TOS Non-Interference Directive versus Prime Directive?

[Robert Comsol]

So what if they believe the newcomers are gods? That's a familiar reference frame and helps the contact along.

(Cloud William sinks to his knees.)
KIRK: Now, Cloud William.
CLOUD: You are a great God servant. We are your slaves.
KIRK; Get up. Face me.
KIRK: This was not written for chiefs.

First, Starfleet personnel pretending to be gods would backfire in long-term considerations. Finding out these gods are false will definitely not contribute to good and mutual relations in the long run.

Second, establishing a physical encounter with a "god" will most likely not contribute to an independent, self-determining and advanced culture but one that prays for help and assistance rather than to get up on its own feet.

And we have a good example from our own world. I once talked to an Arabian journalist who told me in the face that he can't stand it anymore to listen to other Arabs saying "Insha'Allah" ("God willing") because they don't rely on their own capabilities to actively get things moving, but instead rely on God and wait for things to happen. I'd call that a progress-killer, it stands in the way of "normal social development".

And here is another TOS line regarding the Prime Directive from the aforequoted episode:

SPOCK: There's no question about [Tracey's] guilt, Captain, but does our involvement here also constitute a violation of the Prime Directive?
KIRK: We merely showed them the meaning of what they were fighting for. Liberty and freedom have to be more than just words.

Bob

 

[Mario de Monti]

I agree about the god thing. In Paradise Syndrome things didn´t work out too well for Kirk as a god. And the techniques/technologies he taught the natives were probably also in violation of the NID and/or the PD - of course he wasn´t aware of that at the time.

But thinking of that epsiode raises another question: Is saving a less developed or primitive culture (even without its knowledge) a violation of the directives? Did they violate a directive in repairing the deflector to save the planet and thus change its (natural) fate? Or is that sort of interference condoned in the name of "humanity"?

Mario

 

[Robert Comsol]

But thinking of that epsiode raises another question: Is saving a less developed or primitive culture (even without its knowledge) a violation of the directives? Did they violate a directive in repairing the deflector to save the planet and thus change its (natural) fate? Or is that sort of interference condoned in the name of "humanity"?

I think it's best to take a look at the Prime Directive and its most basic and essential intention, which is apparently the "protection" of a less-advanced civilization.

To me it looks that the creators of the "Non-Interference Directive" (and the subsequent Prime Directive) were aware that technological development must not surpass social development.

And this is and/or was exactly the question in the 1960's whether we had adequately advanced to really be in control of our nuclear weapons (compare "The Doomsday Machine" and "Assignment Earth").

I could imagine a couple of civilizations that attained prematurely nuclear weapons, following knowledge transfer from ships like the Horizon, and annihilated their civilizations.

Thus I think "protection" and "preservation" of an alien culture are somewhat synonymous, they are the fundamental intentions of the Prime Directive, and therefore the actions of our protagonists in "The Paradise Syndrome" to save the Native Americans was not only permitted but rather expected, according to the Prime Directive.

Bob

 

[Metryq]

Did they violate a directive in repairing the deflector to save the planet and thus change its (natural) fate?

The Preservers set up an entirely unnatural situation in the first place. And why did they select a planet so likely to get pummeled by rocks from space that a deflector was needed? Or perhaps that was the Preservers' intent—let the colony be wiped out by their own character flaws (Salish's predecessor jealously failing to share the knowledge of the temple). In that case, why did the Preservers "rescue" the tribes at all? Many TREK episodes don't bear close scrutiny.

 

[Timo]

First, Starfleet personnel pretending to be gods would backfire in long-term considerations. Finding out these gods are false will definitely not contribute to good and mutual relations in the long run.

Why pretend? Be god. Starfleet officers aren't really all that different from gods - they descend from the heavens and propose a pact with unearthly good conditions, then live true to their word. That's what most scriptures tell of most gods, and there's no built-in need for such a relationship to go sour over time.

Second, establishing a physical encounter with a "god" will most likely not contribute to an independent, self-determining and advanced culture but one that prays for help and assistance rather than to get up on its own feet.

