For the most part, I'm inclined to agree with
Jefferies, though I have to add a few quibbles with everyone....
I have to admit I am outright surprised and dismayed at the degree of cynicism and contempt towards the Federation voiced by many of the postings in this thread. Seriously, comparing the Federation to the Borg, are you out of your minds?
The Federation is the most liberal, tolerant and free society that humanity has ever had a part in.
I completely agree. In fact, I'd go further: The Federation is the most liberal, tolerant, egalitarian, peaceful, and free society that Humanity, Vulcanity, Andorianity, Tellariteity, Betazoidity, Trillity, Ardanity, Bolarianity, Antedeanity, Axanarity, Benzariteity, Bre'elianity, Brikarity, Bynarity, Caitianity, Damianoity, Deltanity, Denobulanity, Efrosianity, Grazeriteity, Ktarianity, Kriosianity, Medusanity, Hortaity, Nasatity, Pacificanity, Pandriliteity, Rigellianity, Risianity, Sulamidity, Tiburonianity, Zakdornity, Zaldanity, and any other -ity you can think of has ever had a part in.
In no way does the Federation endeavour to subjugate or even incorporate all other sentient races or any race for that matter. Only the races that explicitly wish to join are considered. Those that wish to be left alone are protected by the PRIME DIRECTIVE. Surely you guys have heard of this law?
Well, yes and no. Yes, the Federation will completely respect the wishes of any people who do not wish to join. But I think it's safe to say that one of the Federation's ultimate goals is to end interstellar conflict and war by peacefully, non-coercively persuading every sentient race to join and adopt its values.
I mean, when the Ferengi start adopting Federation-like gender laws and social reforms within twenty years of first contact with the UFP? When the last two Klingon Chancellors have been installed by Federation Starfleet officers and the Klingons themselves seem to be far less expansionist than they used to be? I think it's kind of hard to argue that Eddington was wrong in saying that the UFP wants to see every culture become one of their Member States.
I for one don't think that's a bad thing, though.
Exceptions to this only prove the rule. Some people have brought up the Ba’ku incident. If you paid any attention to Insurrection then it should have been clear that this was more of a rouge operation than anything else and once all the facts where revealed to the Federation Council it was stopped immediately.
Or you could argue that it would have been ordered stopped because of public embarrassment. The Federation may be the best government in history, but that doesn't mean it doesn't sometimes make mistakes or do things it shouldn't do.
Also the existence of Section 31 does not prove that the Federation is malevolent. This is clearly not an official organisation, but a bunch of criminals who believe to be above the laws of the Federation.
Agreed. Section 31 is no more evidence that the Federation is not at its core basically good than the Bush Administration or Blair government are somehow indications that at their cores, the US and UK are not basically good.
The Federation endeavours to be the most ethical, humane and decent government it can be, a fact that is clearly enshrined in its institutions such as Starfleet and the Council. To suggest some sinister, covert-hegemonial counter-agendum simply does not fit the facts. It rather sounds like one of those crazy conspiracy theories by people who believe that power is always abused, regardless of the laws and institutions that it is based on.
Weeeeeeellllllllllll. It almost always is, is the thing. That's why the best laws and institutions are ones that provide effective checks against abuse and encourage democracy and popular transparency.
This, however, is no moral justification for people like the Marquis. Sure, it was a less than optimal situation and clearly the Federation wasn’t happy with it. However, peace is seldom free. The fact that the Federation was willing to make sacrifices for this shows their good intent.
The colonists were given every chance of moving to safety and every warning of what would happen if they didn’t. Furthermore, the Federation was willing to assist them in any way possible to build a new life on different planets. They refused and then formed a terrorist group when things didn’t turn out the way they wanted. These people are murders and traitors. The response they eventually received from the Federation is hardly a sign of totalitarianism.
Completely disagree. The Federation government basically engaged in theft -- of their property, of their homes, of their COMMUNITIES. You don't just change planets and expect to be able to put a community back together like it was. And theft is theft, whether it's the government doing it or someone else.
And all this the Federation did to appease Cardassians who then went and began engaging in sentient rights abuses against those colonists who didn't leave. I don't care if the Federation regarded those worlds are Cardassian territory, it still regarded those colonists as Federation citizens -- it therefore had a legal obligation to act with force to protect the rights of its citizens. That it did not means that, in this case, the Federation fundamentally betrayed its citizenry: Selling their homes to a foreign state and then turning a blind eye when atrocities were committed against them.
