Discussion in 'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine' started by Qonundrum, Apr 8, 2021.
That's different. That's flat-out war.
How? If people are asked to move, and there is an extremely vast amount of materials to recreate exactly your home, and a massive amount of empty planets, why can't the people on Earth just move?
This is why I agree with the Maquis when they were defending their homes, but not when they started targeting ships and colonies outside their systems. They moved from being defensive to aggressive.
Because Earth has not been ceded to another power in a treaty.
The colonies in the DMZ were. They were subject to the treaty between the Federation and Cardassia. (Even though the colonists made the decision to stay, knowing full well they would be under Cardassian jurisdiction, I'm sure the Federation did encourage them to move, and offered them resettlement on any world they wanted.)
No such treaty ever existed with the Dominion, of cousre. And the Dominion (despite their blustering) never attacked and conquered Earth. So Earth's status was always secure - its citizens don't need to move, because they were never asked nor required to do so, and Earth is so deep inside Federation territory that there's no way anybody's giving it away.
They were still told their homes were going to a foreign power. Homes they built themselves, on planets they've been on for decades in some cases.
And the Dominion DID attack Earth. San Fransisco was hit hard by the Breen. Had that chance warp core realignment with the Klingon ship not happened, the Dominion would very quickly have gained A LOT of ground in Federation space, and their worlds would be overrun by legions of Jem'Hadar.
It was a bad treaty, particularly knowing how treacherous the Cardassian military/government is.
And, knowing that, they still agreed to stay.
As I said, it doesn't excuse what the Cardassian colonists later did, but at NO point did the Federation ever force the (ex-)Federation citizens in the DMZ to do anything against their will.
Yes, perhaps the Federation should have known better how treacherous the Cardassians could be, But so should the colonists.
Ah yes, it's the people being displaced's fault. The Palestinians should just move out of the Gaza Strip too? I mean, they know that they will be living under Israeli rule, right?
*Disclaimer - I am in no way comparing Israel to the Cardassians. For one thing one of them is a fictional race whereas the other is an attempt the redress centuries of oppression of the Jewish people. I do, however, see analogues in the border changes and its impact.*
The people living in these colonies have effectively been shafted by the Fed who have given away their homes with little to no consultation to appease an aggressive force. I would be shocked to not see them stand and fight for the world that they call home.
Did you hear what I just said? I meant that literally. The colonists explicitly agreed to live under Cardassian rule. Haven't you ever seen TNG's "Journey's End"? That set up the whole Maquis situation.
Basically it went like this:
Federation: Look, these are Cardassians, ok? We'll help you move if you want. Hell, we'll re-create all of your homes down to the molecular level on whatever world you choose.
Colonists: No thanks, we'll stay.
Federation: Are you sure? These are CARDASSIANS.
Colonists: Lol, whateverz, we don't care.
To be fair I was slightly rusty on the specifics of the episode so I did a quick read up.
The way the story runs is that the Fed has decided on the colonist's behalf to give their land away.
Everyone's favourite Admiral Resting Bitch Face turns up and tells Picard to evacuate them - indicating a very short notice turn around.
Picard himself points out that these people had been previously displaced from their ancestral homes, so yeah let's displace them again.
My point is that if someone comes along and tells you to get out of your home, you aren't just going to bend over and take it.
Consultation means reasoned and detailed discussions with all stakeholders to ensure as a fair and equitable an outcome as possible.
It does not mean telling them to move, them saying "no", and simply going "well you made your choice. Good luck with the Cardassians"
Admiral Nechayev - was meant to be a joke due to how she is typically played in an antagonistic manner.
Well, technically the colonies did have representatives at the negotiations, they were just outvoted.
These situations are not unknown. Alsace-Lorraine belonged to France from medieval times, but they always had some German cultural elements. When Prussia won the Franco-Prussian War in 1871 they took them. The inhabitants had two choices: relocate to France, or accept German citizenship. When France and her allies won WW I, France took them back. While Germany occupied France from 1940-1944, they became part of Germany again. With the allied victory in 1945, they were part of France once more.
Israel captured the Sinai from Egypt in the 1967 War and put down quite a few Israeli settlements there. As part of the peace agreement, Israel agreed to give the Sinai back to Egypt. The settlers were moved back to Israel proper, not given a choice.
At the end of the Mexican-American War in 1848, Mexico reaffirmed Texas' transfer to the United States and in addition ceded what became the U.S. states of California, Nevada, Utah and most of New Mexico, Arizona, and Colorado, and parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Wyoming. Part of that treaty guaranteed Mexicans remaining in those territories U.S. citizenship, but afterward the U.S. largely ignored the Mexicans and their property claims under Mexican and Spanish law. Also the Indians were citizens under Mexican law, but not under U.S. law until much later.
The theme here is that even if you get a choice to stay when your territory is transfered, don't expect good treatment by the new owners.
I believe that Nechayev said was that there was a representative (i.e. singular) and that they were able to express their concerns but those concerns were overridden for the greater good.
The key for me is that it is a case of "Federation knows best" and that they are effectively playing with people's lives. Can argue a slightly expanded version of Spock's utilitarianism from TWOK (lives of the many etc etc) but I think that it is still morally wrong what was being done.
KKT - I guess this is where we hit your point. You raise a series of instances which this appears to be an allegory of and you could look at this episode as a critique of them. That is what I was trying to get to with my comment about Israel and Palestine earlier - especially due to the colonists attaching a religious/spiritual dimension to the settlement.
War with Cardassia would be an even worse wrong.
Separate names with a comma.