• 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!

How bad of a tyrant was Khan Noonien Singh?

Seeing Khan mentioned on the level of Hitler, even though Khan’s rule was supposedly peaceful yet authoritarian, does seem contradictory to me. How does one reconcile the romanticism of him as just a strong and forceful leader and military commander in the 23rd century, and the realization that he was a ruthless tyrant in the 24th century? Did the events of “Space Seed” & TWOK influence perception of him afterwards? Or was it intellectual dishonesty on the part of Kirk’s crew as to what Khan really was?
The "romanticism" expressed in Space Seed is more related to the fact that Khan was the most effective of the Augment leaders. I imagine all the others were needlessly brutal to their populaces resulting in the people rising up against them and/or were provoking the world superpowers at a stage when they hadn't yet consolidated their powerbases and so it took a well placed aerial bomb strike or special forces team to quickly neutralize them. Meanwhile Khan kept his own people relatively placated so that there was no active resistance from within and knew not to provoke other more powerful nations until he had consolidated his powerbase and as a result said superpowers considered him a low priority threat until the purge of Augments began.

Also, I imagine Khan's temperament was probably on a more even keel than other Augments. we see this to some degree in Space Seed, where when he holds McCoy by the throat with the scalpel to it and McCoy says "either choke me or slit my throat" and Khan chuckles and says he likes a brave man and lets go of McCoy. I imagine other Augment leaders in that position would like would respond "fine" and both choke and slit McCoy's throat.

None of this negates how evil Khan was. It just means he was smart about how he applied his evil.
 
It's not remotely canon, of course, but IDW comics did a Khan miniseries around the time Into Darkness came out and showed a pretty ugly take on the Eugenics Wars. Essentially Khan and his fellow Augments declared war on a chaotic world and ultimately seized power after detonating several strategically-placed nukes across the globe (surviving nations, be quiet or you're next). If only the rest of humanity hadn't wanted that freedom nonsense, there would have been total order under Augment rule...
 
A recent rewatching of “Space Seed” inspired me to make this topic.

In the 23rd century, Khan was considered to be the best of tyrants and the most dangerous, and was the last tyrant overthrown. He is also known to speak in military terms frequently, considered to have a magnetic personality, and he personally considered himself a prince.

Which he did - due in part to Ricardo Montalban's spot-on performance. A script can only go so far just as much as actors can take a script to new directions.

His rule in the mid-1990s was synonymous with severely curtailed personal freedoms,

Interesting as to what those might entail.

no internal massacres,

Ditto. There's more going on than just the previous point.

and no wars of aggression until other governments moved in to overthrow him.

Which is typical for most governments.

He and his fellow Augments (some of whom were military commanders, according to Archer in “Hatchery”) were considered to be a bunch of Alexander the Greats & Napoleans capable of both offering courage to the rest of the world and following the rules of war.

I believe the current colloquialism calls it "member berries". Which actually sounds like quite the double entendre after giving the phrase upon second glance...

On one hand, Khan ruled 1/4 of the planet and controlled 40 nations, from North Africa & the Middle East to Asia, ruling over millions. On the other, his fellow Augments began warring with each other after they took power, and after other nations joined in, it resulted in at least 37 million deaths, with entire populations bombed out and nearly causing a new Dark Age, and Khan fleeing Earth on the SS Botany Bay with over 80 fellow Augments and they were considered to be war criminals by the governments of Earth.

I never read any of the books or saw the spinoffs that went into detail. "Space Seed" did enough of a job, though I can understand why there's a desire to flesh out that era more.

Spock is shocked that a dictator like Khan is admired by Starfleet officers, particularly Kirk, Bones and Scotty. Scotty himself admits has a soft spot for him.

Not just fascinated? But season one Spock was comparatively emotional. It's actually a great scene, reflecting on the raw complexity of the human condition - and a reminder that rarely is anything so simple, despite romanticizing otherwise. Even for Spock, who may be aware of the concept but not the execution of it.

Note that this is the same era where 20th century humans are considered to be extremely primitive and not as evolved as 23rd century humans. Kirk chooses to pardon Khan by dropping all charges against him and allows him to colonize Ceti Alpha V at the end of “Space Seed,”

Which is impressive for two reasons:

1. Given the relative punishment told for such a colonization process, it seemed a not unreasonable exchange.
2. He did give Khan free access to every technical manual. But if Khan wasn't a baddie then the episode would be mighty boring...

even after Khan holds the crew hostage and attempts to kill Kirk and the rest of the Enterprise by blowing up the ship. Meanwhile, Chekov considers Khan to be a criminal in TWOK. And Spock later comes to see Khan as brilliant and ruthless, as he explains to the crew of the Enterprise of the Kelvinverse.

