And? Is it only a relevant story only if you agree with them?
Opinions on Michael Eddington
- Thread starter Emperor Norton
- Start date
Hudson and Eddington stated they were farmers, I guess some people in the 24th century still appreciate the sweat of your brow, enjoy the fruit of your labors, built something for yourself-lifestyle then.
In RL lands and homes are more than patches of ground-land matters a lot to people-the most famous example being Israel/Palestine a lot of people have invested a lot in a small(relatively speaking) patch of land for political, ethnic, religious, social, and other reasons. Place and roots matter to people-human beings for the most part like having a tied down in place existence in which time flows and life goes on yet stability, contentment, and love abound.
Rootedness in place is perhaps a defining aspect of human conservatism and nationalist passion. It's totally understandable as well, I can't expect you or anybody that changes apartments and cities every few years to understand that.
I've lived in the same apartment for over a decade, thank you very much. And even so, it's just an apartment! Yeah, I like it, and yeah, I'd be upset if I got told I had to move, but I damned well wouldn't refuse to move if I thought people were likely to get killed due to my own misplaced sense of pride.
It's not about pride, it's about being rooted.
Forced displacements have historically involved lots of blood and tears for that reason.
Exactly, they were from the Federation and their indigenous planets still existed.
Last edited:
"According to the fictional storyline of the Star Trek universe, the Maquis were formed in the 24th century after a peace treaty was enacted between the United Federation of Planets and the Cardassian Union, redesignating the demilitarized zone between the two powers, which resulted in the Federation ceding several of their colony worlds to the Cardassians. Although the colonists were offered free relocation to elsewhere in Federation territory, some insisted on remaining on the ceded worlds, effectively becoming Cardassian Union citizens. Some of these colonists subsequently formed the Maquis to protect themselves from Cardassian aggression, although they received no official support from the Federation, who feared breaking the peace treaty with the Cardassians, which would lead to war."
So they chose to remain.
So they chose to remain.
This is always a sticking point. The colonists may have felt on the raw end of the deal with the Cardassians, but are they really that short sighted to not recognize what a war would mean? Especially after they had just gotten done with a war that was rather long and cost many lives.
So, I know we're supposed to be sympathetic to the Maquis, and I am, to a point. But, risking interstellar war? I have a hard time sympathizing with that. Needs of the many and all that, you know?
This isn't a problem until protecting a perceived right to that lifestyle endangers others. Making a choice in a moral vacuum is very different from making a choice at the expense of others who had none.
These things matter, but in any reasonable heirarchy of priorities my "having place and roots" surely is less important than you simply being alive, especially if I'm acting as the sole agent making a decision that affects us both.
Remember there was no forced relocation here, the colonists had a free choice, but in exercising that perceived right to protect what was ultimately nothing more than a lifestyle choice (they had no material investment or force of necessity here, nor had they grown up on those colonies) they knew full well they were almost certainly condemning others WHO HAD NO CHOICE to live through and likely die in a war.
As others have pointed out the portrayal of the Maquis as victims of necessity doesn't play out well in context precisely because they had every choice in the matter and put their own fulfillment above the safety of others. Far from being being a moral rebellion against tyranny, or an unequal plight against oppression or genocide, theirs is simply a fight to get their own way regardless of how irresponsible that might be. It's the kind of moral crusade typically only available to those who have sufficient entitlement to make a sport of throwing it away and failing to see how others are carrying the weight of the consequences. It may have emotional ramifications but facing those ramifications is exactly we should expect of sufficiently mature people who understand the situation.
They were not dying out of necessity, nor for a belief, they were dying (and more importantly causing others who had no involvement or choice in the matter to die on their behalf) quite simply because they wanted to live out the fantasy of being frontierspeople, in a way that was ultimately illegal and on a frontier that wasn't theirs anyway.
Which makes me continue to ask the question what the hell were the Federation doing starting up colonies so close to the Cardessian border in the first place? Its this sense of entitlement of 'we are explorers, so we can stick our Federation flag anywhere we see a bit of space' that starts wars. And I bet its the humans that are behind it with their sense of Terran privilege.
To be sure, it's unclear whether the original colonists would have identified themselves as Federation citizens, and it's similarly unclear whether the original colonists knew they were settling near the Cardassians or simply thought they were near unexplored space (though assuming that's safe seems a bit dubious to me).
At least, that's the argument I'd offer in defense of the original colonists. Certainly once the first Cardassian war happened the colonists knew their situation.
I do have a question for those defending the Maquis actions though...if Eddington had gone so far as to destroy the Malinche/Defiant/Enterprise (and he had the opportunity with 2/3 of those ships), would that alter your impressions, or would you feel that such actions were justified given the Maquis circumstances?
At least, that's the argument I'd offer in defense of the original colonists. Certainly once the first Cardassian war happened the colonists knew their situation.
I do have a question for those defending the Maquis actions though...if Eddington had gone so far as to destroy the Malinche/Defiant/Enterprise (and he had the opportunity with 2/3 of those ships), would that alter your impressions, or would you feel that such actions were justified given the Maquis circumstances?
Yes the federation harassed and persecuted the Maquis and their sympathizers, plotted against them, overtly betrayed them and hunted them like rabid dogs. If Eddington had destroyed the Defiant or Ro the Enterprise I would have been on their side.
I'm not sure we ever get much insight into the processes behind colonisation in trek, to what extent it's a private enterprise, centrally governed, subsidised, whatever. There may be tenders out out for people to apply for colony rights, an application process deeming suitability, etc.
Probably there is a broad church of colony varieties, with the relative placement of responsibility varying according to the particular "flavour" so to speak. Nonetheless we do know:
1) These people had no legal right to be there
2) They had no pressing need to be there
3) They had no cultural heritage linking them to being there
4) They were there as a form of life choice, more akin to modern day voluntary self sufficiency than frontier survivalism.
5) Their presence was likely to incite a war
6) The actions of the colonists risked not only their own lives, but those of others. Far more others.
7) The Federation acted to mitigate that risk and safeguard those lives the colonists were putting at risk.
8) The Maquis emerged as a para military group attacking the very assets and people starfleet had put in place to manage the risks
Of the involved factions, who behaved in the most responsible, mature fashion?
The Maquis remind me of old style pioneers to the 'Frontier' of the 18th century, they had no legal right to be at the places they claimed for God and country, no moral right, their presence did incite wars and they had no cultural heritage linking them to the Americas or Australia. But in real world history the Spanish and English won their wars against the indigenous peoples and we all know the results. However did the pioneers of the past have a just cause? No, they did not!
Last edited:
Did Cardassian citizens expect to be ethnically cleansed? That's what effectively happened as the Central Command armed settlers against the former Federation citizens.
Yes the Cardessian state went back on territorial treaties (sounds familiar right?), they wanted their galactic sphere of influence back. The colonies were in their back yard, you put your tent up near scorpions don't be surprised when they choose to sting. However the Maquis were never between a rock and a hard place, they had a choice and made the wrong one. The locals start to turn their guns on you, so up sticks and leave and decide this part of the galaxy ain't worth it, go back to Earth or whatever planet you originally came from. The only people who had a galactic right to the area were the Cardessians and the Bajorans. The Cardessians got their Trump except he wanted to do a lot more than just build big a wall....
After he sabotaged the Defiant, Miles needed to accidentally throw him out an airlock.
