Did the Cardassians get a bad wrap?

[Nerys Ghemor]

There's a difference between an enthusiast and an apologist. For myself, I am VERY much an enthusiast, but when they screw up, I have no problem pointing it out. Seeing the potential in them should not mean NOT seeing how they are falling short of said potential.

 

[Praxius]

Sorry, I gotta call you on this one. I hear this old saw trotted out all the time and it's just not true.

Pretty much any article, any textbook, any museum display, any documentary on the Holocaust says pretty clearly up front that the Nazis killed gays, Roma, and people with disabilities as well as Jews. The Jewish deaths get more mention because they made up the vast majority of those murdered.

I just don't see this as us acting "like they were the only ones treated this way."

*sigh* Why do people always try and take more out of what was said then there really exists?

Yes the vast majority were Jewish people... when did I ever say this wasn't the case? They were used as the main excuse for most of Germany's problems.

"Vast Majority" is different from "All"

I know what the damn text books, reports and history say.... I've learned much about WWII growing up, since my father was an avid collector of just about everything WWII.... I was surrounded by it.

I was referring towards how many in the public generalize (or ignorantly spout off) talk about WWII and speak of the "Holocaust" in regards to approx. 6 millions jews being killed.... yet by doing so, they openly ignore and pass off all of the others who were killed in the same process and time, which when you add everybody up, accounts for between 11-17 million people total.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

So you have over half of the victims not being accounted for, nor being discussed all based on the larger % of all the groups affected being talked about/counted.

I wasn't trying to discount or trivialize what the Jewish people went through.... I was trying to point out that there were many more people who were put similar shoes as they were.... the Jewish people were just the ones who took the brunt of the suffering.

Yes, there were 6 million jewish people who died in the process.... yet there were up to 11 million more people on top of that, that a lot of people seem to forget to talk about who died as well.

That was my only point, which some here seemed to have taken way out of context to build up some argument that really doesn't matter to the topic at hand.

I sated my views on the Klingons and the Cardassians, I stated my views on how they connect to our own human history... they are my own personal opinions, and if others here have an issue with my opinion, too bad..... it's still my opinion.

 

[Trek_princess]

The Cardassians do get a bad rap because DS9 is told primarily from a Federation/Bajoran viewpoint. If the show was called Terok Nor, then I think the Bajorans would be portrayed as superstitious, unenlightened reactionists, and that the Federation would be naive, hypocritical, and politically Evangelical. I like Garak and Quark's metaphor of the Federation as bubbly, cloying root beer (all sugar and no substance).

We have to remember that most of the main characters are Bajoran or human/Federation aliens - and the non-Federation alien main characters (Odo and Quark) mostly cooperate with the Federation. If there were non-militaristic, positive Cardassian characters, for example if there was a Cardassian version of Bashir or Jake Sisko, then we'd see their culture in a different light. Of course, the Cardassian's militaristic nationalism and the Bajoran occupation would still be an issue, but it's always easy to excuse the bad things that "the good guys" do.

One of the great things about DS9 is that it often blurrs the boundaries between what it means to be inherently good or bad. Sometimes we are sympathetic to a villain (Dukat's nervous breakdown at Ziyal's death, the Dominion's casual destruction of entire Cardassian cities) and critical of heros (Sisko dishonestly drags the Romulans into the war to serve his own ends, and don't forget that Kira was a TERRORIST after all).

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

I don't think the Cardassians' actions would become excusable, personally. What I think a truly Cardassian-focused show would have to do to be successful would be to have a heavy emphasis on the dissidents. That's what books like the Terok Nor series, and The Never-Ending Sacrifice, in Treklit, did, and were successful.

 

[Captain Zog]

Dukat coerced Bajoran women into sleeping with him. What choice did they have, after all? He was a rapist and a lot more too. Whatever one says about the Cardassians (and, yes, they were brutal), Dukat was an all-out monster.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Totally agreed that Dukat was a rapist and a monster. If you coerce a woman into saying yes, and you use your power to that end (power gained in a REALLY horrible way, I might add), that's still rape.

 

[indolover]

Sisko and company would likely have been too low on the totem pole, relatively speaking, to be aware of the fall of Central Command--that makes sense. As to what the upper echelons of Starfleet, or its intelligence services knew, that is a different matter and I see no reason why the higher-ups wouldn't have been aware of it. Obviously it would make sense to keep that knowledge under wraps if officially the Cardassians had an isolationist policy at the time, and work through backdoor channels to ensure favorable terms when the borders did reopen. That's what I would've done in that situation and what I strongly suspect WAS going on--but as I said, that would've been well above Sisko's pay grade and thus that of the audience.

The way of the warrior situation was complex.

As Worf said in the episode, Klingons are warriors and live to fight and conquer. The fear of the Dominion in the Alpha Quadrant gave them an excuse to do what is fundamental to Klingon culture, and be aggressive and warlike.

Also, as has been stated before now in this thread, the Changeling Martok instigated this by cajoling Gowron to be aggressive. Note that once the Changeling Martok got killed, and the Dominion pushed the Klingons out of Cardassian space, Gowron was ready to re-sign the Alliance treaty. And in TNG, there were Klingons ready to break up the Alliance, but the Klingons punished them for doing so.

