From Memory Alpha... Lieutenant Ayala (Maquis, relief conn) Crewman Kurt Bendera (Maquis, engineering, 2371-2372 KIA) Crewman Carlson (Maquis, 2371-2378) Commander Chakotay (Maquis, XO) Crewman Chell (Maquis) Crewman Kenneth Dalby (Maquis) Crewman Doyle (Maquis) Crewman Gerron (Maquis, 2371-2378) Crewman Mariah Henley (Maquis, 2371-2378) Ensign Hogan (Maquis, 2371-2372 KIA) Crewman Jackson (Maquis) Crewman Jarvin (Maquis) Crewman Michael Jonas (Maquis, 2371-2372 KIA) Crewman Jor (Maquis, engineering) Crewman O'Donnell (Maquis, 2371-2378) Ensign Seska (Maquis/Cardassian spy, engineering, defected to the Kazon 2371) Lieutenant Lon Suder (Maquis, engineering, 2371-2373 KIA) Ensign Tabor (Maquis, 2371- ) Lieutenant B'Elanna Torres (Maquis, chief engineer, 2371-2378) Crewman Yosa (Maquis, engineering 2371-2378) These are he Maquis we know about, but I'm more worried about the Maquis which we don't know about. Um. How the hell come is Lon Suder a Lieutenant?
That is based on an assumption, we don't know what transpired between destroying the Array and the scene where we saw them all in uniform. I can and have made the case that becoming Starfleet was Chakotay's idea. For all we know they all voted to become Starfleet. You would like to believe this, but that doesn't make it true. In fact you are also assuming that basic Federation and Maquis values are different. Based of what we have seen they don't appear much different. Because At the time people thought he was creepy, but they hadn't realized he was a serial killer.
From the Maquis perspective, the Federation abandoned their colonies. There should have been a lot more resentment among the Maquis than we saw.
This is as assumption too, you have a group of people with a lot the same background facing a common enemy. That can level all kinds of differences in a hurry.
Of course it's all assumption. As are your assumptions that they'd all get along hunky dory. However, mine is based on an understanding of history. There's still a lot of resentment in Indian Country over broken treaties--a hundred years later. That's not an assumption. That's fact.
From the Maquis perspective, they were now 75 years away from what they were fighting over (and the Cardassians were their main enemies, not the Federation) and were in utterly unknown territory with the Fleeters being the only people they knew. People who had already put themselves on the line to help them when they didn't have to. They'd kind of be dumb to immediately turn on the Fleeters for folks they didn't know, and they'd be hypocrites to think that badly of Janeway seeing how she was willing to help out a planet of innocent people (The Ocampa) instead of just selling them out. That was the opposite of what the Feds did to the Maquis and I think that might resonate with some of them.
It's not invalid, especially when you consider an episode like Learning Curve where the inept Maquis are put through demeaning training to "shape them up" and basically get them to conform to Starfleet standards. Not knowing what happens "between scenes" is a flimsy argument with no substance. Not to mention circular at best. For example, on the opposite side of that extreme coin Janeway could have had her security people put phasers to their heads and ordered them to join or die. Making up stuff between scenes is the realms of fanfiction pretty much. As established in DS9, these were freedom fighters willing to do anything to defend their homes and win freedom from the Cardassians. The Federation turned a blind eye to their problems at best to actively aiding their enemies at worst. And we're supposed to think that they'd want to join a Starfleet crew without a hitch? Not likely. As for sharing the same values? Similar perhaps, but as I said it was Federation values that led to them turning a blind eye to the Cardassians oppressing them. Couple this with them being a fringe group, doing what it takes to survive, then you have Janeway telling them that she's willing to sacrifice their lives over a replicator because of the Prime Directive, and you don't think they'd be resentful over that? Heck Hogan the all around "good Maquis" looked like he was one step away from maiming Janeway in that scene alone.
Except you are still making assumptions based on your own perception. This is not about who is right or wrong. The argument is we are all making assumptions. The core of what I said was that your argument just like everyone else's is based on assuming things that no one "knows" for sure. If my argument appears to be circular it maybe because you are trying to present as facts things you have assumed based on your perception. That doesn't make you right or wrong. But right or wrong isn't my point, assuming is. And assuming that everyone perceives events the same way you do is where your argument loses.
