• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Bonus scene from Season One Finale

I don't like that idea. It suggests one of two things, neither of which I like: either (A) Section 31 was somehow privy to important intel (i.e., Lorca's status) that escaped the attention of Starfleet and other Federation authorities, suggesting they're actually really good at what they do, or (B) Starfleet and/or the Federation also knew about Lorca's status, and let him keep his command anyway, suggesting that they're comfortable sanctioning that sort of thing and that Section 31 found out through internal channels. Moreover, either option suggests that Lorca was uncharacteristically incompetent at keeping his secret.

With MUGeorgiou, things are different. The cat is already out of the bag about her true provenance, at least up to the level of the admiralty (and purportedly all the way up to the Federation Council). All Section 31 would've had to do is keep its ear to the ground.
 
Maybe Lorca infiltrated Section 31? Found out about it and got himself recruited? He did have that secret stash of weapons and curiosities, so I imagine he'd value the connection. Perhaps he was exploiting them, rather than the other way round. Hard to imagine they'd be on his ship without his knowledge.
 
Honestly, Lorca had to be in bed with Section 31, otherwise it makes no sense how he could have command of Starfleet's most important wartime asset. This is the guy who admitted to murdering his previous crew of his previous command. Someone like that should not be given another command, period, let alone command of the most important asset in the fleet. Though, I should think even Section 31 had to work overtime greasing poles to get Lorca command of Discovery...
 
The notion that Section 31 has any say whatsoever in who gets the captaincy of important Starfleet ships is not compatible with my interpretation of how Starfleet works. It's a rogue organization, not part of the power structure. I concur with those who have posted that it is not in any formal sense part of the Federation intelligence apparatus.
 
Honestly, Lorca had to be in bed with Section 31, otherwise it makes no sense how he could have command of Starfleet's most important wartime asset. This is the guy who admitted to murdering his previous crew of his previous command. Someone like that should not be given another command, period, let alone command of the most important asset in the fleet. Though, I should think even Section 31 had to work overtime greasing poles to get Lorca command of Discovery...
I thought it was pretty clear that Admiral Cornwell was more responsible for his remaining in command, despite the fact that he had changed.
 
S31 may have be attracted to Lorca because he was unorthodox.

Possible. And without knowing he was from another universe they may have simply believed he was the kind of officer they always liked to discover serving in the ranks of Starfleet. A throwback to a bygone era of human behavior whom they could manipulate into doing their bidding. To them he could simply have been a practicioner of discredited ideas from a previous chapter in human history and malleable, an ideal tool to undermine the Federation's adversaries.
 
I thought it was pretty clear that Admiral Cornwell was more responsible for his remaining in command, despite the fact that he had changed.
Indeed. And it was also Cornwell who greenlit Georgiou's attack plan and Cornwell who introduced Mirror Georgiou to Discovery's crew, trying to pass her off as the original.

What does THAT tell you?

I could buy Baskin Robbins keeping her in the dark about who and what Lorca really was (given their past together), but she's too high up in the admiralty not to at least know about them, let alone have dealings with them from time to time, especially in the desperation of the Klingon War. And given that the black badges probably are the ones who got Burnham out of prison in the first place on Lorca's insistence, Cornwell's warning "Don't make any more enemies!" has a whole new dimension of meaning right there.

I don't like that idea. It suggests one of two things, neither of which I like: either (A) Section 31 was somehow privy to important intel (i.e., Lorca's status) that escaped the attention of Starfleet and other Federation authorities, suggesting they're actually really good at what they do, or (B) Starfleet and/or the Federation also knew about Lorca's status, and let him keep his command anyway, suggesting that they're comfortable sanctioning that sort of thing and that Section 31 found out through internal channels.
Or (C) Section 31 found out about Lorca, recruited him to build the spore drive, and then hid his true nature from the rest of Starfleet. That would nicely explain how it is that Lorca managed to bump the learning curve and fit in with our non-barbarian universe; in fact, his monolog when they were Mirrofying the Discovery is probably just him repeating what Leland told him when they were trying to get him to fit in with Starfleet. "Listen, Gabriel. In order to crash a party, you have to look like you belong there..."