Khan wanting to blow up the ship seemed almost uncharacteristic for Khan, and it's never developed except as a throwaway plot point. I never got the impression of Khan's ego being momentarily defeated, if that's even a possible reason?

Individual crewmembers, despite being overall loyal, may still disagree on individual issues (harking back but in a new way the same complex multifaceted human condition).

By the time of the 24th century, the perception of Khan has clearly changed. Picard shows concern over the rise of another Hitler or Khan on an endangered planet in “A Matter of Time”:

Of which said neodictator couldn't do much unless they found a way to contact a ship or if a ship, in such a teensy tiny galaxy, wanders by. It's possible but the law of probability renders it far less likely.

Seeing Khan mentioned on the level of Hitler, even though Khan’s rule was supposedly peaceful yet authoritarian, does seem contradictory to me. How does one reconcile the romanticism of him as just a strong and forceful leader and military commander in the 23rd century, and the realization that he was a ruthless tyrant in the 24th century? Did the events of “Space Seed” & TWOK influence perception of him afterwards? Or was it intellectual dishonesty on the part of Kirk’s crew as to what Khan really was?

Excellent question. I believe this - in part - harks back to the multifaceted issue above and how some personal freedoms were clearly curtailed... but clearly not others. As for the rest, Kirk and crew might be naive over Khan's ambitions and it took Spock to raise the notion of 90 potential Napoleons might be dozing in that ship...

After TWOK, that would definitely set the history books more concisely for Picard to be sufficiently worried about. Picard did seem rather learned at times in TNG, but he's a walking database of centuries' worth of information? It's not easy to work in some continuity canon memberberry thing over this. Maybe it's required reading at the academy, like how we learned various big history events from 100 years ago. I guess.
 
It's just poor writing. Khan didn't intend to kill anyone on the Enterprise in "Space Seed" as long as they submitted to him as their leader. He didn't eradicate the Reliant's crew in the second movie, though there would have been no consequences for him doing so. He didn't even wipe out Kirk's landing party on Regula, instead leaving them to the punishment he deemed fitting. Khan is authoritarian - something still eminently worth fighting against - not genocidal.

To be fair, he did slaughter all the scientists on the Regula 1 space station, and quite savagely:

"He tortured those people. But none of those people would tell him anything. He went wild. He slit their throats."

Granted, the Khan of WRATH OF KHAN is a good deal more crazed and obsessed with vengeance than the Khan we saw in "Space Seed."
 
Khan wanting to blow up the ship seemed almost uncharacteristic for Khan
Or Khan didn't intend to take it to the point the Enterprise actually exploded, it was just an attempt to gain control though the employment of a threat. Except Kirk refused to play.,
"He tortured those people. But none of those people would tell him anything. He went wild. He slit their throats."
But remember at that time Terrell was under Khan's control, so was he telling the truth as to what happen, or was he telling Kirk what Khan wanted Kirk to hear?

Were the dead bodies deliberately staged to have Kirk then have to locate Genesis (which Khan couldn't do), to have Terrell then know where Genesis was, so Terrell could then tell Khan?

Spock: "He is quite intelligent."

Dune: "Plans, within plans, within plans."
 
Last edited:
Just read the 5 comics, they portray Khan as a benevolent dictator, ruthless and only killing as a means to an end. The other augmens were ' bad', ruthless, greedy and killing for the sake of it. They get round the whitening of Khan with the only logical explaination lol
 
Were the dead bodies deliberately staged to have Kirk then have to locate Genesis (which Khan couldn't do), to have Terrell then know where Genesis was, so Terrell could then tell Khan?
I don't see how that's particularly relevant. All of the people on Regula One were still dead, and killed in a particularly gruesome way. The motivation doesn't matter too much.
 
