• 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!

Eugenics war (world war 3)

TOS stated that they were one & the same thing, and that's good enough for me.

Oh? To me it sounds that TOS explicitly stated they were two different things - Spock mixed them together, and was in error, and McCoy immediately put the record straight.

It is pretty unlikely that the writer would have been thinking "Hey, it would be cool for this war to have two names!". World War One didn't have two names ("Great War" went completely out of fashion once the new name was invented). World War Two didn't have two names. Why would World War Three have two names?

Yet the writer clearly was thinking in terms of the characters making errors. Indeed, the opening for "Space Seed" consists of nothing but the main characters being in error.

McCoy doesn't "confirm" anything - he doesn't use any positive words after Spock lets slip the erroneous statement. Instead, he offers an alternative term. It's Spock who "confirms" that McCoy is right, and supposedly also that he himself was wrong.

It really amazes me that anybody could read the scene differently. But obviously there is no a priori reason to condemn alternate takes - after all, most Trek continuity, especially within TOS, consists of alternate takes. It's just that the a posteriori reason for keeping WWIII separate from all other conflicts is pretty pressing...

Timo Saloniemi
 
The one negative thing Khan has to say about McGivers is "I hoped you would be stronger" when she balks at Khan's step-by-step murdering of the crew. When the two next meet, Khan's definition for her is "A superior woman!", though.

We never exactly learn what Khan thinks about McGivers' mental abilities, but he seems to admire the fact that she outwitted him, which gives us one definition of "superior" - superior to the superman...

Timo Saloniemi
 
TOS stated that they were one & the same thing, and that's good enough for me.

Oh? To me it sounds that TOS explicitly stated they were two different things - Spock mixed them together, and was in error, and McCoy immediately put the record straight.

I can't agree with your reading of that dialogue, but no matter. To the point I really want to argue:

It is pretty unlikely that the writer would have been thinking "Hey, it would be cool for this war to have two names!". World War One didn't have two names ("Great War" went completely out of fashion once the new name was invented). World War Two didn't have two names. Why would World War Three have two names?

I don't see evidence that ``The Great War'' has fallen out of fashion. I checked Google NGrams to compare "World War I" versus "The Great War" and that at least matches my feeling: while "World War I" is the dominant term from about 1940 to 1960, the two phrases come to about parity from 1960 to 1990, with "The Great War" taking a lead after that. Granted that at least some of those matches for "The Great War" are going to be false positives, but that still supports the claim that "The Great War" is a still-recognized and understood term for the 1914-1918 conflict.

(I also don't see what's extraordinary about a war having multiple names; goodness, we're on the sesquicentennial of the end of the Slavers Treason right now over here in the United States. Then there's India's First War of Independence.)
 
I can't agree with your reading of that dialogue ...

In Bread and Circuses, Spock said that 37 million people died in the third world war, both Riker and Seven said that 600 million died in the third. Now, even if Spock was "somewhat off" in the figure he used (as he was with the death numbers for WWI and WWII) it doesn't sound like the war Spock's referring to as the third world war is the same war as Riker and Seven are referring to.

If the Eugenics Wars claimed 37 million people and WWIII claimed 600 million, then Spock (twice?) got the two different wars confused.

Spock said that the war to which he was referring occurred in the early-mid 1990's. Data said that WWIII ended in the early 2050's. My impression is that Spock meant that the Eugenics Wars ended in the mid 1990's.

:)l
 
World War II had several names, depending on which country you ask.

The majority call it World War II and it lasted from 1939 to 1945 (with the Americans joing late in 1941)

The Russians call it the Great Patriotic War from 1941 to 1945 against Germany. With a small Soviet-Japanese War of 1945 happening soon after.

The Japanese balance it between the Second Sino-Japanese War (1937 to 1945) and the Pacific War (1941 to 1945) with some going back as far as the Japanese Invasion of Manchuria in 1931.


And arguments over what happened in the United States between 1861 and 1865 can get your ears boxed in some parts of the South. The American Civil War. War Between the State, War of Northern Aggression are the three I've heard the most often. (Slavers' Treason is a new one for me though).

Also some debate on if the Seven Years War (1734 to 1763) should be called a World War.
 
To me it sounds that TOS explicitly stated they were two different things - Spock mixed them together, and was in error, and McCoy immediately put the record straight.

I've never interpreted the scene this way, even after reading here that some folks saw it like that. It's pretty out of character for McCoy to pass up a chance to explicitly tell Spock that he was wrong about something. McCoy doesn't say the line in any sort of tone that indicates that he's correcting someone. He's not irritated, or amused, or gloating. He's perfectly calm, indicating that he's expanding on the information Spock just provided, not disagreeing with it. He's just providing a bit more context for what Spock just said.

And considering that Spock had just corrected Kirk on his DY-100/500 error, you'd think that Kirk would also tease Spock a bit on how he's not so infallible as he likes to pretend. Instead, nothing.

It is pretty unlikely that the writer would have been thinking "Hey, it would be cool for this war to have two names!". World War One didn't have two names ("Great War" went completely out of fashion once the new name was invented). World War Two didn't have two names. Why would World War Three have two names?

