Can you imagine? This is like the James Bond themed Omega watches that say 007 on the dial. Makes it a bit hard to maintain that you work for the Far East Import/Export Corporation.
Eddington's vitriolic assessment of The Federation
- Thread starter Ragitsu
- Start date
Can you imagine? This is like the James Bond themed Omega watches that say 007 on the dial. Makes it a bit hard to maintain that you work for the Far East Import/Export Corporation.
They just mention black badges. They are never explicitly called Section 31. Section 31 needs legitimate operational fronts to conduct operations.
Indeed, it's easy enough to assume that during the time of DISCO S31 (at least the public-facing side of it) was considered a legitimate organization that at some point got decommissioned (or so it was generally believed) prior to their more covert subsequent appearances
As I was enjoying some home-grown goodness (from a cool clime, no less)...
...I thought of - well, I did not specifically think of him, admittedly - the Maquis and how, even with the overwhelming evidence to the contrary readily available on the internet, there are still folk who doggedly insist that the Maquis were justified in their actions (although, whether they collectively agree that The United Federation of Planets is literally worse than The Borg is unclear)
...I thought of - well, I did not specifically think of him, admittedly - the Maquis and how, even with the overwhelming evidence to the contrary readily available on the internet, there are still folk who doggedly insist that the Maquis were justified in their actions (although, whether they collectively agree that The United Federation of Planets is literally worse than The Borg is unclear)
I love tomatoes! But I don't see why they couldn't be grown in a station. If Keiko can have an arboretum, how much harder would tomatoes be? Their water, soil, temperature, sun, and fertilizer needs are understood pretty well even today.
My climate is, alas, just a little too cool for tomatoes. I can get cherry tomatoes to grow and make fruit but it isn't quite warm enough for the fruit to ripen before the fall rains come. But we do get tomatoes from across the mountains at the farmer's markets, so that's something.
The Federation encouraged the Maquis to leave, even Demanded that they leave. The Borg WON'T LET their victims leave. That's the difference.
My climate is, alas, just a little too cool for tomatoes. I can get cherry tomatoes to grow and make fruit but it isn't quite warm enough for the fruit to ripen before the fall rains come. But we do get tomatoes from across the mountains at the farmer's markets, so that's something.
The Federation encouraged the Maquis to leave, even Demanded that they leave. The Borg WON'T LET their victims leave. That's the difference.
People often care about belonging more than they care about accuracy. We don’t always believe things because they are factually correct. In many cases, we cling to beliefs that make us look good to the people we care about.” — James ClearAs I was enjoying some home-grown goodness (from a cool clime, no less)...
...I thought of - well, I did not specifically think of him, admittedly - the Maquis and how, even with the overwhelming evidence to the contrary readily available on the internet, there are still folk who doggedly insist that the Maquis were justified in their actions (although, whether they collectively agree that The United Federation of Planets is literally worse than The Borg is unclear)
Accuracy? We’re discussing a fictional universe. There’s no accurate or inaccurate, there’s just interpretation.
This misses the point.
Certain groups are portrayed to be right in fiction and the audience is expected to side with. With Eddington people don't always see past Sisko and his vendetta as right so the Marquis come out looking better than Sisko.
In this literature, the information we get on screen is far too limited to support a substantive discussion of whether the Maquis is justified or not.
And that’s not really the question the audience is challenged to ask. It’s a personal drama. Sisko and Eddington are each committed to their causes, they each believe they are fighting for the right cause, and their approaches are both comparable and contrasting.
“He’s just a man! And he beat me! ARGH!” This isn’t about right and wrong and the cause of justice.
And that’s not really the question the audience is challenged to ask. It’s a personal drama. Sisko and Eddington are each committed to their causes, they each believe they are fighting for the right cause, and their approaches are both comparable and contrasting.
“He’s just a man! And he beat me! ARGH!” This isn’t about right and wrong and the cause of justice.
You know, when Sisko and Eddington are arguing about who’s to blame for all the displaced victims, I bet most viewers think they’re supposed to decide who’s right and who’s wrong,
I don’t. I don’t think we have enough information to judge. What matters is that both parties believe what they say.
We do get some perspective on Sisko’s moral judgments, though.
You betrayed us. You pretended to be working for us while secretly working for the other side. That’s called treason. I think you’re contemptible.
Cing’ta betrayed you. He pretended to be working for you while secretly working for our side. That’s called undercover. I think it’s necessary, righteous and brave.
I don’t. I don’t think we have enough information to judge. What matters is that both parties believe what they say.
We do get some perspective on Sisko’s moral judgments, though.
You betrayed us. You pretended to be working for us while secretly working for the other side. That’s called treason. I think you’re contemptible.
Cing’ta betrayed you. He pretended to be working for you while secretly working for our side. That’s called undercover. I think it’s necessary, righteous and brave.
Last edited:
Which is an interesting question to ask and why it prompts this discussion because part of literature is that we are only getting limited information and we have a protagonist we are used to being on their side. So, this idea that Sisko might be in the wrong is a different one, and prompts far more sympathy towards Eddington because this is unusual for Sisko to act this way.
Their points have been raised and repeatedly slapped down. Replicated food is not mind control or programming. Tomatoes can be grown. The Federation is not worse than The Borg. An argument that remaining in The Federation while moving elsewhere was made and yet - ultimately - no one was held in bondage.
The only reason why the idea of the Maquis persists is because anti-government sentiment persists. Only, in this case, it is emotion with little (if any) backing intellect.
The only reason why the idea of the Maquis persists is because anti-government sentiment persists. Only, in this case, it is emotion with little (if any) backing intellect.
How dare humans have emotions as part of their arguments?
The appeal to emotion is always going to go stronger, especially in art which is designed to *checks notes* promote an emotional reaction.
You already had, to some extent
. In any case, we eventually covered both: Maquis claims versus "reality" as well as Eddington's rhetoric.
