View Single Post
Old April 24 2010, 03:03 PM   #42
Rush Limborg
Vice Admiral
Rush Limborg's Avatar
Location: The EIB Network
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Admiral Shran wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Admiral Shran wrote: View Post
The Klingons are definitely hypocrites, but no more so than the Federation.

The Klingons talk a big game about honor, but then constantly act dishonorably.

The Federation talks a big game about understanding and acceptance, but then constantly judges others by UFP standards.
That's because the Federation actually follows its moral code.
The alternative is not applying this moral code when it comes to others - aka betraying its morals. The prime directive streches the limit of its morality as it is.
If its moral code is to accept others' ways and beliefs, how is it following that code to impose someone else's ways and beliefs on others and expect them to follow UFP, or more often Earth, standards? Being accepting of others means you can't expect them to be just like you.

Also, while I think Ezri was spot on about the hypocrisy of the Klingons, I think she was wrong about one thing. She asks Worf if there has ever been a single Klingon Chancellor worthy of respect. I'd say there was at least one - Gorkon.
Technically, she asked Worf "Who was the last leader of the High Council that you respected?" Worf wasn't even alive during Gorkon's time....

ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar--I am not even going to dignify your ranting and ridiculously incorrect assertions about my character with any more of a response than to say that I think that however much the Cardassians have screwed up (and they have, royally), they at least have a chance to improve because they got hit upside the head hard enough, because they lost one too many times. As for the rest, I believe there's more than sufficient evidence. And I would suggest that you avoid the personal remarks towards me--I'm not going to ask again.
Nerys Ghemor, I was merely responding to your post - you ASKED me to comment about you. If you know you won't like the answers, don't ask the questions.

Also - I wasn't discussing the cardassians in my previous post - I was discussing your attitude towards the trekverse humans.
And that post follows logic aka it is NOT a rant. Feel free to point out where my analysis is incorect.
How does it follow logic? You look at her constant critiques of Federation society--many of which are, indeed, quite valid--and you automatically chalk it up to envy, because of what you percieve as inconsistancies?

Testify, please:

Where do I get this 'envy' stuff from:
Your posts towards trekverse humans/the Federation have been consistently resentful, full af agressivity.
So? The Federation has done a great deal which, from a certain point of view, is blatantly wrong. Naturally, one following that POV would be resentful.


And yet, your stated reasons for this have been all over the place: conspiracy theories that, after the third world war, humans have exterminated all opposing viewpoints in order to create their society;
And...? Consider the admittedly awkward attitudes with which humans seem to approach different POVs in Trek.

humans don't interfere enough and are hypocrites; humans interfere too much and are hypocrites;
Now...for those charges, please cite what you mean.

And then, look at the context of her arguments, sir, and I think you will find that this simply points out the contradictions--and therefore, hypocrisy--of Federation foreign policy.

humans are naive and arrogant (I find that quite ironic, considering that cardassians are your favourite species), etc.
Again, this is not a logical statement, simply an opinion on your part. And it contradicts itself. You rebuke a "Cardassian" for having a certain POV about humans--and yet you feel free to hold the same attitude about Cardassians.

Your resentment towards trekverse humans has no logical basis, it's textbook envy;
How so? Envy is hating someone who is more succesful at something than you, or similar feelings to that effect. How does that apply?

if I were to speculate, I would say it exists because you identified with the cardassians and the Federation won one too many times the 'games' played with the Cardassian Union.
Please. She identifies with the Cardassians as an effect, not a cause. And the "game" went on for decades before ending in a draw. The UFP didn't "win".

Trust was a rant.
"The saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its supposed utopia.... 'Needs and abilities' are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to 'the State shall take, the State shall give'."
--David Mamet
Rush Limborg is offline   Reply With Quote