Religions don't need physical encounters in order to maintain cultures that pray for help and assistance. Little would change there in practice.

And we have a good example from our own world. I once talked to an Arabian journalist who told me in the face that he can't stand it anymore to listen to other Arabs saying "Insha'Allah" ("God willing") because they don't rely on their own capabilities to actively get things moving, but instead rely on God and wait for things to happen. I'd call that a progress-killer, it stands in the way of "normal social development".

But that's again the Starfleet chauvinist in you speaking. This is merely normal social development for the Arab culture - if you condemn it, you certainly aren't helping the culture along. You are replacing it with another culture of your liking.

In Paradise Syndrome things didn´t work out too well for Kirk as a god.

They didn't work for Kirok. Kirk might have fared much better, considering that the divine acts required were technological in nature.

And the techniques/technologies he taught the natives were probably also in violation of the NID and/or the PD

So what? They certainly "worked out well", benefiting the local culture without destroying it.

In general, it seems that Kirk doesn't much care for the "do no help/harm" aspects of the PD. Is this because he knows from experience that he won't get punished for it? Or because he knowe from experience that the natives will be better off for it? Or is it simply that the PD (unless enforced in the rare "full" form) does not actually preclude him from doing help or harm when required?

Is saving a less developed or primitive culture (even without its knowledge) a violation of the directives? Did they violate a directive in repairing the deflector to save the planet and thus change its (natural) fate? Or is that sort of interference condoned in the name of "humanity"?

A somewhat more intriguing question is, why did Kirk bother in the first place? He knew there would be an asteroid strike within a couple of months - but he also knew there would be another, and another, and another, apparently averaging three to twelve per year as we later learn ("skies darkened three times since the harvest"). Yet the planet is pristine, obviously immune to asteroids somehow.

It's a mighty coincidence that Kirk/Kirok arrives exactly when the immunity ceases, but a mystery why he arrives at all. If his mandate and orders include saving planets that aren't even in the need of saving, then it's clear that the PD rather categorically allows for helping when nobody notices, including less extreme cases than this one.

I think it's best to take a look at the Prime Directive and its most basic and essential intention, which is apparently the "protection" of a less-advanced civilization.

But that's not its dramatic function, which leads to it not being its in-universe function in practice, either. Essentially, we are dealing with a rule that ties the hands of our heroes, so why not treat it as one in-universe as well? Surely there would be obvious reasons for limiting the freedom of action of a starship skipper. His most innocent keypresses alter the course of galactic history, his innocent smiles and friendly worlds topple kingdoms. Telling him to keep his hands off a number of things is a good start for a list of General Orders!

Thus I think "protection" and "preservation" of an alien culture are somewhat synonymous

Wouldn't "preservation" rather equate stagnation, which apparently must be eradicated even with the force of arms if necessary?

The Preservers set up an entirely unnatural situation in the first place. And why did they select a planet so likely to get pummeled by rocks from space that a deflector was needed? Or perhaps that was the Preservers' intent—let the colony be wiped out by their own character flaws (Salish's predecessor jealously failing to share the knowledge of the temple). In that case, why did the Preservers "rescue" the tribes at all? Many TREK episodes don't bear close scrutiny.

This is another case of things becoming clearer if we keep on watching the Star Trek universe unfold. "Paradise Syndrome", "The 37s" and "North Star" all seem to describe the popular custom of abducting Earthlings nobody will miss, and the latter two involve putting said Earthlings to forced labor. Why not the first one as well? Primitives cannot mine asteroids - unless asteroids are brought down to the surface of the planet by deflector beams.

Possibly the Preservers set up a labor camp but didn't have time to get the industry going (or had to shut it down in mid-run) before they had to run away from the cops. Only one end of their setup was now in operation: the one chucking asteroids towards the planet...

OTOH, the planet was clearly terraformed, and neither the Briori nor the Skagarrans were credited with terraforming abilities or ambitions. Abducting slave labor is probably dirt cheap, but terraforming must be expensive... So we might be talking about a more venerable culture that used asteroids for raw material, but disappeared, leaving behind the perfect setup for ruthless criminals...

