New uniforms in Season 2 Trailer

[Butters]

I must have missed something because this doesn't track. Because, the original point, as I read it, was that Section 31 reflected that corruption of the Federation. But, now it's the whole setting is corrupt and and no longer an "aspirational future?"

My point, admittedly ill-formed, was that humans of the future inhabit this perfect righteous society, where we have overcome our differences and hold ourselves to higher standard. A view I never quite shared but I read it here everyday, usually in the same sentence as the words vision and Gene.

The presence of self serving admirals abusing their power is one example of humans being humans, same as they ever were, but those shady characters and their failings were always exposed in the harsh light of Federation values and justice is served.

But section 31 undermines everything we see of this better future, with a few bad eggs. Star Fleet isn’t an organisation of benevolent exploration, it’s a wolf in sheeps clothing. Picard can, and does, preach the rightness of doing the right thing, but he’s the public face of flagship, he doesn’t know enough.

I’m not explaining myself very well, (full on week, hard earned bank holiday booze opened). I know what I mean.

 

[fireproof78]

But section 31 undermines everything we see of this better future, with a few bad eggs. Star Fleet isn’t an organisation of benevolent exploration, it’s a wolf in sheeps clothing. Picard can, and does, preach the rightness of doing the right thing, but he’s the public face of flagship, he doesn’t know enough.

I don't see how it does, if the leadership of Starfleet didn't already undermine it.

But, I'll grant I'm not following very well either.

 

[DaveyNY]

My point, admittedly ill-formed, was that humans of the future inhabit this perfect righteous society, where we have overcome our differences and hold ourselves to higher standard. A view I never quite shared but I read it here everyday, usually in the same sentence as the words vision and Gene.

The presence of self serving admirals abusing their power is one example of humans being humans, same as they ever were, but those shady characters and their failings were always exposed in the harsh light of Federation values and justice is served.

But section 31 undermines everything we see of this better future, with a few bad eggs. Star Fleet isn’t an organisation of benevolent exploration, it’s a wolf in sheeps clothing. Picard can, and does, preach the rightness of doing the right thing, but he’s the public face of flagship, he doesn’t know enough.

I’m not explaining myself very well, (full on week, hard earned bank holiday booze opened). I know what I mean.

Everybody knows Nothing is Perfect...
I believe that Mr. Roddenberry wasn't really espousing that the Human Race will be completely free of all our inherent foibles in the far future.

He was saying that our future is such that we will eventually learn as a society to reach beyond those failings.

That we will be in a better place intellectually, where most individuals will have learned that controlling their inner demons makes for a much healthier, respectful and long lasting civilization.
We will have moved beyond the petty bickering over personal possessions and contrivances.

Of course that's not to say that Everybody will be "sheeples" in the future, there will always be someone who feels put upon and will act accordingly.
Again, that's just Human Nature, we'll never be able to completely ignore that part of our psyches, we can only hope to control it to the best of our individual abilities.

"... Today, I'm not going to kill this Gorn..."

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Everybody knows Nothing is Perfect...
I believe that Mr. Roddenberry wasn't really espousing that the Human Race will be completely free of all our inherent foibles in the far future.

In TNG, he was.

If nothing else, look no further than that Season 3 episode where a young child is derided as being unnatural, just because he was sad when his mother died. (I think it was called The Bonding.)

I dunno about the rest of y’all but I would never want to live in a world where we aren’t allowed to mourn the deaths of loved ones. That’s just this side of Equilibrium.

 

[DaveyNY]

Wasn't Gene pretty much out of the loop by the time that episode was in production?

And I would assert that that particular episode was a whole lot deeper and also involved the ways in which different society's deal with death, not just that one aspect you described above.

 

[fireproof78]

Wasn't Gene pretty much out of the loop by the time that episode was in production?

No, that was one in which Michael Piller first encountered the "Roddenberry Box" as the writer's room called it. Gene essentially told Piller, after purchasing the script, that it didn't work because people didn't mourn in the future. So, Piller had to rework it to fit the box.

 

[DaveyNY]

I would guess he meant that people would be more likely to celebrate the life of a loved one, instead of mourning it.
But the sense-of-loss is a very powerful human emotion, I rather doubt we'll ever really be able to push it completely out of our psyches.
Gene was a bit over-the-top more often than not with his predilections, but I think he meant well.

 

[cooleddie74]

Gene essentially told Piller, after purchasing the script, that it didn't work because people didn't mourn in the future. So, Piller had to rework it to fit the box.

Gene could be a damned idiot.

 

[fireproof78]

I would guess he meant that people would be more likely to celebrate the life of a loved one, instead of mourning it.
But the sense-of-loss is a very powerful human emotion, I rather doubt we'll ever really be able to push it completely out of our psyches.
Gene was a bit over-the-top more often than not with his predilections, but I think he meant well.

That was a very brief description. Piller had a book, "Fade In," written that was circulated on the Internet posthumously that goes in to more detail. It's an interesting insight in to Gene's later views.

Gene could be a damned idiot.

That doesn't even go in to the purposed lack of conflict between the crew in the future.

 

[cooleddie74]

There's a fine line between being an optimist and a fool.

 

[lawman]

How so? Almost every S31 story I've watched has showcased how their machinations are too extreme and often are unnecessary response to a threat. ... S31, while loathsome, is often used as a foil to showcase that shadow ops are neither beneficial nor productive.

Still, the very thought that the organization is allowed to exist is disconcerting.

Secondly, Starfleet is constantly being shown having corrupt leadership-how is that an aspirational future if the leadership ends up having so many individuals who violate their own rules for the sake of power?

