RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,838
Posts: 5,473,392
Members: 25,037
Currently online: 481
Newest member: noroadcordova

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Shatner Book Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Trek Original Series Slippers
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Hemsworth Is Sexiest Man Alive
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Trek Business Card Cases
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

February IDW Publishing Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

Retro Review: The Siege of AR-558
By: Michelle on Nov 15

Trevco Full Bleed Uniform T-Shirts
By: T'Bonz on Nov 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 1 2012, 09:54 PM   #46
lewisniven
Lieutenant Commander
 
lewisniven's Avatar
 
Location: Northants - UK
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

The other glaring hole is that it's a big planet! The baku have one village, ON A WHOLE PLANET. Just bring sick people or people in need of the properties of the planet and stick them on the other side of the world, really.
__________________
www.1701dproject.blogspot.com - Follow my progress creating 1701-D in the Source engine, as well as my various SketchUp projects
lewisniven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1 2012, 11:37 PM   #47
horatio83
Commodore
 
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

You forget that nobody cared about any medical innovations, it was just a Rumsfeldian pretext. The main goal was to gain new allies against the Dominion. Picard pointed out that the So'na are a bunch of "petty thugs" while Dougherty arrogantly believed that the mighty Federation could deal with them.
Not incidentally this Federation-centered arrogance is also present in the arguments that view the well-being of the Federation as supreme good in the galaxy. Well, arguments is a euphemism, rationalizations for imperialism is more precise.
__________________
The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer. - former US Secretary of State and unconvicted war criminal Henry Kissinger
horatio83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 03:02 AM   #48
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

1) You know TV tropes had a debate about whether it was right to relocate the Ba'ku or not and someone mentioned something I found interesting, which is that there was nothing in the film to indicate that the Ba'ku were theses selfish bastards like some fans seem to think.

2) I find it disturbing that some fans not only think that every planet in a certain area belongs to the federation regardless of if the people living their have joined it or not or are not living in a federation colony and that they seem to think this doesn't count as imperialism in any way and that it is in fact a good thing.

lewisniven wrote: View Post
The other glaring hole is that it's a big planet! The baku have one village, ON A WHOLE PLANET. Just bring sick people or people in need of the properties of the planet and stick them on the other side of the world, really.
Honestly I get the impression that the Ba'ku probably wouldn't have cared as long as you weren't building the medical facility in the valley they lived in and its not like there weren't other nice placed to put it.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 03:06 AM   #49
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
1) You know TV tropes had a debate about whether it was right to relocate the Ba'ku or not and someone mentioned something I found interesting, which is that there was nothing in the film to indicate that the Ba'ku were theses selfish bastards like some fans seem to think.

2) I find it disturbing that some fans not only think that every planet in a certain area belongs to the federation regardless of if the people living their have joined it or not or are not living in a federation colony and that they seem to think this doesn't count as imperialism in any way and that it is in fact a good thing.

1. This is simply incorrect. There are many things to indicate this, including the fact that they DIDN'T SHARE WHAT THEY FOUND WITH ANYONE ELSE. And indeed, that there was no indication that they would ever consider doing so.

2. I find it disturbing that some fans think that the property rights of a small village outweighs the welfare of billions, and that by throwing around the buzzword "imperialism," they can obfuscate that central part of the so-called "dilemma."
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 05:03 AM   #50
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

With regards to point 2, I'll just say that, as with the Maquis, I'd find it a lot more relevant if the movie wasn't set in a universe where relocating 600 people is a hell of a lot easier for all parties concerned than it would be, say, on Earth in the present.
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 05:29 AM   #51
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

sonak wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
1) You know TV tropes had a debate about whether it was right to relocate the Ba'ku or not and someone mentioned something I found interesting, which is that there was nothing in the film to indicate that the Ba'ku were theses selfish bastards like some fans seem to think.

2) I find it disturbing that some fans not only think that every planet in a certain area belongs to the federation regardless of if the people living their have joined it or not or are not living in a federation colony and that they seem to think this doesn't count as imperialism in any way and that it is in fact a good thing.

1. This is simply incorrect. There are many things to indicate this, including the fact that they DIDN'T SHARE WHAT THEY FOUND WITH ANYONE ELSE. And indeed, that there was no indication that they would ever consider doing so.
Who were they going to share it with? Nobody seemed particularly inclined to go into the Briar Patch.

2. I find it disturbing that some fans think that the property rights of a small village outweighs the welfare of billions, and that by throwing around the buzzword "imperialism," they can obfuscate that central part of the so-called "dilemma."
It's not their planet. It wasn't colonized by the federation. The Ba'ku never joined the federation.

