Discovery Season 3 Easter Egg Could Suggest the Future Federation Is Evil

[Yistaan]

What IS a problem would be a theoretical corruption of the Federation itself.

I don't want to get into real world stuff too much, but this has to be tackled. Because nothing is incorruptible. I see it in the real world every day.

For Trek to hit the viewers emotionally, they need to go there at some point. Then the heroes find a way to uncorrupt the Federation and people in the real world say, "We need to do that to our government."

By treating a government as incorruptible, we pretend everything will be ok even when bad people manipulate the rules for bad ends. People pretend rules magically enforce themselves when they themselves need to be the ones to enforce them.

Not naming names, but I'm horrified that governments I thought would never do certain things are gleefully doing those things. And more people need that wake up call. If the Federation going corrupt is that wakeup call to give to our audience, count me in.

 

[XCV330]

I don't want to get into real world stuff too much, but this has to be tackled. Because nothing is incorruptible. I see it in the real world every day.

For Trek to hit the viewers emotionally, they need to go there at some point. Then the heroes find a way to uncorrupt the Federation and people in the real world say, "We need to do that to our government."

By treating a government as incorruptible, we pretend everything will be ok even when bad people manipulate the rules for bad ends. People pretend rules magically enforce themselves when they themselves need to be the ones to enforce them.

Not naming names, but I'm horrified that governments I thought would never do certain things are gleefully doing those things. And more people need that wake up call. If the Federation going corrupt is that wakeup call to give to our audience, count me in.

You said it exactly. Audiences don't always know why they like what they like, and so by picking on the main themes they like, they forget the elements that lead them too it.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

What happens when Trek fans (or Kevin J Anderson) writes

 

[Rahul]

I don't want to get into real world stuff too much, but this has to be tackled. Because nothing is incorruptible. I see it in the real world every day.

For Trek to hit the viewers emotionally, they need to go there at some point.

Jesus Christ, that's every other science fiction show made, ever.

I just don't get it why people want to go to specific properties, and void them of the very part that make them specific?

Hey, let's do Star Trek, but gritty 'n' real, like BSG and Hunger Games! Let's do Star Wars, but use it as a way to say stories about wizards and fantasies are stupid! Hey, let's do Superman, but real people aren't altruistic, so let's make him a selfish asshole!

No wonder MARVEL is, like, the only successful and beloved franchise at this point. They're cookie-cutter. But at least they know the heart of their stories. And hey, they STILL manage to get politics right! "Winter Soldier"was a better movie about governments corrupting, "Black Panther" about inclusiveness, than Star Trek has ever done in the last twenty years.

And guess what? They didn't need to throw their unique selling point away, as you so desperately want - they were able to make the exact same - nah better! -points, just by telling interesting stories.

You are way too much occupied with "backstory" and "setting". That's not where a story hits the viewer! The only emotional reaction you can get there is "congratulations, you fucked it up". If you want to make a point - you have to put it in the story itself.

 

[Takeru]

Jesus Christ, that's every other science fiction show made, ever.

I just don't get it why people want to go to specific properties, and void them of the very part that make them specific?

Hey, let's do Star Trek, but gritty 'n' real, like BSG and Hunger Games! Let's do Star Wars, but use it as a way to say stories about wizards and fantasies are stupid! Hey, let's do Superman, but real people aren't altruistic, so let's make him a selfish asshole!

No wonder MARVEL is, like, the only successful and beloved franchise at this point. They're cookie-cutter. But at least they know the heart of their stories. And hey, they STILL manage to get politics right! "Winter Soldier"was a better movie about governments corrupting, "Black Panther" about inclusiveness, than Star Trek has ever done in the last twenty years.

And guess what? They didn't need to throw their unique selling point away, as you so desperately want - they were able to make the exact same - nah better! -points, just by telling interesting stories.

