• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Let’s talk about the destruction of Trek utopia…

Would you include Gary Buechler of Nerdrotic in this category of ignorant reviewers? He’s fairly scathing about PIC, regularly scoring it around 5/10.
Gary Buechler is the rear end of an ass. I've commented on his stupidity many times. He uses a rotating number of tactics that he tries to pass off as criticism.

First, he uses canards, all of which are dismissable. 1) ST PIC was supposed to be a TNG reboot. 2) The Federation was from the beginning a socialist utopia. 3) Star Trek never before addressed social and political topics except through very vague allegories. 4) The people who have watched Star Trek since diapers have the right to dictate what is Trek and what is not.

Second, he fails to use facts and evidence when talking about what is Trek and what is not. Even if we could come to a conclusion about the nature of the universe, everything must come from the episodes themselves, not some manifesto written by some dude in his basement. He never talks about episodes. He only talks in vague principles.

ETA: Third, he enables the worst instincts of the other members of the axis of stupid (the so called Fandom Menace). Dumbcock has used misogynistic and antisemitic slurs, which Buechler lapped up eagerly.

ETA: Fourth, like other members of the axis of stupid, he tries to pass off nitpicking at criticism. Who the fuck cares if they used the Anaheim Convention Center? Is that any different than the multiple reuses of the Tillman Water Reclamation Plant?

There are some critics whom I appreciate, especially Lore Reloaded, even as I disagree with them strenuously.
 
Last edited:
Nerdrotic reviews Star Trek? I was under the impression his Never-been-touched-by-a-female-because-women-are-eeeeeevil" toxic masculinity BS doesn't qualify in any shape or form as what sane people would consider as reviews.

Suddenly I feel an urge to hatewatch this. How bad is it?
 
Would you include Gary Buechler of Nerdrotic in this category of ignorant reviewers? He’s fairly scathing about PIC, regularly scoring it around 5/10.
Personally, I think Gary Buechler makes some valid points in his criticisms of various genre tv - including the new Star Treks. Much of how people take this or that person depends heavily on their preconceived notions and biases about whatever is being discussed - 'ignorant' seems to be one of those go-to labels used to insult or demean people that have different opinions. I think it's use is far to liberal nowadays.
 
When watching reviews of Picard on YouTube, one of the biggest issues that keeps coming up is the destruction of the Trek utopia envisioned by Roddenberry.

Are you okay with it? Is it upsetting your enjoyment of Picard? Or is it so bad that for you it’s not even Trek any more?

Some people take the stance that it’s Roddenberry’s vision and therefore shouldn’t be changed. Where do you stand on this?

Well I’m here to explain that what we’re watching isn’t actually a breakdown of the Federation’s utopia (at least not by episode 5), it’s just an illusion created by the serialisation of one dark story on the fringes of the Federation, strung out over a whole season. It’s certainly not Trek, but that’s for other reasons unrelated to utopia.

Disclaimer: I’m not a fan of Kurtzman Trek and nor am I defending it - I hate the gore; the shallow relationships/characters; moronic language, the disrespectful attitudes to authority, and swearing, all of which denigrated the professionalism of the crew on Discovery; I prefer episodic narrative over serialisation and like best the way X-files combined the two; and I dislike the way he messes with/ignores canon.

However, it’s using canon that I will seek to explain/defend the dystopian feeling we get in Picard.

The reason we’re not actually witnessing a breakdown of utopia in the Federation is because (a) we’re not on a Federation vessel and (b) most of the show takes place outside or on the fringes of Federation space.

When we were on Earth the worst thing we saw in terms of a dystopian vision was the F-word from an admiral, and that Starfleet Intelligence seems to have been infiltrated by the Zhat Vash. There is *no* evidence of a utopian breakdown.

The worst we can say (by episode 5) is that the Federation failed to live up to its vision by resettling the Romulans to utopian standards. But it’s totally plausible that resources weren’t available to save an entire planet and in any case the Romulans do not care for the Federation vision of utopia and it moreover hates the Federation.

Although it seems clear that some of top brass of the Federation/Starfleet did not care to help the Romulans (and that attitude does not live up to Roddenberry’s utopian ideals), this kind of diversion from the ideal is rife within Trek canon…it’s nothing new…it’s happened before.

Cast a careful eye over TNG, DS9, movies, etc and you’ll see the cracks were always there, but they were always on the fringes of Federation space. And we only get the occasional glimpse of hard-nosed, dirty, non-utopian Federation/Starfleet decision making when dealing with Admirals.

Most of the time, we were sheltered from the Federation’s dirty laundry facing Starfleet management, because we saw Trek through the eyes of the crew of the Federation flagship. Our view of the Federation has been seen through the eyes of its staff not its upper management, which gives a distorted/biased view as to the realities of how this utopia is actually run, maintained and is continually being attacked at its fringes.