I agree with most of what you have said, except the last part. Again you are assuming that those resentments are still festering after another three hundred years and that isn't very realistic. However this is also an assumption based on history. Look at it this way, the British and the Scottish have been at odds dating back to Robert the Bruce in the 13 hundreds. However when Germany threatened them in the middle twentieth century, they had a very common enemy and banded together. Heck even the Americans bonded with the English at the same time and our argument with England was less than two hundred years old.
Perhaps I wasn't clear. I used Indian Country in the US as an example of resentments lasting a very long time. Resentment still exists today over treaties forged & broken a hundred years ago. In Star Trek, the Federation abandoning the colonists happened within these characters' lifetime. That anger is fresh.
The premise of Voyager was subverted into a simple adventure-of-the-week. Originally they had wanted to have it accumulate damage and have patches/retrofits as the seasons progressed- it even had a spare warp core which was totally ignored in the couple of episodes where it would have proven useful. Problem was the suits wanted the shows to stand alone- if shown as syndicated reruns they would be almost interchangeable. Trek shows typically lasted seven seasons because that was the optimum balance between the investment in the show and maxing the payback with syndication (Enterprise was the only exception). 'The Year of Hell' was the only story where the original concepts were realized although limited to a two parter you could see what the result of battles on the hull was like and it is my favorite for that reason.
The Maquis were much more like settlers who wanted the cavalry to chase out the Indians now rather than when Washington tod them to. Their colonoies were in no sense separate nations undone by treachery. History speaks against the notion of genuinely deep and bitter resentments between Federation and Maquis. The Maquis are anti-Nazi and the Federation is anti-Nazi, their differences are merely tactical. In general, every view of the Maquis that claims that the Maquis were deep-rooted enemies of Federatino "values" is a projection of a personal distaste for Trek-style humanitarianism. The only distinct political values attributed to the Maquis was their belief that Captain Chakotay should settle differences with his fists. There is no rational way to believe that this kind of thing will get them home. And the only entertainment value in this kind of thing is what you got from fist fights you watched in middle school. None of this is very good writing or much fun.
The internal conflict might have worked out better if the other crew were Romulans, instead of Maquis. True enemies of the Federation with their own beliefs that were the true opposite of Federation values.
Personally I think it went wrong before it went into pre-production. The premise of "let's get back home" had been done to death well before then, and it forced the series' writers to try to come up with new, episodic content after 10 years of TOS+TNG had done so. Also, it basically competed with DS9, which hurt the franchise as a whole. Maybe if they had waited 2-3 more years it would have been better for Trek. Just my opinion, of course. I tried to watch the show for the first two seasons but I gave up after the 3rd season opener.
I feel sorry for you. You missed out on the greatest character in the history of Star Trek. I would beg you to reconsider except I used up all my begging credit getting people to watch Enterprise.
Spock was in TOS, Teacake. I presume you refer to the Doctor ? I find it hard to be compelled by a character who essentially doesn't exist and is a function of the ship's computer. Why not make the computer a character ? I assume the Federation has that kind of technology.
Oh, I saw her alright. I'm amazed they gave her clothes. No, seriously, she played her part right. They all did. The material just wasn't very good. I did see some of the episodes past season 2, but I just could never get back into it.
The Scottish are BRITISH. The Welsh are BRITISH, the English are BRITISH, the people of N. Ireland are BRITISH. And America sided with the BRITISH during WWII. It isn't that hard, Britain (Brit, British etc..) refers to the whole of the UK, whilst English, Scottish etc. refers to one specific country within Britain.
I wasn't talking about countries, I was talking about cultures. You know in America, the south is a culture, Texans are a culture (which has latino, English, German, Native American and European influences). Native Amercian is multi cultural but are Americans too. That doesn't mean that they don't have differences and yes even issues with each other, but bottom line peoples tend to stick together when threatened from the outside. That is a human trait. So it is likely that facing the same enemy would tend to make friends of Maquis and Starfleet even in the short term.