Humanity in the TNG era is more buggered than they let on

[Marsden]

My opinion of this is, I don't feel better than anyone else. I'm not predjudiced against people because of skin color, intelligence, and all the usual things that are usually mentioned, or when they were born.

If time travel were really possible and we had a human from 10,000 years ago and 2,000 years ago and now and 2,000 years from now, of course there would be differences, but take them all at age 1 month and raise them together and I really doubt there would be much difference. Certainly not enought to for one to look down on another.

 

[Trekker4747]

My opinion of this is, I don't feel better than anyone else. I'm not predjudiced against people because of skin color, intelligence, and all the usual things that are usually mentioned, or when they were born.

If time travel were really possible and we had a human from 10,000 years ago and 2,000 years ago and now and 2,000 years from now, of course there would be differences, but take them all at age 1 month and raise them together and I really doubt there would be much difference. Certainly not enought to for one to look down on another.

But that's not the comparison we're making. We *are*, in essence, comparing the respective civilizations and by nearly all respects our civilization today is better than the one that existed a few hundred years ago and a society a few hundred years from now very likely will be better than our current one.

Hell, we could make the argument our current society in America is better than the America that existed even 50 or 60 years ago. That long back black people were still struggling with Jim Crowe laws, segregation, sexism and so much else.

Today we have a black president as well as black people and women serving in public offices. Back then? Unheard of. Won't happen. No one will ever elect a woman or a black-man into an office, let alone president. Today? We have a black president. Make all of the claims you want, some of which may be founded, on the struggles Obama has faced as a president against members of Congress he's still a black-man (a mixed-race one at that) who's serving as the most powerful man in the world. That's quite the accomplishment for our society to have made when there's still people alive today from the segregation era.

No one's arguing that humans in the 24c are somehow biologically different than us today (well, on a minuscule level they technically are) of course of you took someone from the past or someone from the future and raised them today they'd come out different than they would have in their respective timeline. But only because they'd be brought up in an entirely different society and environment.

But, overall as a society we are better than our predecessors by a considerable margin and not just on a technological level. As a society we're better. Freedom, abolishing of slavery, equal rights, clothing and feeding as many people as we can, not huddled in huts giving most of our earnings to powerful leaders, all of that. As a society we're better.

As individuals, yeah, lots of problems there and there's certainly plenty of groups out there who're not much removed from the historical counterparts. But, overall, society is still largely better. That shouldn't be argued.

 

[Marsden]

I though we were comparing 24th century characters to 20th century characters and looking at the 24th century's character's arrogance and self importance.

And apparently, you think environment has no impact on civilization. Namely an environment of advanced technology that makes the need for food easy enough to give it away, to control the weather and not have to struggle for resources.


I find this line particularly off:

PICARD: The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives

The acquisition of wealth is not a driving force in my life. Maybe I'm doing it wrong.
The driving force in my life is providing for my family, which causes me to work so I can be paid, but to buy food, heat and light, plus some dvds once in a while. I'm not amassing gold so I can throw it in the air and laugh about my avarice.
I admit many people do only want wealth, but I think there are less of them motivated by pure greed than ones that want to survive, comfortably, but survive nevertheless. And I don't think that's unique to a time period.

But, you're probably right, I am probably missing the point. And I mean that unsarcasticly, I just never saw the need for them to look down on us just like I don't look down on them. I would never own a slave, but what if my dad was a plantation owner and he owned slaves and I was born in 1800? It would seem natural to me, it's not like I'd be cackling with evil delight every time I gave an order, it's just what you would do. I don't see any reason to look down on them.

 

[T'Girl]

But that's not the comparison we're making.

I was under the impression that that was exactly the comparison we were making.

Yes modern day is more technological and comfortable than 10,000 years ago, and likely the future will hold even more of the same.

The discussion however is to whether the people are different, and not just different but "better" than other people from other times.

As Marsden posted, I don't feel Trekker4747 that I'm a better PERSON than someone else on Earth today who hasn't had access to a western lifestyle, my educational possibilities, my upbringing.

Trekker4747 if you don't hold that you're better than someone today from a war torn impoverished third world area ... how can you say people from the 24th century are better than people today?

 

[Anwar]

I though we were comparing 24th century characters to 20th century characters and looking at the 24th century's character's arrogance and self importance.

Like I said, it's a deserved arrogance. No one ever complained the Vulcans looked down on Humanity.

 

[Dobian]

I find this line particularly off:

PICARD: The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives

The Star Trek universe is full of contradictions like this. Picard says acquiring wealth is not important, but in countless episodes across all the series you see the allies and enemies of the Federation battling each other over land and resources. You have people packing Quark's on DS9 to gamble. Most conflicts and disputes are over very materialistic things. The Earth is supposed to be this paradise with no crime or violence, but you can barely go two episodes in a row in one of these shows without some crime or violence happening. So the human race has it down, just the entire rest of the galaxy is screwed up? Hardly.