Here is the briefing room scene again:

[Briefing room]

(A large picture of their guest in on a screen)
KIRK: Name, Khan, as we know him today. (Spock changes the picture) Name, Khan Noonien Singh.
SPOCK: From 1992 through 1996, absolute ruler of more than a quarter of your world. From Asia through the Middle East.
MCCOY: The last of the tyrants to be overthrown.
SCOTT: I must confess, gentlemen. I've always held a sneaking admiration for this one.
KIRK: He was the best of the tyrants and the most dangerous. They were supermen, in a sense. Stronger, braver, certainly more ambitious, more daring.
SPOCK: Gentlemen, this romanticism about a ruthless dictator is
KIRK: Mister Spock, we humans have a streak of barbarism in us. Appalling, but there, nevertheless.
SCOTT: There were no massacres under his rule.
SPOCK: And as little freedom.
MCCOY: No wars until he was attacked.

So Khan ruled a large region, approximately a quarter of earth (or more likely a quarter of the land area of Earth).

Earth has a surface area of about 510,072,000 square kilometers or 196,940,000 square miles, and a land area of about 148,940,000 square kilometers or 57,510,000 square miles, which is 0.292017 of the total surface area. So if Khan ruled a quarter of the total surface area of Earth he would have ruled almost all of the land area. Thus Khan probably ruled a quarter of the land area of Earth and thus an area of about 37,2350,000 square kilometers or about 14,377,500 square miles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

So Khan's realm would have been somewhat larger than the British Empire at its height about 1920, when the British Empire had an area of 35,500,000 square kilometers or 13,710,000 square miles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_empires

Asia covers an area of 44,579,000 square kilometres (17,212,000 sq mi), about 30% of Earth's total land area and 8.7% of the Earth's total surface area.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asia

Size of Africa:

At about 30.3 million km2 (11.7 million square miles) including adjacent islands, it covers 6% of Earth's total surface area and 20% of its land area.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa

Khan's state could have been entirely within Asia. But since Spock said:

From Asia through the Middle East.

I deduce that Khan's realm probably included African regions that count as part of the Middle East, thus making Khan's share of Asia somewhat smaller.

The Middle East is a transcontinental region which includes Western Asia (although generally excluding the Caucasus) and all of Egypt (which is mostly in North Africa). The term has come into wider usage as a replacement of the term Near East (as opposed to the Far East) beginning in the early 20th century. The broader concept of the "Greater Middle East" (or Middle East and North Africa) also adds the Maghreb, Sudan, Djibouti, Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and sometimes even Central Asia and Transcaucasia into the region. The term "Middle East" has led to some confusion over its changing definitions.

So Khan's realm almost certainly included Egypt, and might have included some or all of Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Sudan, Djibouti, & Somalia, and possibly parts of other African countries. So possible maps of Khan's realm could vary a lot in how much of Asia and Africa, and which regions of those continents, are included, though Khan would probably always rule more of Asia than Africa.

Spock said;

SPOCK: From 1992 through 1996, absolute ruler of more than a quarter of your world. From Asia through the Middle East.

Earlier, Spock said:

SPOCK: There is that possibility, Captain. His age would be correct. In 1993, a group of these young supermen did seize power simultaneously in over forty nations.
KIRK: Well, they were hardly supermen. They were aggressive, arrogant. They began to battle among themselves.
SPOCK: Because the scientists overlooked one fact. Superior ability breeds superior ambition.
KIRK: Interesting, if true. They created a group of Alexanders, Napoleons.

Note that groups of young supermen took power in over forty nations in 1993, the year after Khan gained power in his realm in 1992. I don't know where those supermen were in the spectrum between enemies of Khan and followers of Khan, but apparently the countries they ruled remained independent of Khan's state. Khan's realm was not one of those over forty nations, but was separate from them.

At the present time (2020) there are 54 nations in Africa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_in_Africa

There are 48 countries in Asia, 45 countries in Europe, 23 countries in North America, 12 countries in South America, and 14 countries in Oceania/Australia.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_continents

I imagine that the Supermen may have taken over countries in someor all of the continents of Africa, Asia, Oceania/Australia, Europe, and North and South America, and there may have also been countries ruled by ordinary humans in some or all of those continents.

Khan apparently was not aggressive during his rule from 1992 to 1996:

MCCOY: No wars until he was attacked.

Khan may have been attacked by other supermen ruling other countries and/or by normal humans, but since Khan was:

MCCOY: The last of the tyrants to be overthrown.

Khan must have been overthrown by ordinary humans during what Spock called:

SPOCK: There was the war to end tyranny. Many considered that a noble effort.

