Re: Prime Directive problem with "Homeward"
So a preindustrial society can have comets and asteroids moved out of their path, but a society like ours gets hit just because we understand the threat? How is that fair?
One has a choice on whether it puts its collective resources towards preventing its own extinction while the other does not. You're far more likely to want to save a toddler, who is in the wrong place at the wrong time, from getting hit by a bus which is a threat it doesn't understand than trying to save someone who darts across a busy intersection everyday to save a minute or two.
One understands the ramifications of reckless actions while the other doesn't know the potential threat exists.
You'll never be able to save every species and no one here has said that you should even try, but you do have a responsibility to those you're exploiting for personal gain. Or else the Federation is really no different than the Klingons or other races that exploit less advanced cultures.
I don't think that's a good analogy. Our planet is on set course orbiting its sun. We know that sooner or later we'll get hit by something big. We have no control over that. The idiot who tries to dart across a busy street and gets hit did have a choice. We don't. We have ideas on what MIGHT work. But no idea has been tested. And it really wouldn't matter if we don't spot the object in time. And if it's a cluster of smaller objects whose total mass is enough to cause an extinction level event, we have no defense.
And how are these societies being exploited? They are being watched, no interference was done except in the case of the Boral and the Ba'ku.
Did I happen to mention, did I bother to disclose, this man we're seeking with a mole on his nose, I'm not sure of his clothes or anything else, except he's Chinese. A big clue by itself.
--David Addison, Moonlighting