 

[Kruezerman]

"Better" is incredibly subjective, back in the Imperial age (1875-1920) many Americans and Europeans thought it was their duty to "civilize" the rest of the world. It was called the "White Man's Burden." Because of this, the native cultures were forcibly thrown out for the predominantly white culture. It's shown in Star Trek the way Picard consistently denies Worf:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edflm7Hh3hs[/yt]

It should be noted, that as a security officer, Worf's first duty is the protection of the ship and her crew, yet Picard always seems to "know better" than his own security officer.

ETA: I think my problem is the way they made humans the "civilized whites" where the Klingons are "the rest." It makes me, a Hispanic man, very uncomfortable because attitudes like this is very pervasive in society and very hurtful. Culture is important, and TNG had difficulty portraying that in their first seasons.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Like I said, it's a deserved arrogance.

That is a contradiction in terms.

 

[Dobian]

I'm sure that a lot of Earth's major problems have gone away in the Star Trek future. Technology no doubt has elminated poverty (Hey, replicators for everyone!) and provided an almost infinite supply of cheap energy. But human nature never changes.

 

[Anwar]

Like I said, it's a deserved arrogance.

That is a contradiction in terms.

How? Do people no longer have the right to have any sense of pride at all? Should they have to constantly put themselves down so their wastrel neighbors can feel better about themselves without doing anything about their own lives?

 

[T'Girl]

Because of this, the native cultures were forcibly thrown out for the predominantly white culture.

To be fair, the Spanish and Portuguese who came to Central and South America treated the native peoples only somewhat better. My ancestors (and your too?) made a effort to blend the natives into their culture, but they still expected them to change.

It's shown in Star Trek the way Picard consistently denies Worf ...

It pretty obvious that Picard (in many episodes) regards Worf as only a communications and weapons systems operator.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

No one ever complained the Vulcans looked down on Humanity.

Except Archer, Sisko, and McCoy.

 

[Anwar]

And for whatever reason, we're supposed to see them as being in the wrong.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

And for whatever reason, we're supposed to see them as being in the wrong.

So Take Me Out to the Holosuite which pretty much paints Sisko's Vulcan rival as an asshole somehow means Sisko is in the wrong.

 

[Kruezerman]

Duh. They think humans are stupid because they are.

 

[Anwar]

And for whatever reason, we're supposed to see them as being in the wrong.

So Take Me Out to the Holosuite which pretty much paints Sisko's Vulcan rival as an asshole somehow means Sisko is in the wrong.

TOS Fundamentalists will say that episode misportrays Vulcans, since TOS rarely if ever let Spock be wrong about anything.

 

[BillJ]

And for whatever reason, we're supposed to see them as being in the wrong.

So Take Me Out to the Holosuite which pretty much paints Sisko's Vulcan rival as an asshole somehow means Sisko is in the wrong.

TOS Fundamentalists will say that episode misportrays Vulcans, since TOS rarely if ever let Spock be wrong about anything.

Actually, as a "TOS Fundamentalist", I think "Take Me Out to the Holosuite" and Enterprise hit Vulcans spot on. They were douchebags in TOS, even Spock from time to time.

 

[T'Girl]

since TOS rarely if ever let Spock be wrong about anything.

Galileo Seven.
Spock: "I did everything logically, why are half the people under my command dead?
The Paradise Syndrome.
Scotty: "I need a couple of minutes to change the spark plugs."
Spock: "No time, my dicking around the Indian planet made us late."
Scotty: "Hey Commander Ass-wipe, you just blew up the engines."

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Like I said, it's a deserved arrogance.

That is a contradiction in terms.

How? Do people no longer have the right to have any sense of pride at all? Should they have to constantly put themselves down so their wastrel neighbors can feel better about themselves without doing anything about their own lives?

There's a difference between pride and arrogance.

Pride = "I feel good about what we've done."

Arrogance = "We did all these things so therefore we're better than you, nyah nyah nyah."

 

[Hartzilla2007]

So Take Me Out to the Holosuite which pretty much paints Sisko's Vulcan rival as an asshole somehow means Sisko is in the wrong.

TOS Fundamentalists will say that episode misportrays Vulcans, since TOS rarely if ever let Spock be wrong about anything.

Actually, as a "TOS Fundamentalist", I think "Take Me Out to the Holosuite" and Enterprise hit Vulcans spot on. They were douchebags in TOS, even Spock from time to time.

Yep, just look at Amok Time or Spock's backstory for Journey to Babel about dealing with racist Vulcan kids picking on him.