ST Picard puts us into these fringes and outside the federation, on a private vessel, in the thick of a conspiracy involving enemies seeking to take the Federation down. So, of course it’s going to be dark, but it’s not offering a dystopian vision of the Federation - we’re not even in the Federation - it’s showing us that on the edge of the Federation’s utopia, progress exists on a knife edge and sometimes things get rough and dirty...just like in DS9.

It’s no different to how in “Star Trek VI: Undiscovered Country” - Chief-in-Command Admiral Cartwright conspires with other Starfleet officers, Klingons and Vulcans to kill the Klingon Chancellor in order to AVOID peace with Klingon. ST Picard is doing the same thing in a far more sophisticated way serialised over 10 episodes and multiple seasons, instead of 2 hours.

Therefore, it is reasonable and realistic for writers to show that there will be attacks on Trek utopia, so long as it’s not dismantled, but because this storyline is serialised it gives the feeling of a dystopian vision, when in fact it’s anything but.

Refresh your memory with new eyes on the following episodes and you’ll see that on many occasions Starfleet took dirty non-Roddenbery-utopian like decisions. But these were single episodes and now we’re living one episode over a whole season and beyond.

“Ensign Ro” TNG S05e03 - Admiral Kennelly orders Picard to escort a Bajoran cruiser to a camp, but secretly negotiates with the Cardassians to maintain their treaty alliance with the Federation in exchange for the lives on that ship...Picard is ordered to stand down while the Cardassians blow it up.

“The Offspring” TNG S03E16 - Admiral Haften tries to force the separation of Lal from her father, Data.

“The Search Part II” DS9 S03E02 - The Federation tries to negotiate a peace treaty with the Dominion and Admiral superbitch Nechayev excludes the Romulans from peace talks, because they’ll be irrelevant once the treaty is signed. She also reneges on a deal with Bajor by suspending its request for membership indefinitely, and agrees for the Federation to withdraw from DS9 leaving it in the Dominion’s hands, thus screwing the Bajorans whose enemy is the Dominion.

“The Pegasus” TNG S07E12 - Starfleet Intelligence buries an investigation into a cover-up on The Pegasus, in which countless crew members died, because the Federation secretly broke the Treaty of Algeron by developing a cloaking device.

“A Journey’s End” TNG S07E20 - Admiral Nechayev orders Picard to remove Native American Indians who settled in an outpost near Cardassian border by any means necessary. Orders come from the top of Starfleet. The tribe were previously removed from native lands 200 years earlier.

“Descent Part I” TNG S06E26 - Admiral Nechayev reprimands Picard for letting the Borg, Hugh, free when he regained individuality. She said he should have used him to destroy the Borg (as well as Hugh) and orders him to do so at any other opportunity in future.

“The Drumhead” TNG S04E21 - Starfleet Command dispatches Admiral Nora Satie to investigate potential sabotage aboard the Enterprise and she turns it into a McCarthy style witch hunt.
tl;dr ;)
Short reply, make up your own version of what Star Trek is to you, and never ever watch any YouTube reviewers where they mention “Gene’s vision”

Oh, and it’s another Bingo! ;)
 
1) I don't like the dystopian aspects - especially DIS went a bit far IMO as characters generally mistrusting each other. This type of behaviour is fine in Zombie-movies. In Star Trek the characters were delightfully honest with each other. So much so that it felt like a statement at times.

2) Yet I don't think PIC is "dystopian". Yes, the former Neutral Zone is definitely dystopian. But to have regional regression, especially following dramatic events, is natural. I see the Federation as a whole in PIC more as a "frightened Utopia". Would I have preferred a more straightforward Utopia? Yes. Am I okay with what they're doing? Also yes.

3) Yes, cut the fucking gore @All Acess. It belongs to Star Trek like it belongs to "Teen Titans". Not at all. I love Amazons' "The Boys". That doesn't mean I want to see the same level of violence in "Batman".
 
Last edited:
When it comes to the Utopian vision of Star Trek I've always been on the skeptical side of this part of the lore. I always thought of it as a poorly grounded idea based on a general sort of Utopianism that I have noticed to be fairly common among 'artsy' people. As such I never really took it at face value.
 
In Star Trek the characters were delightfully honest with each other.
Agreed. I personally loved how honestly Spock talked about his family with his friends on the Enterprise. After years of working with him he told them everything. How his father is this famous diplomat, how he had a half-brother who was a little weird, how he had an adopted human sister. He was so honest about it, he couldn't talk about anything else. There was never a second of doubt if he should keep that a secret
 
Earth is a utopia.

But Starfleet and the Federation, while on the whole are great organisations, have some hugely negative aspects to them, deep dark secrets. DS9 opened up the whole can of worms on it the best it could, Picard is just showing a bit more.
 
