Spoilers Star Trek: Picard 2x04 - "Watcher"

[eschaton]

I would go one step further and argue that she didn't un-do Tuvok's and Neelix's deaths -- she just created new copies of them. Tuvok and Neelix are still dead, and the people we called by their names for the rest of the series were entirely separate beings.

Although if you hold to this belief then the original person dies as soon as they transport for the first time.

I am of the belief that if strict materialism is true, then there's no reason why a transporter would kill you. All atoms of a given element are identical after all, and rebuilding you with the exact same configuration should mean your perceptual reality just shifts to the new physical location. Ergo, a "copy" is still you.

Of course, Trek is actually a dualist setting, where "mind" is somehow separate from the body and can be moved around (as witnessed by what happened in this season of Picard).

 

[Jayson1]

Even a lot of people who believe in capitalism just say it's the best system yet created, not that it's perfect.

In a future scenario where a lot of the priors of capitalism - that people need to labor in order to generate enough surplus value to create goods and services for others - suddenly there are a number of new economic possibilities which arise which heretofore we could not have considered.

I tend to think most Americans tend to think of American Capitalism, which of course includes a wee bit of socialism like the social safety net. Of course you also have predatory capitalism which is people exploiting by basically being so greedy that their greed becomes a issue for everyone.

 

[Yistaan]

Yeah, I saw people saying she was 'too young' so I did the math.

They said the same about James Frain and Mark Lenard as Sarek, and I believe the math was that Frain was actually the same age if not older than Lenard (can't remember)

 

[zenophite]

If you (general) are okay with ICE officers treating groups of people as less than human scum because they crossed an imaginary lime, we've nothing to discuss.

The point is I never said that and moreover, I don't really see how what I've said can be interpreted in those terms. It seems like an over the top knee jerk reaction - "If you don't agree with my take on immigration then you support concentration camps' (to paraphrase another person here). I've said before that I'm against state sponsored abuse. What I also said is that we should be clear about what we consider 'abuse'. Not every use of force is abuse - as unfortunate as it is, sometimes forcible means are necessary to perform some function such as, in this case, immigration enforcement. To some people even the idea of having border controls is 'abuse' - that is a radical view IMO.
ICE, just like any organization, undoubtedly has flaws but I don't think it's productive or practical to simply shout "ICE is evil and must be abolished" from the roof tops and expect people to agree or disparage them when they don't. Especially not when it it is a disingenuous position in the sense that, for many, it's not even really ICE that they want to get rid of but the whole idea of borders and border controls.

Yeah, they broke a law and that shouldn't be easily shrugged off or tolerated but the way ICE and then government treats them as dispicible and shouldn't be shrugged off.

Guess what, I'm in full agreement with you here. Immigration enforcement, and for that matter any law enforcement or interaction of state power with citizens, residents and non-residents should be handled with strict and humane guidelines.

 

[fireproof78]

I tend to think most Americans tend to think of American Capitalism, which of course includes a wee bit of socialism like the social safety net. Of course you also have predatory capitalism which is people exploiting by basically being so greedy that their greed becomes a issue for everyone.

Indeed. Which is why I think a balanced approach rather than an absolutist approach is needed when discussing social issues. The absolutistionist positions make it very difficult to want to even engaged in a discussion because of the labels thrown out. Hard to discuss pros and cons when one feels on the defensive.

Guess what, I'm in full agreement with you here. Immigration enforcement, and for that matter any law enforcement or interaction of state power with citizens, residents and non-residents should be handled with strict and humane guidelines.

Agreed, 100%. Supporting enforcement of law doesn't mean supporting of abuse of power.

 

[J. Frank Doobie]

My complaint is the non-mention of Time's Arrow, not the recasting. Personally, I like the recasting and I mean no offense or disparagement or anything in saying this but as a straight male viewer I find Ito's Guinan a lot "hotter" than Whoopi's (sorry Whoopi). I want to see Ito's Guinan in Strange New Worlds fighting the Borg or something.