You are way too much occupied with "backstory" and "setting". That's not where a story hits the viewer! The only emotional reaction you can get there is "congratulations, you fucked it up". If you want to make a point - you have to put it in the story itself.

You make some good points but I do think showing the federation to be pretty much the same after a thousand years would be problematic too because it's unrealistic, values, organizations, people and states change over time. Star Trek could still portray a positive future with an evil federation, that's not necessarily a contradiction. If the federation is evil in Craft's time he still represents another side of humanity, Star Trek never portrayed humans as flawless and infallible so having an earth led federation take the spot of the villains can work.

Of course the Federation in that time could still be good, for all we know Craft's government are moustache twirling villains trying to destroy the federation and that's why he has been fighting them, there's simply not enough information.

 

[Rahul]

You make some good points but I do think showing the federation to be pretty much the same after a thousand years would be problematic too because it's unrealistic, values, organizations, people and states change over time. Star Trek could still portray a positive future with an evil federation, that's not necessarily a contradiction. If the federation is evil in Craft's time he still represents another side of humanity, Star Trek never portrayed humans as flawless and infallible so having an earth led federation take the spot of the villains can work.

Of course the Federation in that time could still be good, for all we know Craft's government are moustache twirling villains trying to destroy the federation and that's why he has been fighting them, there's simply not enough information.

The be quite honest, I find the whole assertion of a gouvernment being entirely "good" or "evil" quite reductive. That works on Star Wars, or Lord of the RIngs, because those are fantasy settings.

In the real world, gouvernments are made up by real people. Most people aren't "evil", but just flawed. That's why a good gouvernment necessarily has strong institutions with strong guidelines, to stop arbitrariness. If you have an "evil Empire" like in Star Wars - that really only works if the people of it have been conditioned to act evil. And you don't get to change that with single change in leadership personal via a rvolution or something. It took years and years for Germany to get rid of all the Nazis in it's institutions after WWII. Most Eastern European countries still struggle from the power structures from the Soviet era.



I agree that the Federation of the very far future shouldn't and can't be the exact same Federation that we saw from the 23rd to 24th century. There must have occured some structural changes. But the thing is - we never learned how exactly the Federation of the 23rd or 24th century work specifically either. They're background entities.

You cannot have a character (or entity) have a believable "turn" to the dark side, if you never explained how the "light" side worked (the reason for all that political stuff in the Star Wars prequel). And that - in turn - would mean that they first would need to exlain how the Federation actually works.

That's why it was stupid in DIS season 2 for "Control" to turn evil - before they ever explained how "good" control actually works, how it interacts, what it's goals and means are. It turned into a complete non-entity on screen, nobody - even the biggest DIS fans - actually cared about. Turning the Federation evil would be equally stupid - because they never set up how the Federation works exactly in it's "good" days, and thus how they could actually "change it back to good", other than getting rid of an evil leadership. Which - again - only works in fantasy, not in "realistic" settings.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Even if the V'draysh are the Federation, it doesn't mean they're evil.

For all we know, Craft and his ilk could be the bad guys.

That could well be it.

We just don't know though, and maybe Zora fought Control and lost all hands in battle or something.

 

[Lord Garth]

The only thing that doesn't work with the Federation being the antagonists is that Discovery slower and less powerful than even 24th Century ships and doesn't have software security updates. It wouldn't stand a chance, tactically, in the 33rd Century. Discovery would need something like Zora just to be able to stand on their own two feet if they encounter any major powers. And they're one ship.

Voyager had the advantage of being more advanced than most of the species it ran into in the Delta Quadrant. Discovery might not be so lucky.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Perhaps there are multiple factions, all claiming to be the true Federation?

"I'm the Federation!"
"No, I'M the Federation!"
"I'm the Federation and so's my wife!"

 

[SJGardner]

Perhaps there are multiple factions, all claiming to be the true Federation?

"I'm the Federation!"
"No, I'M the Federation!"
"I'm the Federation and so's my wife!"

