We Can Rebuild It. We Have The Technology.

Spotted on Facebook.

My slight reworking.

Have a hand at it yourself. The best entry may receive a fabulous prize.


Last 5 posts by Patrick Non-White


  1. Direwolf says

    The Federation is not even socialist. Socialism has money and a market, it is still a a scarcity-based economy. The Federation has no money, no market and is post-scarcity.

    Also, the Federation is secretly oppressive, what with banning genetic modification and all.

  2. says

    I think this is one of the reasons I like written SF but generally despise the movie versions. The written stuff is generally done by libertarians or conservatives, the movies are all done by lefties.

    Think Starship Troopers.

  3. princessartemis says

    Y'don't even have to go out of universe for it–substitute in a Borg cube.

    Anyhow, there always was something in TNG and beyond that drove me batty, and it was indeed the "Assimilate, resistance is futile" outlook of the Federation towards those who had the audacity to be something other than human.

  4. says

    You're stuck on some backwoods world watching Everybody Loves Raymond reruns and dying of cancer. Under the Prime Directive, you'll continue to watch Everybody Loves Raymond reruns until the pain becomes uncontrollable, at which time you'll be in a morphine fog until you die.

    Under a libertarian model, galactic traders will swoop in offering to cure your cancer, make you immune to further disease, provide access to the Library of Ultimate Knowledge, and give you an all-expenses-paid trip to the Zommos, the Galactic Pleasure Planet, in return for your signing away your rights to property you consider to be of no value, such as the genotypes of your intestinal flora.

  5. Dan Weber says

    and it was indeed the "Assimilate, resistance is futile" outlook of the Federation towards those who had the audacity to be something other than human

    Eddington said words pretty much like that to Sisko.

    I also think of the Wild-Cards universe, whose fan page I used to maintain waaaaay long ago. There was a libertarian battle fleet that would extract a very high price to save your planet from invasion. The invasion was by a socialist organic hivemind that sought to consume all life that wasn't itself.

  6. Xenocles says

    In a world where you can get food on demand from a computer in the wall and then exhaust yourself in a lifelike simulation of an orgy, what motivates anyone to be productive? I suppose the holodeck would keep the people from becoming the lounge chair slugs from Wall-E, but I imagine society would be otherwise similar.

  7. Grifter says


    My favorite is probably the (likely apocryphal) Marrou quote:

    An anarchist is an extreme libertarian, like a socialist is an extreme democrat, and a fascist is an extreme republican.

  8. C. S. P. Schofield says


    Fascism is socialism plus rabid nationalism. Think Italy and Germany during (and slightly before) WWII. Frankly, the difference between Fascism and Communism is usually not apparent to the naked eye …. Unless you are looking through rose-colored Lefty glasses.

  9. Grifter says

    @C.S.P. Schofield:

    While I agree to a certain extent, I you might be oversimplifying a wee bit; I think the distinctions between Fascism, Socialism, and Communism still serve a purpose, hence their continued existence.

  10. Erik Carlseen says

    Comparing philosophical and economic systems based on cinema stereotypes is kinda like comparing the quality of romance in the relationships of guys based on the letters they've written to Penthouse – it's all fiction (geared toward genre memes) and wishful thinking anyway.

  11. says

    I know two people who made money writing those letters-to-the editor in soft pr0n magazines. Those are all professional writers taking assignments, in case you haven't guessed. They're given a description of the scenario, and off they go. One of them, her day job was writing children's books for under-fives.

  12. Kevin says

    @Erik Carlseen Why so serious? It's the weekend, let us have our fun. We can get back to high minded public policy discussions on monday. All work and no play makes homer something something

  13. David Schwartz says

    Xenocles: I'd still want my own starship, crew and all. I'd be willing to work to get it.

  14. Scott Jacobs says

    One of them, her day job was writing children's books for under-fives.

    Why have you not introduced me to this woman??

  15. James Pollock says

    "The Federation has no money, no market and is post-scarcity."

    Did you tell that to Harcourt Fenton Mudd? He seems to have not gotten the memo…

  16. Matthew Cline says

    This is being pedantic, but can you really apply a term like "socialism" to aliens with non-human psychology?