On the one hand I'm inclined to agree with this. It's understandable why a story about a bad apple within a supposedly upstanding organization can make for compelling drama, but it feels like Trek has gone to the well too many times on this... the cumulative effect is that Starfleet and/or the Federation wind up seeming to be riddled with corruption and hypocrisy.

On the other hand, I'm left wondering how many times we're really talking about. In the TOS era, for instance, certainly Starfleet contained a few commodores and admirals whose sense of their own importance might have been a bit inflated, and a captain or two who went off the reservation, but I don't recall anyone who actually betrayed or undermined Starfleet and/or the UFP. That didn't happen until STVI:TUC. Then in the TNG era, there was the conspiracy in "Conspiracy" (but that was actually alien parasites) and later "The Pegasus," in which an admiral had conspired with Starfleet Intelligence to violate a treaty agreement. In DS9 we got "Paradise Lost," in which an admiral conspired to commit a coup, and eventually "The Dogs of War," in which the Federation Council tacitly endorses Section 31's plan for genocide against the Changelings.

But unless I'm forgetting something, that's about it. (Setting aside the events of STID — gakk, thankfully an alternate universe! — and Treklit novels like, e.g., Dreadnought). By comparison with the level of dirty dealings conducted by the US government and military over the last few decades, it actually seems like a pretty clean record. Perhaps our impression of the Federation and Starfleet's shortcomings is exaggerated?

 

[fireproof78]

But unless I'm forgetting something, that's about it. (Setting aside the events of STID — gakk, thankfully an alternate universe! — and Treklit novels like, e.g., Dreadnought). By comparison with the level of dirty dealings conducted by the US government and military over the last few decades, it actually seems like a pretty clean record. Perhaps our impression of the Federation and Starfleet's shortcomings is exaggerated?

Perhaps. But, between Kennelly, Cartwright, Captain Maxwell, Admiral Satie's paranoia witch hunt, Admiral Nechayev's genocide against the Borg, Admiral Doughtery's forced relocation, as well several defectors it is hard not to call in to question the organization as a whole.

Now, I will grant that the sampling is probably quite small in comparison, but that's just what we've got. So, the idea that S31 is somehow is more disconcerting, when time and again they are shown to be the villains, is odd to me. I don't like S31 but I can see how it would come about and work to sustain itself with all the threats in the galaxy.

 

[lawman]

Ah, yeah, I'd forgotten about Nechayev's plans for Hugh, Kennelly's analogue to the Iran/Contra deal, and Dougherty's plot in Resurrection.

Seems like most of the Starfleet corruption centers on the TNG era, doesn't it?

Perhaps that's just an artifact of having more episodes overall, or perhaps it really does make a difference that TOS was written in the pre-Watergate, pre-Reagan years...

Any way you slice it, though, I think Section 31 takes things to another level. The notion that there's an established organization devoted to black ops suggests something more systematic than just an occasional corrupt flag officer or politician, and the notion that the UFP would countenance or even support such an organization is even more disquieting. Insofar as S31 exists, I prefer to think of it as a entirely rogue operation — not unlike how it was originally introduced.

 

[Tuskin38]

and the notion that the UFP would countenance or even support such an organization is even more disquieting.

Good thing they don’t support it

They probably get unofficial support from operatives/sympathetic people in starfleet and the government, but S31 is not an official or authorized organization

S31 is rogue, they say as much in DS9

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Good thing they don’t support it

They probably get unofficial support from operatives/sympathetic people in starfleet and the government, but S31 is not an official or authorized organization

S31 is rogue, they say as much in DS9

But they've also said S31 is "part of the original (Earth) Starfleet charter". Must have been some language somewhere that mentioned it.

 

[Jadeb]

I don't mind the idea of it popping up as a story point -- corruption to be rooted out in a time of fear or whatever -- but i really, really dislike it being threaded through the whole history of Starfleet. At a certain point, simply letting it exist is tacit endorsement.

 

[fireproof78]

Any way you slice it, though, I think Section 31 takes things to another level. The notion that there's an established organization devoted to black ops suggests something more systematic than just an occasional corrupt flag officer or politician, and the notion that the UFP would countenance or even support such an organization is even more disquieting. Insofar as S31 exists, I prefer to think of it as a entirely rogue operation — not unlike how it was originally introduced.

I tend to as well, much like the NID in Stargate. They just can co-op legitimate Starfleet functions to serve their purposes. In essence, they find ways to survive even without official endorsement. Starfleet or the Federation tries to dismantle them and they simply fade for a bit.

 

[Jadeb]

Even if Starfleet technically disapproves, that it can exist for so long -- that people remain eager to feed its darkness -- really puts the lie to Star Trek's idealistic notions about the future of humanity. Turns out they're no better than we are.

That's no doubt more realistic than the take I prefer, but it's still dispiriting.

 

[Tuskin38]

But they've also said S31 is "part of the original (Earth) Starfleet charter". Must have been some language somewhere that mentioned it.

The charter is an excuse they use

 

[fireproof78]

Even if Starfleet technically disapproves, that it can exist for so long -- that people remain eager to feed its darkness -- really puts the lie to Star Trek's idealistic notions about the future of humanity. Turns out they're no better than we are.

Given that GR's original optimistic future was that we had survived to the 23rd century and smaller differences, such as skin color, were not a factor in working together, I would say that the idealism still lives, if on a smaller scale.

Also, TOS had characters like Mudd, Cyrano Jones, as well and Kirk and Spock infiltrating enemy strongholds in the name of sabotaging or disrupting their operations. There are still some darker aspects of human behavior. But, as Kirk put it, it doesn't me that today we indulge them.