"In some ways you're even worse than the Borg!"
- Thread starter Darth_Pazuzu
- Start date
I would say the Federation's influence is more subtle--it's not on a military level, but a cultural level. Kinda like how if you go to almost any foreign country nowadays, you're going to see tons and tons of American culture (particularly of the consumer variety) everywhere, and people all over the world know how to speak English and we pretty much expect it of them. (Not RIGHT, but that's what happens.)
We've seen plenty of alien cultures in Trek, and none of them seemed that much like the Federation.
The Klingons, for example, have had extensive experience dealing with the UFP, yet haven't become *like* them. Allied with them, yes. Similar to them, no.
The United States 'assimilates' immigrants all the time. A lot of immigrants come here and adapt to our culture and livestyle but also maintain their own cultural identity, not in public perhaps but in their homes they do. The Federation DOES assimilate, they just don't do it the way the Borg do. They do it through the ways that are generally seen as 'good'.
Immigrants come to the United State and anymore we don't demand thathtey become citizens and many of them are illegal. The Federation has alway allowed people the option not to join if they so wish as TNG's First Contact the ep. not the movie proved.
It's a valid "what if" (to a rhetorical question, no less
). The thing is, what we see on screen, we take for full value, and there's nothing in dialogue or in the show that would indicate anything else aside from a human cultural dominance in the Federation. Also, I would fall back about Azetbhur, too. I believe she would argue that while any species can join Starfleet, even from non-member worlds, that there's a human-placed cultural barrier that's preventing other peoples from joining. Of course, her thinking that is just a guess on my part, but culture, culture shock, and culture assimilation is a big, big part of this topic, and a major crux of Eddington's argument that can't be ignored. I'm of the firm belief that whenever Picard says there are 150 worlds in the Federation, that he also means 150 different races altogether (as opposed to, say, 70 worlds and 80 colonized planets or something like that), which is a mighty and proud number for sure. The thing is, what we see on screen doesn't reflect those numbers at all. Most ships in Starfleet are named after Earth people/objects, most senior officials we see are humans, etc. etc. Most colonies are named after humans. The capital of the Federation is on Earth, the least advanced planet of the founding four worlds. Doesn't that seem odd?
But here's the thing about having a majority, too. If you have a majority, the minorities begin to take up traits of that majority, either willingly or as a means to adapt to their surroundings. Ie, a Democrat in a heavily Republican state may be more conservative than his other Democrats. An immigrant will try his best to fit into what he sees as the standard American. A Chinese restaurant will serve French fries, etc. etc. etc. Some would argue that's a bad thing, leading to a loss of culture that makes a country great. Others would argue that it's a good thing, adding to a more global and united human front. Both arguments, I think, are extremely valid. But if you take those arguments (both for and against) and greatly expand them to galactic terms, stretch them across 150 worlds, then you get one of the fundamental ideas of Star Trek: taking a topic that's on the minds of people today and examining it on the show's terms.
The real world reason why there are so few aliens compared to the dialogue is, of course, budget. Am I blaming the makeup dept, the producers, and the powers that be for the discrepancy of fewer humans? Of course not, a budget is a budget and nothing more. Actually, what I see in TUC and DS9 are the writers using the limitations of tv/film and using it to frame a debate about melting pots. To me, that's excellent writing. (to wit, I wish Voyager would've explored that debate a little more, too. Voyager was always an outsider, meddling in the affairs of others. THEY would be the fish under water. This time, they would be the immigrants, and therefore more of a struggle to maintain Starfleet ideals, or more of a struggle to truly learn about alien cultures, rather than, ironically, depending on the Borg for a quick weekly fix.).
Last edited:
I'd like to point out that assimilation by itself doesn't have to be a negative (or positive) thing. We just assign a value to the word. I suppose that since the word is so well associated with villains like the Borg that we as Trekkies tend to think of assimilation as inherently evil.
