Jim Kirk and the Prime Directive

[BillJ]

I'm curious what the board thinks about Jim Kirk in relation to the Prime directive. One poster in another thread said Kirk broke the Prime directive a dozen times during TOS and said that there were others who believed he broke it as many as three dozen times.

So what do others think?

 

[Cyke101]

It sounds like an auction: "A dozen, I got a dozen WHAT'S THAT two dozen-dozen-coming-in-fast do-I-hear-three we HAVE THREE DOZEN..."

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I think if Kirk had broken the intent of the Prime Directive, then he never would have made admiral. But he did make admiral.

Examples like The Return of the Archons are arguable, but to that specific example I have three things to say.

One. It wasn't that great an episode to begin with. Nothing to see here, move along, move along. But if you must stop and look, here are two more points.

Two. I see Archons as a metaphor for the hypocrisy of organized religion and the stagnation that results from following it. On the Neanderthal literary level of the episode, Kirk must destroy Landru, so that the audience can get the point that Landru=bad.

Three. If one must wank on this issue, then one could wank to the left as follows. Kirk says that the Prime Directive refers only to "a living, growing culture." Perhaps the Federation has explicitly decided that cultures dominated by machines do not qualify for protection from interference. Perhaps Federation scientists have determined that any such culture is doomed to eventual extinction.

Personally, I think Archons should be an actual violation, as should be Miri and The Apple. For, freeing these peoples could lead to greater problems for everyone else down the line. Perhaps nature intends these peoples to be selected for stagnation and extinction. However, For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky is even more debatable, because Yonada will collide with Daran V, and something must be done.

 

[BillJ]

Great response.

Personally, I think Archons should be an actual violation, as should be Miri and The Apple. For, freeing these peoples could lead to greater problems for everyone else down the line. Perhaps nature intends these peoples to be selected for stagnation and extinction. However, For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky is even more debatable, because Yonada will collide with Daran V, and something must be done.

Now here is where the fun begins.

What exactly determines if a society is primitive enough to be protected by the Prime Directive? In both Archons and The Apple we see computers with sophisticated enough weaponry to bring down ships in orbital space. So do we only evaluate the culture where it currently stands or do we look at it in context of where its' been? Especially in the case of Archons.

Miri, we'll have to disagree. It wasn't the fault of the children that the adults screwed the pooch.

 

[Jonas Grumby]

I think you'd have to specify whether you mean violations of the TOS or the TNG (and later) version of the Prime Directive. The TNG version was much more restrictive and wide-ranging than the TOS version.

The TOS version basically just forbade interference in the normal development of relatively primitive societies--and even then with great emphasis placed on a determination of "normal." By all evidence seen in TOS, Val's planet ("The Apple") and Landru's planet ("The Return of the Archons")--among others--were fair game for Federation intervention due to the abnormal influences affecting those societies. The TNG version of the Prime Directive would have no doubt forbidden all of those interactions.

I suspect when one cites huge numbers of violations of the PD by Kirk, a great many of those incidents would only be violations of the TNG version, which should really have no bearing on TOS.

 

[BillJ]

I think you'd have to specify whether you mean violations of the TOS or the TNG (and later) version of the Prime Directive. The TNG version was much more restrictive and wide-ranging than the TOS version.

TOS version. I don't believe in holding someone to a standard that hadn't been created yet.

 

[C.E. Evans]

There are often more myths circulated about Kirk among fans than facts, IMO. Kirk more frequently than not toed the company line during TOS, and the few times he did violate the Prime Directive were usually instances in which the natural evolution of a society had already been altered or had been otherwise compromised in some way (usually by some super computer gone mad--those generally drove Kirk nuts).

It could be said that Kirk violates the Prime Directive to restore the Prime Directive...or that societies run by mad super computers really piss him off.

 

[T'Girl]

One poster in another thread said Kirk broke the Prime directive a dozen times during TOS

From my own viewing of TOS, I believe the PD didn't come into force until after Friday's Child. I don't mean that's when Roddenberry and the TOS writer created it, I mean that 's when in-universe Starfleet began to observe it.