There's also the intriguing fact that the incoming asteroid is a whopper. "The size of Earth's moon" means ginormous as far as asteroids go - not your prime choice for mining. But since the deflector deals with such things with ease, that's probably not a factor. Hmm. Perhaps it's set to "hold" as the mining and refining operation is not online, and just chucks the same rock, or set of rocks, to a holding pattern over and over?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mario de Monti]

So what? They certainly "worked out well", benefiting the local culture without destroying it.

Did they really? Is it better to be simply given a new technology or is it more beneficial to a culture if they came up with it themselves? It surely is a short term progress that they know how to water their fields now, but having to think that up for themselves would probably have helped them more in the long run.

In general, it seems that Kirk doesn't much care for the "do no help/harm" aspects of the PD. Is this because he knows from experience that he won't get punished for it? Or because he knowe from experience that the natives will be better off for it? Or is it simply that the PD (unless enforced in the rare "full" form) does not actually preclude him from doing help or harm when required?

Again the question, if a short term improvement is really beneficial. A society that becomes reliant on "divine influence" to advance technologically and culturally is definitely not better off, since they basically can stop thinking for themselves to find solutions to their problems.

Mario

 

[Robert Comsol]

But that's again the Starfleet chauvinist in you speaking. This is merely normal social development for the Arab culture - if you condemn it, you certainly aren't helping the culture along. You are replacing it with another culture of your liking.

Timo, I understand that you like to play devil's advocate and don't mind, but please don’t tear my statements from their original context. I used that merely as an example to illustrate that reliance on god (images) rather creates lethargy than progress.

Wouldn't "preservation" rather equate stagnation, which apparently must be eradicated even with the force of arms if necessary?

I should have seen this one coming. No, “preservation” does not equate stagnation, I was referring to preservation of cultural integrity, i.e. give them a chance to develop within their cultural and ethical beliefs (as they would without exterior influence)

Did they violate a directive in repairing the deflector to save the planet and thus change its (natural) fate?

The Preservers set up an entirely unnatural situation in the first place. And why did they select a planet so likely to get pummeled by rocks from space that a deflector was needed?

I see two explanations.

They wanted to relocate the Native Americans on a planet with a high probability that no one else would take an interest. I'd say that a planet that is threatened by asteroids isn't exactly the site for any species with spacegoing and asteroid course predicting abilities. And the capabilities of the obelisk were even unknown to Kirk & Co., at first.

Or the Preservers felt, that the Native Americans should have a chance to develop without interference and were expected to eventually manage industrialization and the like after 400 years in order to be capable themselves to repair the obelisk should it ever break down. In simpler language: If they haven't learned / shared knowledge how to operate that thing after 4 centuries, they are ultimately responsible for their own demise.

Bob

 

[Timo]

Did they really? Is it better to be simply given a new technology or is it more beneficial to a culture if they came up with it themselves?

That isn't the real question, though, now is it? The real question is "Is it better to withhold a technology in the faint hope that they develop it themselves, or to provide the technology?". Because that's the actual choice the heroes have to make.

Almost invariably, providing the technology will benefit the locals in the short term. In many Star Trek cases, withholding will hurt them, as the decision comes at a juncture where the technology would save lives. Thinking in the short term is being God. Thinking in the long term is just playing God, unless you take a time machine and go check your facts (and don't get lost in the garden of forking paths).

Timo, I understand that you like to play devil's advocate and don't mind, but please don’t tear my statements from their original context. I used that merely as an example to illustrate that reliance on god (images) rather creates lethargy than progress.

Apologies for the provocation. But Kirk is the child (or grand-grand-grandchild) of a god-based society himself: all his human-chauvinist actions should be in support of theist systems because those give rise to societies like the UFP. Lethargy may be an appropriate description for the theist approach, but it is also Kirk's definition of paradise. "Stagnation" is something else altogether, apparently.

They wanted to relocate the Native Americans on a planet with a high probability that no one else would take an interest. I'd say that a planet that is threatened by asteroids isn't exactly the site for any species with spacegoing and asteroid course predicting abilities. And the capabilities of the obelisk were even unknown to Kirk & Co., at first.

