After the Destiny events, The Typhon Pact and future novels

[ProtoAvatar]

Aren't the upcoming Typhon Pact books essentially cold war stories?

I doubt the Federation is responsible for initiating such hostilities - not with its ideals, definitely not with the shape Starfleet's in.

Obviously, the Typhon Pact formed not only "as a defense against UFP bullying and imperialism", but, primarily, in order to do some bullying of its own - and it didn't waste any time in accompishing this agenda.

Actually, the Typhon Pact was a counter-agent to the bullying and imperialism of two of its members. It forced the Kinshaya and Tholians to apologize for their hostile acts.

Firstly, the tholians didn't even think of apologising.

Secondly, have you read the info about the 4 Typhon Pact books? The Typhon Pact wasted no time starting a cold war with the federation.

Is it really accurate to say that the history of all six nations was aggressive, though? The Gorn, canonically, are not an aggressive power; the one known conflict was one where the Gorn believed themselves to be defending against outside aggressors.

The Gorn are not agressive, canonically? Really?
In their only on-screen appearance they massacred every last inhabitant - man, woman and child - of a colony inhabited largely with civilians, knowing that they were civilians (or having the means to easily find this out). This is not agressive? It's a blatant war crime!

If you wish to include books in canon, "A Singular Destiny" expressly established that ALL Typhon Pact members were consistently agressive/xenophobic.

 

[Christopher]

The Gorn are not agressive, canonically? Really?
In their only on-screen appearance they massacred every last inhabitant - man, woman and child - of a colony inhabited largely with civilians, knowing that they were civilians (or having the means to easily find this out). This is not agressive? It's a blatant war crime!

The word "civilian" was not spoken at any point in the episode "Arena." Cestus III is described as an "Earth observation outpost" and its commander was a Starfleet commodore. True, they had women and children present, but the impression was that the Cestus outpost was like a frontier fort in the Old West (indeed, it was shot at a location representing a fortress, often featured in Westerns). A fort is a military outpost, even if it has a certain number of civilians within it. Travers' line "We had women and children" suggests a mostly Starfleet or government outpost with some civilian presence, not a colony that was primarily civilian. The mostly civilian Cestus III is something that comes along in the 24th century, once the frontier has become more settled.

The point is that the Gorn were not the aggressors, i.e. not the ones who initiated the conflict. The aggressive party in a conflict is the one that starts the fight, the one that invades or attacks. The Gorn believed they were being invaded, and they acted in what they thought was self-defense. Certainly they were ruthless in the defense of their territory, certainly they overreacted, but that's probably a species trait, intense territoriality. That's not the same thing as political aggression, i.e. the desire to attack or conquer others' territories.

My point is that, while the Gorn are certainly dangerous and ruthless when provoked, they were not portrayed as a power that has an interest in conquest or invasion. The point of "Arena" was that, though it initially looked as though the Gorn were attacking the Federation, that turned out to be a misunderstanding because they thought they were the ones being attacked and invaded. They were acting as defenders, not aggressors. Their perception of combat ethics clearly differs from ours, but it would hardly be the first time that the defending side in a conflict committed an atrocity.

And once they understood that the Federation was not their enemy, there was no further conflict, because the Gorn Hegemony's policies as a state are not aggressive, not defined by the pursuit of conquest. That's my point. After that initial misunderstanding, the Gorn have never been a threat to the Federation or to galactic peace, except for the brief period in The Gorn Crisis where a militant sect briefly took power after slaughtering the legitimate leadership. Historically, aside from two aberrations, the Hegemony and the Federation have had either neutral or amiable relations. And the fact that the Gorn eventually ceded Cestus III even though it was rightfully theirs to begin with should prove that they aren't inimical to the UFP as a rule.