So if the Federation is assimilating a culture, it could be said that it's adding to the big melting pot of diversity that is the Federation, just as it could be equally said that Federation culture would be crushing it.
It was Eddington though who made the comparison and I can't agree with it since as I pointed out a planet does have an option of not joining the Federation, I've never seen the Borg offer anybody that kind of choice. And I don't think Eddington thought of assimilation as being anyting other than a bad thing, even though he saw himself as a hero.
^ Exactly. If Eddington ever had any *legitimate* grievances with the Federation (and I'm still not convinced he, or the Maquis in general, did), all that got lost in the shuffle when he started that Jean Valjean thing of his. He was an opportunistic, arrogant jerk with a Messiah complex. He was hardly objective.
Remember Tom Paris? He basically only joined the Maquis for the thrill of it. And Lon Suder joined just because he liked to *kill*. Neither of them ever believed in the group's goals. Eddington was so fixated on being a hero that I don't think his motivations were that much more genuine.
Remember Tom Paris? He basically only joined the Maquis for the thrill of it. And Lon Suder joined just because he liked to *kill*. Neither of them ever believed in the group's goals. Eddington was so fixated on being a hero that I don't think his motivations were that much more genuine.
You're right, of course. Eddington was the one who made the comparison. However, if you'll note, neither you nor I nor most others in this thread are Eddington. He was definitely trying to strike a chord with Sisko. But we have people in this very thread who are arguing that assimilation happens (like the Borg) but in fundamentally different ways (unlike the Borg, ie the option of choice). And that is where I think both contrasting arguments come to meet each other and ultimately join together.
Besides, the one big catch all that should be credited to Eddington is that he said "...in some ways," not in all ways. That alone makes his entire argument up for interpretation, both for and against the Federation. Is it against Federation ideals to advance itself, just like the Borg? No, that's an inherently organistic goal. Is it against Federation ideals to force everything through sheer might? Yes. So in some ways, we ARE like the Borg, but perhaps not in a negative way like Eddington suggests. I'm saying he may have a point, but it might not be such a damning point after all if put into a certain, pro-Federation context.
After all, to know the enemy is to defeat the enemy. The Borg's main strength is adaptation, which is exactly what Starfleet has done to beat them in the past. Borg-like traits may or may not be a bad thing, it simply depends on how those traits are applied. The whole intention behind creating a character like Eddington was to make a black-and-white issue into a very very grey issue. He's right in a few regards, wrong in others, but he qualifies that possibility of vagueness in his very own statement.
The definition for assimilate:
as·sim·i·late
1.
to take in and incorporate as one's own; absorb: He assimilated many new experiences on his European trip.
2.
to bring into conformity with the customs, attitudes, etc., of a group, nation, or the like; adapt or adjust: to assimilate the new immigrants.
Yes, the Federation DOES assimilate.
Agreed. Still, what he says isn't: "In some ways you're like the Borg." (I'd agree to that because of everything you mentioned) but "In some ways you're even worse than the Borg." and that just sounds ridiculous to me.
Any paramilitary group is going to attract its share of nutters and jerks. But what about people like Chakotay? Some people had to have been there to defend their homes, not just for the hell of killing.
Perhaps. But there's no indication that Eddington was that noble. He was all about ego; I see no reason to trust anything he ever said.
If Chakotay had made the same argument, perhaps that'd have been more believable. But not Eddington. He couldn't be trusted.
And for the record, Chakotay never *would* have argued that the Federation is like the Borg. Chakotay was never that full of shit to begin with; certainly he didn't hate the Federation like Eddington did. To put it another way: I'm sure Chakotay actually agonized over his decision to leave Starfleet and join the Maquis. He surely wished there had been another way. Eddington probably jumped at the chance.