So how are the Ba'ku subject to the power of an organization that they are not and never were members of?

DonIago wrote: View Post
With regards to point 2, I'll just say that, as with the Maquis, I'd find it a lot more relevant if the movie wasn't set in a universe where relocating 600 people is a hell of a lot easier for all parties concerned than it would be, say, on Earth in the present.
IT'S. NOT. A. FEDERATION. PLANET.

The federation can't claim emanate domain on a sovereign planet. EMANATE DOMAIN DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

What is so hard to grasp about the fact that the Ba'ku aren't part of the federation?

I mean its not like Star Trek didn't go to the trouble of showing how planets become part of the federation or that if a sovereign planet says no the federation that they leave.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 05:32 AM   #52
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

DonIago wrote: View Post
With regards to point 2, I'll just say that, as with the Maquis, I'd find it a lot more relevant if the movie wasn't set in a universe where relocating 600 people is a hell of a lot easier for all parties concerned than it would be, say, on Earth in the present.

I'm not sure I understand your point. I don't think the issue was the difficulty or logistics of relocation in either case. The Baku would have simply been unwilling to relocate because it would have meant an end to their lifestyle, and the Maquis because of ideological objections and their perceived connection to the land.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 05:33 AM   #53
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
1) You know TV tropes had a debate about whether it was right to relocate the Ba'ku or not and someone mentioned something I found interesting, which is that there was nothing in the film to indicate that the Ba'ku were theses selfish bastards like some fans seem to think.

2) I find it disturbing that some fans not only think that every planet in a certain area belongs to the federation regardless of if the people living their have joined it or not or are not living in a federation colony and that they seem to think this doesn't count as imperialism in any way and that it is in fact a good thing.

1. This is simply incorrect. There are many things to indicate this, including the fact that they DIDN'T SHARE WHAT THEY FOUND WITH ANYONE ELSE. And indeed, that there was no indication that they would ever consider doing so.
Who were they going to share it with? Nobody seemed particularly inclined to go into the Briar Patch.

2. I find it disturbing that some fans think that the property rights of a small village outweighs the welfare of billions, and that by throwing around the buzzword "imperialism," they can obfuscate that central part of the so-called "dilemma."
It's not their planet. It wasn't colonized by the federation. The Ba'ku never joined the federation.

So how are the Ba'ku subject to the power of an organization that they are not and never were members of?

DonIago wrote: View Post
With regards to point 2, I'll just say that, as with the Maquis, I'd find it a lot more relevant if the movie wasn't set in a universe where relocating 600 people is a hell of a lot easier for all parties concerned than it would be, say, on Earth in the present.
IT'S. NOT. A. FEDERATION. PLANET.

The federation can't claim emanate domain on a sovereign planet. EMANATE DOMAIN DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

What is so hard to grasp about the fact that the Ba'ku aren't part of the federation?

I mean its not like Star Trek didn't go to the trouble of showing how planets become part of the federation or that if a sovereign planet says no the federation that they leave.

You're still caught up in the eminent domain analogy. It doesn't really matter whether they're technically a Federation planet at all.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 06:35 AM   #54
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

sonak wrote: View Post
DonIago wrote: View Post
With regards to point 2, I'll just say that, as with the Maquis, I'd find it a lot more relevant if the movie wasn't set in a universe where relocating 600 people is a hell of a lot easier for all parties concerned than it would be, say, on Earth in the present.

I'm not sure I understand your point. I don't think the issue was the difficulty or logistics of relocation in either case. The Baku would have simply been unwilling to relocate because it would have meant an end to their lifestyle, and the Maquis because of ideological objections and their perceived connection to the land.
I think that was my cold talking...I seem to have blanked on the whole point of why that particular planet was the one that mattered.
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 09:37 AM   #55
horatio83
Commodore
 
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

sonak wrote: View Post
2. I find it disturbing that some fans think that the property rights of a small village outweighs the welfare of billions, and that by throwing around the buzzword "imperialism," they can obfuscate that central part of the so-called "dilemma."
The settlers of the Americas or the colonizers of Africa probably said the same thing, what are a handful of savages compared to the well-being of millions of Europeans.
Picard asked Dougherty were he wants to draw the line. For us anti-imperialists the line is clear, never mess with another people. So tell us, where do you draw the line? Is it an absolute number or one relative to the population of the Federation? Where does your logic differ from Borg logic which perceives the assimilation of another lifeform into their collective as welfare-enhancing?