That would work if they didn't know about human(oid) curiosity... But since they abducted humans specifically, they should have realized how alluring a beautiful, obviously terraformed world immune to asteroid strikes is to us and our likes!

Or the Preservers felt, that the Native Americans should have a chance to develop without interference and were expected to eventually manage industrialization and the like after 400 years in order to be capable themselves to repair the obelisk should it ever break down. In simpler language: If they haven't learned / shared knowledge how to operate that thing after 4 centuries, they are ultimately responsible for their own demise.

It seems that there was only one community on the entire planet, as Kirk's landing party homed in on that one before they knew of the presence of the unique and uniquely important obelisk. (Or were there other obelisks elsewhere, in full working order and properly managed by the local medicine men, and it was much ado about nothing?)

Transplanting just one village would be a death sentence, especially if that one village would be required to elevate itself to industrialism in 400 years when comparable communities barely reached cultivation in 4,000 or 40,000.

I think there's a temporal disconnect here, between the very recent transplantation and the supposedly much older terraforming. The obelisk supposedly is associated with the former, if Spock's translation of the texts was anywhere near correct. But if the latter is in fact recent, and thus accomplished in a short time, this tells of fairly godlike powers, which doesn't really match the use of crude deflector obelisks.

Altruistic motivations behind the transplantation of the poor primitives seem at odds with the mortal danger we witness, but perhaps this disconnect allows us to believe in a well-intentioned and an indifferent or sinister group acting at cross purposes.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Lethargy may be an appropriate description for the theist approach, but it is also Kirk's definition of paradise. "Stagnation" is something else altogether, apparently.


Timo Saloniemi

True stagantion--in TOS terms--would be the Keepers--who (according to Vina:

VINA: But they found it's a trap. Like a narcotic. Because when dreams become more important than reality, you give up travel, building, creating. You even forget how to repair the machines left behind by your ancestors. You just sit, living and reliving other lives left behind in the thought record.

Some have observed that those who live and die by social media (an ever-swelling mass) are stagnating (much as some would scream "what?" to that), as many often lose the human birthright of the genuinely interpersonal in exchange for a "world" where it is based on easily manipulated sight, word & sound.

As the addiction grows every day, their relation to real human beings--in the physical world--takes a back seat, thus the natural skills of human development--once irrevocably tied to true contact--stalls in favor of a "world" where nothing is tested on the field of realism. No one required to come (at least) halfway to the table to expose a part of themselves.

While some see the ability to talk/share with anyone in the world progress, the undeniable hook of social media is that you have the choice to be something other than yourself. With that sort of game playing, they are more comfortable with that, than dealing with "pressing the flesh" (so to speak) with the people around them.

I wonder...if Kirk discovered a culture where the obsession was living through a screen compromised or sacrificed real, developed relationships, would he attempt to alter their course--or stick to the PD and move on after the planet survey?

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

Not knowing the real back-story of the Indians' migration via Preservers, there are many possibilities. Maybe the colony was an attempt to fix a mistake, like in The Next Generation episode where Worf's brother relocated that colony under cover of darkness to the holodeck. Maybe some "young, idealistic"-type Preserver observed an Indian village about to be wiped away by a natural disaster, and rescued them. The "older" Preservers then were put in a "What the hell do we do with them now?" scenario, and this relocation was sort of a 'least bad' solution.

I have a similar theory about The Return of the Archons' Landru.

 

[Timo]

VINA: But they found it's a trap. Like a narcotic. Because when dreams become more important than reality, you give up travel, building, creating. You even forget how to repair the machines left behind by your ancestors. You just sit, living and reliving other lives left behind in the thought record.

We should consider that this is Vina speaking, and Vina is the mouthpiece of the Talosians rather than an independent thinker. (Indeed, it's a bit unclear whether Vina even exists for real, and if so, in what form.)

