I would simplify that into Section 31. Spies may make a fun holosuite program but they are anti-Star Trek and a society as strong as the Federation is supposed to be should be making do with their Intelligence Service and not need Section 31 as well.
And Mudd's Women.
Magic mushrooms, red angel suits, cavernous turbo lifts and a character that is more evil than Hitler that the audience is supposed to root for. Klingon Orc monsters, Spocks Dad being a warmonger and Spock having a sister.
But all that pales into insignificance when we have a character called Gene who is belittled whilst sweeping up guts. And that godawful "Yum yum" line.
And yeah, I know I was hate watching, so I stopped mid way through season 3. And I'm one of those nerds whose watched everything at least 3 times. Even crap like Fair Haven.
But all that pales into insignificance when we have a character called Gene who is belittled whilst sweeping up guts. And that godawful "Yum yum" line.
And yeah, I know I was hate watching, so I stopped mid way through season 3. And I'm one of those nerds whose watched everything at least 3 times. Even crap like Fair Haven.
If Georgiou is not redeemable then there is no hope for the rest of us unevolved humans.
I actually never thought Mirror Georgiou was particularly evil. She came from a universe that didn't really have any of the morality or values of the Federation. But I can see why people call her space Hitler.
The mistake a lot of actors make (and writers, too) is in putting the Mirror Universe as evil for the sake of it. The best portrayals I've seen is the Mirror version of our characters being essentially the same as their prime counterparts... just more unfettered and ruthless in their actions.
The two actors who got this perfectly were Leonard Nimoy and Colm Meaney. Spock was still quite logical, stoic, calculating... but he was ruthless in the application of his logic. Same with O'Brien: he was at heart a good guy, but he would definitely resort to less than savory tactics to achieve his goals.
The mistake a lot of actors make (and writers, too) is in putting the Mirror Universe as evil for the sake of it. The best portrayals I've seen is the Mirror version of our characters being essentially the same as their prime counterparts... just more unfettered and ruthless in their actions.
The two actors who got this perfectly were Leonard Nimoy and Colm Meaney. Spock was still quite logical, stoic, calculating... but he was ruthless in the application of his logic. Same with O'Brien: he was at heart a good guy, but he would definitely resort to less than savory tactics to achieve his goals.
But then, does anyone "evil" automatically get a pass because of where they come from?
If someone was a serial killer because they were raised that way, we'd still judge them as a serial killer and treat them accordingly.
Not at all.
In Mirror Georgiou's case, she can't be (for example) tried for anything that we would consider crimes she did in her home universe. Now if she actually did crimes while in the Prime universe, absolutely she can charged and tried for them. But only the ones she committed in the Prime universe. But any actions in the Mirror universe? That's not for the Prime universe to decide.
With the Mirror Universe, yes.
Here in Earth we can learn how they were educated and know the moral system they were raised with. And even then, wouldn't the evolved ideal be education not name calling?
In fairness, they did the 2 part episode with Carl the Guardian of Forever, which showed she really did try to make a positive difference in the Mirror Universe when she was sent back.
Yes she commited atrocities in a world of atrocities, but when shown a better way, she adopted it.
"everyone was doing it, man!! peer pressure!!"
Mirror Georgiou ate people, tortured people and seemed to get off on it too (yum, yum). She's presented in the campiest way possible to make her more palatable. I don't think DSC is a particularly moral or serious show, so if we treat her like a Batman 1966 baddie, I guess anything goes. But if you stop and think about her character, she's a mass murderer and utterly irredeemable.
It's ludicrous that anyone would trust her, or put her in a position of authority outside of the mirror universe where she ruled with an iron fist. As you rightly say, there were good and honest people in the MU as well.
Last edited:
Would Goebells or Hitler or Sadam Hussain, or Mengele, or Pol Pot be redeemable in your opinion?
Do we know the moral system they were raised under?
To a certain extent, that's irrelevant.
Just as there are certain "inalienable rights" that all humans share, there is also a certain morality all humans share. For example, look at stories about people who escape cultures steeped in physical or sexual abuse. These individuals, while raised in such environments, know on some basic level that the atrocities they are experiencing or expected to dish out are wrong.
I don't care what culture a person is from, everyone knows that putting people in ovens or forcing them into showers that are without water is wrong. That's why so many evil people at the end of the day try to hide their crimes and cover up the evidence.
Of course, this does not mean there are mitigating factors. Mental disease or defect might skew a person's moral compass. Some people are deluded or brainwashed or conditioned to accept a certain amount of depravity as normal and acceptable. At the end of the day, however, everyone knows smashing babies against rocks is evil.
But that's reality and not a fictionalized universe created to entertain and provide intellectual thought exercises.
Which is my point. Georgiou is judged on a morality system she knows nothing about.
Yes of course we know, it's history, we can look it up. For example ,Hitler had a Catholic upbringing. He had an unhappy childhood as his father was abusive, true. But so do many people.
Pol Pot has a comfy and pleasant childhood. He was raised in a well off family and had a very good education.
Both these men were educated and understood right from wrong. But they were morally depraved.
Neither of the above are redeemable in any sane persons eyes. Hitler was responsible for the death of some 16 million people and Pol Pot around 2-3 million.
It's very disconcerting to see people siding and trying to forgive a fictional unrepentant genocidal lunatic just because she happens to be on their side.
It's actually sickening to suggest that anyone could redeem or excuse the murder, torture, forced labor and mass killings of a real life person such as Ghengis Khan or Hitler.
Last edited:
Heres a thought experiment then. Pretend that parallel worlds are real like in Star Trek and that time travel is possible. Ghengis Khan, who was responsible for the deaths of 40 million people! Let that sink in, crosses over to another parallel world.
Are you saying that in that world, he's now innocent and cannot be locked up. You'd let him loose in the community because it's not for that world to decide his punishment? Absolve him of his heinous actions?
That's not only illogical, but immoral and irresponsible.
People are not all the same.
No, he can't be locked up in this world unless he did any of those actions in this world.
Similar threads
- Locked