Here's another way I see Eddington different from Chakotay:
Let's assume, theoretically, that not every colonist in the DMZ was a member of the Maquis. I'm sure that there was a recruitment drive, of some sorts, among those colonists, trying to persuade them to join up. I wonder, what happened to the colonists who actively refused to join the Maquis? Chakotay would have respected their decision. Eddington would have probably used force against them, to compel them to join and fight the glorious revolution and all that crap.
Last edited:
No, the Federaton is like an outer space version of The United Nations or NATO, planets first of all have a choice and once in the Federation their people have a choie whether or not to join Starfleet. Mind you a human can also leave earth and live somewhere else so it's more of a blending of cultures than an assimulation into one.
You can't argue the Federation does not assimilate cultures. They may choose to join up, and not want the assimilation, but it tends to happen. That happens when people network. It happens to immigrants - even those who do not want to assimilate get assimilated, even if its' a few generations later.
Of course the Federation is a choice- but Eddington's comment about the Federation being 'in some ways worse' is, I think, a reference to the quiet, insidious way that assimilation happens. It doesn't happen through violence. Planets are simply joining a political/military/economic alliance- they do not have to meet any other conditions- except certain political freedoms (which is the bad door for the assimilation to happen).
Of course Eddington was an extremist and wrong in his extreme negative characterization of the Federation. The Federation does not use violence to assimilate, and (probably) does not even intend to assimilate anyone. But it DOES happen.
Of course, assimilation doesn't happen to everyone to a great degree, if at all. Actually, at least in the show, there's a lot of evidence planetary cultures remain pretty intact, especially if they are ancient I assume. For example, Vulcans remain logical IDIC people, even after 200 years. That is probably true of most worlds. But they do have to arrange their affairs in ways that conform to what the Federation calls 'good' in order to be members. If you are one of the rare people that still believes that Reason is universal, then all Federation members can meet these standards on their own terms and in their own ways. But it DOES mean giving up that caste system you liked so much- but you those planets do it of their own will- which is not true assimilation. That comes later with trade and the exchange of ideas, particularly if one member seems to have hegemonic influence (humans and Earth). But that insidiousness comes after- which is what Eddington was complainging about. But his gross generalization and willingness to kill for it is what makes him an the Maquis the bad guys.
Originally the Maquis were easier to sympathize with- the Federation signed a treaty that screwed over a lot of its citizens by leaving them at the mercy of the Cardassians (yes it was a DMZ, but you there was lots of evidence the Cardassians could not be trusted- then again, what else could the Feds do?). They started to defend themselves. But then they started to blame the Federation for trying to make the best of a bad situation, and THEN started to make sweeping and inaccurate generalizations about the Federation and consider those gross generalizations to mark the essential character of the Federation. Which was dead wrong.
As to humanity and Earth's hegemonic position in the Federation, well that's obviously because we are humans and like the idea of being the good guys. For an in-show explanation, there are a few more. One is that humans were simply the community builders that got the original 5 on board, so Earth was the capital. If you take Enterprise (the show) as a reference, the other members barely trusted each other, so Earth may have been chosen as a more neutral middle-ground (like Geneva for the UN). The predominance of humans in Starfleet could be 'human curiosity' but also because other member prefer to serve with their own kind. There have been several instances of all-Vulcan Starfleet vessels. This may happen quite a bit.
Hmm, this actually makes ,e think of Starfleet as assimilationist. The Federation might have that tendency by accident (although limited, at least it appears so) but Starfleet is CLEARLY assimilationist. You go to an Academy where you learn not only skills, but a way of life, a set of ethics, and you interact on a grand scale with other cultures, where on in particular is predominant. You even have to wear uniforms and conform to standards of behaviour that were not chosen by your own planet. But of course, each Starfleet officer chooses to be there too.
Anyway, it's fun to think about all this. And as someone else said, Eddington's greatest victory lies is creating a discussion about the nature of the Federation. Not because it helps his cause (because his cause is wrong, even if gross generalization has some truth to it), but because it HELPS the Federation, and us. The Federation, like us, is supposed to have self-criticism built in. That means taking seriously any criticisms directed at us.
