Are we victims of Federation propaganda?

[Melakon]

Given the basic conceit of Captain's log and all its variations, and Roddenberry's use of the concept as a type of historical record, we can imagine we are viewing reports by our descendents. What if information we think we know about Federation enemies is inaccurate?

We only have information from Starfleet's perspective. One might say we've seen Klingons torturing people, we've seen Rura Penthe for what it is, but again this is through Starfleet's eyes.

Is it possible all the atrocities we hear about against the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, and any other alien race are simply a sophisticated form of misinformation?

Watching TOS: Day of the Dove prompted this out of me due to its mention of propaganda, though I imagine later episodes in the other series and films also present plenty of examples.

Could Starfleet's enemies actually be as humane as it considers itself to be?

 

[DimesDan]

There is a real possibility that they could be, but my "gut" reaction to the question is no and I'll think I'll stick with that.

 

[Push The Button]

The Klingons were considered to be ruthless murderers in Kirk's time, but became honorable warriors by the TNG era, which culminated in the character of Worf serving in Starfleet aboard Picard's Enterprise. This could be an example of what you are talking about, that the Klingons as a species were never as bad as we were led to believe.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

This may depend on exactly how much of the available details you're trying to describe as propaganda. If you're just talking about famous atrocities, then maybe. I can't think of any description of that sort of major event that doesn't come from Starfleet. But, certainly where the Klingons are concerned we have plenty of non-starfleet sources to back up the general bloodthirstiness of their culture. We've seen the day to day life of Klingon warriors on Klingon ships from Klingon perspectives, and it absolutely did involve a lot of anger, pride, fighting and potentially death. We also have many Klingon descriptions of Klingon history that put a great emphasis on war, conquest and empire. Even to the point that they hunted a species across the galaxy with the explicit goal of driving it to extinction simply because they disliked it.

Overall, I would say that - with the exception of the apparent underhandedness of Klingon politics which actually flies in the face of general klingon culture - the Starfleet description of Klingons is not really that far off from the Klingon description of Klingons. And on the basis of that, I'm inclined to believe that Starfleet, for the most part, does not indulge in extensive propaganda, and that therefore, even those alien species about whom starfleet is our only source of information probably do more or less match the description we have of them.

Or, possibly, it represents Starfleet simply having bought into Klingon propaganda about Klingon culture (which would explain why the politicians on Qonos and the Klingon servants we've seen appeared so very different from what we generally expect of Klingon culture - because the supremacy of the Warrior's Way is not nearly as absolute as the Empire would like everyone to believe). This would also be a real possibility with a least a few other races (especially the more secretive ones, like the Romulans or the Tholians), though certainly not with all of them (the Gorn, for instance, seem highly unlikely to engage in propaganda).

 

[F. King Daniel]

Gene Roddenberry himself called TOS an inaccurate representation of the five-year mission in his TMP novelization. It opens the door to question if anything we've seen in Trek is what "really" happened, or some skewed after-the-point interpretation.

Here's the relevant section of the TMP novel:

Unfortunately, Starfleet's enthusiasm affected even those who chronicled our adventures, and we were painted somewhat larger than life, especially myself.

Eventually, I found that I had been fictionalized into some sort of "modern Ulysses" and it has been painful to see my command decisions of those years so widely applauded, whereas the plain facts are that ninety-four of our crew met violent deaths during those years - and many of them would still be alive if I had acted either more quickly or more wisely. Nor have I been as foolishly courageous as depicted. I have never happily invited injury; I have disliked in the extreme every duty circumstance which has required me to risk my life. But there appears to be something in the nature of depicters of popular events which leads them into the habit of exaggeration. As a result, I have become determined that if I ever again found myself involved in an affair attracting public attention, I would insist that some way be found to tell the story more accurately.
(P. 7-8)

Then there's Voyager, which implies that up until "Latent Image" we'd been seeing the Doctor's censored, Ensign Jetal-free version of the show.

It's fascinating to wonder what we might be missing...

 

[Melakon]

Yes, and even though we've seen life supposedly from a Klingon or even Vulcan perspective, we're still seeing it through Federation eyes. As far as I know, none of the other races have produced a television show or film giving their side of the story.

The closest example we have so far is ENT: In a Mirror, Darkly.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

There were no Federation eyes on board Kruge's ship in STIII, nor among the Klingon high court in STVI. And a very large percentage of Klingon custom in TNG/DS9 comes from Worf - yes, he is Starfleet, but he is also Klingon. Seems not exactly the guy to be spreading anti-klingon propaganda.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Yes, and even though we've seen life supposedly from a Klingon or even Vulcan perspective, we're still seeing it through Federation eyes. As far as I know, none of the other races have produced a television show or film giving their side of the story.