The Eugenics Wars happened in the 1990s in the calendar used in "Space Seed":

SPOCK: No such vessel listed. Records of that period are fragmentary, however. The mid=1990s was the era of your last so-called World War.
MCCOY: The Eugenics Wars.

And the Eugencis Wars were also Earth's last world War in the history sources used by Spock.

How bloody did a war have to be for Spock to consider it a world war?

In "Bread and Circuses" Spock listed some world wars which happened on Earth before Earth became peaceful.

MERIK: There's been no war here for over four hundred years, Jim. Could, let's say, your land of that same era make that same boast? I think you can see why they don't want to have their stability contaminated by dangerous ideas of other ways and other places.
SPOCK: Interesting, and given a conservative empire, quite understandable.
MCCOY: Are you out of your head?
SPOCK: I said I understood it, Doctor. I find the checks and balances of this civilisation quite illuminating.
MCCOY: Next he'll be telling us he prefers it over Earth history.
SPOCK: They do seem to have escaped the carnage of your first three world wars, Doctor.
MCCOY: They have slavery, gladiatorial games, despotism.
SPOCK: Situations quite familiar to the six million who died in your first world war, the eleven million who died in your second, the thirty seven million who died in your third. Shall I go on?

So a war with as "few" as six million dead can count as a world war in Earth's history according to Spock..

In Star trek: First Contact Picard's Enterprise travels back in time to:

DATA: April fourth, two thousand sixty-three.

Which is:

DATA: According to our astrometric readings we're in the mid twenty-first century. From the radioactive isotopes in the atmosphere I would estimate we have arrived approximately ten years after the Third World War.
RIKER: Makes sense. Most of the major cities have been destroyed. There are few governments left. Six hundred million dead. No resistance.

So the Third World War in the list used in the era of TNG happened about 2053 in the calendar used in the era of First Contact. And it had one hundred times as many people killed as in Spock's First World War, so it certainly counted as one of the world wars on the list that Spock used. There was no way that Spock would omit a war which killed 600,000,000 people and left most major cities destroyed from his list of Earth's world wars.

Since Spock mentioned:

the carnage of your first three world wars,
.

and:

the thirty seven million who died in your third. Shall I go on?

Spock's list of Earth's world wars probably includes a fourth world war and possibly more.

Since the 600,000,000 killed in First Contact's third world war were over 16 times as numerous as the 37,000,000 killed in Spock's third world war, Earth history must list different numbers of world wars in the era of TOS and the era of TNG. At least one war on the TOS era list must have been dropped from the TNG era list, making the fourth or later world war in the TOS era list the Third World War in the TNG era list.

The importance of making first contact is explained to Cochrane in First Contact:

RIKER: It is one of the pivotal moments in human history, Doctor. You get to make first contact with an alien race, and after you do, everything begins to change.
LAFORGE: Your theories on warp drive allow fleets of starships to be built and mankind to start exploring the Galaxy.
TROI: It unites humanity in a way no one ever thought possible when they realise they're not alone in the universe. Poverty, disease, war. They'll all be gone within the next fifty years.

So there will be peace on Earth after some time before 2113 in the First Contact calendar. There could be a number of wars after First Contact, but probably none of them will be bad enough to count as world wars.

In the TNG episode "Up the Long Ladder":

DATA: In the early twenty-second century, Earth was recovering from World War Three. A major philosopher of the period was Liam Dieghan, founder of the Neo-Transcendentalists, who advocated a return to a simpler life in which one lived in harmony with nature, and learned under her gentle tutelage.

So apparently Earth was not devastated by a fourth world war in the history used by Data, which indicates that none of the wars happening after the Third World War of First Contact were anywhere near as devastating as that one. Unless there was a really big world war after First Contact, but the list of world wars used in the second season of TNG listed a world war after the one on First Contact as the third one, thus making three separate lists listing different Earth World wars.

So when did the Eugenics wars happen in relation to the Third World War of First Contact?

Spock described the Eugenics Wars as:

SPOCK: No such vessel listed. Records of that period are fragmentary, however. The mid=1990s was the era of your last so-called World War.

So the Eugenics Wars must either be identical with the Third World War of First Contact or else have happened after First Contact.