I get you, and perhaps I'm overreacting to a perceived grievance about recasting. So, I don't intend to continue on that topic.

Regarding continuity, didn't the new Confederation timeline negate the existence of "Time's Arrow"? I guess if the timeline change hasn't happened yet, that's a weird continuity error --- but how do we know the change hasn't happened yet? Again, I'm curious, but in the end, I care less about continuity than many others, and don't really care to defend my position, because I only hold in tenuously.

And yes: I'd watch Ito read the phone book, as they say.

 

[Kilana2]

At least Whoopi Goldberg did return contrary to Brian Brophy.

 

[Amaris]

I tend to think most Americans tend to think of American Capitalism, which of course includes a wee bit of socialism like the social safety net. Of course you also have predatory capitalism which is people exploiting by basically being so greedy that their greed becomes a issue for everyone.

I'm pretty much done with that particular conversation (you can only go around in circles so many times before it begins to feel pointless), but US capitalism is late stage capitalism. It does not contain any socialism, it simply has some social safety nets. Socialism is when labor has control of production. So, for example, decisions made by a power company would start with the unions and their workers, not the shareholders, or any kind of board of directors.

 

[eschaton]

The term "concentration camp" immediately brings up the Nazis today, but that wasn't the sole use of the term. It actually rose to prominence during the Second Anglo-Boer War in South Africa around 1900. The British, facing guerilla warfare basically turned already existing refugee camps into places Boers were forcibly settled under armed guards. There was a huge death toll due to disease and malnutrition, but few people were actively killed - and it was arguably incidental to the overall policy, more due to neglect than anything.

Regardless, any internment camp which targets a particular class of people can be termed a "concentration camp" - even relatively "humane" ones like the forced internments of Japanese Americans during World War II.

 

[eschaton]

I'm pretty much done with that particular conversation (you can only go around in circles so many times before it begins to feel pointless), but US capitalism is late stage capitalism. It does not contain any socialism, it simply has some social safety nets. Socialism is when labor has control of production. So, for example, decisions made by a power company would start with the unions and their workers, not the shareholders, or any kind of board of directors.

Though arguably a business where the workers collectively own a controlling interest of shares could be termed a socialist entity working with the capitalist superstructure.

ESOPs where workers have real power are quite rare though.

 

[J. Frank Doobie]

Socialism is when labor has control of production.

Just chiming in to express agreement: Social democratic (i.e. Scandinavian) social safety net systems are not socialism unless production is democratized to those who labor to produce. If businesses are still privately owned, it's capitalism --- that's the very definition. And systems like the Norwegian one are still built on planet-killing oil production (which is state-owned, but not directly worker-controlled) and the imbalance of wealth between rich and poor countries.

The post-scarcity aspect of Star Trek is an important part of what makes the ST universe so free from economic oppression, but it will not happen if we don't try to prefigure that world and bring it into being. Post-Scarcity Anarchism by Murray Bookchin is a good read on this topic.

But I digress!!

 

[UssGlenn]

Regarding continuity, didn't the new Confederation timeline negate the existence of "Time's Arrow"? I guess if the timeline change hasn't happened yet, that's a weird continuity error --- but how do we know the change hasn't happened yet? Again, I'm curious, but in the end, I care less about continuity than many others, and don't really care to defend my position, because I only hold in tenuously.

The timeline was changed in Picard's past. By going back in time to before the 15th they have caused the effects of the change (no Enterprise D crew to time travel) to appear early. This is because they have "locked in" the Confederacy timeline as the active one. Guinan would have "lost" her memories of Times Arrow the moment the La Serena appeared. The first time around she would have lost them when Q made the change on the 15th.