The closest example we have so far is ENT: In a Mirror, Darkly.

The novel The Final Reflection gives a fantastic look at the universe from a Klingon's perspective (although TNG sadly invalidated most of it's Klingon lore)

 

[Robert Comsol]

Is it possible all the atrocities we hear about against the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, and any other alien race are simply a sophisticated form of misinformation?

In the Grand Unified Theory view of things this would almost be an inevitable conclusion, IMHO.

The Making of Star Trek describes the TOS Klingons as anything but honorable (IIRC it even says they despise honor) and the portrayal of Klingons in TOS compared to TNG still constitutes the biggest paradigm shift in the whole of Star Trek.

Nevertheless, I think by the time of "Day of the Dove" the Klingons received a rather fair portrayal with the introduction of Kang's wife that made them look less like the stereotypical antagonists they had been previously.

Since this episode has no stardate, I regard it as the very last TOS episode in my personal canon because of its positive outlook for future Federation-Klingon relations.

Bob

 

[Lt. LaForge]

a very large percentage of Klingon custom in TNG/DS9 comes from Worf - yes, he is Starfleet, but he is also Klingon. Seems not exactly the guy to be spreading anti-klingon propaganda.

If anything, pro-Klingon propaganda is what we see from Worf. Didn't sweet Ezri challenge him based on that concept?

 

[2takesfrakes]

The way to Hell is paived with Good Intentions and Federation/STARFLEET representatives have often failed to remind themselves of this fact. Captain Kirk, perhaps, being the most notorious, in this regard. Oh! Here's a planet run by computers! You know THAT ain't right! This lifestyle is completely unfamiliar and unpalatable to me, so Spock ... find the plug on this thing!!! And, because ENTERPRISE has a schedule to keep, Kirk gets to avoid witnessing the bedlam he leaves behind, whilst promising to send "advisors." Always with the forthcoming "advisors." Then, he makes it with the hottest of the local natives and sets off, once again, for uncharted "waters" ...

 

[Melakon]

TOS: The Trouble with Tribbles, despite being a comedy, may also be an honest look at Klingons. They drink, they tell jokes, they laugh, they taunt people just to start a fight. There are dozens of people like that in any average sized town.

And TOS: Errand of Mercy shows us they do have their own concept of honor, which we can probably interpret as an honest opinion.

Regarding scenes where no Federation personnel are present among Klingons, Cardassians, etc., since we're being presented information through Federation media sources themselves (assuming Star Trek as we know it is based on future historical records), those scenes must be a form of report author's conjecture.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I know I'm not a victim of Federation propaganda, although it helps that the Federation isn't real...


As far as propaganda in Trek is concerned, everybody has theirs. No nation--fictional or not--can truthfully claim to not have any. Everyone sees the Galaxy through their own point of view and will paint those that sees things differently either as ignorant or just outright wrong. While the Federation may see itself as a benevolent organization promoting peaceful cooperation and unity, the others may see the Federation as nothing more than an invading force sweeping across the Galaxy...

 

[Melakon]

For many years, I've thought some sort of episode presented solely from a Klingon point of view would be an interesting experiment. How differently would they be portrayed if toned down from operatic proportions? Would Starfleet be presented as bloodthirsty aggressors? Certainly races like the Gorn initially saw them that way.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

a very large percentage of Klingon custom in TNG/DS9 comes from Worf - yes, he is Starfleet, but he is also Klingon. Seems not exactly the guy to be spreading anti-klingon propaganda.

If anything, pro-Klingon propaganda is what we see from Worf. Didn't sweet Ezri challenge him based on that concept?

Agreed.

I just find the concept of the 'Captains Log Conceit' to be entirely unconvincing. With the possible exception of TOS, there are just too many scenes (and sometimes almost entire entire episodes) where no starfleet or federation personnel were present. And even outside that, there are way too many details that would never be included in any log of any kind.

 

[Last Redshirt]

Gene Roddenberry himself called TOS an inaccurate representation of the five-year mission in his TMP novelization. It opens the door to question if anything we've seen in Trek is what "really" happened, or some skewed after-the-point interpretation.

Here's the relevant section of the TMP novel:

Unfortunately, Starfleet's enthusiasm affected even those who chronicled our adventures, and we were painted somewhat larger than life, especially myself.

Eventually, I found that I had been fictionalized into some sort of "modern Ulysses" and it has been painful to see my command decisions of those years so widely applauded, whereas the plain facts are that ninety-four of our crew met violent deaths during those years - and many of them would still be alive if I had acted either more quickly or more wisely. Nor have I been as foolishly courageous as depicted. I have never happily invited injury; I have disliked in the extreme every duty circumstance which has required me to risk my life. But there appears to be something in the nature of depicters of popular events which leads them into the habit of exaggeration. As a result, I have become determined that if I ever again found myself involved in an affair attracting public attention, I would insist that some way be found to tell the story more accurately.
(P. 7-8)

Then there's Voyager, which implies that up until "Latent Image" we'd been seeing the Doctor's censored, Ensign Jetal-free version of the show.