Of course the Federation is a choice- but Eddington's comment about the Federation being 'in some ways worse' is, I think, a reference to the quiet, insidious way that assimilation happens. It doesn't happen through violence. Planets are simply joining a political/military/economic alliance- they do not have to meet any other conditions- except certain political freedoms (which is the bad door for the assimilation to happen).
Of course Eddington was an extremist and wrong in his extreme negative characterization of the Federation. The Federation does not use violence to assimilate, and (probably) does not even intend to assimilate anyone. But it DOES happen.
Of course, assimilation doesn't happen to everyone to a great degree, if at all. Actually, at least in the show, there's a lot of evidence planetary cultures remain pretty intact, especially if they are ancient I assume. For example, Vulcans remain logical IDIC people, even after 200 years. That is probably true of most worlds. But they do have to arrange their affairs in ways that conform to what the Federation calls 'good' in order to be members. If you are one of the rare people that still believes that Reason is universal, then all Federation members can meet these standards on their own terms and in their own ways. But it DOES mean giving up that caste system you liked so much- but you those planets do it of their own will- which is not true assimilation. That comes later with trade and the exchange of ideas, particularly if one member seems to have hegemonic influence (humans and Earth). But that insidiousness comes after- which is what Eddington was complainging about. But his gross generalization and willingness to kill for it is what makes him an the Maquis the bad guys.
Originally the Maquis were easier to sympathize with- the Federation signed a treaty that screwed over a lot of its citizens by leaving them at the mercy of the Cardassians (yes it was a DMZ, but you there was lots of evidence the Cardassians could not be trusted- then again, what else could the Feds do?). They started to defend themselves. But then they started to blame the Federation for trying to make the best of a bad situation, and THEN started to make sweeping and inaccurate generalizations about the Federation and consider those gross generalizations to mark the essential character of the Federation. Which was dead wrong.
As to humanity and Earth's hegemonic position in the Federation, well that's obviously because we are humans and like the idea of being the good guys. For an in-show explanation, there are a few more. One is that humans were simply the community builders that got the original 5 on board, so Earth was the capital. If you take Enterprise (the show) as a reference, the other members barely trusted each other, so Earth may have been chosen as a more neutral middle-ground (like Geneva for the UN). The predominance of humans in Starfleet could be 'human curiosity' but also because other member prefer to serve with their own kind. There have been several instances of all-Vulcan Starfleet vessels. This may happen quite a bit.
Hmm, this actually makes ,e think of Starfleet as assimilationist. The Federation might have that tendency by accident (although limited, at least it appears so) but Starfleet is CLEARLY assimilationist. You go to an Academy where you learn not only skills, but a way of life, a set of ethics, and you interact on a grand scale with other cultures, where on in particular is predominant. You even have to wear uniforms and conform to standards of behaviour that were not chosen by your own planet. But of course, each Starfleet officer chooses to be there too.
Anyway, it's fun to think about all this. And as someone else said, Eddington's greatest victory lies is creating a discussion about the nature of the Federation. Not because it helps his cause (because his cause is wrong, even if gross generalization has some truth to it), but because it HELPS the Federation, and us. The Federation, like us, is supposed to have self-criticism built in. That means taking seriously any criticisms directed at us.
I think Starfleet is a great example of Federation assimilation by choice. If you're from race/planet that's just joined the Federation, and you choose to join Starfleet, you have to abide by these rules that everyone else (in a hive, no less) came up with, serve on vessels with crews that act as one unit, and use technology that's been cobbled together by tons of civilizations. Any one of those three might be completely alien, but if you want to work in the system, you have to become part of the system. If anyone wants an example of assimilation by the Federation, one need not look further than Starfleet. And, again, that's an analogy to the Borg isn't such a bad thing after all. Heck, that system has saved the galaxy quite a few times.