Spock says:

SPOCK: Your Earth was on the verge of a dark ages. Whole populations were being bombed out of existence. A group of criminals could have been dealt with far more efficiently than wasting one of their most advanced spaceships.

That is certainly consistent with most major cities being destroyed and 600,000,000 dead. So the Eugenics Wars, Earth's last world war, are probably identical with the Third World War of First Contact.

But the Eugenics Wars are said to have happened in the 1990s in the calendar used in "Space seed", while the Third World war of First Contact happened about 2053 in the calendar used in First Contact. How can that be? Obviously different Earth calendars counting the years from different times must be used in the eras of TOS and First Contact.

Since there is no proof that either the "Space Seed" calendar or the First Contact calendar uses Anno Domini dating, there is no way to know whether the war in "Space Seed" and in First Contact happens before AD 1996 or after AD 2053.

So why do members of Kirk's crew have some admiration for Khan while Picard compares him to Hitler in some way, probably in the disastrous results of Khan's actions?

It may be a change in attitudes several generations later. And in my opinion it may be due to Khan "pushing the button" in the war in which he was overthrown. Khan's radar may have detected hundreds of missiles with atomic warheads headed for his cities and Khan may have launched a strike with tens or hundreds of nuclear warheads in retaliation.

And possibly members of Starfleet in Picard's era think that such actions are more horrifying than Starfleet members in Kirk's era did, when Starfleet had a General Order 24.
 
Last edited:
Quark's time trip back to 1947 must have changed the timeline more than we thought...good thing Kirk went back to 1968 to work with Gary Seven who'd change the timeline again so Khan and super augments never got a foothold, avoiding that WW3, and forcing Khan to flee Earth. I'm dizzy. :wtf:
 

I think Spock is just a bit spotty with Human history. He says 'Last World War' but McCoy interjects with a correction - the Eugenics Wars. And since Spock was going to 'go on' in his list, I feel like the WW3 in FC is the proper nuclear WW3 while the Eugenics War was just a Post-Soviet mess, filled with Supermen that still could had killed 37 or so million (note that Spocks casualty numbers are very, very low, mostly just military figures, and even then, they're shockingly low - WW1 took out double that, WW2 again double, 'WW3' might be accurate if Spock is still using that for the Eugenics war....

As for the 'countries' thing - there's no telling what those countries were. The Augments could had carved out their own of any size, and all we have is a range on Khan's state - the Middle East and Asia.

Smashing together what I barely remember from books and the like, the Eugenics war went down like this: Mankind goes into genetic science, develops supermen for their armies, but then the USSR broke apart and their supermen basically carve up the Geopolitical Second and Third World. The Geopolitical First World - "NATO and CO, the West, somesuch" fights back, first the most cruel of these supermen and to impose order (Think of Operation Steppe Shield), and then takes out Khan who ruled something from India to Turan to Morocco.

A recent rewatching of “Space Seed” inspired me to make this topic.

In the 23rd century, Khan was considered to be the best of tyrants and the most dangerous, and was the last tyrant overthrown. He is also known to speak in military terms frequently, considered to have a magnetic personality, and he personally considered himself a prince.

His rule in the mid-1990s was synonymous with severely curtailed personal freedoms, no internal massacres, and no wars of aggression until other governments moved in to overthrow him. He and his fellow Augments (some of whom were military commanders, according to Archer in “Hatchery”) were considered to be a bunch of Alexander the Greats & Napoleans capable of both offering courage to the rest of the world and following the rules of war. On one hand, Khan ruled 1/4 of the planet and controlled 40 nations, from North Africa & the Middle East to Asia, ruling over millions. On the other, his fellow Augments began warring with each other after they took power, and after other nations joined in, it resulted in at least 37 million deaths, with entire populations bombed out and nearly causing a new Dark Age, and Khan fleeing Earth on the SS Botany Bay with over 80 fellow Augments and they were considered to be war criminals by the governments of Earth.

Spock is shocked that a dictator like Khan is admired by Starfleet officers, particularly Kirk, Bones and Scotty. Scotty himself admits has a soft spot for him. Note that this is the same era where 20th century humans are considered to be extremely primitive and not as evolved as 23rd century humans. Kirk chooses to pardon Khan by dropping all charges against him and allows him to colonize Ceti Alpha V at the end of “Space Seed,” even after Khan holds the crew hostage and attempts to kill Kirk and the rest of the Enterprise by blowing up the ship. Meanwhile, Chekov considers Khan to be a criminal in TWOK. And Spock later comes to see Khan as brilliant and ruthless, as he explains to the crew of the Enterprise of the Kelvinverse.

