Um, no. It's exactly the opposite. While one could make the "for its time" argument with DS9 (one to which I don't subscribe), it doesn't hold up in the "post-woke world" - or whatever you want to call it - at all. Like way, way less than any of the other shows. And frankly, I find its recent self-aggrandizing to be misguided and woefully out of touch.
It's extremely misogynistic - or at least presented a huge regression in its treatment of women, such that neither of its two "strong female characters" could escape it.
The disgusting treatment of Marina Sirtis was superseded by the even more disgusting treatment of Terry Farrell. But at least Jadzia got to spew the sciencey gobbledygook of the week, whilst having to fight off Julian's constant creepy AF behavior. Oh, and she got married just in time to see the inside of the fridge. So there's that.
Kira spent most of the series being defined by whichever man she was dating. Also Dukat. This is tragic because she's otherwise the best character in the franchise. Then there's "His Way," in which any deconstruction under a modern lens should find it problematic.
And most times Jadzia and Kira were together were Bechdel fails.
Having two women as villains could have been a huge plus. But nope. Both were so bad that they can only be seen as a negative. The Kia was utterly incompetent when left to her own devices. Her two big power plays were at the behest of men. And the Founder never amounted to anything more than a mother hen, nagging her male subordinates and incapable of doing anything on her own. (The only Founders who took any active action were male*.)
*And this in and itself presents a missed opportunity. The Founders could have been presented as being distinctly non-binary. But they didn't. The binary genders only became more pronounced as the show progressed.
Then there's Leeta, whose sole existence was to satisfy the male gaze. It looked for a while towards the end she might get some substance. But no. Well, that's not true. She got married. At least STO finally gave Chase something to do.
One could also argue that, despite being the one with the POC captain, it's the least diverse show, especially if you account for the oft-celebrated "extended cast." It's a couple of women, Marc Alaimo, and a whole bunch of white dudes. And here again. They had a Sudanese Muslim in the cast. In the 1990s. What a huge opportunity this was! And nothing.
But it's the show's pro-military stance that's the most topical.
There's that old argument of whether or not Starfleet is a military. I always say of course it is because, well, of course it is. But with all the other shows there's the whole thing where it's "It's a military but does other things too." as suggested through whatever the euphemism of choice is. But not with DS9. It is a military and only a military. Its sole function is to protect Federation borders and/or interests (The Wormhole) that morphs into full-on interventionism in the later seasons. The pilot episode sees it planting its flag (with the flagship) and annexing new territory.
But it's more than that. DS9 doesn't just celebrate the military. It fetishizes it, in the same way a CBS procedural might. This is fine for CBS procedural but not for Star Trek. A lot of the dialog - especially Sisko's speeches - parrot World War II propaganda films. Plus, Sisko is a Christ-like figure, so these speeches are literally
by the living Jingo. O'Brien and Bashir run off to the holodeck to play in romanticized recreations of bloody battles. And you have characters (Rom Nog
Kira) whose character arcs - and betterment as people - are characterized by their uniforms. And this all fine in and of itself.
However, the problem arises because this military is presented as being the gold standard - the ideal that holds precedence over all other things. It's the military that makes Bajor better. It makes Cardassia better. It even makes Ferenginar better through Rom becoming Nagus. This all makes everything Eddington says 100% true. And they brand him a traitor and throw him in jail for saying so. It's with this that the Federation becomes imperialistic in nature. Which is the core of the problem.
As I said during the discussion about the possibility of Disco S3 being a fall of the Federation thing, you can't have Star Trek without the Federation. But what I really mean is you can't have Star Trek without Starfleet. Within the context (and subtext) of the franchise, Starfleet is the metaphor - the analog - for the conceit. It is working together in peaceful coexistence put into action. But that's not the Starfleet of DS9. In DS9, groups are forced to work together at the end of a gun or because of some Chanakyan existential crisis. It is antithetical to the very heart of the franchise.
And so is Section 31 for much the same reason.
