Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Spock on Collectivism by Atamolos Spock on Collectivism by Atamolos
Interesting fact:  Gene Roddenberry was a socialist.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconlipizzaner-kgirl:
Lipizzaner-Kgirl Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2014  Student General Artist
I'm not so sure Spock was addressing societies as a whole. At least, that's not what the movie played out.
Reply
:iconamericandralion:
AmericanDralion Featured By Owner Jul 2, 2014  Hobbyist Photographer
Roddenberry may have been one of the few progressive voices in a genre that seems to tend towards a libertarian/martial philosophy--IMO of course!
Reply
:iconfinnishecosocialist:
FinnishEcoSocialist Featured By Owner May 18, 2014  Hobbyist Interface Designer
No wonder why Patrick Stewart wanted to be in the Star Trek XD
Reply
:iconkakerate:
kakerate Featured By Owner Mar 4, 2014
The principle has good reason to it. The problem is understanding how the practice of this principle of utilitarianism will affect society.

Justification of using this utilitarianism principle in practice requires that there be no assumptions, and that you're forced to make a choice in a situation where you cannot ask for consent. The choice must also rationally weigh the pros and cons the outcome of the choice will have morally on society. 

There really is no other way I can reason where you could implement this kind of principle into written law onto a society of people without having more harm come from it than good.

The principle on its own, when practiced by the individual of their own free will, tends to be fine until they get control over other people's lives. That's why consent is so important to have in this principle's practice. 
Reply
:iconshiows:
Shiows Featured By Owner Feb 21, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
You sir spark alot of debate with your views. Keep up the good work.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014
Exactly what needs of the many outweigh what needs of the few?  Any and all?
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
How kind of you to unblock me so I could respond.

"The needs of the many" refers firstly, to the basic needs and rights of the collective.  More often than not, this includes everybody, not simply the majority.

The central message of the phrase is to emphasize that, if the desires of a few individuals infringe upon the rights of "the many", being the collective, then they are harmful to the society as a whole, and it would be a waste of resources to cater exclusively to such.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014
Are you aware that, in Dark of the Moon, Sentinel Prime (also voiced by Leonard Nimoy), used this very same "reasoning" to justify the extermination of an entire species?

And what happens when the desires of the many infringe on the rights of the few?
Reply
:iconjmoc1:
Jmoc1 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
What part is Nimroy best known for? Most likely Star Trek's Spock. Now riddle me this, do you honestly believe that Capitalism is the way to go in space? Humanity needs to outgrow these mythical desires in order to exand their knowledge about the galaxy around them. Star Trek's future depends on a post-Capital society based on the idea that each human an alien is special and deserves respect as such. So if you honestly think that Communism and Socialism is about the murder of society, look to Star Trek and remember that the Federation is a benevolent institution designed to bring unity, autonomy, and equality through a collective field. Almost like Socialism or Communism.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
You do realize you're using a fictional show that takes a lot of liberties with reality to support your ideology, right?
Reply
:iconjmoc1:
Jmoc1 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
Well than thank you for using Transformers as a reference. I hope you remember that when you mention Nimroy's role as a villain in a movie. Oh, I almost forgot! Did you know that Star Trek has culturally affected the world by having the first desegregated crew in a scifi show? Not to mention that it solely brought out many questions in regard to our treatment of the poor, the affects of Capitalism (Ferengi), and the problems regarding race and religion. Face facts, a liberal show like Star Trek has changed the world.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
And before you try and jump on me for what I just said, Ferengi culture does have problems, but they aren't from capitalism.
Reply
:iconjmoc1:
Jmoc1 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
Then what are they from? They are an example of Capitalism that hates taxes, labor laws, and believe in mythical religions like worshipping the First Negus. In no way do they believe in the society that the Communistic Federation believes in.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
And not that you give a damn, but the Ferengi are not representative of free-market capitalism.  I could say why...but I already have.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
Actually, looking a bit deeper into them, they are a good race and do represent many of the great benefits of capitalism, and I'm failing to see what "problems" of capitalism they demonstrate...then again, you wouldn't be the first one to view individual freedom as dangerous.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
"Well than thank you for using Transformers as a reference." 

Considering Atamolos started off by quoting a fake character, I think that allows me to do the same.  In any case, it was Nimroy who was making the quote, and he's not fake.

"Oh, I almost forgot! Did you know that Star Trek has culturally affected the world by having the first desegregated crew in a scifi show? Not to mention that it solely brought out many questions in regard to our treatment of the poor, the affects of Capitalism (Ferengi), and the problems regarding race and religion. Face facts, a liberal show like Star Trek has changed the world." 

Major League Baseball and the military, things that are actually real, were also changing opinions on race.

And no one's saying "Hey, in the future, we'll be able to beam things and people where we need them, so let's stop building cars and drilling for oil now."  No one's ignoring the facts of today for the wishes of tomorrow.  

How are things produced in your beloved Star Trek?  How is food grown, how are homes built, how are diseases cured?
Reply
:iconjmoc1:
Jmoc1 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
Actually, strange enough, a replicator works exactly like the 3D printers NASA has been working on. Think about it, how much has Star Trek influenced our technology? Not to mention, how often did Star Trek ask questions regarding morality?
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Firstly, in my opinion, that was a terrible movie: the plot was silly, the screenplay was horrible, and Ironhide was killed.  But I digress.