By the time of the 24th century, the perception of Khan has clearly changed. Picard shows concern over the rise of another Hitler or Khan on an endangered planet in “A Matter of Time”:

Seeing Khan mentioned on the level of Hitler, even though Khan’s rule was supposedly peaceful yet authoritarian, does seem contradictory to me. How does one reconcile the romanticism of him as just a strong and forceful leader and military commander in the 23rd century, and the realization that he was a ruthless tyrant in the 24th century? Did the events of “Space Seed” & TWOK influence perception of him afterwards? Or was it intellectual dishonesty on the part of Kirk’s crew as to what Khan really was?

While Khan can't be a genocidal dictator, that doesn't make him anymore tolerable. He seems like the type of man that ruled with 'my way or the prison way' instead of 'my way or the bullet', probably trying to re-educate and re-align mankind or even enact forced evolution. Kirk's time might not bat an eye at that, but Picard's would see it just as ghastly as any other from Mao to Pol Pot to Stalin to Khan. And we have little details on Khan's empire: plenty an empire has expanded from being on the 'defensive' - Rome comes to mind, and even Mongolia would wait until they pissed off some King with haughty messengers demanding tribute to have a valid excuse before coming in. Kirk's time might have brought it, while Picard wouldn't, and Khan's hands may still had been bloody indeed.

Honestly in the end it relies less on canon and more on guesses. But even with the Canon numbers - around 37 million dead, Kirk's statements, the like - I wouldn't want to see a Khan now or in our 90s, that's for sure. 37 million dead is far more dead than the total of every Post-Soviet conflict in the 90s combined; those must had been rightly hellish times. Oh, and I think a book has the Enterprise carrier sunk in a battle against Khan, so there's that, too.
 
I think Spock is just a bit spotty with Human history. He says 'Last World War' but McCoy interjects with a correction - the Eugenics Wars.
McCoy isn't correcting Spock, he's agreeing with him and providing more information. Watch that scene again. DeForest Kelley nods slightly just before he says "The Eugenics Wars."

Besides, TOS hardly ever presented Mr. Spock as being spotty with his facts. At the beginning of the episode he corrects Kirk on the exact class of the Botany Bay. It's a pretty safe assumption that if Spock states something, it's accurate.
 
Blah. Everybody is correcting others in that scene, and gracefully admitting to being dead wrong. It's a running gag there. McCoy just nods at Spock being wrong again, and Spock responds to the correction with his customary "Of course". :vulcan:

His rule in the mid-1990s was synonymous with severely curtailed personal freedoms, no internal massacres, and no wars of aggression until other governments moved in to overthrow him.

That wouldn't be a "war of aggression", defending against an invasion by muggles!

What is actually said that he had / there were "no wars until he was attacked". We don't know by whom - but be it fellow Augments or muggles, it either gave him carte blanche to launch whatever wars he deemed necessary, or then prompted him to use minimum force to solve his problems. We really can't tell which...

...Except from the context, where our heroes are listing his positive or redeeming factors, not the damning ones. So erring on the side of the latter seems prudent here.

it resulted in at least 37 million deaths

Only in the dubious interpretation where Khan was involved in WWIII to which that figure applies, even though it's painfully clear that WWIII took place long after Khan departed this Earth (it's spoken of as a rather singular event when given a timestamp in ST:FC, not a protracted affair spanning half a century - and rightly so, considering all the nuking).

But since we have two different figures for WWIII already, it really doesn't matter: perhaps nobody died but those naturally slated to, perhaps five billion died but some of those don't count.

By the time of the 24th century, the perception of Khan has clearly changed. Picard shows concern over the rise of another Hitler or Khan on an endangered planet in “A Matter of Time”

How is that a changed perception? Kirk never says he wouldn't have admired Hitler, too. (He is a student of John Gill, and hasn't lived through "Patterns of Force" yet.)

Picard just isn't Kirk. He's Spock instead.

My take on Spock's number of deaths from the three world wars: Spock was clearly responding about the political system of controlled slavery and gladiatorial combat and not military combat deaths.