...So you question why a war would be known under two names, and then immediately name a real-life example of a war known under two names. :rommie: And "The Great War" is obviously still known as an alternate name for WWI, as no one in this thread has gone, "The Great War? What's that?"

Heck, we've even had more recent examples, with Desert Storm/The First Gulf War, which wasn't known as the First Gulf War until the US went back there. Sometimes things bounce around a bit before history is written. I have no problem believing that they were known as the Eugenics Wars while they were going on, and later christened WWIII, or vice versa. It makes perfect sense to me.

McCoy doesn't "confirm" anything - he doesn't use any positive words after Spock lets slip the erroneous statement. Instead, he offers an alternative term. It's Spock who "confirms" that McCoy is right, and supposedly also that he himself was wrong.

I'd have to look at the scene again, but IIRC, Kelley even gives a slight nod after Spock says "...the last of your World Wars." Confirmation isn't always verbal. In fact, in this case the absence of any acknowledgement of an error is evidence that no error occurred. If Spock had really made a blunder like that, do you really think he wouldn't say something like, "Thank you, Doctor. I was unaware that you had added history to your areas of expertise" in a withering tone?

It really amazes me that anybody could read the scene differently.

Well, hey, I'm amazed you could interpret a scene where Sulu explicitly states that Chekov doesn't have a brother as evidence that he does, so I guess we're even. One thing I've learned here is that you & I will rarely interpret Trek in the same way.

In Bread and Circuses, Spock said that 37 million people died in the third world war, both Riker and Seven said that 600 million died in the third. Now, even if Spock was "somewhat off" in the figure he used (as he was with the death numbers for WWI and WWII) it doesn't sound like the war Spock's referring to as the third world war is the same war as Riker and Seven are referring to.

Well, if I had to bet on Spock, Riker, or Seven being right about a bit of factual data, I know who I'm putting my money on. :)
 
I would gather the 37 million were those that died from combat while the remaining of the 600 million were fallout, famine, and disease. Either during or in the aftermath as a result of the war. If the two wars are the same war. Something happened in the 2050s that got everything all screwed up before Earth became United Earth by a century later.
 
My impression is that Spock meant that the Eugenics Wars ended in the mid 1990's.

What Spock is stating, grammatically speaking, is that the mid-1990s fall within the period known as "your last so-called world war". That is, the last World War covers the mid-1990s (which is the timespan of interest here because that's when DY-100 went out of production and probably also out of regular operations) and possibly expands beyond it in both directions.

It's pretty out of character for McCoy to pass up a chance to explicitly tell Spock that he was wrong about something.

:D

He's perfectly calm, indicating that he's expanding on the information Spock just provided, not disagreeing with it.

Mmm. My take on that is "gently chiding", which is another McCoy forte.

Heck, we've even had more recent examples

But those do not deal with "systematic" naming - the issue here specifically is a series of wars known by a common name, "World Wars". Once the series gets going, separate names should fall into disfavor, just like "The Great War" has done (except for insignificant usage by random people - hey, there still are Zoroastrians and Druids, too! Doesn't mean that they would matter in a world of sevenish billion people.)

Why would McCoy be a "Great War buff"? The whole thing is in his truly distant past, unlike WWI today. It apparently didn't touch his native country at all (unless his great-great-grandparents lived in the Old World, which we can certainly speculate upon). It's not particularly relevant to his profession or known worldviews.

Interestingly, McCoy responds with plural - "The last of your so-called World War" = "The Eugenics Wars". Does he mean that all the World Wars have been renamed "Eugenics Wars"? That would make a lot of sense - WWII was about eugenics, the aftermath of WWIII has been established to have been about eugenics (the Colonel Green thing in ENT), and we (and they!) could easily overlook WWI not being all that much about eugenics insofar as it was all about colonialism and racism.

[quote If Spock had really made a blunder like that, do you really think he wouldn't say something like, "Thank you, Doctor...[/quote]

He does say "Indeed". ;)

And the entire teaser consists of the main heroes making mistakes, the immediate corrections coming as simple statements of fact rather than gleeful tirades. Spock: "Can't be Earth ship"; Uhura: "Sends Earth Morse". Kirk is smug; Spock comments; Kirk admits to schadenfreude. But that's it - its covered now, even though the mistakes and corrections continue.

- Kirk: "DY-500"; Spock: "No, DY-100"
- Kirk: "Is derelict"; McCoy: "Life onboard"
- McCoy: "Can't be human"; events: "Is human"

Adding Spock: "Last World War"; McCoy "Eugenics Wars" would simply be following form.

I would gather the 37 million were those that died from combat while the remaining of the 600 million were fallout, famine, and disease.

Yup. The whole concept of saying "this many died in this conflict" is a bit odd in itself. People die all the time: lethality of dying is 100%. People don't stop dying just because it's war. How many died in WWI? Well, everybody. How many died out of WWI? Debate rages. Would there have been Spanish Flu without the war? Would there have been a more effective response to it if not for war propaganda and censorship? Which diseases were brought to Europe (or Africa and Asia) by troop movements alone, and which would have arrived regardless?