Francis: "Whatever happened to the Federation Popular Front, Reg?"
Reg: "He's over there."
All: "SPLITTER!"

 

[Yistaan]

In the real world, gouvernments are made up by real people. Most people aren't "evil", but just flawed. That's why a good gouvernment necessarily has strong institutions with strong guidelines, to stop arbitrariness. If you have an "evil Empire" like in Star Wars - that really only works if the people of it have been conditioned to act evil. And you don't get to change that with single change in leadership personal via a rvolution or something. It took years and years for Germany to get rid of all the Nazis in it's institutions after WWII. Most Eastern European countries still struggle from the power structures from the Soviet era.

Pardoning war criminals, separating parents from kids and putting kids in camps. Drones killing innocents. Whether the people "following orders" are evil or flawed is besides the point. When a government is committing enough evil actions, even if their laws look good on paper something needs to be done.

And no, "evil" governments don't "only work if the people of it have been conditioned to act evil". A lot of the evil going on in the world, and that has gone on in history, is done in the name of and by people who have been raised in religions that on paper look perfectly peaceful. And I saw more evidence of this just this morning in the news, and seemingly every day these days.

People afraid to call a duck a duck even when it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck are just wasting time while governments continue to push the bounds of what "evil" acts can be committed each day. Do the children who were tearfully separated from parents and locked up care whether the people responsible are "flawed" or "evil"? It's gone too far by that point.

 

[Rahul]

Pardoning war criminals, separating parents from kids and putting kids in camps. Drones killing innocents. Whether the people "following orders" are evil or flawed is besides the point. When a government is committing enough evil actions, even if their laws look good on paper something needs to be done.

And no, "evil" governments don't "only work if the people of it have been conditioned to act evil". A lot of the evil going on in the world, and that has gone on in history, is done in the name of and by people who have been raised in religions that on paper look perfectly peaceful. And I saw more evidence of this just this morning in the news, and seemingly every day these days.

People afraid to call a duck a duck even when it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck are just wasting time while governments continue to push the bounds of what "evil" acts can be committed each day. Do the children who were tearfully separated from parents and locked up care whether the people responsible are "flawed" or "evil"? It's gone too far by that point.

You act as if your gouvernment suddenly "turned" evil. It didn't.
The orange man isn't your gouvernment. The Senate is. The House. The State gouvernours. The State Congresses. The district representatives. The Majors. The cities councils. Everyone. Everything the orange man does, is what you, the people, decided and implemented on all levels of gouvernment for him to do, either through direct choice, or through chosen in-action. Nothing of these things you just quoted were actually "his" ideas, but come from deep within what your population has decided over the years it wants to happen. The Republicans took away the votes of millions and millions of people. And it never bothered you. Now, they have free, un-checked reign, without having the majority of the population behind them. Because the other side lacks millions of vote. How surprising.

Y'all Americans all need some serious civics lessons.
And no, watching Star Wars (or, the "Burnham-Rebellion" fight the "Federation-Empire") doesn't count. Nor would it be helpfull. All it would do woult be to re-enforce the stupid fantasy of not being responsible for everything yourself, but to be able to put the blame on some small, mysterious, all-powerfull "tyrannical" gouvernment.

 

[Yistaan]

And it never bothered you.

As someone who is a registered voter, can you please provide evidence of this? You don't have anything because there isn't any. I've been fighting government overreach since the 2003 Iraq War.

Please don't make sweeping generalizations of which you have no evidence for, hmm? Just this offensive comment has honestly given me little reason to pay attention to the rest of your post. Upon apology, I might skim through it.

 

[Rahul]

As someone who is a registered voter, can you please provide evidence of this? You don't have anything because there isn't any. I've been fighting government overreach since the 2003 Iraq War.

Please don't make sweeping generalizations of which you have no evidence for, hmm? Just this offensive comment has honestly given me little reason to pay attention to the rest of your post. Upon apology, I might skim through it.