 

[Amaris]

Just chiming in to express agreement: Social democratic (i.e. Scandinavian) social safety net systems are not socialism unless production is democratized to those who labor to produce. If businesses are still privately owned, it's capitalism --- that's the very definition. And systems like the Norwegian one are still built on planet-killing oil production (which is state-owned, but not directly worker-controlled) and the imbalance of wealth between rich and poor countries.

The post-scarcity aspect of Star Trek is an important part of what makes the ST universe so free from economic oppression, but it will not happen if we don't try to prefigure that world and bring it into being. Post-Scarcity Anarchism by Murray Bookchin is a good read on this topic.

But I digress!!

Murray Bookchin rep.

 

[J. Frank Doobie]

Though arguably a business where the workers collectively own a controlling interest of shares could be termed a socialist entity working with the capitalist superstructure.

Something perhaps like the Mondragon Corporation in Spain.

 

[Tuskin38]

There's line in Voyager, where Janeway says something about the effects of time travel can precede the cause.

 

[Sci]

Although if you hold to this belief then the original person dies as soon as they transport for the first time.

Not necessarily. Tuvix didn't have the mass of two men -- obviously a great deal of mass was just lost. I think it's clear that normal transporting preserves continuity of consciousness, and that in this instance the consciousnesses of Tuvok and Neelix were terminated and then copied.

I tend to think most Americans tend to think of American Capitalism, which of course includes a wee bit of socialism like the social safety net. Of course you also have predatory capitalism which is people exploiting by basically being so greedy that their greed becomes a issue for everyone.

For the record, socialism is a a family of economic systems characterized by some form of communal ownership of the means of production.

A social safety net is a form of downwards redistribution, but that is not the same thing as socialism. The means of production in the U.S. remain privately owned.

ICE, just like any organization, undoubtedly has flaws but I don't think it's productive or practical to simply shout "ICE is evil and must be abolished" from the roof tops and expect people to agree or disparage them when they don't.

The problem is that ICE is too systemically abusive to frame it in terms of bad actors within an otherwise-acceptable system. It is abusive and racist as an institution.

Especially not when it it is a disingenuous position in the sense that, for many, it's not even really ICE that they want to get rid of but the whole idea of borders and border controls.

First off, getting rid of ICE for most progressives I know is a goal in and of itself, even for those who also want open borders -- they consider them separate goals, and most of those who want open borders whom I know consider abolishing ICE to be a first priority before opening borders.

Secondly: Open borders is a perfectly legitimate opinion to have. Especially since the entire concept of closing borders and limiting what groups get to enter the U.S. has its origins in racism. The U.S. had open borders until it decided to ban immigration from non-white countries.

Thirdly: Star Trek is literally a show that espouses open borders, since it endorses the idea of the nations of the world uniting under a single planetary government called United Earth.

Guess what, I'm in full agreement with you here. Immigration enforcement, and for that matter any law enforcement or interaction of state power with citizens, residents and non-residents should be handled with strict and humane guidelines.

Then you should want to abolish ICE.

They said the same about James Frain and Mark Lenard as Sarek, and I believe the math was that Frain was actually the same age if not older than Lenard (can't remember)

Honestly, I think people generally just aged faster back in the 1940s-1980s era because smoking was so much more prevalent everywhere.

 

[Crusher Disciple]

Personally I've always thought Time's Arrow was a stupid episode to begin with, so I'm not really so bothered with the "Why didn't she recognize Picard" thing. A part of me wishes they'd just drop all of the TNG things and just let the Picard series be itself on its own. I know that won't happen, but a girl can dream.

 

[Sci]

Side-note: Y'all anti-capitalists should go to TNZ and participate in the socialism and anti-capitalism thread there.

 

[137th Gebirg]

ICE and Tuvix. Tuvix and ICE. This thread really has become quite the dumpster fire, hasn't it?

 

[Sci]

ICE and Tuvix. Tuvix and ICE. This thread really has become quite the dumpster fire, hasn't it?

ICE would 100% have tried to deport Tuvix to the Delta Quadrant.