The way The Federation was portrayed in DS9
- Thread starter John200
- Start date
The Federation did some pretty nasty things, but it was always a democracy. The only time it ever came close to being anything else was in Homefront/Paradise Lost.
Its called reality. The Great Bird(Geno Rod(as was called by his peones))/TNG was...well...a little far-fetched. Guess it was all those 'ludes and adult beverages that finally caught the ol boy.
DS9 is as close to reality possible in a Trek series.
Last edited:
And even then, that was because of a coup d'etat, which is always bad news in a democracy.
Withers
Captain
Well, first of all, there's a pretty big divide between fascism and democracy. It's impossible to walk a line between them because they don't border one another. So, you know, there's that.
Deep Space Nine showed that the Federation didn't exist by mistake or good luck. With the introduction of elements like Section 31 and Admirals who would 'destroy paradise in order to save it' we were given the idea that the Federation, while morally upstanding in principle and general behavior, was not so far removed from the people of today that elements of it would never stray from the absolute path of righteousness.
That, to me, made the very notion of Starfleet more realistic. 'It's easy to be a saint in Paradise.' DS9 showed us how difficult it was to maintain where everything didn't smell like roses. That endeared the characters and developed them, along with the Federation itself, as the show progressed.
-Withers-
Deep Space Nine showed that the Federation didn't exist by mistake or good luck. With the introduction of elements like Section 31 and Admirals who would 'destroy paradise in order to save it' we were given the idea that the Federation, while morally upstanding in principle and general behavior, was not so far removed from the people of today that elements of it would never stray from the absolute path of righteousness.
That, to me, made the very notion of Starfleet more realistic. 'It's easy to be a saint in Paradise.' DS9 showed us how difficult it was to maintain where everything didn't smell like roses. That endeared the characters and developed them, along with the Federation itself, as the show progressed.
-Withers-
I think the Federation was shown to be slightly totalitarian in TNG as well. The Prime Directive has its uses, but there were a few times when Jean Luc became ludicrously pompous about it, and should have made exceptions to it.
DS9 proved that the Federation people are, in reality, dirty slimeballs (how much lower can you get than committing genocide, and then refusing to stop it?!!!) and their alleged system of peace is just a facade.
Of course, despite putting that reality on-screen, DS9 also, totally inexplicably, tried to justify it, and pretend nothing is wrong with it. Like with the BS messages that the genocide is ok because a war is on, and that after it ends, Odo is going to be able to 'spread humanity' to and brainwash The Great Link into thinking humans are ok, despite the fact that they were just committing a genocide against them.
Not only is the very idea inherently ludicrous, is it also a bastardization of the Odo character himself. There is no way that an in-character Odo would have allowed the genocide to continue for one second, much less still believe that humans are fine and dandy after Sisko et al. have decided to continue the genocide.
In other words, the DS9 showrunners had the balls to show the Federation as it's ugly, evil true self, and then also tried to talk out of both sides of their mouths by reniging on that reality, and portraying the Federation is wonderful nonetheless. These are irreconcilable concepts, and the showrunners' attempt to reconcile them is made of epic fail.
Therefore, a choice must be made about which side of the showrunners' mouths to listen to. I personally reject the ludicrous and OOC stuff and go with the showrunners' original depiction of the Federation as slimeballs whose system is a facade, and Odo as a man of integrity who will always pursue justice at all costs, as the truth. I don't see how any other conclusions can be made. There is absolutey no way to justify the genocide against the Founders, period. Nor Odo's complacency about it.
To add insult to (the Federation's) injury, that the genocide happened just goes to show that the Founders were right all along, and had great, totally legitimate reason to distrust and want to eliminate or subjugate all solids.
Of course, despite putting that reality on-screen, DS9 also, totally inexplicably, tried to justify it, and pretend nothing is wrong with it. Like with the BS messages that the genocide is ok because a war is on, and that after it ends, Odo is going to be able to 'spread humanity' to and brainwash The Great Link into thinking humans are ok, despite the fact that they were just committing a genocide against them.
Not only is the very idea inherently ludicrous, is it also a bastardization of the Odo character himself. There is no way that an in-character Odo would have allowed the genocide to continue for one second, much less still believe that humans are fine and dandy after Sisko et al. have decided to continue the genocide.
In other words, the DS9 showrunners had the balls to show the Federation as it's ugly, evil true self, and then also tried to talk out of both sides of their mouths by reniging on that reality, and portraying the Federation is wonderful nonetheless. These are irreconcilable concepts, and the showrunners' attempt to reconcile them is made of epic fail.