Moreover, either option suggests that Lorca was uncharacteristically incompetent at keeping his secret.
Which is probably why he ended up destroying the Buran with all hands. His crew figured out he was an imposter pretty much from the get-go, but couldn't get their original back, so Lorca killed them all. When Section 31 found him, they figured out what was happening and cut a deal.

The notion that Section 31 has any say whatsoever in who gets the captaincy of important Starfleet ships is not compatible with my interpretation of how Starfleet works. It's a rogue organization, not part of the power structure.
Power structures are controlled by PEOPLE, whose motivations and sympathies vary wildly and are subject to pressure, manipulation, and even blackmail. Section 31 is good at what it does.

I concur with those who have posted that it is not in any formal sense part of the Federation intelligence apparatus.
Sure. It's an unofficial department within Starfleet that is probably at the beck and call of at least one of its senior officers (Admiral Alex Marcus, let's say) who keeps it officially off the books but still directs personnel and funding to it through a very liberal interpretation of Starfleet regulations.
 
Last edited:
Or (C) Section 31 found out about Lorca, recruited him to build the spore drive, and then hid his true nature from the rest of Starfleet. ...
That's pretty much the same as (A). It infers that S31 gained access to important intel that Starfleet didn't have. Which suggests that...

Section 31 is good at what it does.
And that's precisely the problem here. That is not a message the show should be sending, at least not if it's to have any thematic clarity to it whatsoever. S31 is a parasitical organization. Its MO is to co-opt people with skills, abilities, or positions that are of use to it (e.g., Reed, Bashir), hoard bits of intel gathered by others, misdirect resources belonging to others, and try to put all of these assets to use in service of its own agenda. It's the Federation equivalent of real-life operations like, say, CoIntelPro. IRL such operations are not effective. They are destructive, and the means they use undermine the ends they claim to serve. If the show sends the message that S31 is good at what it does (by, say, gaining intel Starfleet didn't have and using it to put in position the captain who spearheaded the research effort that led to winning the war), that would send exactly the sort of mixed signals that a lot of us are concerned about, and that the show seemed to be trying to step away from in the season finale.
 
And that's precisely the problem here. That is not a message the show should be sending, at least not if it's to have any thematic clarity to it whatsoever. S31 is a parasitical organization. Its MO is to co-opt people with skills, abilities, or positions that are of use to it (e.g., Reed, Bashir), hoard bits of intel gathered by others, misdirect resources belonging to others, and try to put all of these assets to use in service of its own agenda. It's the Federation equivalent of real-life operations like, say, CoIntelPro. IRL such operations are not effective.
That makes no sense. Even if that was true (CointelPro was EXTREMELY effective, as are many other secret police organizations) that doesn't mean Section 31 couldn't still be good at what they do, even if their various schemes occasionally backfire. Hell, Sloan's scheme to overthrow half the Romulan government obviously worked more or less the way they planned it, so there's never been a question of whether or not Section 31 was competent.

They ARE good at what they do, and they're usually successful. But it's never been a question of whether or not they could succeed, it's always been a question of whether or not they SHOULD.

If the show sends the message that S31 is good at what it does (by, say, gaining intel Starfleet didn't have and using it to put in position the captain who spearheaded the research effort that led to winning the war), that would send exactly the sort of mixed signals that a lot of us are concerned about
That's not a mixed signal at all. Obviously, Section 31 can do things Starfleet can't do and they're really really good at it. They wouldn't even exist if this wasn't the case. The question facing us is whether or not their superior capabilities are morally justified by their lack of oversight and unwillingness to obey Federation laws or even basic standards of ethics.

