enough capital to aquire one can create any good they demand, wthout the labor, capital, or resources of anyone else? Would this realm of near limitless energy (which one would need to make replicators) invalidate the current economic orthodoxy, or would a form of the Market remain alive, such as selling the patterns to replicate stuff? If so, how long would ownership of a pattern last? forever in the hands of one company? How could it work?

PS:
On the topic of star trek, two separate questions:
How could the Ferengi continue to use species (Latinum) as currency? Why has no unscrupolous (ie. any) Ferengi simply replicated tons of the stuff, thus making it worthless?
Does the Federation ever hold elections? We rarely ever see (even in DS9) the political, civilians leaders of this "federation", only Starfleet Officers. And I have never heard of any of the many crews talk about absentee ballots, the coming or past elections, so forth and so on: do we assume the dictatorship of the proletariat came true?

[Graag]

How could the Ferengi continue to use species (Latinum) as currency? Why has no unscrupolous (ie. any) Ferengi simply replicated tons of the stuff, thus making it worthless?

Its worth is that fact that it cannot be replicated, which is why the ferengi like it so much.

Good post by the way, wish I had the brain capacity at the moment to answer it.

[DinoDoc]

Re: Marx and Star Trek

Originally posted by GePap
How could the Ferengi continue to use species (Latinum) as currency? Why has no unscrupolous (ie. any) Ferengi simply replicated tons of the stuff, thus making it worthless?

IIRC, in one of the books I've read they say that no one has figured out how replicate it yet. Supossedly it defies conventional techniques. However I expect to be corrected by one of the more geeky people on the board shortly.

Does the Federation ever hold elections?

Wasn't thier a coup attempt in one of the DS9 episodes against the civilian leadership?

[Andrew1999]

Yes, whenever anyone tries to replicate latinum a giant Plot Hole opens up and swallows them, and they are never seen again.

Don't try to get philosophy or political sceince from some sci-fi show. That's how we wound up with Scientology (well, OK, that was a novel).

[GePap]

Non-replicable? Weird....

Another question (though the main economic question is the most interesting..)
Everytime someone replicates something to drink or eat, the replicate the glasses, cups, plates etc. as well: what do they do with all these containers? Is there some way to "un-replicate" and get back some of the energy you used?

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by GePap
Non-replicable? Weird....

Another question (though the main economic question is the most interesting..)
Everytime someone replicates something to drink or eat, the replicate the glasses, cups, plates etc. as well: what do they do with all these containers? Is there some way to "un-replicate" and get back some of the energy you used?

"Doing the dishes" involves putting the plates back in the replicator. I've seen that happen in an episode involving Cheif O'Brian and his wife Keiko.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Andrew1999
Yes, whenever anyone tries to replicate latinum a giant Plot Hole opens up and swallows them, and they are never seen again.

Don't try to get philosophy or political sceince from some sci-fi show. That's how we wound up with Scientology (well, OK, that was a novel).

I am not trying to get economics out of Trek: the question is: if at any point makind was able to have at their hands near limitless energy, and something like replicators, would modern economic theory remain valid? Can our economy be so productive, as to make the Market meanigless (and perhaps, in the end, validate Marx)

[Adam Smith]

Economics is about making choices subject to resource constraints. If one resource, energy, is effectively limitless, and can be freely transformed into all other resources, then there is no resource constraint, and no need for economics. But can replicators be used to create, say, a limitless supply of each person's time? If not, scarcity still exists and economics still has something to say.

[Ned]

There is a lot about Star Trek that makes no sense if one assumes that there is no money. Why, for example, are people working to provide services for others?

GePap, as to the continued study of Marxism in academia, etc., I don't think the issue is based solely on the economics of it. I think Marxism offers a vision of absolute equality that many find attractive even if one knows that equality is achieved in a state of poverty. After all, this is exactly what Christ seemed to be teaching and actually practicing.

So Star Trek offers a magical way to have Marxist equality without poverty. An attractive world to many.

[Jules]

Re: Re: Marx and Star Trek

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Wasn't thier a coup attempt in one of the DS9 episodes against the civilian leadership?

IIRC, before the Dominion War, a high-ranking Starfleet officer tried to overthrow the civilian leadership of the Federation because of paranoia over the changeling threat. He recruited an elite unit of Starfleet Academy cadets to sabatoge Earth's power grid as a pretext to martial law, blaming it on changeling infiltrators obviously. Fortunately Sisko and crew foiled the plot.

[Graag]

There is a lot about Star Trek that makes no sense if one assumes that there is no money. Why, for example, are people working to provide services for others?

The idea is that since they seem to be able to replicate what they want, when they want and have limitless amounts of energy, everyone is so rich they can do what they want.
People work because they want to - everyone needs to spend their life doing something, and a lot of them choose to join Starfleet or whatever.

My question is why don't the crew of TNG ever die of dehydration or starvation? Everytime the poor bastards go into 10-forward (I think its called that) for a drink of bite to eat there's an emergency and they have to leave their drink/meal.

[Provost Harrison]

LOL, that is a very good point Graag.

Of course, if we had effectively finite resources, the whole need for economics ceases to exist. Think - no more Roland Stenish threads

[GePap]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Economics is about making choices subject to resource constraints. If one resource, energy, is effectively limitless, and can be freely transformed into all other resources, then there is no resource constraint, and no need for economics. But can replicators be used to create, say, a limitless supply of each person's time? If not, scarcity still exists and economics still has something to say.

What would be the economics of time, exactly?

And what about ideas: the whole idiotic "latinum" disucssion birngs up one point: you probably need formulas for anything you whish to replicate, so where would these formulas come from? You could argue that if someone comes up witha design for some new tool, they would own the patent, and be able to charge individuals for using their idea. Yet what about, lets say, and apple? Could anyone own the pattern for an apple, or any sort of common plant?

And then there is the idea of services: you still need engineers, and repair personal for this equipment, teahcers, and doctors (probably even lawyers). Could these serives be provided all by an overarching state?Or would private companies still exist? and then thre is the question of who builds and controls the power output, the lifeline of this whole system.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Economics is about making choices subject to resource constraints. If one resource, energy, is effectively limitless, and can be freely transformed into all other resources, then there is no resource constraint, and no need for economics. But can replicators be used to create, say, a limitless supply of each person's time? If not, scarcity still exists and economics still has something to say.

If technology of the same time allows clinical immortality and advanced medicine techniques to combat just about all ailments, then yes...people could have lots of time too. The issue is, humans would have to find something to do with all the time...

[Kropotkin]

Originally posted by GePap
What would be the economics of time, exactly?

Probably what you said yourself; services. Services take a lot of time.