All the best stories are based upon unrealistic things. That's why I'm reading a story of a US Marine who went to Mars to serve on the secret base there.
Never said it was my real life . . . . Trust me, nobody wants a gritty thriller about the shady, duplicitous world of media tie-in writing.
Meh. The operative phrase was "human experience" and the suggestion that wallowing in a particular kind of fantasy is particularly illuminating about our lives and nature. Which, of course, it is not - this is all commercial, popular mass entertainment and as such defaults to one kind or another of gentle, reassuring myths about who and what we are. If grim, dark melodrama were in fact anything other than somehow fundamentally reassuring to folks who like it, there would be no real market for it. As far as such fantasies go, the folks running Trek have never demonstrated the ability - nor been given the leeway by their employers* - to do the kind of stuff that Section 31 represents with nearly the skill or elan that shows like GoT or Westworld do, so what's the point in pissing away that money on imitating the work of their betters? It's like "dining" at MickeyD's. *Yes, yes, DS9 - zzzzzzz.
Translation of the above post: "I personally think it sucks, so why should they even try? Star Trek should only be what I think it should be and nothing else."
What can I say? I couldn't resist evoking the famous coda to TMP: "The human adventure is only beginning." It's a Trekkie thing.
Here is the thing though: While I completely agree with your post, the context in which you set it is 100% wrong. Having a genocidal mass murderer be the head of a gouvernment sanctioned black ops organization is NOT in ANY way "realism" or "inspiration from real life". In fact, this is such a stupid cartoonishly evil act - it's LESS realistic than TNG's "evolutionary enlightnened humans". TNG's humans is straight up scientific gritty realism comüpared to fantasy shit like this. Shit like this has NEVER, EVER happened in real life, or would happen, or has ANY kind of real-world relevance to ever talk about. This is not a commentary on "operation paperclip", or McCarthy'sim, or has really ANYTHING to do with real life. The only real-life example that would come close is what the Allied did to the Nazis. And yeah, they didn't give Hitler the CIA afterwards. And that guy wasn't even a cannibal. This is just straight up stupid.
Off-topic, but of course there were better choices. There is no reason, for example, why they didn't drop the first bomb on un-inhabited area, with the specific statement - the next one's gonna' hit you hard. As it was, it was banking on "we have this bomb, and we have more than one. Trus us on that" - which, yeah, the Japanes of course didn't at first. And even thought the first one was a only-of-a-kind. Until the next one hit. After which they immediately surrendered. If you were invested in keeping civilian casualties low, you could have given them a free demonstration first, and THEN start to target their cities with the next one - they'd probably have given up after two bombs (aka "only" one city instead of two) as well. But there was another reason why they didn't: To impress the Soviets. Because at that time there were already tensions. And the clear message was "don't fuck with us. If we say we gonna' annhilate your cities, we gonna' do that". Which they did. Ironically - this was also the reason why American scientists deserted directly from the Manhatten projects and gave the technology to the Soviets, to create a power-balance. Even though these scientists weren't communists at all, and hated having to spend the rest of their lifesin Russia, they were deadly afraid of how a rightwing American gouvernment would dominate the world with these bombs without any counter-balance. Just another nice example of "showing force" gone wrong. Yes, the two nuclear strikes were both kinda' justified in the war situation. But - as in most politics - going full confrontational also hits yourself HARD in the long-run, because you don't just project strength - you also show the world you can't be trusted with that strength. In this case - that the rest of the world also needs nuclear weapons to protect themselves from the first-strike trigger-happy Americans.
You may be quite incorrect about the real life scenario, but regardless, Sec.31 is headed by Ash Tyler. Whatever part of him is Voq, its not fair to call Voq a mass murderer or genocidal nogoodnik. We don't know if or when Georgiou takes over Sec31 (this is Trek.. we don't even know which VERSION of her takes over) Are you thinking of the local Public Works departments or actual secret police organizations? Because you might want to throttle back. Hitler was dead. They DID give Werner Von Braun the entire US missile and space development program, essentially, except for some side projets like Vanguard that did badly without his input. Von Braun worked hundreds of Jewish slave laborers to death in his underground factories producing V2 rockets that rained hell down on undefended civilians in England. And he was working on an ICBM as part of a larger attempt that would have established nuclear hedgemony. But we needed him and suddenly it wasn't his fault. He never sat on trial at Nuremburg, and we have streets named after him now. Because he was needed. If you don't know history, you can trip over your own feet making bombastic statements.
Compared to Westworld, The Handmaid's Tale and others, Discovery is amateur hour, and I expect the Section 31 show to be full of the same dour emptiness.
Wernher von Braun wasn't the Führer, and didn't personally order genocide or war He had actual assets in his knowledge superseeding everything the Americans had about rockets - he would be MU Stamets, NOT Georgiou von Braun was under HEAVY surveillence by the Intelligence after WWII No one gave him a fucking WEAPON and a list with American names and told him: "You're free to use that on them"! Jesus fucking Christ.