The Maquis had every right to take up arms to defend their homes, secure territorial sovereignty from both the Cardassian Union and Federation, and declare themselves an independent polity.
Also the existence of Section 31 does not prove that the Federation is malevolent. This is clearly not an official organisation, but a bunch of criminals who believe to be above the laws of the Federation.
No. They get their "powers" from an article in the Federation charter.
Everyone's misremembering the line from "Inquisition." Here's the relevant quote, courtesy of Star Trek Minutiae:
BASHIR
And Starfleet sanctions what
you're doing?
SLOAN
We don't submit reports or ask for
approval for specific operations,
if that's what you mean. We're an
autonomous department.
BASHIR
Authorized by whom?
DEEP SPACE NINE: "Inquisition" - REV. 1/29/98 - ACT FIVE 51B.
41A CONTINUED: (4)
Sloan smiles, maintaining control of the situation.
SLOAN
Section Thirty-one was part of the
original Starfleet charter.
BASHIR
That was two hundred years ago.
Are you telling me you've been
operating on your own ever since?
Without specific orders?
Accountable to nobody, but
yourselves?
SLOAN
You make it sound so... ominous.
BASHIR
Isn't it?
Bold added.
Note Sloan's words (assuming they can be trusted): "Original Starfleet Charter." Well, as ENT revealed, there are two Starfleets: The Federation Starfleet, and the United Earth Starfleet. So his line would seem to indicate that Section 31 legally justifies its existence through a clause from the United Earth Starfleet Charter -- a charter that would have no legal effect, since the UE Starfleet ceased to exist (so far as we know) upon the incorporation of the United Federation of Planets and the establishment of the Federation Starfleet with the Federation Starfleet Charter.
In other words, they're justifying their existence through a clause of a charter that is no longer in effect. It would be as though we were to find out that a division of the United States Navy justifies its existence through a clause in the British Royal Navy's charter.
Sure enough, ENT's "Affliction" confirms this when Agent Harris establishes that his bureau derives its authority from Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter.
They are as much an official part of Starfleet as the engineering corp are.
Not necessarily. All we know about Article 14, Section 31 of the UE Starfleet Charter is that it allows "certain rules of conduct to be 'bent' during times of extraordinary threat." That's a far cry from the complete and utter autonomy that the agency now known as Section 31 claims. Even if the UES Charter was still in effect, Section 31's purported legal justification of its existence is dubious at best; to me, that clause sounds like it's there to give legal cover to Starfleet Command or to individual officers during times of extraordinary crisis, not like a statute authorizing the existence of a permanent cabal of officers who are given carte blanche and elevated above the rule of law. To me, it sounds more like a group of officers decided to begin to engage in a criminal conspiracy and cited Article 14, Section 31 as their nonsense legal justification. It would never stand up in court.
Starfleet admirals work with them. Starfleet medical covers up their acts.
The existence of high-ranking officers within a criminal conspiracy does not make it any less of a criminal conspiracy. If we were to find out that a United States Air Force General was a member of the Mafia, we wouldn't assume that the Mafia has official standing.
When they try to commit genocide Starfleet "condems" them but are pretty happy with the result. At least the Romulans acknowledge that the Tal'Shiar are a part of them. The Federation as Odo said look the other way when they want the dirty work done.
A perfectly valid complaint however. The UFP and Starfleet may not actually authorize or be responsible for Section 31's actions, but they certainly aren't doing enough to fight them. Though one must consider the possibility that A) most members of the government and Starfleet Command don't know that they exist, and/or that B) they refuse to admit to themselves that Section 31 exists because it's such a fundamental departure from the Federation's normal political culture. It would be a bit like finding out that the President of the United States had personally committed murder in the Oval Office -- even if the evidence was damning, a lot of people would never be willing to believe it.
At no point do we see that they are treated with disregard. If anything Sisko’s father seemed to be a highly respected member of the community.
Sure until he's forced to take a blood test because he's related to someone in Starfleet.
And, of course, the point of that episode was that the Federation realized that it was giving into its worst impulses and discontinued those policies, and did so within only a few weeks.
(As opposed to the United States, which seems posed to continue its civil rights-violating policies unless or until Barack Obama is elected President....)