It's easy to say "No" to an immoral choice when the choice doesn't even work. But what do you do if the immoral choice might work better than the moral one? If you have to choose between morality and effect, which do you go with? "Do the ends justifies the means" has always been Section 31's fundamental question. For that question to even BEGIN to make sense, the ends must be desirable, while the means are anything but.
 
That makes no sense. Even if that was true (CointelPro was EXTREMELY effective...
CoIntelPro was a fucking abomination. What on god's green earth do you imagine it was "effective" at, other than breaking the law? Did it improve national security? Reduce violence? Quell political dissent? Achieve anything remotely constructive whatsoever? You might as well claim that the Phoenix Program helped us win the Vietnam War.

That's not a mixed signal at all. Obviously, Section 31 can do things Starfleet can't do and they're really really good at it. They wouldn't even exist if this wasn't the case. The question facing us is whether or not their superior capabilities are morally justified by their lack of oversight and unwillingness to obey Federation laws or even basic standards of ethics.
Obviously we see this very differently. They don't have "superior capabilities." All they have is the willingness to be more brutal. They have a hammer, and the tendency to treat every problem as a nail. People who are willing to be brutal will always exist... that doesn't mean they accomplish anything worth doing.

In the aftermath of 9/11, did all the renditions and torture sites and Guantanamo detentions and illegal wiretaps accomplish anything useful? Make anyone even slightly safer? Of course not. All that kind of thing ever does is generate blowback.

It's easy to say "No" to an immoral choice when the choice doesn't even work. But what do you do if the immoral choice might work better than the moral one? If you have to choose between morality and effect, which do you go with? "Do the ends justifies the means" has always been Section 31's fundamental question. For that question to even BEGIN to make sense, the ends must be desirable, while the means are anything but.
The brutalizers will always argue that they're serving worthy ends. (At least, they will if they care about rationalizing what they do.) They're wrong.

And in Star Trek's reality, importantly, the means-vs-ends question has already been asked and answered. The very existence of the Federation and Starfleet answers it. The continued existence of S31 in that reality does nothing but muddy the waters. If it's to be used as a story element, it should be used in a way that drives home the point that its existence is counterproductive.
 
And in Star Trek's reality, importantly, the means-vs-ends question has already been asked and answered. The very existence of the Federation and Starfleet answers it. The continued existence of S31 in that reality does nothing but muddy the waters. If it's to be used as a story element, it should be used in a way that drives home the point that its existence is counterproductive.
Yes, it should. And, I genuinely think that it can be used as such, to the same degree Abrams was able to do so in STID.

Human nature doesn't change automatically, and we've seen, especially in TOS era, that problems like murderers, and dictators, and the like are still a problem. Is S31 that impossible to imagine?
 
It's not impossible to imagine (sad to say). I'm not of the opinion that human beings have perfected themselves by Star Trek's era (certain statements by GR late in life notwithstanding). I just find it very hard to see what DSC can accomplish thematically by using Section 31 in season 2 that it didn't already accomplish (fairly anviliciously) in season 1. At best it would be covering old ground. I also see a genuine risk that the writers could portray it as Crazy Eddie describes, as an organization that actually "gets things done" by setting principle aside.

(Probably not to the extent of, say, Jack Bauer and his colleagues in 24, which was a truly politically disturbing show, but enough to muddy the waters, as I put it previously.)
 
It's easy to say "No" to an immoral choice when the choice doesn't even work. But what do you do if the immoral choice might work better than the moral one? If you have to choose between morality and effect, which do you go with? "Do the ends justifies the means" has always been Section 31's fundamental question. For that question to even BEGIN to make sense, the ends must be desirable, while the means are anything but.
I don't need time wasted for that topic in Star Trek ever again. The DS9 dealt it with a lot, the DIS first season was about that. I'm fucking done with that shit. It is not interesting, it is not thoughtful, and it sure as hell is not inspirational. Enough.

"You cannot explain away a wantonly immoral act because you think it is connected to some higher purpose."
-Jean-Luc Picard

There. That's the answer, now move on.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top