Agreed. I personally loved how honestly Spock talked about his family with his friends on the Enterprise. After years of working with him he told them everything. How his father is this famous diplomat, how he had a half-brother who was a little weird, how he had an adopted human sister. He was so honest about it, he couldn't talk about anything else. There was never a second of doubt if he should keep that a secret

Yes, how dare Spock never having mentioned Burnham! Shame on TOS for ignoring DIS. These bastards. Bet they were influenced by those stupid Youtube haters to ignore her so dastardly.:guffaw:
 
1)
3) Yes, cut the fucking gore @All Acess. It belongs to Star Trek like it belongs to "Teen Titans". Not at all. I love Amazons' "The Boys". That doesn't mean I want to see the same level of violence in "Batman".
Yeah, about that...TNG S1 - "Conspiracy" (The time when GR was in full control of TNG); has this to say on that subject:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Yeah, about that...TNG S1 - "Conspiracy" (The time when GR was in full control of TNG); has this to say on that subject:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Oh, sweet.... :censored::censored::censored:

I didn't even watch the video and the preview still was enough! :barf2:
 
For some strange reason these defenders of Star Trek utopia expect everyone to think and behave like the TNG crew, as if the Federation is some sort of totalitarian dictatorship that prevents people from being shaped by their personal feelings and life experiences.

TNG is centered around a crew led by an incorruptible, patient, and understanding authority figure who views the Enterprise as his home and who considers his crew his family. I think our perception of the utopian society in TNG has as much to do with the world building as it does with the fact that Picard is our gauge for a typical Federation citizen. I never assumed that Captain Picard’s attitude and moral values were shared by everyone in Starfleet, let alone by the average Federation citizen. Imagine if instead of following Captain Picard and his crew TNG focused on the adventures of Captain Jellico. Jellico is not particularly considerate, he’s rough, direct and he makes some questionable choices, but he’s neither evil nor morally corrupt. He’s simply doing his job in a style that’s diametrically opposed to Picard’s. If we replace Picard with Jellico as our touchstone for future humans we get a somewhat different picture of the average Federation citizen. Call me cynical, but it’s likely that there are a lot more Captain Jellicos out there than there are Picards.

Even though TNG depicts a drastically improved quality of life and humanity as a whole is in a much better shape than it is today, people have not evolved beyond their emotions and the inherent complications they bring. Before accusing STP of corrupting the ideals established in TNG people should not forget about morally grey characters such as Thomas Riker, Nicholas Locarno, Captain Maxwell, Admiral Satie, Dr. Marr etc. They are not evil, “unevolved” individuals. They are people who have been molded by life in unfortunate ways. Our experiences shape us—it took Picard a life threatening heart injury to stop being a douchebag—and not everyone copes the same way with pain, loss, pressure, and difficult situations, regardless of the state of the society at large. STP explores the unpleasant parts of Star Trek that have always been there while simultaneously using the incorruptible beacon of hope from TNG to illustrate the importance of striving to do better in spite of the constant setbacks. Striving to do better, not because they’ve been inconvenienced by the external problem of the week, but because the struggle against entropy within ourselves as well as within our society, regardless of how advanced it becomes, never ends. It can be as small and “insignificant” as trying to reconnect with your family, or as massive as “saving the galaxy”. Things are not black and white and one size does not fit all. It’s difficult and messy and human.

TNG crew very rarely experience failures, and when they do the problem is almost always resolved by the end of the episode and, more importantly, we never see the aftermath. In reality, for every right choice and close call that we do see there are probably many catastrophically wrong choices being made on other Federation ships that we never see. Someone fails to run a certain scan or instead of an experimental technobabble solution a more conventional approach is taken—whoops, we just created dozens of orphans, many of whom will not simply move on and shrug off their loss as “My parents knew what they signed up for.” and “I don’t resent the captain because he or she clearly had to make a difficult choice and/or was under the influence of parasites/toxins/aliens.” Sisko’s life, for example, could’ve gone in dozens of horrible directions after Wolf 359. Just because we only get to see the best case scenario it doesn’t mean that there aren’t people who never recovered from that experience. There would probably be a significant number of emotionally scarred people like Raffi, Rios, and Seven.

I love both the unyielding, sweeping optimism of TNG as well as the exploration of the messy details in STP, and I don’t think they are mutually exclusive.
 
For some strange reason these defenders of Star Trek utopia expect everyone to think and behave like the TNG crew, as if the Federation is some sort of totalitarian dictatorship that prevents people from being shaped by their personal feelings and life experiences.
Honestly, this is truly the part that disturbs me most. It disturbs me that there is this groupthink type mentality around Star Trek.
 
Agreed. I personally loved how honestly Spock talked about his family with his friends on the Enterprise. After years of working with him he told them everything. How his father is this famous diplomat, how he had a half-brother who was a little weird, how he had an adopted human sister. He was so honest about it, he couldn't talk about anything else. There was never a second of doubt if he should keep that a secret

Don't forget his fiancee/wife, the one he never mentioned until his mating drive kicked in.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top