It's fascinating to wonder what we might be missing...

That sounds less like we were given a false image of the occurrences of the original five-year voyage of the Enterprise and more Kirk being guilt-wracked over the loss of crewmembers under his command, blaming himself for their loss because he wasn't fast enough, or he wasn't strong enough.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Gene Roddenberry himself called TOS an inaccurate representation of the five-year mission in his TMP novelization. It opens the door to question if anything we've seen in Trek is what "really" happened, or some skewed after-the-point interpretation.

Here's the relevant section of the TMP novel:

Unfortunately, Starfleet's enthusiasm affected even those who chronicled our adventures, and we were painted somewhat larger than life, especially myself.

Eventually, I found that I had been fictionalized into some sort of "modern Ulysses" and it has been painful to see my command decisions of those years so widely applauded, whereas the plain facts are that ninety-four of our crew met violent deaths during those years - and many of them would still be alive if I had acted either more quickly or more wisely. Nor have I been as foolishly courageous as depicted. I have never happily invited injury; I have disliked in the extreme every duty circumstance which has required me to risk my life. But there appears to be something in the nature of depicters of popular events which leads them into the habit of exaggeration. As a result, I have become determined that if I ever again found myself involved in an affair attracting public attention, I would insist that some way be found to tell the story more accurately.
(P. 7-8)

Then there's Voyager, which implies that up until "Latent Image" we'd been seeing the Doctor's censored, Ensign Jetal-free version of the show.

It's fascinating to wonder what we might be missing...

That sounds less like we were given a false image of the occurrences of the original five-year voyage of the Enterprise and more Kirk being guilt-wracked over the loss of crewmembers under his command, blaming himself for their loss because he wasn't fast enough, or he wasn't strong enough.

That's kind of my take on it too. I do think TOS happened exactly as we saw it, but that Admiral Kirk was downplaying any embellishing or exaggeration of it by others (the press, fans, detractors, etc.).

 

[Christopher]

I just find the concept of the 'Captains Log Conceit' to be entirely unconvincing. With the possible exception of TOS, there are just too many scenes (and sometimes almost entire entire episodes) where no starfleet or federation personnel were present. And even outside that, there are way too many details that would never be included in any log of any kind.

But the idea suggested in the TMP novelization is that the episodes are works of fiction inspired by Kirk's logs, dramatizing actual events complete with the embellishments and fictional extrapolations of most dramatizations. By analogy with another Shatner work, it's like Judgment at Nuremburg -- based on a true story, but with parts of it made up or simplified or changed for dramatic effect.


In response to the original point, if all of Trek is a work of fiction presented by Starfleet (or its partisans within the Federation entertainment industry), then not only might we be seeing exaggeratedly negative portrayals of the Federation's enemies, but we might be seeing an exaggeratedly positive portrayal of the Federation itself. Think of the World War II-era films that glossed over the United States' immoral acts like the internment of Japanese-Americans in concentration camps. The first episode of the 1943 Batman serial actually praised that crime as the action of a "wise" government to protect the nation against enemies from within. So maybe the show's portrayal of the benevolence of Starfleet and Federation policies could be an idealized depiction of a more ambiguous reality.

For instance, what if Vulcans were "actually" an oppressed minority? Building up Spock as a central character in the fictionalized version of events could've been a form of tokenism to make the show seem fair and inclusive, but he had the advantage of being half-human. And maybe the portrayal of Vulcans' savage mating rites was a form of ethnic stereotyping to sell the idea that they're a morally inferior people who need to be closely supervised -- much like the way the infrequently practiced custom of sati (widow-burning) among certain narrow subcultures in India was exaggeratedly presented as a universal, compulsory practice in Indian culture in order for the British Raj to convince the folks back home that Indian culture was immoral and dangerous and the Indians needed to be converted to proper English culture and values for their own good. (Note also how poorly the all-Vulcan Intrepid crew fared in their one token mention.)

 

[varek]

We obviously are biased in favor of the Federation, but we are also aware of many of its flaws and the flaws of some of its more prominent citizens. So, I think it balances out relatively fairly.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Eh, you can argue Star Trek gives us a perspective from inside a bubble, but that's not quite the same as 'Propaganda'. In TNG it's more like naivete, and in DS9 it comes off as more of a 'See no evil' attitude.

But is there some sort of massive Orwellian conspiracy to conceal the horrible truth from everyone? If that were the case I would lose all interest in the show.