So there's no reason to assume that the Hegemony as a member of the Typhon Pact would be a potential threat to the Federation, because the Hegemony's leadership has never been shown to embrace expansionist or imperialist policies. They just want to be left alone, to protect their own territory. Yes, they're extremely aggressive in defense of their territory, but they're not political or military aggressors, i.e. initiators of conflict or seekers of conquest.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

@Christopher

"Earth observation outpost" does not translate into "Earth military fortification".
"Earth scientific outpost" is much more plausible - consider, Earth had no ideea that the gorn/anyone even existed in that region of space prior to this massacre; why establish a military base if there's no one to defend against?
The limited resistance the colonists were able to put forth against a single ship further contradicts the notion of their colony being a military base.

The women and children WERE civilians - and they were slaughtered along with the men (probably civilians in large part, too). And how many people were in that colony? How many were civilians, I wonder? Hundreds, thousands?


How did the attack took place?

The colonists didn't know they were in gorn territory and they had no way of knowing (no gorn warning beacon, no gorn ship telling them this). And the gorn knew this.
The colonists were in part (likely the largest part) civilian. The gorn knew this or could easily find this out.
The colonists didn't have the means to effectively fight the gorn. And the gorn knew this or could easily find this out.

In other words, the colonists had nor the intention, nor the means to invade the gorn. And the gorn knew this or could easily find this out.

And yet, we're supposed to beleive that the gorn acted in 'self-defense' against an 'invader' who had neither the intent, nor the means to actually 'invade/attack' the gorn hegemony? And that the gorn killed all civilians (men, women, children) in self-defense? Highly unconvincing - I heard about war criminals who had much better excuses for their crimes.

And this concludes the gorn on-screen appearances. They are xenophobic and paranoid.

If we count books/comics, in "The gorn crisis", a fraction that took power had NO PROBLEM making the gorn army attack the Federation. Apparently, the gorn military has no problems, no hesitations in attacking the federation.
In "A singular destiny", ALL SIX Typhon Pact members are expressly described as consistently agressive in their history: "The history of all six nations was one of aggression, and in the case of the Tholians, they joined solely to make life miserable for their enemies."

Quite the opposite of your "once they understood that the Federation was not their enemy, there was no further conflict" feel-goodism mentality you apply to the gorn.
Anyone who massacres an entire colony without being provoked in any credible way has no interest in understanding that the victims are not an enemy.

 

[Christopher]

And this concludes the gorn on-screen appearances. They are xenophobic and paranoid.

Yes, but not expansionistic or driven by conquest. That's my point. You're not hearing what I'm saying. I'm not claiming the Gorn are nice, harmless people. Obviously they're highly dangerous when provoked. But what I'm saying is that it's a false stereotype to assume they're a conquering power out to start wars or invade their neighbors.

If we count books/comics, in "The gorn crisis", a fraction that took power had NO PROBLEM making the gorn army attack the Federation.

Yes, and as I've said twice, that was a fringe faction that had to assassinate the rightful leadership in order to institute those policies of aggression, because the rightful leadership of the Hegemony was not interested in conquest. Again, I'm not talking about every single member of the species, I'm talking about the policies of the Gorn Hegemony as a political entity. Any civilization is going to have different factions with different agendas, but the political leaders of the Hegemony have not been portrayed as conquerors, with the exception of the fringe faction that briefly took power in The Gorn Crisis.

And since it was Picard and the Enterprise crew that defeated the usurpers and restored the rightful ruling line to power, that puts the Hegemony in the Federation's debt. There's no reason to assume they're hostile to the Federation when the sitting government owes its very survival to a Starfleet crew.

I don't understand why you have such a problem accepting this. Andorians are an aggressive race, consistently defined as warlike, yet they've been Federation members in good standing for over two centuries. Klingons are aggressive and warlike, but they've been allies of the Federation for most of the past three decades in-universe, except for a brief period when they were tricked into renewed conflict by the Dominion. So why is it so hard for you to accept the idea that the Gorn aren't automatically the Federation's enemies?