Talosians might want to evoke pity here, much as with showing Vina's wounds (or perhaps "Vina's" "wounds"), while hiding the ultimate truth about their motivations. They are flexible, quick-witted and seemingly desperate in their perversions of reality; for all we know, they are relatively well off, and their motivation for persuading Pike to stay and breed is unrelated to the need for life-saving, civilization-rescuing slave labor.

I do wonder what Kirk would have done with the Talosians, had he been there in "The Cage" (where the aliens still appeared at least somewhat vulnerable and manageable) rather than in "The Menagerie" (where there's nothing to be done about them, given their superior powers). But as for Kirk stumbling on Planet Facebook... Supposedly Kirk owes his own life and civilization to such roots, and might respect them for that. Unless our universes diverge in that respect.

I have a similar theory about The Return of the Archons' Landru.

It is interesting and convenient that when Kirk stumbles on a society that doesn't meet his standards, it often actually is an incredibly compact and centralized one, easily forced to a new course. There apparently was only one Preserver village, only one Vaal village, only one Landru town, only one Führer on Ekon, only one city for Bosses on Sigma Iotia... And never mind Platonians or Ardanans with their tiny communities.

It might well be that diversions from the human norm that Kirk prefers are indeed the result of colonization, transplantation or natural disaster causing the population to shrink to a size that is vulnerable to perversion!

The planetwide civilization of "Bread and Circuses" was left unaltered in the end, probably being too big a mouthful for even Kirk to chew. Little was done about Gideon, either. OTOH, Kirk did alter the fates of entire planets of supposed "natural order" once or twice - but he accomplished that by extremely local means, such as with the Capellans or Tyree's people, as if again interacting with the only village on the planet.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Robert Comsol]

@ TREK GOD 1

Very good observations, I wholeheartedly concur!

(Has an uncomfortable ring of prophecy, doesn't it? Interestingly, a famous SciFi protagonist in a German pulp fiction series, Perry Rhodan, felt the Arkonides to be a decadent race, when he first encountered them on the Moon, playing video games all day long. That was back in the 1960's, too)

Maybe some "young, idealistic"-type Preserver observed an Indian village about to be wiped away by a natural disaster, and rescued them.

A very good theory, but can you exclude that the “natural disaster” went by the name of George Armstrong Custer or Andrew Jackson?

VINA: But they found it's a trap. Like a narcotic. Because when dreams become more important than reality, you give up travel, building, creating. You even forget how to repair the machines left behind by your ancestors. You just sit, living and reliving other lives left behind in the thought record.

We should consider that this is Vina speaking, and Vina is the mouthpiece of the Talosians rather than an independent thinker. (Indeed, it's a bit unclear whether Vina even exists for real, and if so, in what form.)

Is it just me thinking that you show an increasing tendency to double-guess everything? I don’t think the original producers had this in mind, Vina provides Pike and the audience with the information both need to evaluate the situation.

The planetwide civilization of "Bread and Circuses" was left unaltered in the end, probably being too big a mouthful for even Kirk to chew.

I disagree, Kirk stuck to the rules of the Prime Directive for obvious reasons

• Proconsul Claudius (apparently a leader figure) made it abundantly clear, that he didn’t want any interference whatsoever from outworlders. The same, though for different reasons, happened in TNG’s “First Contact”
• Although this society hadn’t seen any actual social development for quite some time, it was obvious that the “Sun/Son worshippers” were about to change that, given known parallels on other planets like Earth. Again, there was no good reason whatsoever to interfere

Bob

 

[Timo]

Is it just me thinking that you show an increasing tendency to double-guess everything? I don’t think the original producers had this in mind, Vina provides Pike and the audience with the information both need to evaluate the situation.

...Yet everything Vina had said or done by that point had been profoundly insincere, only intended to turn Pike's behavior and thinking to paths more conductive of Talosian goals (whatever those were). Why would she suddenly start telling the truth?

I mean, it could have been the truth as well as a lie, but ultimately it was the Talosians who made her tell it.