"Going to vote" isn't "fighting overreach". It's the bare minimum amount expected of interaction. If you have actual goals you should do way more than that.

Also, the "TL,DR"-attitude toward getting at least marginally aware of gouvernment works, and that you want ME to work as a condition for YOU to engage it (even only on a surface "skim" through it) - is exactly what I meant. You're not ruled by a tyrannical gouvernment. You, yourself are responsible for your gouvernment, and you utterly failed to act on that.

 

[Yistaan]

"Going to vote" isn't "fighting overreach". It's the bare minimum amount expected of interaction.

Also, the "TL,DR"-attitude toward getting at least marginally aware of gouvernment works, and that you want ME to work as a condition for YOU to engage it - is exactly what I meant. You're not ruled by a tyrannical gouvernment. You, yourself are responsible for your gouvernment, and you utterly failed to act on that.

Again no evidence which is bizarre considering I was taking part in UC Berkeley political action movements etc.

My wife from Russia also did as much as possible to fight her president.

Have a nice day.

You, yourself are responsible for your gouvernment, and you utterly failed to act on that.

Personal attack post has been reported.

 

[Rahul]

Again no evidence which is bizarre considering I was taking part in UC Berkeley political action movements etc.

Have a nice day.

Evidence you care about the matters:

• Pro: You say you did
• Con: Your direct words here, wanting everything handed to you, and pose pre-conditions and apologies to even read opinions other than yours

IMO the conclusion is pretty evident.
You want to put blame on some evil tyrannical gouvernment. Even going so far that you want fiction to adhere to your fantasy of not being responsible yourself. You want things to change. But you don't want to put more than an afternoons work in it. And you want confirmation of others that it's not you who are responsible. Even from entertainment writers.

I'm free to change my mind. But that's how it looks to me.
Have a nice day, too.

 

[cultcross]

Let's leave the real world politics as to one side as possible, everyone. This is a Discovery forum; except where we are discussing explicit themes of the show, American political discussion is better suited for Misc or TNZ.

 

[Rahul]

On a second note, @Yistaan : I just realized you meant I make you personally responsible for the Actions that take place.
Which, yeah, sorry, I didn't meant to. It's the American people that are responsible for it.
Which, well, you're part of. But I encourage every political action any person takes - taking part in sit-ins and movements certainly is a great start! So you personally might actually do the very right thing, and engage with your gouvernment the way people in a democracy should!

I just find the notion that, well, this entire political quagmire is the result of a "gouvernment turning evil" pretty weird, and nothing more like a scape-coat legend, to be quite frank. The U.S. gouvernment - as it acts, in all it's uglinesssr today - is the representation of what it's people want it to act. But which is still a vast improvement of, say, how it acted in the past.

Yes, the deeds you counted are inherintly evil. But it's not like poll-taxes, segregation, Tuskegee experiments or fuckin' slavery. And not even back then, the US gouvernment could have been decided as "good" or "evil" in it's entirety.


Edit:
Sorry @cultcross, I'm gonna' stop that now!

 

[Yistaan]

On a second note, @Yistaan : I just realized you meant I make you personally responsible for the Actions that take place.
Which, yeah, sorry, I didn't meant to. It's the American people that are responsible for it.

Ok, thanks I accept the apology. @cultcross is right and we should all move on.

There's also the possibility that the V'Draysh are not evil, the short Trek was not clear.

 

[Rahul]

There's also the possibility that the V'Draysh are not evil, the short Trek was not clear.

I really liked 'Calypso' for how it presented neither the V'Draysh nor Craft's people as either good or evil. Craft wasn't evil. And people watching "Betty Boop" aren't necessary either.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

I really liked 'Calypso' for how it presented neither the V'Draysh nor Craft's people as either good or evil. Craft wasn't evil. And people watching "Betty Boop" aren't necessary either.

Boop boop.

Used to love those cartoons.