I'd think of any major Alpha Quadrant power, the Klingons make the best and most trustworthy allies. Romulans are deceitful, Cardassians use treaties as rouses to re-group (as seen in the Wounded), etc. If a culture believes in honour, then it surely is dishonourable to break a treaty signed in good faith.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

As Worf said in the episode, Klingons are warriors and live to fight and conquer. The fear of the Dominion in the Alpha Quadrant gave them an excuse to do what is fundamental to Klingon culture, and be aggressive and warlike.

Borg "nature" is to assimilate. Cardassian "nature" is to want order. And their forms of tyranny are not tolerated and should not be. Why should the Klingons get a pass? I know! Political expedience! They engaged in an aggressive action against a Cardassian government that was NOT proven to be aggressive or to have the same characteristics as the government that had caused all the mayhem in the past. As soon as the Cardassians asked for help, and the Klingons refused to desist, then sorry--the Klingons asked for it.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

Also, as has been stated before now in this thread, the Changeling Martok instigated this by cajoling Gowron to be aggressive. Note that once the Changeling Martok got killed, and the Dominion pushed the Klingons out of Cardassian space, Gowron was ready to re-sign the Alliance treaty. And in TNG, there were Klingons ready to break up the Alliance, but the Klingons punished them for doing so.

The changeling did NOT brain wash the klingon high council; he just convinced them to start a war without even bothering to mention this to the federation and then retreat from the alliance when the federation refused to submit to their bullying and support the war.

ONE changeling managed to convince the klingons to start a large scale war, to end their alliance with the federation and this is supposed to be a good thing? To paint the klingons as loyal?

I'd think of any major Alpha Quadrant power, the Klingons make the best and most trustworthy allies. Romulans are deceitful, Cardassians use treaties as rouses to re-group (as seen in the Wounded), etc. If a culture believes in honour, then it surely is dishonourable to break a treaty signed in good faith.

The klingons - at least, the vast majority of the klingons we saw - do NOT beleive in honor.
O, they repeat the word 'honor' once every 3 sentences. But their 'honor', curiously, changes with the situation, always supporting whatever course of action is most profitable for the klingons.

The klingons are bullies, pirates.
They built their empire by conquering other species (in the process, killing everyone who opposed them in the slightest) and exploiting their worlds.
During TNG they were in a state of 'frozen war' with the federation. See 'Aquiel' or 'Unification'.

And what's with their horrendous table manners?

You want loyal allies with a warrior nature? Look at the Andorians.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Bingo. Had the Klingons been truer allies, I think they would've given LONG pause before starting an aggressive war that they KNEW was going to provoke people they had signed a treaty with and gave their word of honor.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Cardassians are more like TOS Klingons, who were based off the Soviets. Many of those commonalities are applicable.

And as Forrest Gump once said, "Thats all I have to say about that."

 

[indolover]

Also, as has been stated before now in this thread, the Changeling Martok instigated this by cajoling Gowron to be aggressive. Note that once the Changeling Martok got killed, and the Dominion pushed the Klingons out of Cardassian space, Gowron was ready to re-sign the Alliance treaty. And in TNG, there were Klingons ready to break up the Alliance, but the Klingons punished them for doing so.

The changeling did NOT brain wash the klingon high council; he just convinced them to start a war without even bothering to mention this to the federation and then retreat from the alliance when the federation refused to submit to their bullying and support the war.

ONE changeling managed to convince the klingons to start a large scale war, to end their alliance with the federation and this is supposed to be a good thing? To paint the klingons as loyal?

I'd think of any major Alpha Quadrant power, the Klingons make the best and most trustworthy allies. Romulans are deceitful, Cardassians use treaties as rouses to re-group (as seen in the Wounded), etc. If a culture believes in honour, then it surely is dishonourable to break a treaty signed in good faith.

The klingons - at least, the vast majority of the klingons we saw - do NOT beleive in honor.
O, they repeat the word 'honor' once every 3 sentences. But their 'honor', curiously, changes with the situation, always supporting whatever course of action is most profitable for the klingons.

The klingons are bullies, pirates.
They built their empire by conquering other species (in the process, killing everyone who opposed them in the slightest) and exploiting their worlds.
During TNG they were in a state of 'frozen war' with the federation. See 'Aquiel' or 'Unification'.

And what's with their horrendous table manners?

You want loyal allies with a warrior nature? Look at the Andorians.

In Aquiel and Unification, both scenarios were not cut and dry.

Didn't Gowron offer a cloaked ship to help Picard and thus the Federation in its mission? I think the Klingons were good allies in the sense that the High Council never openly sought to undermine the treaty.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

Also, as has been stated before now in this thread, the Changeling Martok instigated this by cajoling Gowron to be aggressive. Note that once the Changeling Martok got killed, and the Dominion pushed the Klingons out of Cardassian space, Gowron was ready to re-sign the Alliance treaty. And in TNG, there were Klingons ready to break up the Alliance, but the Klingons punished them for doing so.