I disagree, Kirk stuck to the rules of the Prime Directive for obvious reasons

• Proconsul Claudius (apparently a leader figure) made it abundantly clear, that he didn’t want any interference whatsoever from outworlders. The same, though for different reasons, happened in TNG’s “First Contact”

Kirk ignored the wishes of local leaders in many an occasion. Why would he fall short of gunning down Claudius when he so expediently dealt with Landru, Vaal and others who were "perverting" or "stagnating" a society? Clearly, the circumstances here were unnatural from Kirk's POV, development arrested for two thousand years!

Although this society hadn’t seen any actual social development for quite some time, it was obvious that the “Sun/Son worshippers” were about to change that, given known parallels on other planets like Earth. Again, there was no good reason whatsoever to interfere

Kirk didn't even bother to arm the rebels, like he did with Tyree's world. These were slaves, evidently woefully underarmed to really cut their chains (however symbolic). Kirk dislikes slavery, to put it mildly, and is willing to go against it even in circumstances where the law clearly is against him (such as with the Federation member world Ardana).



Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mario de Monti]

Kirk ignored the wishes of local leaders in many an occasion. Why would he fall short of gunning down Claudius when he so expediently dealt with Landru, Vaal and others who were "perverting" or "stagnating" a society?

Because it is a big difference obviously, whether you destroy a computer (Landru, Vaal, etc.) or "gun down" a living being (Claudius, Bela Oxmyx, etc.)! And it is also debatable, if the commands of a computer qualify as "wishes of local leaders" - it is their pogramming, not something arrived at through social evolution and/or necessities and definitely not through reflections on the people´s well-being. You can always talk to actual beings and affect the way they think or handle things (see Plato´s Stepchildren, A Taste of Armageddon, etc.), but that doesn´t work with computers.

Mario

 

[Robert Comsol]

...Yet everything Vina had said or done by that point had been profoundly insincere, only intended to turn Pike's behavior and thinking to paths more conductive of Talosian goals (whatever those were). Why would she suddenly start telling the truth?

Did you look at the context of the scene?

VINA: If I tell you, then will you pick some dream you've had and let me live it with you?

Vina strikes a bargain with Pike. Everything she tells him adds up to what the crew on the Enterprise finds out and what is revealed as true at the very end. Vina is just desperate to please Pike, nothing more, nothing less.

Kirk ignored the wishes of local leaders in many an occasion. Why would he fall short of gunning down Claudius when he so expediently dealt with Landru, Vaal and others who were "perverting" or "stagnating" a society? Clearly, the circumstances here were unnatural from Kirk's POV, development arrested for two thousand years!

Landru and Vaal (which others?) were two machines that needed to be eliminated to free their humanoid captives.

While Claudius may have been a ruthless dictator, who would have filled the vacuum after his assasination? We may just look at Iraq or Libya to see how the average population is doing after her dictators have been killed.

Without outside interference these dictatorships would have eventually evolved into something else. And Rome on Earth also prevailed for a long time but eventually changed and evolved.

Kirk didn't even bother to arm the rebels, like he did with Tyree's world. These were slaves, evidently woefully underarmed to really cut their chains (however symbolic). Kirk dislikes slavery, to put it mildly, and is willing to go against it even in circumstances where the law clearly is against him (such as with the Federation member world Ardana).

Neural was an exception and disputed. By providing Tyree's people with firesticks, too, he merely tried to restore the balance somewhat that had been disrupted by the Klingons

(Although it was an unrealistic depiction. The Native Americans rejected front loaders because by the time you had reloaded, they had already shot multiple arrows )

But you just provided the main intention of the Prime Directive in regard to the Roman planet I think:

To help a Starfleet officer refrain from the personal urge to intervene in alien matters when confronted with injustice.

(Because what your personal conscience tells you is the right thing, might not be the right thing in the longterm and big picture)

Bob

P.S. Excellent argument, Mario de Monti

 

[Timo]

Because it is a big difference obviously, whether you destroy a computer (Landru, Vaal, etc.) or "gun down" a living being (Claudius, Bela Oxmyx, etc.)! And it is also debatable, if the commands of a computer qualify as "wishes of local leaders" - it is their pogramming, not something arrived at through social evolution and/or necessities and definitely not through reflections on the people´s well-being. You can always talk to actual beings and affect the way they think or handle things (see Plato´s Stepchildren, A Taste of Armageddon, etc.), but that doesn´t work with computers.