A Piece Of The Action is the first time I can remember non-interference being mentioned. That's the sixteenth episode of season two. In all episodes after that point the prime directive seems to be in force.

All the classic supposed violations by Kirk were from before that episode. Miri, The Return of the Archons, A Taste of Armageddon, Errand of Mercy, The Apple, all happen before the prime directive kicked in. Friday's Child was the last episode definitely without the directive. A Private Little War was the eighteenth episode season two, but Starfleet and Kirk, had already contacted that "primitive" world and so continued to do so, the damage was done.

Bread and Circuses is the twenty-fifth episode of season two, in that episode Spock feels the need to ask, "Then the Prime Directive is in full force, Captain?" Like perhaps it was still something new?

 

[{ Emilia }]

What exactly determines if a society is primitive enough to be protected by the Prime Directive?

Wasn't it whether they have invented warp drive technology or not?

 

[BillJ]

What exactly determines if a society is primitive enough to be protected by the Prime Directive?

Wasn't it whether they have invented warp drive technology or not?

That was defined in The Next Generation.

 

[The Wormhole]

Honestly, all the captains broke tossed the Prime Directive out the airlock whenever it suited them. Except maybe Sisko and Archer. But that's mainly because Sisko was never in any situations where the Prime Directive applied (although the whole Emissary business was definately too close for comfort) and it didn't exist in Archer's time.

 

[BillJ]

Bread and Circuses is the twenty-fifth episode of season two, in that episode Spock feels the need to ask, "Then the Prime Directive is in full force, Captain?" Like perhaps it was still something new?

I thought he was asking since the crew of the SS Beagle had already broken it.

 

[Timo]

We don't know if the Beagle bunch would even have been bound by the PD.

In TNG, the PD appears to only tie the hands of Starfleet field commanders; civilians have a free run with societies, primitive and advanced alike. TOS doesn't really contradict this. Perhaps the purpose of the PD is not actually to protect the virginity of primitive cultures, but to keep Starfleet field commanders from elevating themselves to gods?

That is, a Galactic High Commissioner could interfere in the affairs of foreign civilizations, because he's merely the unarmed and unthreatening representative of the democratically operating government of the UFP. And through him, said government can order its military commanders to execute the dermocratically decided policy of interference. But without Ferris on board, Kirk would not have the permission to interfere at Eminiar, because that gives way too much power to the guy who's in direct control of extinction-level weapons. Without direct Starfleet orders, he could not practice gunboat diplomacy on the Melkots, either.

When Kirk does interfere, it's in reaction to unpredictable events, in situations where it's too late to request the exalted presence of a High Commissioner or even to ask the HQ for clearance to bombard the natives. In the 23rd century, he may have had the leeway to interfere in self-defense; in the 24th, even this leeway may have been taken away from starship captains, because it poses too great a danger to the chain of command and to the very structure of the UFP. Even Kirk is expected to give his life if that best serves the UFP, rather than pull stunts to save his own ass but betray his government in the process.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[BillJ]

We don't know if the Beagle bunch would even have been bound by the PD.

KIRK: Septimus, wherever we may be from, you must believe that it is one of our most important laws that none of us interfere with the affairs of others. If Captain Merik is Merikus, then he has violated that law, and he must be taken away and punished. Will you help us get to the truth of all this?

From Homeward:

PICARD: I have no intention of compounding what you have done by committing another gross violation of the Prime Directive.

Since Nikolai wasn't in Starfleet, how can we have 'another gross violation' of the Prime Directive? If it only applies to Starfleet personnel.

In TNG, the PD appears to only tie the hands of Starfleet field commanders; civilians have a free run with societies, primitive and advanced alike. TOS doesn't really contradict this. Perhaps the purpose of the PD is not actually to protect the virginity of primitive cultures, but to keep Starfleet field commanders from elevating themselves to gods?