I mean, really, that was the whole point of "Arena" -- that the Gorn weren't the evil monsters they originally appeared to be. It was a statement against prejudice and xenophobia, pointing out that even someone who looks scary and dangerous could be misunderstood. If you think the point of "Arena" was that "the Gorn are evil and must be feared," then you misunderstood it profoundly.

In "A singular destiny", ALL SIX Typhon Pact members are expressly described as consistently agressive in their history.

Uhh, yes, and it's that exact quote that I'm questioning here by pointing out that it's inaccurate to apply it to the Gorn. You can't use a statement as proof of itself. That's circular argument.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

I mean, really, that was the whole point of "Arena" -- that the Gorn weren't the evil monsters they originally appeared to be. It was a statement against prejudice and xenophobia, pointing out that even someone who looks scary and dangerous could be misunderstood. If you think the point of "Arena" was that "the Gorn are evil and must be feared," then you misunderstood it profoundly.

That may have been the point the scenarists wanted to convey.
It's NOT what the episode conveys. Why? Because the gorn ARE depicted as war criminals, massacring civilians for no credible provocation/reason.
If the writers wanted to paint the gorn as NOT being sociopaths, they should have made a much better reason for the gorn's massacre than their pitiful excuse - self defense against someone who poses no threat and has no intention of attacking them.

But you are right that TOS: Arena, although it depicts the gorn as xenophobic, paranoid, and placing little value on alien's lives, does not depict them as expansionistic.

"The gorn crisis" does depict them as expansionistic.
Consider:
An extremist faction kills the legitimate government.

If the military was loyal to the legitimate government, it would reject any order from the usurpers as illegal; furthermore, it would act to dethrone the usurpers and restore the legitimate leadership to power - or to name new legitimate leaders.

The military did none of the above. On the contrary - it didn't lift a finger to remove from power this extremist group and it followed its orders - attack the Federation.
It sounds as if the military was not particularly loyal to its previous leaders and their non-expansionistic policies.

Obviously, imperialist tendencies are quite common in gorn society.

In "A singular destiny", ALL SIX Typhon Pact members are expressly described as consistently agressive in their history.

Uhh, yes, and it's that exact quote that I'm questioning here by pointing out that it's inaccurate to apply it to the Gorn. You can't use a statement as proof of itself. That's circular argument.

You only have very limited information about the gorn history.
A history/diplomacy expert (who said the line in "A singular destiny") is, BY FAR, better informed. What he said, goes - the gorn are agressive because he has studied their history, ascertaining this before making the affirmation. Nothing is circular in this argument.

Indeed, based on what we know, it's highly probable that the gorn did exhibit imperialist tendencies on many occasions throughout their history - they don't value alien life and important segments of the gorn society exhibit imperialist tendencies.
It's just that no such expansionist wave was detailed on-screen or in books/comics (except for "The gorn crisis", of course).

 

[PrimeDirective]

Individual Starfleet officers may be patronizing when they encounter a new civilization that has different values, beliefs, attitudes, and traditions, but imperialism is not an ideal that the Federation supports. Besides, as Starfleet officers spend more time exploring and encountering new civilizations, most of them become wiser and more understanding.

 

[Sci]

Individual Starfleet officers may be patronizing when they encounter a new civilization that has different values, beliefs, attitudes, and traditions, but imperialism is not an ideal that the Federation supports.

Conventional imperialism? No. But the Federation does have a very deliberate agenda of spreading its beliefs in egalitarianism and personal liberty to the rest of the galaxy and then persuading every world to join the Federation. Eddington was right when he said that one of the reasons the Federation was sending humanitarian aide to the Cardassians, beyond simple humanitarianism, was a desire to eventually see the Cardassian Union become a Federation Member State.

Now, is that a bad thing?

