By the end of Undiscovered Country, I believe Kirk overcomes his somewhat understandable prejudice as well…

I agree with you about human imperfection. You need conflict to drive a good story. But by the end of those stories, we have recognized and overcome those imperfections, thus the moral of the story.

Education and enlightenment is the answer, and I’m glad that Star Trek gives us a little of that. LL&P

Off the top of my head, Mike Huckabee and Gary Bauer are two prominent religious conservatives who have targeted big business in the past. But when they critique corporate America as “immoral,” I doubt they have personal freedom, choice, and equality in mind. Personally, I do not subscribe to their theocratic agenda. But it is illogical to ascribe fundamentalism to capitalism. These are two separate ideas. Their alliance is largely opportunistic. And either can exist just fine without the other. Eliminating the money, in and of itself, will not eliminate religious fervor.

As for getting rid of our baser instincts, perhaps FC “Ahab” Picard should go back in time and have a debate with smug TNG ” Evolved Sensibility” Picard about that one. Violence and greed are as much a part of the human condition as compassion and hope. Humans on Star Trek seem to think that Federation social conditioning (denial) is the answer.

But starting with The Undiscovered Country, the TPTB even acknowledged some of the flaws in Gene’s extreme idealism. The negative impulses are still present inside each and every one of us. And we have to learn to live with that as best we can. If Kirk had simply spouted absurd Federation ideals like “we’ve moved beyond racism” in ST 6, it wouldn’t have been progress in any real sense. His honest admission to Spock that he is prejudiced against Klingons, on the other hand, represented genuine personal growth and inner struggle.

In my opinion, the best Star Trek movies and episodes involve imperfect humans being human. The more preachy, utopian stuff is usually so heavy-handed that viewers tend to get all defensive and belligerent any way.

There certainly is not any difference, except with reference to scale (which is a result of a much larger population). Our early-human ancestors fought (and slaughtered) over resources—-such as water supply, foraging grounds, and even women.

As humans evolved and developed technology, more resources inherent to the Earth became objects of value. Men have sought to obtain things of value as far back as there are remains of human existence, and violence (and the threat of its use) has been the dominant method of procuring and protecting those things.

I think that everyone would agree that civilization has improved over time, and that it should continue to improve, but the idea that “war” (in all of its forms) first showed its ugly head (which I have unfortunately witnessed firsthand) with the advent of currency is simply incorrect. There have always been valuable resources, and there has always been competition to obtain them.

I’m not a fan of name-calling. When either you or TrekdomKeeper can have a civil discussion without it, give me a jingle.

I have never heard any of this… it would be refreshing! They should also complain about personal greed and the sin of wasteful consumption.
I only hear them trying to deny personal freedom, choice, equality, etc…

266. sean: Until you can backup any of your “one-liners”, they do seem thoughtless.

267. JohnWA: “I can understand the Klingons and the Ferengi.”
It’s probably because they are driven by their BASER INSTINCTS.
The humans in Star Trek have risen above those instincts; we should strive to do the same.

269. TrekdomKeeper: FULL AGREEMENT

The new Star Trek movie hopefully will have some morals to learn along the way. Trek has already taught us A LOT about greed and bigotry. I think now we may see a moral about hate, terrorism, genocidal warfare and how they are driven, with parallels between Nero and bin Laden.

…we shall soon see!!! =D

To get at the origins of warfare, you’d almost certainly have to go pre-historic (which would probably fall under the purview of anthropology rather than history). However, you’re right in saying that currency came much later than the violence. Without going too much into the debate over when exactly warfare became a feature of hominid existence, I think it is safe to say that stealing – and the accompanying fights – pre-dates organized economic activity.

But, of course, this was a common mistake on the show as well. Star Trek tends to fail on social science even worse than it does on physical science. And the assumptions about money are only the tip of the iceberg. Some of Counselor Troi’s so-called “psychology” was downright hilarious. I guess the University of Betazed has decided to revive 19th century human diagnoses of mental illness and started teaching those theories as gospel.

There’s a reason why the humans on Star Trek are so… not human-like in any behavior. I’ve said it before. The “aliens” here aren’t the Klingons or the Ferengi. I can understand the Klingons and the Ferengi. It is the humans.

No one manufactured them for me. I just paid attention in history class.