Other reasons for the discrepancy can be postulated, though. Spock might have been speaking of a different war. Research (including time travel) might have revealed new things about the era between TOS and TNG. Research (including time travel) may have contributed to a change in casualties...

Timo Saloniemi
 
Spock said that 37 million people died in the third world war, both Riker and Seven said that 600 million died in the third
Well, if I had to bet on Spock, Riker, or Seven being right about a bit of factual data, I know who I'm putting my money on.
Earth is Riker's home world. Riker was previously shown to be knowledgeably about Earth's history, Spock wasn't.

Spock is a science officer, not a historian.

:cool:
 
...It's not as if even Kirk would know all that much about Earth history, beyond his special interest in the 19th century West.

Spock flunked not just Wild West but Nazi Germany and Great Depression as well. Then again, Kirk knew practically squat even about current Vulcan culture, save for recognizing T'Pau. But Spock had a human mother, while Kirk's known relatives didn't include any Vulcans.

Timo Saloniemi
 
...In Bread and Circuses, Spock said that 37 million people died in the third world war, both Riker and Seven said that 600 million died in the third. Now, even if Spock was "somewhat off" in the figure he used (as he was with the death numbers for WWI and WWII)...
Spock's seemingly erroneous figures for WW1 and WW2 prompted me to do a tiny bit of Googling - this is what Memory Alpha has speculated on the subject:

Spock's figure of six million deaths falls short of the sixteen million casualties of World War I, but may be a reference to seven million civilian deaths or the number of deaths as a result of "despotism" (link)

In TOS: "Bread and Circuses", Spock states that eleven million people died in World War II. This, however, severely contradicts current data, which places the death toll anywhere from a low of twenty million (if only military is counted) to a high of over seventy million (if military and civilians are counted). Most counts settle on around fifty million or so.

Spock may have been referring solely to civilian casualties as a result of "slavery" and "despotism" rather than the total war itself. 11 million is a number frequently given for civilian deaths solely from Nazi policies. This might explain the six million figure he gave for World War I, too, as that is about an average (slightly on the low side) estimate of civilian deaths out of a World War I total of about sixteen million. (link)

Figures based on despotism? Eh, maybe! ;)

What I would like to know is, where did the script writer get these figures from? Was information on the World Wars so drastically out of whack in the 1960s? I'm not sure what research is available on this subject, but it would be interesting to know!

EDIT
Hmm, perhaps 6 million is the number of Allied deaths?
https://www.forces-war-records.co.uk/soldiers-died-in-the-great-war
 
Soviet/Russian deaths were not common knowledge in the West in the 1960s far various reasons.
 
Does that make sense?

I understand where you're coming from.

In my case I got past it and don't give it a thought, but I was about 4 or 5 when I started watching Star Trek. It didn't matter then. As I got a bit older in the 80s I watch a lot of Twilight Zone and the Planet of the Apes movies and they had many future stories set ten or more years before I was watching them. After that it didn't bother me anymore. Plus, don't forget 2001, 2010, and many other things that haven't happened. It's actually very interesting at times to see what people would have thought the future held.

A little further of the topic but I was watching an episode of Outer Limits and they had phones with viewscreens to see who you were talking to but they still had rotary dials. How about that combination?


Back on topic:

World war 3 is also known as the Eugenics wars because of the many different theaters of action that it entailed and that many of them were caused by the eugenically enhanced individuals abound in that time.

Riker's only interest in history is to trick women into thinking he's deep. His history book was written by famed 20th century historian and polymath Cliff Claven.

I trust Mr. Spock's history much more that anyone else's.
 
The same Spock who said that Nazi Germany was the most efficient country in Earth's history?

:)
 
The same Spock who said that Nazi Germany was the most efficient country in Earth's history?

:)


Gill the "historian" said that.

Spock merely didn't argue the point. :)

KIRK: Gill. Gill, why did you abandon your mission? Why did you interfere with this culture?
GILL: Planet fragmented. Divided. Took lesson from Earth history.
KIRK: But why Nazi Germany? You studied history. You knew what the Nazis were.
GILL: Most efficient state Earth ever knew.
SPOCK: Quite true, Captain. That tiny country, beaten, bankrupt, defeated, rose in a few years to stand only one step away from global domination.
KIRK: But it was brutal, perverted, had to be destroyed at a terrible cost. Why that example?
SPOCK: Perhaps Gill felt that such a state, run benignly, could accomplish its efficiency without sadism.
KIRK: Why, Gill? Why?
GILL: Worked. At first it worked. Then Melakon began take over. Used the. Gave me the drug.

It's all Melakon's fault.



Then there's this outake that didn't make it to the final cut:

KIRK: Gill. Gill, why did you abandon your mission? Why did you interfere with this culture?
GILL: Planet fragmented. Divided. Took lesson from Earth history.
KIRK: But why Nazi Germany?
KIRK: But it was brutal, perverted, had to be destroyed at a terrible cost. Why that example?
SPOCK: Perhaps the costuming department thought we could produce this episode within the budget.
KIRK: Why, Theiss? Why?
 
Last edited:
No all it says in my fiction I trust one fictional character over another.
You say trust the writer's facts as if there were actual facts involved. :lol:
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top