Your thinking is totalitarian, you elevate the potential medical benefits of some funky radiation upon the population of the Federation as supreme good in the galaxy. That is not how the liberal democratic Federation functions.
__________________
The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer. - former US Secretary of State and unconvicted war criminal Henry Kissinger
horatio83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 09:49 AM   #56
EyalM
Captain
 
Location: Haifa
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

The Baku threw out the Sona, why don't the Sona have a right to do the same to the Baku?
__________________
Well, he’s kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog.
Actually, replace ’accidentally’ with ’repeatedly’ and replace ’dog’ with ’son.’
EyalM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 10:04 AM   #57
horatio83
Commodore
 
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

Ehm, you know the Prime Directive, do you? It is not the job of the Federation to judge or even interfere into the internal matters of another culture. The Ba'ku could slaughter the Son'a or vice versa, it is none of our business.
Furthermore the Ba'ku exiled a bunch of people who wanted to explore the stars anyway. No idea how a bunch of peasants are supposed to be able to force the younger generation which has warp-capable spaceships off the planet. The older folks could not even have thrown the younger folks out of their villages if the latter had particle weapons. So it wasn't a matter of force but had more in common with parents telling their children to get lost. No physical harm done but the relationship is damaged.
__________________
The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer. - former US Secretary of State and unconvicted war criminal Henry Kissinger
horatio83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 06:30 PM   #58
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

sonak wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post


1. This is simply incorrect. There are many things to indicate this, including the fact that they DIDN'T SHARE WHAT THEY FOUND WITH ANYONE ELSE. And indeed, that there was no indication that they would ever consider doing so.
Who were they going to share it with? Nobody seemed particularly inclined to go into the Briar Patch.

It's not their planet. It wasn't colonized by the federation. The Ba'ku never joined the federation.

So how are the Ba'ku subject to the power of an organization that they are not and never were members of?

DonIago wrote: View Post
With regards to point 2, I'll just say that, as with the Maquis, I'd find it a lot more relevant if the movie wasn't set in a universe where relocating 600 people is a hell of a lot easier for all parties concerned than it would be, say, on Earth in the present.
IT'S. NOT. A. FEDERATION. PLANET.

The federation can't claim emanate domain on a sovereign planet. EMANATE DOMAIN DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

What is so hard to grasp about the fact that the Ba'ku aren't part of the federation?

I mean its not like Star Trek didn't go to the trouble of showing how planets become part of the federation or that if a sovereign planet says no the federation that they leave.

You're still caught up in the eminent domain analogy. It doesn't really matter whether they're technically a Federation planet at all.
So your supporting imperialism basically.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 08:17 PM   #59
Starfury
Commander
 
Starfury's Avatar
 
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

lewisniven wrote: View Post
The other glaring hole is that it's a big planet! The baku have one village, ON A WHOLE PLANET. Just bring sick people or people in need of the properties of the planet and stick them on the other side of the world, really.
Dougherty: "Besides, they don't want to live in the middle of the Briar Patch. Who would?"

Neither the Feds, nor the So'Na had the intention to bring people to the planet. They wanted to collect the metaphasic particles in the planets ring, which would have killed everyone and everything on the planet.

"I only know they inject something into the rings that starts a thermolytic reaction. When it's over, the planet will be uninhabitable for generations."

So, basically, they planned to destroy the whole ecosystem. You are still good with that?
__________________
My Art: http://damon1984.deviantart.com/gallery/
Starfury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 2 2012, 10:37 PM   #60
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Insurrection as an episode...

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post

Who were they going to share it with? Nobody seemed particularly inclined to go into the Briar Patch.

It's not their planet. It wasn't colonized by the federation. The Ba'ku never joined the federation.

So how are the Ba'ku subject to the power of an organization that they are not and never were members of?



IT'S. NOT. A. FEDERATION. PLANET.

The federation can't claim emanate domain on a sovereign planet. EMANATE DOMAIN DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

What is so hard to grasp about the fact that the Ba'ku aren't part of the federation?

I mean its not like Star Trek didn't go to the trouble of showing how planets become part of the federation or that if a sovereign planet says no the federation that they leave.

You're still caught up in the eminent domain analogy. It doesn't really matter whether they're technically a Federation planet at all.
So your supporting imperialism basically.

I'm supporting a pragmatic view of ethics that focuses on concrete good rather than a rigid adherence to abstract principles when that rigid adherence ends up doing more harm than good. I'm supporting the same view that Picard once argued for in episodes like "Justice" or "Journey's End."


If you want to call it "imperialism" because that sounds like a scary word to throw around, then call it that if you wish.
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.