Therefore, a choice must be made about which side of the showrunners' mouths to listen to. I personally reject the ludicrous and OOC stuff and go with the showrunners' original depiction of the Federation as slimeballs whose system is a facade, and Odo as a man of integrity who will always pursue justice at all costs, as the truth. I don't see how any other conclusions can be made. There is absolutey no way to justify the genocide against the Founders, period. Nor Odo's complacency about it.
To add insult to (the Federation's) injury, that the genocide happened just goes to show that the Founders were right all along, and had great, totally legitimate reason to distrust and want to eliminate or subjugate all solids.
While I agree that the genocide was wrong, I think the Founders were not right all along. Their belief that the solids were a monolithic threat became a self-fulfilling prophecy. If they hadn't tried to enslave the solids of the Alpha Quadrant, the genocide would never have been conceived.
As for the OP, I liked the way the Federation was presented in DS9. Roddenberry's, and TNG's, idea of a perfect society was simply unbelievable. Here we had a society that was still immeasureably better than our own, yet still had to deal with hard choices and live with their consequences. Like the man said, "It's easy to be a saint in paradise."
ReadyAndWilling
Fleet Captain
I don't know if the Federation was ever shown to be a democracy?
I always thought it was totalitarian and run by a small elite.
What you're doing here is the same mistake that TNG did with it's (albeit a bit exaggerated by fans) 'the Federation is perfect' thing, just in the opposite direction. You can't judge the entire human race and the Federation based on actions of just a part of it. If anything, it's more realistic to show both sides of the coin.
Although I enjoyed the episodes where that happened, I can't really disagree with this assessment.
DS9 proved that the Federation people are, in reality, dirty slimeballs (how much lower can you get than committing genocide, and then refusing to stop it?!!!) and their alleged system of peace is just a facade.
Of course, despite putting that reality on-screen, DS9 also, totally inexplicably, tried to justify it, and pretend nothing is wrong with it. Like with the BS messages that the genocide is ok because a war is on, and that after it ends, Odo is going to be able to 'spread humanity' to and brainwash The Great Link into thinking humans are ok, despite the fact that they were just committing a genocide against them.
Not only is the very idea inherently ludicrous, is it also a bastardization of the Odo character himself. There is no way that an in-character Odo would have allowed the genocide to continue for one second, much less still believe that humans are fine and dandy after Sisko et al. have decided to continue the genocide.
In other words, the DS9 showrunners had the balls to show the Federation as it's ugly, evil true self, and then also tried to talk out of both sides of their mouths by reniging on that reality, and portraying the Federation is wonderful nonetheless. These are irreconcilable concepts, and the showrunners' attempt to reconcile them is made of epic fail.
Therefore, a choice must be made about which side of the showrunners' mouths to listen to. I personally reject the ludicrous and OOC stuff and go with the showrunners' original depiction of the Federation as slimeballs whose system is a facade, and Odo as a man of integrity who will always pursue justice at all costs, as the truth. I don't see how any other conclusions can be made. There is absolutey no way to justify the genocide against the Founders, period. Nor Odo's complacency about it.
To add insult to (the Federation's) injury, that the genocide happened just goes to show that the Founders were right all along, and had great, totally legitimate reason to distrust and want to eliminate or subjugate all solids.
If I were in command, I would have sent a fleet of cloaked, drone ships deep into Dominion space and took out the Founder's planet, w/the Founders on it.
The started the damn war, I would end it.
DS9 proved that the Federation people are, in reality, dirty slimeballs (how much lower can you get than committing genocide, and then refusing to stop it?!!!) and their alleged system of peace is just a facade.
Of course, despite putting that reality on-screen, DS9 also, totally inexplicably, tried to justify it, and pretend nothing is wrong with it. Like with the BS messages that the genocide is ok because a war is on, and that after it ends, Odo is going to be able to 'spread humanity' to and brainwash The Great Link into thinking humans are ok, despite the fact that they were just committing a genocide against them.
Not only is the very idea inherently ludicrous, is it also a bastardization of the Odo character himself. There is no way that an in-character Odo would have allowed the genocide to continue for one second, much less still believe that humans are fine and dandy after Sisko et al. have decided to continue the genocide.
In other words, the DS9 showrunners had the balls to show the Federation as it's ugly, evil true self, and then also tried to talk out of both sides of their mouths by reniging on that reality, and portraying the Federation is wonderful nonetheless. These are irreconcilable concepts, and the showrunners' attempt to reconcile them is made of epic fail.
Therefore, a choice must be made about which side of the showrunners' mouths to listen to. I personally reject the ludicrous and OOC stuff and go with the showrunners' original depiction of the Federation as slimeballs whose system is a facade, and Odo as a man of integrity who will always pursue justice at all costs, as the truth. I don't see how any other conclusions can be made. There is absolutey no way to justify the genocide against the Founders, period. Nor Odo's complacency about it.
