www.ditl.org

Not only that but the law is 200 years old. It had probably been changed quite a bit over the years leaving outdated bits and areas that need updating. This is the reason democracy doesnt work.

Yeah, but at least it's better than the alternative.

You do know its not just democracy or a dictator dispite what Bush tells everyone. There are other better options.

I'm not talking about dictatorship per se, and I don't listen to ANYTHING Bush says - you do know that people in America might have different viewpoints than the president, right? BTW, America is not a true democracy per Pericles etc.

Anyway, what form of government do you prefer to democracy?

A mix of Meritocracy, Libertarianism and Feudalism. I'm a social Darwinist and strong Liberatarian.

Very limited government (Liberatian) that rules over smallish areas of land (About the size of an American state (Feudalisum)) what government official there are are placed due to merit and skill not money/popularity/class (Meritocracy)

Thats what I would ideally like to see as each individual has absolute power over themselves which I believe is the most important thing.

Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:*snip essay*

The incident of Kirk supplying the hill people with weapons was to counter action by the Klingons, not another Starfleet officer, in a pretty obvious parallel to the various proxy wars between US and Soviet client states.

The key problem, as I see it, is treating the TOS and TNG Federations as the same entity, as there's sufficient evidence to make the argument that the latter is a different entity than the former. It's attitude towards the military, its economy, and the PD have all changed between the two periods. In the case of the PD, while the basic principle of "don't give a two-year old a gun" remains the same, the details have changed from Kirk repeatedly intervening to save lives, or to undo damage caused, to Picard refusing to intervene (or intervening very reluctantly) to save lives. Even a specific request for aid from a close Federation ally was refused on PD grounds ("Redemption"), as was the plight of the Bajorans.

Did they cite the PD as a reason for not helping Bajor?

Als you have to remember it is one hundred years after TOS that TNG is set. A lot happens in that much time.

Teaos wrote:Did they cite the PD as a reason for not helping Bajor?

From "Ensign Ro":

KEEVE
(pleasantly)
You were innocent bystanders for
decades as the Cardassians took
our homes... as they violated and
tortured our people in the most
hideous ways imaginable... as we
were forced to flee...

PICARD
We were saddened by those
events... but they occurred within
the designated borders of the
Cardassian Empire...

KEEVE
... and the Federation is pledged
not to interfere in the internal
affairs of others.

Sounds like the PD to me.

Also you have to remember it is one hundred years after TOS that TNG is set. A lot happens in that much time.

True, but the Federation has gone from a free-market economy (Cyrano Jones, Harry Mudd, the Rigellan lithium miners, Scotty buying a boat, etc) to Communism, and from a military that could "clean [the Klingons' chronometers" to the Galaxy class. That isn't just change, that's a revolution. My personnal theory is that a key cause was the defeat at Tomed, and it was completed by the start of 2323 (the origin of the TNG Stardate system).

I agree that it is massive change but I think it is more likely to be the fact that they have had a prolnged period of relative peace. Sure they hav had minor stuff but nothing that truely causes warry for the Federation as a whole. Peace tends to dull your senses and make you think it will last forever.

Teaos - how do you avoid a limited, Hellenic type of aristo-democracy in choosing the members of a meritocracy? I'm not being anti, I'm jsut curious about the theoretical logistics.

And I agree with the Federation having been lulled into a false sense of security by the great periods of peace it has enjoyed. It explains so many other failings or omissions that have been discussed in other threads (yes, like the design of the Galaxy, Rochey) as well as the more modern interpretation of the PD - the non-involvement interpretation.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:*snip essay*

The incident of Kirk supplying the hill people with weapons was to counter action by the Klingons, not another Starfleet officer, in a pretty obvious parallel to the various proxy wars between US and Soviet client states.

Which one am I thinking of? Admiral Jameson, the guy that was getting younger and younger? I may have confused them.

The example with Kirk supplying Tyree's hill people against the Klingon-armed villagers was in TOS "A Private Little War", Captain (later Admiral) Jameson's arming of all sides in a civil war equally to ensure the release of hostages was the core plot of TNG "Too Short a Season".

The PD like so many things in the UFP is a failed but well meant idea. Just like their down sizing of the Military and turning starfleet into a group of girl scouts.

Teaos - how do you avoid a limited, Hellenic type of aristo-democracy in choosing the members of a meritocracy? I'm not being anti, I'm jsut curious about the theoretical logistics.

As I said I am far from an expert this just comes from my own person reserch and general knowledge.

But I would think the use of clans and guilds would work the best. As an example, To select Judges you gather the names of the most qualified lawers. How they select this is up to them but I would imagin it would be through contribution to justice or something like that. Then you see out of them who would like to and they are then selected by panel.

It keeps the power of selection in the hands of those who are best qualified to make the decision and not some slob who will vote for who ever promises him the most stuff.

Makes sense to me, but unfortunately in the real world I'm afraid it would still come down to an at least partially democratic process.