  17. Anony Mouse says

    Well, from TNG on it was certainly post-scarcity. In the episode where they thaw out the people from the 20th Century, they rather soundly mock the investor for caring about such outdated concepts as money and capitalism and trade.

    Hell, that's part of why the Ferengi are so weird and (originally) evil: they were practically Randian capitalists with a side salad of Gor.

  18. C. S. P. Schofield says


    Sure the distinction serves a purpose. It allows a lot of self-styled intellectuals pretend that their fantasies of a Communist State under their benevolent direction are somehow respectable by ignoring the lesson of history that putting the State sbove the Law inevitably leads to mass slaughter and misery.


  19. says

    All entries were excellent, with special commendation to Erbo and Steven Olsen, but the winner is Geek Chick.

    So Geek Chick, if that's a working email address, check your mail later today.

  20. says

    B wondered, "Wouldn't the prime directive indicate more of a Libertarian mentality?" Patrick answered dramatically, but I have a guide to the general question — look at the noun, forget the adjective…

    "______ Directive" Yeah, libertarians are against that.

  21. says

    I dunno. I think the Star Trek example is spot-on.

    Consider: everybody in ST works for the military; the object pictured is first and foremost a big fucking gun; its primary mission is to subjugate native cultures and enforce the Protestant/Stakhanovite work ethic of the Federation on them.

    That's exactly one Moon-sized hologram of the Dear Leader's face mandated to orbit every world away from being the Kim dynasty's fantasy of what they're making out of North Korea.

  22. says

    Also: Dan Weber, Lord love you for your good works in bringing up Wild Cards, as well as once maintaining the fan page.

    And while your take on the Network vs. the Swarm is very interesting (and arguably supported by the stories) I'd say it's not really what was intended. GRRM, who created the Network, was a professed socialist at the time (he may still be, though he now has more money than God). The Network was meant as an invidious parody of the sort of unfettered capitalism liberals like to imagine the US has had since Reagan, as opposed to the bipartisan corporatism that's dominated since WWII.

    I love the folks in the Wild Cards Consortium. And to the best of my knowledge and belief, it has exactly one member who would identify himself as a "libertarian."

  23. says

    I left the original image in out of impish humor Kevin, but Somalia's a good example of anarchy. Libertarians do believe in government, and that government's primary functions are to enforce contracts through courts, and to protect life and private property.

    The image above is taken from the wonderful film, "The Road Warrior." In a libertarian society, the Lord Humungus, who was attempting to rob a colony of scientists who'd set up an oil drilling and refining station in a post-apocalyptic waste, would have been crushed by the government.

    The best image anyone submitted, from a libertarian perspective, is Windypundit's. Unfortunately Windypundit submitted his image after I'd already decided to award the prize (arbitrarily, as is my right from a libertarian perspective), but he knows I love him anyway.

    The prize, by the way, is UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY FABULOUS. Geek Chick certainly earned it.

  24. says

    I love this blog, but what a silly pile of shit. For the sake of my enjoyment, I'm going to assume no one is being particularly serious.

  25. says

    Aw, shucks, now I'm blushing.

    The images, by the way, are from Hong Kong and Benxi. And of course the comparison is a bit unfair: Parts of Hong Kong are ugly, and I'm sure Benxi has some nice areas. But it's no more unfair than representing the Federation with one of it's shiny starships without wondering why they have a standard numbered general order for murdering everyone on a planet.

  26. Matthew Carberry says


    I like your entry, but the libertarians' guns should be holstered, not pointed.
    As I've understood it, the idea is to not aggress and be prepared to defend, your libertarian example is more M.A.D. or Hobbesean state of nature. Libertarians are too busy making mutually profitable business deals to be in armed stand-offs all the time.

  27. Caleb says


    That should be your default assumption at all times, towards everyone. Life is much more enjoyable that way.

  28. Dan Weber says

    Victor, I think it was when some characters were in Russia when someone pointed out, to the great offense of their Russian hosts, how the Takisian society was monarchy, the Network capitalist, and the Swarm socialist. Or something like that. Darn, I really need to re-read the copies I have in a shoe-box, and get the newer ones on e-reader. I've been out of the loop since Radical re-appeared.

    The Network was what the Ferengi should have been. Capitalist to the extreme. Signing a Network contract without a team of lawyers on your side is a very bad idea — and it's probably legal for your lawyers to actually be working for the other side.