I don't think so, personally. I believe in egalitarianism and personal liberty, and I don't think there's anything wrong with seeking to peacefully persuade other cultures of the superiority of your belief system purely through the strength of your arguments, provided that you're not forcing those beliefs on them by, for instance, making their implementation conditions of humanitarian aide. (Or, for that matter, as long as you're not invading foreign dictatorships with the intention of turning them into a democracy, irrelevant of whether they want one or not, a la Iraq.)

But I also think that it's important not to be in denial about what the goal is or to sugar-coat it.

 

[justcorbly]

One of the Federation's underlying goals, after all, is to unite the galaxy under its rule. Their goal is to persuade every culture to adopt Federation values of peace, exploration, egalitarianism, and liberal democracy and to join the Federation as a Member, after all.

It is? Who says?

 

[PrimeDirective]

Of course the Federation wanted the Cardassian Union to become a member world, but not for the reason that you state. They wanted them to join because if they did, the Federation would be able to provide the Cardassians with all the aid that they would need, thus the people of Cardasia would live more peaceful, comfortable, and fulfilling lives.

 

[TerraUnam]

The ending of A Singular Destiny essentially said as much. Opening up the Khitomer Accords to the Cardassian Union? Plus all the aid they have received since the Dominion War? Or the fact that most new First Contacts are appraised for membership potential?

If you're a small or middle power with even a vague sense of liberal democracy, the Rule of Law, or Sentient (aka Human) Rights, the Federation is a great deal. The protection of Starfleet, membership in the largest power in local space, the benefit of an an advanced and very liberal government with lots of advanced technology. The only downside is that your culture may be subsumed into the greater Federation whole. Bajor was willing to pay that price, and they wanted everything that was offered.

Eddington was also right when he said that the Federation was worse then the Borg. At least the Borg told you when you were going to be assimilated. The Federation just does it before you realize what's going on.

 

[Christopher]

I think the point is not about whether the Federation actually is culturally imperialistic, but about whether its neighbors perceive it that way. And we already know that a lot of them do -- consider the famous Quark/Garak "root beer" discussion from DS9. Regardless of the UFP's true intentions, the founding members of the Pact believed that the Federation's power and self-righteousness made it a threat to their cultural and astropolitical autonomy, and so they decided they needed to balance its power with an allied bloc of their own.

And I can't see that as a bad thing. Even with the most benevolent intentions, unchecked power is a dangerous thing. It's always possible to go too far in the attempt to do good. So it's always important to have checks and balances. The Typhon Pact could not only be a check on the Federation's power and keep it from getting out of hand, but could also be a reminder, a way to prompt the Federation to take a look at itself and keep itself honest. "Others see us as a moral bully, a power so strong they fear it threatens their autonomy. Could they be right? Are we acting in ways that are ultimately harmful to the autonomy of other cultures? Do we need to reform?" Self-examination is vital if one wishes to stay honest and ethical. So the Pact's formation could ultimately be good for the Federation.

 

[Sci]

One of the Federation's underlying goals, after all, is to unite the galaxy under its rule. Their goal is to persuade every culture to adopt Federation values of peace, exploration, egalitarianism, and liberal democracy and to join the Federation as a Member, after all.

It is? Who says?

No one says it openly, but it's easily observable in their behavior. How many times does Captain Kirk have to overthrow an alien dictatorship, or Captain Picard have to give a sanctimonious speech against values he disagrees with, or does Riker have to talk about the idea of the Ferengi learning from the Federation, or do we have to see the Federation trying to moderate the behavior of the Klingon Empire, or do we have to see Sisko receiving orders to do everything he can short of violating the Prime Directive to bring Bajor into the Federation, or see Captain Janeway citing the Federation Charter as an example of how to bring disparate groups together, before we can reasonably conclude that one of the Federation's goals is the spread of its beliefs and the union of the galaxy under its banner?