To add insult to (the Federation's) injury, that the genocide happened just goes to show that the Founders were right all along, and had great, totally legitimate reason to distrust and want to eliminate or subjugate all solids.
Wait...what? No one was complacent about the genocide except for Section 31 and maybe a few key members of the Federation, admirals, etc. Wasn't the whole point of that plot line to show that genocide was wrong? That Dr. Bashir was noble and just being used by Section 31 and that Sloan was no better than the Founders themselves? I really thought that was the point. Sisko was pissed about the genocide, they all thought it was terrible.
If they were complacent about it, do you think in "Rocks And Shoals" there would have even been the question of whether or not to slaughter the Jem'Hadar crew? If I recall, they were ALL upset about how not giving the Jem'Hadar a fair faight was wrong.
And it wasn't the whole system that was a facade, the Federation was depicted as generally righteous as usual, and Section 31, which barely anyone even knew about, was working behind the scenes, and everyone, except for Admiral Ross in "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges", was totally NOT complacent about the idea. They just couldn't really do anything about it. There are all kinds of scenes where Sisko is righteously pissed about Section 31, Bashir is appalled at the very idea that someone in Starfleet could come up with a plan for genocide, and Bashir continues to work on the vaccine for Odo despite the threat of Section 31.
Yeah, there were a few bad apples not upholding Starfleet's values, but I think it's a huge exaggeration to say everyone was complacent with the genocide and the show was preaching two opposite messages. You say it as if they might as well had Sisko himself come up with the plan to introduce the disease to the Founders.
DS9 was all about moral gray areas, whether it's Sisko being an accomplice to murder for the good of the Alpha Quadrant in "In The Pale Moonlight" or Odo grappling with his own sense of justice when he finds out Kira committed murder in "Necessary Evil". That was a huge aspect of the show, and to most, it made DS9 that much more realistic. The show never painted genocide as acceptable under the circumstances, but it portrayed it as realistic that SOMEONE, under the threat of the Dominion, would try to introduce a plan of genocide during the war.
Guys, it's Navaros. Feel free to take the opposite message from his posts, cause it's closer to reality.
Anywho, Behr hates Trek so he wanted to make things less "perfect" (though NO Trek series made the Federation perfect, especially not TNG). It made the Federation less noble, but with an organization that is composed of so many billions upon billions of people and hundreds of separate species NOTHING will be perfect. I do think they should've tried harder to maintain their integrity, but I was overall satisfied with the Federation being pushed a little harder than usual.
And seeing how giving the Dominion the cure worked out the best for everyone in the end, not just the Feds, is a Trekian message. Instead of selfishly acting for sheer self-preservation characters influenced by Trek ideals make the choice that served the good for ALL and not just the "good side".
Anywho, Behr hates Trek so he wanted to make things less "perfect" (though NO Trek series made the Federation perfect, especially not TNG). It made the Federation less noble, but with an organization that is composed of so many billions upon billions of people and hundreds of separate species NOTHING will be perfect. I do think they should've tried harder to maintain their integrity, but I was overall satisfied with the Federation being pushed a little harder than usual.
And seeing how giving the Dominion the cure worked out the best for everyone in the end, not just the Feds, is a Trekian message. Instead of selfishly acting for sheer self-preservation characters influenced by Trek ideals make the choice that served the good for ALL and not just the "good side".
I doubt that.
And I think they held onto their integrity just fine, but we were shown that there are corrupt elements in the Federation and that, even excluding the token crazy admiral/commodore of the week, not everyone is perfect
Don't you see? It is logical for someone who hates Trek to become a head writer and showrunner for a Trek show. In fact, people who hate Trek are always fighting for a chance to get to work on it. That way that can work from the inside to ruin it (and by ruin, I mean, run a really great Trek show and write many of its best episodes). And then this Trek can also be loved by the hatedom (i.e. people who hate Trek, which they show by watching every Trek episode ever, analyzing its every detail, and writing thousands of posts about it on Trek forums). It makes perfect sense. Really.
Don't you see? It is logical for someone who hates Trek to become a head writer and showrunner for a Trek show. In fact, people who hate Trek are always fighting for a chance to get to work on it. That way that can work from the inside to ruin it (and by ruin, I mean, run a really great Trek show and write many of its best episodes). And then this Trek can also be loved by the hatedom (i.e. people who hate Trek, which they show by watching every Trek episode ever, analyzing its every detail, and writing thousands of posts about it on Trek forums). It makes perfect sense. Really.
I love you for that post, DevilEyes.
Yep my bullshit detector went off when ever the humans of DS9 went on about how moral they were.
Thats why I got a kick out of DS9 so much.
Same vibe I get from the current administration in the White House.