In this instance, Sentinel Prime's misconception is that the life on Earth "needed" to be exterminated for the Cybertronians to survive.  This simply isn't true.  You could draw a parallel of any line reasoning to a flawed usage of itself.  For example:  if two of your neighbors broke into your house, stole everything, and killed you, would the "needs of the many" reasoning be justified because they outnumber you?  of course not.  There was no legitimate reason for them to do that, so the argument's usage has little relevance if it isn't applied in context.

Desires should never infringe upon rights.  That's the point of this reasoning.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014
So you do not believe that a majority may demand whatever it wishes from a minority or a one simply on the basis that it needs it?
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
You used both the words "wishes" and "needs".  Those are mutually non-inclusive.

In any case, the two pillars of a successful social group are democracy and rights.  Democracy allows for the majority to be satisfied, and rights allow the minorities to be satisfied if their opinion is not full reflected by the majority consensus.

Democracy without rights is mob rule.  Rights without democracy is a benevolent dictatorship.  You must have both for pure communism to be possible.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014
"Rights without democracy is a benevolent dictatorship."

How so?  Rights dictate how a man can live among his fellow men without causing harm, and one of the key requirements of rights is freedom from the initiation of force, which is the cornerstone of any dictatorship, benevolent or otherwise.
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
You're right, that is what rights are, but without democracy, citizens are not free to make decisions that govern them.  The ability to self-govern is liberty, and without the ability to do so, you live under a dictatorship.

A dictatorship is defined as follows:  "A government controlled by one person, or a small group of people. In this form of government the power rests entirely on the person or group of people"

The cornerstone of a dictatorship is that the power is vested entirely in the hands of the government, rather than in the hands of the governed.  Benevolent dictatorships can, and have existed.  Take for instance, the dictators of the late Roman Republic, Hammurabi's rule, Ivan the Great, or the enlightened despots of the Renaissance Period.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconlichtie:
lichtie Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014

I'll have to paraphrase this, but there is a beautiful line in "First Contact". When asked, but what do you do for money? Ryker replies- "We have no need for money..."

Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I finally watched First Contact, and I heard the line to which you are referring. Picard says that people no longer work for money, but for the betterment of humanity.
Reply
:iconlichtie:
lichtie Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014

That's it!!!

Is that not a beautiful concept? What did you think of the movie? Data has a nice line at the end as well

Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
It was a lovely movie, of course to me, anything with Borg is great.  I especially liked the part of Data, as usual, as well as the inner turmoil of Picard as his duties conflicted with his emotions.  It made for a very colorful story.
Reply
:iconlichtie:
lichtie Featured By Owner Jan 27, 2014
It is one of my fav's. What do you think of the new movies? 2nd a bit of a disappointment, almost had the plot figured out in the first 'Act', Still watchable none the less. Watched the Graceland movie last night. My, how, Courtney Cox has matured. In a nice way. 
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 27, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I found the second one to be better than the first, probably because of the role of Khan, although I found Spock's role to be unrealistic. I too had the entire plot predicted early on in the movie.
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Sounds like an excellent line.  Unfortunately, First Contact is one of the only movies I have yet to see.  I've heard great things about it though.
Reply
:iconfiskefyren:
fiskefyren Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014
It's a little to heavy on the action part for my taste, but then again I love the Borg, and it's one of the better movies, unlike some of the other Star Trek movies *shudder* 
Reply
:iconlichtie:
lichtie Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014

Yeah, I kind of the 'Borg' kind of appealing in some respects as well. In some of the movies, the opening credits were about as long as the movies themselves as well as being a complete disaster for fans.

Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
The Search for Spock...
Reply
:iconfiskefyren:
fiskefyren Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014
ew... or the one where they look for god *laughs*
Reply
:iconfinnishecosocialist:
FinnishEcoSocialist Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014  Hobbyist Interface Designer
"Life long and revolt."
Reply
:iconcomradelither:
ComradeLither Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Communism appears to be highly logical.
Reply
:iconace99129:
Ace99129 Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
That's awesome! :D
Reply
:iconjmoc1:
Jmoc1 Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2014
So much win!
Reply
:icontheatticusnew:
TheAtticusNew Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
... and the one.
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Indeed, and the one!  :D
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2014
That sounds a lot more like utilitarianism than communism or socialism.
Reply
:icontheatticusnew:
TheAtticusNew Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2014  Hobbyist Artist
The two aren't mutually exclusive.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014
I guess not? The principle of the many over the individual is basic utilitarianism, though.
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Placing collective interest over the desires of individuals?  That's fairly communistic.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014
I guess I don't know communism all that well- I know it aims to create a classless society in which ownership of everything is shared by everyone- but the many over the few sounds distinctly utilitarian.
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Or at least, the means of production must be collectivized before property is abolished completely.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014
Which seems less than doable.
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 26, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Immediately, yes, but it's a gradual evolution.
Reply
:iconatamolos:
Atamolos Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
You're right on most of that, except the "common ownership" refers to the means of production, rather than all property.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014
Ah, I see.
Reply
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Jan 25, 2014
Yep, but it's a byproduct of the dissolution of property. Individual rights are based on the right to own capital. When humanity itself is seen as an end over and above valorisation of the rich, Spock's word will be made flesh, as it were.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
Download PNG 391 × 453




Details

Submitted on
January 24, 2014
Image Size
206 KB
Resolution
391×453
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
1,297 (3 today)
Favourites
33 (who?)
Comments
62
Downloads
1
×