Of course the Federation wanted the Cardassian Union to become a member world, but not for the reason that you state. They wanted them to join because if they did, the Federation would be able to provide the Cardassians with all the aid that they would need, thus the people of Cardasia would live more peaceful, comfortable, and fulfilling lives.

Which is another way of saying, "We want them to adopt our culture because our culture is better than theirs."

The ending of A Singular Destiny essentially said as much. Opening up the Khitomer Accords to the Cardassian Union? Plus all the aid they have received since the Dominion War? Or the fact that most new First Contacts are appraised for membership potential?

If you're a small or middle power with even a vague sense of liberal democracy, the Rule of Law, or Sentient (aka Human) Rights, the Federation is a great deal. The protection of Starfleet, membership in the largest power in local space, the benefit of an an advanced and very liberal government with lots of advanced technology. The only downside is that your culture may be subsumed into the greater Federation whole. Bajor was willing to pay that price, and they wanted everything that was offered.

Eddington was also right when he said that the Federation was worse then the Borg. At least the Borg told you when you were going to be assimilated. The Federation just does it before you realize what's going on.

Well, I think Eddington was exaggerating that last part. I don't think the Federation assimilates anyone who doesn't know what's going on. Really, it's fairly obvious to everyone what's going on -- that's why I say, the Federation engages in what might be termed consensual cultural imperialism. They want to persuade you to adopt their beliefs, not force you; it's a process they do undertake as your equals.

But it remains that they want to spread their beliefs to everyone, yes. They'll take no for an answer, but they don't want to -- and they still pose the question in the first place.

 

[PrimeDirective]

They want others to become Federation members because the solar systems and planets that have joined them have seen that together they are stronger, and their respective peoples live happier and more fulfilling lives; not becuse they think that they are superior to anybody who doesn't think like them. The Klingon Empire and the Romulan Imperial State aren't members of the Federation, and they still have the core of their values intact without having to sacrifice what they believe makes them who they are.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

"Others see us as a moral bully, a power so strong they fear it threatens their autonomy. Could they be right? Are we acting in ways that are ultimately harmful to the autonomy of other cultures? Do we need to reform?" Self-examination is vital if one wishes to stay honest and ethical.

True, but I'd say that no government would ever self-examine in this way because governments aren't interested in honesty or ethics, apart from in terms of hollow pronouncements in keeping with certain ideologies the people might demand they spout out. Governments are organisms, not individuals- they can't be ethical or honest. If it staves off disatisfaction among the population, a government will cloak itself in the hollow rhetoric of ethics or honesty- at least those ethics the people care about-, but it's as Orwell said: governments want only one thing, and that is to preserve and (hopefully) to expand their power. If a democratic nation is "ethical" it's only because the people are or make a fuss if the government isn't, and the government fears the people and so wants to appease them...for now. If government gains enough size and power, it needn't appease anymore and can safely do as it likes. The people of the UFP are on the whole honest and ethical; the government just appeases the people, and so is "honest and ethical" for now. But it's so swollen and expansive that if it decides it doesn't need to appease the people anymore- it's too powerful and can offer its hordes of employees enough to keep them loyal- it will throw ethics aside. If it's in any way portrayed realistically, that is.

Governments want only power. The Federation may so far wield its power benevolently (98% of the time at least), which is the best people can hope for, but it will never curtail or surrender any of it if it is being presented in any way realistically, because that is simply not how a government- any government- works, at least once it has gotten to a certain size (and the UFP clearly has). You end up with an upper class of government workers and politicians feathering their nests at the expense of others. An individual politician can examine in the way you describe, but a government as an organism will never reform in a manner that might reduce its power. Individual politicians come and go from the bloated mass of government, but government remains unchanged, and the bigger it gets the harder it is for any one individual to challenge or reform it, if it's a Non-dictatorship we're talking about.

Basically, I do not think the UFP could be honest or ethical if it truly existed, because a government cannot be these things. Most of the people making up the UFP are honest and "ethical", but that could easily change, and a big swollen government like the UFP will easily transform into something quite nasty if its power is threatened- as it now is.