This makes plenty of sense, considering how Spock's numbers are on the low side even when written by folks who actually lived through the first couple of World Wars. Slavery was a massive factor in WWII; authoritarian rule by idiots in WWI. The deaths directly attributable to those could be told apart from other types of death if one wished.

It sure is, but what's that have to do with the "Into Darkness" quote? It claims Khan kills people for being less than superior, not for being disloyal.

Sorry to quote outside of the actual argument, but this is a significant point. Many a "claim" is indeed made in ST:ID. They are made by the villain of the story. He tells our heroes who Khan is, while it is very clear the heroes themselves have little initial knowledge of Khan (just as was true in "Space Seed") and have little time or resources to find anything impartial on him (unllike in "Space Seed").

Khan outside ST:ID lacks a genocidal mindset - he wants to rule rather than kill. More significantly, Khan in ST:ID fails to demonstrate any genocidal mindset, on the level of actions or plans or boasts. So probably the villain of the piece was lying to the heroes about Khan there.

Spock the Younger buys into those lies. Spock in his Prime does not repeat the lies. He cannot predict that his less mature self would have been told the lies and is in need of being contradicted.

There need be no contradiction there, then. Just a lie or two from a known lying scumbag.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Last edited:
I think Spock is just a bit spotty with Human history. He says 'Last World War' but McCoy interjects with a correction - the Eugenics Wars. And since Spock was going to 'go on' in his list, I feel like the WW3 in FC is the proper nuclear WW3 while the Eugenics War was just a Post-Soviet mess, filled with Supermen that still could had killed 37 or so million (note that Spocks casualty numbers are very, very low, mostly just military figures, and even then, they're shockingly low - WW1 took out double that, WW2 again double, 'WW3' might be accurate if Spock is still using that for the Eugenics war....
.

Here is the scene:

SPOCK: Hull surface is pitted with meteor scars. However, scanners make out a name. SS Botany Bay.
KIRK: Then you can check the registry.
SPOCK: No such vessel listed. Records of that period are fragmentary, however. The mid=1990s was the era of your last so-called World War.
MCCOY: The Eugenics Wars.
SPOCK: Of course. Your attempt to improve the race through selective breeding.
MCCOY: Now, wait a minute. Not our attempt, Mister Spock. A group of ambitious scientists. I'm sure you know the type. Devoted to logic, completely unemotional
KIRK: All right, all right, gentlemen. As you were. Rig for tractor beam, Helm. Lock onto that vessel.

As I remember seeing the scene, McCoy seems to agree with Spock until McCoy disclaims any responsibility for the "supermen" on the part of the human race as a whole. McCoy gets a little angry at Spock seeming to blame humans in general and instead blames a bunch of ambitious scientists.

And Spock doesn't act like McCoy has made an inaccurate correction or even horrors(!) an accurate correction. Instead he acts like the same conflict is sometimes named the Fourth World War (or possibly with a higher number) and sometimes named The Eugenics Wars. Spock acts like McCoy agrees with him, not like McCoy disagrees with him.

A calendar era is the period of time elapsed since one epoch of a calendar and, if it exists, before the next one.[1] For example, the Gregorian calendar numbers its years in the Western Christian era (the Coptic Orthodox and Ethiopian Orthodox churches have their own Christian eras).

In antiquity, regnal years were counted from the accession of a monarch. This makes the Chronology of the ancient Near East very difficult to reconstruct, based on disparate and scattered king lists, such as the Sumerian King List and the Babylonian Canon of Kings. In East Asia, reckoning by era names chosen by ruling monarchs ceased in the 20th century except for Japan, where they are still used.

There is a lot of evidence for the use of different calendar eras in Earth dates given in different Star Trek productions. So it is perfectly possible that the Eugenics Wars, dated to the 1990s in "Space seed", were the same conflict as the Third World War in Star Trek: First Contact which is dated to about 2053. It is perfectly possible that 1996 in the "Space seed" calendar might be the same year as 2053 in the First Contact calendar instead of being 57 years earlier.

So there is no need to fit the Eugenics Wars into the 1990s in the Christian era, as some sort of secret conflict that went unmentioned by news or history. It is quite possible that the Eugenics Wars happen sometime in the future of the 1990s or even in the future of 2020.

Furthermore, it seems obvious to me that the fictional universe of Star Trek is an alternate universe which separated from ours before Star Trek was broadcast in the 1960s.