The changeling did NOT brain wash the klingon high council; he just convinced them to start a war without even bothering to mention this to the federation and then retreat from the alliance when the federation refused to submit to their bullying and support the war.

ONE changeling managed to convince the klingons to start a large scale war, to end their alliance with the federation and this is supposed to be a good thing? To paint the klingons as loyal?

I'd think of any major Alpha Quadrant power, the Klingons make the best and most trustworthy allies. Romulans are deceitful, Cardassians use treaties as rouses to re-group (as seen in the Wounded), etc. If a culture believes in honour, then it surely is dishonourable to break a treaty signed in good faith.

The klingons - at least, the vast majority of the klingons we saw - do NOT beleive in honor.
O, they repeat the word 'honor' once every 3 sentences. But their 'honor', curiously, changes with the situation, always supporting whatever course of action is most profitable for the klingons.

The klingons are bullies, pirates.
They built their empire by conquering other species (in the process, killing everyone who opposed them in the slightest) and exploiting their worlds.
During TNG they were in a state of 'frozen war' with the federation. See 'Aquiel' or 'Unification'.

And what's with their horrendous table manners?

You want loyal allies with a warrior nature? Look at the Andorians.

In Aquiel and Unification, both scenarios were not cut and dry.

Didn't Gowron offer a cloaked ship to help Picard and thus the Federation in its mission? I think the Klingons were good allies in the sense that the High Council never openly sought to undermine the treaty.

In 'Aquiel' we learn that klingons used to target federation outposts, just for the kick; also, they had no problem spying on their 'allies' when the chance arose, not even bothering to tell their federation 'allies' that one of their outposts was devastated.

In 'Unification' we hear that Gowron rewrote history to make himself look cooler - very 'honourable' - and eliminated any mention of federation help to the empire, in a gesture to their 'allies'.
Gowron gave the use of a cloacked ship to Picard because he had to, because Picard practically blackmailed him, not because he was eager to help.

You want other examples of klingon 'loyalty' to the federation? Each time humans interacted with the high council - or any other klingon - , they were treated as inferior specimens, with poorly weiled insults - yes, 'respect' and 'loyalty'. Take your pick.
And this, at the height of the 'alliance'.

 

[Hermiod]

I don't think it's a consistent criticism. The Federation has Argana as a member world, which essentially practices slavery.

Who ? I thought I might be forgetting something, but a Memory Alpha check reveals nothing.

 

[tau136]

Ok we all know they did terrible things during the Occupation but why were they painted so badly? How is it any different from when the Klingons conquer a world and kill millions to do so.

Conquest and killing may be bad but they are not evil as was the Cardassian occupation and systematic degradation of Bajor, Bajorans & Bajoran Culture.

The greatest wrong an occupying force can do is to brand the natives as animals then proceed to extirpate every aspect of culture and advancement to make that label fit. To strip a territory of all its resources and have no sense of responsibility whatsoever for the territory you have made yourselves administrators of. Both the Cardassians & some RL empires deserve that badge of infamy.

 

[TerokNor]

I don´t agree. I find it worse to kill and fight, just because one is a warrior and that is what a warrior does, than to occupy (and kill), because one needs ressources to survive.
Not that I say the Occupation was good...it was not. But the Cardassians as a folk do not deserve to be branded with the term "evil".

TerokNor

 

[Gul Re'jal]

Cardassians didn't occupy Bajor (and most likely many other words) for no reason, or for the purpose to just hurt people. Cardassians were hungry, so to say. Their homeworld is poor in resources, so to find a way to survive they started to take resources from others by force.

Don't get me wrong, it's not that I justify such actions, but there were reasons why Cardassians were the way they were. In their own eyes they were doing what was necessary to make sure their beloved families had means to live, to ensure their survival. People, with or without scales, can do really unexpected things if it comes to protecting their loved ones. "Hungry" Cardassia escalated to an oppressive empire.

Gul Madred asked Picard where their ancient spiritulism took them and then pointed out what contemporary Cardassians were like - strong, powerful, feared. He thought his people were great.

 

[ConRefit79]

No, I think the Cardassian Government was properly characterized. They did inslave non-Cardassian worlds. They did forment violence in the demilitarized zone. They did torture people. Raped and Pillaged entire worlds. Oppressed there people.

The tragic thing is, unlike the Romulans and Klingons, their past is more like the Federation's. Of course my memory may be faulty, but I think there was an episode that said they were once a Democratic and peaceful people.

 

[Subcommander R.]

I'm actually going to add a few quotes from Errand Of Mercy.

"We Klingons have a reputation for ruthlessness. You will find that it is deserved. Should one Klingon soldier be killed, a thousand Organians will die"

"The Klingons are a military dictatorship."

 

[Hermiod]

^Klingon society as presented in TNG and DS9 was feudal, so not really a dictatorship as such. The Chancellor only stood as long as he had the support of a sufficient number of the Houses whose leaders sat on the High Council. Their military was loyal to individual houses, not the overall government. We see this in "Redemption" amongst other episodes.