Not that the UFP will do that, of course, because the UFP is not realistic but an idealized government. Not that I have a problem with that.

 

[Christopher]

"Others see us as a moral bully, a power so strong they fear it threatens their autonomy. Could they be right? Are we acting in ways that are ultimately harmful to the autonomy of other cultures? Do we need to reform?" Self-examination is vital if one wishes to stay honest and ethical.

True, but I'd say that no government would ever self-examine in this way because governments aren't interested in honesty or ethics, apart from in terms of hollow pronouncements in keeping with certain ideologies the people might demand they spout out.

When did I say anything about the government? I was referring to the society as a whole -- the populace whose values determine what they're willing to let the government get away with and what they'll penalize it for at the polls.

 

[Sci]

They want others to become Federation members because the solar systems and planets that have joined them have seen that together they are stronger, and their respective peoples live happier and more fulfilling lives;

Uh-huh. Fascinating how every expansionistic power is always convinced that all of its members are happier under its rule and live longer lives, isn't it?

That's just another way of saying, "Everyone should want to become part of our culture because it's better than yours."

The Klingon Empire and the Romulan Imperial State aren't members of the Federation, and they still have the core of their values intact without having to sacrifice what they believe makes them who they are.

First off, the Imperial Romulan State has only existed for about six months as of the end of A Singular Destiny -- hardly long enough to characterize how its alliance with the Federation will affect its culture.

As for the Klingon Empire -- the last two Chancellors and the Emperor himself were all installed by Starfleet officers! Martok and Emperor Kahless II were even installed by the same Starfleet officer, who then went and served as the Federation Ambassador to the Klingon Empire. Meanwhile, Martok has actually renounced violent expansionism as of the end of Articles of the Federation -- and, as then-Governor Bacco noted in A Time for War, A Time for Peace, the Klingon Empire has been steadily decreasing the rate at which it expands and conquers other worlds since signing the Khitomer Accords. Hell, according to War/Peace, even the Klingon diet has changed with the growing popularity of Federation imports such as prune juice.

So I think it's pretty obvious that the Federation is slowly but surely changing Klingon culture to something more in line with Federation values.

ETA:

"Others see us as a moral bully, a power so strong they fear it threatens their autonomy. Could they be right? Are we acting in ways that are ultimately harmful to the autonomy of other cultures? Do we need to reform?" Self-examination is vital if one wishes to stay honest and ethical.

True, but I'd say that no government would ever self-examine in this way because governments aren't interested in honesty or ethics, apart from in terms of hollow pronouncements in keeping with certain ideologies the people might demand they spout out. Governments are organisms, not individuals- they can't be ethical or honest.

Of course, one of the fundamental premises of Star Trek is that society has changed, because people are making more moral choices -- and that, by extension, the Federation government is not the amoral organism that governments of real life tend to become.

 

[PrimeDirective]

The Federation isn't forcing the Klingon Empire or anybody else, to adopt or change who they are; the civilizations who are adopting Federation beliefs and other characteristics of said government, are doing it on their own because they like what the Federation is about.

 

[Sci]

The Federation isn't forcing the Klingon Empire or anybody else, to adopt or change who they are;

I never said they were forcing anybody. As I've said from the start, they seek to persuade people to adopt their beliefs, not force them.

But make no mistake: They engage in a systematic campaign to persuade everyone they encounter to adopt their beliefs.

 

[Christopher]

^Which isn't so bad when you consider that those beliefs include respect for others' freedom of belief and choice.

 

[Sci]

^Which isn't so bad when you consider that those beliefs include respect for others' freedom of belief and choice.

Sure. Whether or not it's a bad thing that the Federation seeks to persuade the galaxy to convert to their beliefs is debatable.

I just don't think we should be dishonest about what their goals and behavior amount to: Consensual cultural imperialism.