My post number 2756 and 2778 here: https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/hey-i-never-noticed-that-before.274883/page-139

show that the first manned moon shot in Star Trek launched at a different date and/or time of day than in "Tomorrow is Yesterday", thus proving that must be in an alternate universe that diverged from ours before the historical launch of Apollo 11 on July 16, 1969.

I say that when a writer sets a story in the present time and in the place where the readers will live, the writer can have the characters speak realistically vaguely and even inaccurately about their society and world, because if any of the readers are interested in details mentioned by the characters they can look them up in nonfictional sources. The lies or mistakes of the characters don't have to mislead the readers or viewers if the readers or viewers are interested enough in them to research them.

But when a writer sets a story in a time and place that they have invented, everything that characters say should be accurate to an unnatural degree within that fictional setting, since the readers will have no way to check the accuracy of such statements. The only exceptions must be when characters lying or making mistakes is a part of the plot. So if something a character says is not revealed to be a lie or an error by the end of the story in which they say it, or by the end of multi story story arc (written by the same writer) in which they say it, the reader or viewer has the right to expect that statement to be 100 percent precise and accurate.

So John Kneubuhl, Gene Roddenberry, and Gene L. Coon should have known that if any of the characters said anything inaccurate in "Bread and Circuses", and that statement was not shown to be inaccurate during "Bread and Circuses", it would become an accurate part of the background of Star Trek.

So when Spock says:

SPOCK: Situations quite familiar to the six million who died in your first world war, the eleven million who died in your second, the thirty seven million who died in your third. Shall I go on?

And is not corrected then and there, nor in the epilogue on the bridge when McCoy could have teased Spock for understating the deaths in the world wars, for making an error. Since the deaths in the world wars are not corrected in the episode, nor in any later episode of TOS or even in TAS, they can be considered to be uncontested in TOS and thus accurate in the historical background of Star Trek.

If Gene Roddenberry and Gene L. Coon wanted the viewers to think that Star Trek happens in the future of the viewers instead of in the future of an alternate universe (and I guess they always intended for Star Trek to be in a more or less possible future), they should have gone to the slight trouble of checking various historical references in the scripts and making certain they were accurate. They did have Star Trek scripts checked for various factual errors by Kellam DeForest https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Kellam_de_Forest, who probably corrected some historical references in scripts, but obviously some historical errors remained in some scripts.

And since those uncorrected errors are part of Star Trek lore, they must be correct in the fictional universe of Star Trek, and thus Star Trek must be in an alternate universe which diverged from ours at least as early as World War One.
 
Last edited:
Spock just deadpans some baseless nonsense most of the time, safe in the knowledge that nobody will contradict him. Giving a room a decade-accurate date based on the supposed age of a piano in the corner; declaring a random doomsday machine extragalactic because it has followed a path through perhaps a dozen star systems; surmising that a wandering planet is faking its atmosphere with a machine of a certain size... Most of the time, Spock simply isn't entitled to knowing the things he speaks of with authority. And thus people just learn to sadly nod, saying nothing.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Spock just deadpans some baseless nonsense most of the time, safe in the knowledge that nobody will contradict him. Giving a room a decade-accurate date based on the supposed age of a piano in the corner; declaring a random doomsday machine extragalactic because it has followed a path through perhaps a dozen star systems; surmising that a wandering planet is faking its atmosphere with a machine of a certain size... Most of the time, Spock simply isn't entitled to knowing the things he speaks of with authority. And thus people just learn to sadly nod, saying nothing.
What color is the sky in your world?
 
McCoy isn't correcting Spock, he's agreeing with him
Not the way it appears in the episode, McCoy (quickly and gleefully) is jumping on Spock's wrong statement.

Spock: "World war."
McCoy: "Eugenics war."
Spock: "Of course."

Spock wrongly referred to it as a "world war," McCoy corrected him, Spock conceded the mistake.
 
Last edited:
show that the first manned moon shot in Star Trek launched at a different date and/or time of day than in "Tomorrow is Yesterday", thus proving that must be in an alternate universe that diverged from ours before the historical launch of Apollo 11 on July 16, 1969.
"The first manned Moon shot is scheduled for Wednesday, six am Eastern Standard Time."

Apollo Eleven launched on 16 July 1969, a Wednesday. Although it was 9:32 eastern time.

Tomorrow is Yesterday's original airdate was January 26, 1967, they got the day of the week right.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top