I'm not quite convinced of a difference here. Kirk did talk things through with Landru, which is exactly why he triumphed in the end. Vaal skipped the debate in "The Apple", though, after which Kirk used force.

Claudius or Oxmyx could always be jailed or deported or subjected to judgement by their former subjects - "humane" ways of dealing with stubborn opponents. But Kirk prefers discussion, and whenever he does that from a position of strength (however temporary), he prevails. Sometimes the opponent doesn't listen or agree to Kirk's evaluation of his relative position (Vaal), sometimes Kirk doesn't even bother. Why he didn't bother with the leadership of pseudo-Rome when he already knew they were aware of extraterrestrials and their meddling, I find unusual.

(Also, Landru certainly claimed to be the result of evaluation of social necessities and operating for the good of the people. Kirk didn't debate that - he debated the effectiveness of the approach, and won, something that would not have happened if not for the deeply ethical mindset of the Landru program.)

While Claudius may have been a ruthless dictator, who would have filled the vacuum after his assasination?

Clearly, Kirk isn't the sort to worry about that. He never worried about the vacuum left by Landru or Vaal, either! Or Gill/Melakon, for that matter. Apparently, "letting things run their course" after extreme meddling is in accordance with Starfleet policy or at least Kirk policy. I guess we could call it the Pontius Pilate Doctrine.

To help a Starfleet officer refrain from the personal urge to intervene in alien matters when confronted with injustice.

This, I feel is the sole content and intent of the PD in TOS and TNG alike. But it's wrapped in an attractive package that allows starship captains to play all sorts of power games, up to a limit.
Timo Saloniemi

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

Maybe some "young, idealistic"-type Preserver observed an Indian village about to be wiped away by a natural disaster, and rescued them.

A very good theory, but can you exclude that the “natural disaster” went by the name of George Armstrong Custer or Andrew Jackson?

Actually, yeah I can...sort of. We don't know when these people were taken, or why. We also don't know what standards the Preservers would use as a benchmark. If there were a house with a family inside, and the house is surrounded by encroaching flames, for example, if I had the power to help them, I would.

Besides, I don't recall that Custer or Jackson wiped out every Indian on Earth, but my apologies if I misunderstood your point: I'm still decompressing from my work day!

There are just too many variables to even guess about, really. But all of this is reminded me of the fascinating question: if an endangered plant were about to be eaten by an endangered animal, which would you save?

 

[Nebusj]

Kirk ignored the wishes of local leaders in many an occasion. Why would he fall short of gunning down Claudius when he so expediently dealt with Landru, Vaal and others who were "perverting" or "stagnating" a society? Clearly, the circumstances here were unnatural from Kirk's POV, development arrested for two thousand years!

Landru and Vaal (which others?) were two machines that needed to be eliminated to free their humanoid captives.

What of the computer overlord of the Yonarans, whose rule Kirk seems to have found sufficiently unobjectionable that he let his dear friend McCoy subject himself to it, and left without challenge after the episode was over?

 

[BillJ]

What of the computer overlord of the Yonarans, whose rule Kirk seems to have found sufficiently unobjectionable that he let his dear friend McCoy subject himself to it, and left without challenge after the episode was over?

Landru and Vaal may have both survived if they hadn't tried to drag the Enterprise down from orbit. Kirk even tries to take what is left of his landing party and leave Gamma Trianguli VI, but Vaal blocks his exit.

 

[T'Girl]

A very good theory, but can you exclude that the “natural disaster” went by the name of George Armstrong Custer or Andrew Jackson?

Spock: "A mixture of Navajo, Mohican, and Delaware, I believe. All among the more advanced and peaceful tribes. "

So no, neither Custer nor Jackson. Along the line you raised, perhaps at different times a neighboring native american tribe was about to wipe them out and the preservers moved segments of the "Navajo, Mohican, and Delaware" for that reason.