    (Small world. Just earlier today I was thinking of the "let's shake the shoe tree and see what falls" verbiage that I was, IIRC, one of your characters' words in that last book I read. Now I really need to re-read them!)

  29. JWH says

    This illustrates one thing for me: it's often foolish to apply contemporary American political standards to remote places and times. I suspect that in a universe with an nigh-infinite frontier (where a discontented person can go find another planet) and with almost no scarcity thanks to the replicator, concepts like "money," "capitalism," "socialism" and "scarcity" have meanings that are not comparable to their meanings today.

  30. Sheriff Fatman says

    @Grifter @C.S.P. Schofield: distinctions between Fascism and Communism

    In philosophical terms, Fascism harks back to a non-existent utopian past, while Communism looks forward to an equally imaginary utopian tomorrow.

    In practical terms, Fascism keeps many of the same elites (landowners, business owners) in place, and even entrenches their position (as long as they toe the Party line), while Communism tends to get rid of them and let a different group of people have a go at grinding the faces of the poor.

  31. Orv says

    I think Libertarianism would be better represented (although less visually usefully) by, say, Max Headroom. In that series, a few big corporations control everything, and whichever corporation's TV network can command the most viewers has control of the government.

  32. Scott Jacobs says

    I think Libertarianism would be better represented (although less visually usefully) by, say, Max Headroom. In that series, a few big corporations control everything, and whichever corporation's TV network can command the most viewers has control of the government.

    Then you don't understand Libertarianism…

  33. James Pollock says

    The real problem with Libertarianism is that no two Libertarians have the same idea of what "Libertarian" means.

    How to tell fascism from socialism: In socialism, the government owns the corporations. In fascism, the corporations own the government.

    How to tell a Democrat from a Republican: A Democrat wants to take away YOUR money and give it to someone POORER THAN YOU. A Republican wants to take away YOUR money and give it to someone RICHER THAN YOU.

  34. says

    Patrick, whenever I think of libertarianism, those thoughts are colored by the American statesman who said he wants to make government small enough to strangle in a bathtub. Perhaps this was not the best way to put his beliefs, as those words made it seem that the goal of libertarianism should be to make government completely inept.

  35. cbodley says

    Sorry this is wrong. The Daleks are Fascists you want to post a picture of the cybermen they are more socialist well really they are more communists than socialist but you still get the picture.

  36. Geek Chick says

    Thank you very much Patrick. This truly is awesome. And any one who asks will be told that this is a genuine Popehat pony complete with the blood of dumbass marketers and free speech villains on her hooves.

  37. says

    Well Kevin, when I think of socialism I think of the socialist who said that lower middle class farmers should be eliminated by death sentence, labor collectives, or deportation to wilderness.

    Am I wrong to judge all socialists by the words of one?

    Geek Chick, you're quite welcome.

  38. Joe Pullen says

    Well if corporations like this keep this kind of crap up we're headed for some sort of society and it isn't one I want to be part of.

    Last year Verizon filed a patent application for targeting ads to viewers based on information collected from infrared cameras and microphones that would be able to detect conversations, people, objects and even animals that are near a TV.

    Think I’m spoofing about this Orwellian development? Well the patent application can be seen here http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20120304206&OS=20120304206&RS=20120304206 MSNBC, Techdirt and others have also posted on this.

    A non-final rejection was issued on November 15th, but that's likely meaningless since it does not appear there is any such thing as a TRUE final rejection at the USPTO. You can simply continue to adjust the applications with no limit on times you can resubmit.

    Officials at Verizon declined to comment about the patent application.

    Probably the only smart thing they did. Too bad someone at Verizon couldn’t pull their head from their ass, wiped the shit from their eyes, and looked at the world without dollar signs getting in the way. For engineers to have spent time developing this to even get to a patent state, someone at Verizon in a management position had to get this idea on their desk, and say “hey this looks like a great idea to make money,” they had to specifically NOT be thinking “I’m using my discretion to determine that this is a really bad idea, an illegal invasion of the privacy of our customers and probably not the best use of Verizon’s money and time”. Why am I not surprised they didn’t, or that they are not the only nor will they likely be the last company to pursue this.