Seems like in the 23rd century it does apply to civilian spacecraft.

Even Kirk is expected to give his life if that best serves the UFP, rather than pull stunts to save his own ass but betray his government in the process.

So how exactly does it serve the interests of the Federation for a starship not to be able to report that a "primitive" society has weaponry that can, at the very least, pull warp capable starships out of orbit?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

So how exactly does it serve the interests of the Federation for a starship not to be able to report that a "primitive" society has weaponry that can, at the very least, pull warp capable starships out of orbit?

It doesn't, and this is a good point.

 

[Timo]

KIRK: Septimus, wherever we may be from, you must believe that it is one of our most important laws that none of us interfere with the affairs of others. If Captain Merik is Merikus, then he has violated that law, and he must be taken away and punished. Will you help us get to the truth of all this?

Point granted.

From Homeward:

PICARD: I have no intention of compounding what you have done by committing another gross violation of the Prime Directive.

Since Nikolai wasn't in Starfleet, how can we have 'another gross violation' of the Prime Directive? If it only applies to Starfleet personnel.

There's no specific need for the 'another' to refer to recent events. Picard could simply be disgusted of the idea of ever again violating the PD, like he was forced to do in "Pen Pals".

That way, things would stay consistent with "Angel One" where the crew of the Odin is explicitly free of PD concerns.

Seems like in the 23rd century it does apply to civilian spacecraft.

To Merrick's Beagle, yes. But when Harry Mudd meddled with the android world, no PD concerns were brought up. And neither our TOS nor TNG heroes did a mop-up mission after a civilian had contacted primitives - one'd think this would be a key mission type if the PD really applied to civilians.

So how exactly does it serve the interests of the Federation for a starship not to be able to report that a "primitive" society has weaponry that can, at the very least, pull warp capable starships out of orbit?

Where would this inability arise? If Kirk didn't have the non-Starfleet, government mandate to meddle with Eminiar, he wouldn't be targeted by their weapons; since he did, he could also defend himself and the Federation. If Kirk was pulled down by Landru or Vaal, it would be no big loss for Starfleet, and they'd simply do a follow-up mission with more care; by raping those societies, he exhibited powers that both undermined the credibility of UFP policy and presented a potential threat to his superiors by proving him a loose cannon and a vigilante. Tracey was burned for what he did; that Kirk wasn't is a contradiction in policy.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[BillJ]

Where would this inability arise? If Kirk didn't have the non-Starfleet, government mandate to meddle with Eminiar, he wouldn't be targeted by their weapons; since he did, he could also defend himself and the Federation. If Kirk was pulled down by Landru or Vaal, it would be no big loss for Starfleet, and they'd simply do a follow-up mission with more care; by raping those societies, he exhibited powers that both undermined the credibility of UFP policy and presented a potential threat to his superiors by proving him a loose cannon and a vigilante. Tracey was burned for what he did; that Kirk wasn't is a contradiction in policy.

See your moving from well meaning rule to religious dogma that should be followed no matter what... much like TNG did. Can you truly call Beta III a primitive world? Weapons that can pull spacecraft down from orbit, light sources that Spock calls "amazing in this culture", hollow tubes that can kill a man and knowledge of interstellar civilizations. I never bought that Beta III would be considered a Prime Directive situation once those facts came to light.

Let's go ahead and knock Gamma Trianguli VI off the list as well. People who are little more than automatons, whose sole purpose is to feed a 'living' machine. No art, no culture, no free thought. Are these simply the remnants of a society that constructed Vaal then somehow fell under its control? Too many unanswered questions exist for someone to call this a blanket Prime Directive violation.

 

[Anwar]

Still, in "Archons" Kirk did destroy the stability of their civilization and then said "rebuilding is your problem. We'll leave some scientists to make your new culture something more like ours. Bye!"

 

[BillJ]

Still, in "Archons" Kirk did destroy the stability of their civilization and then said "rebuilding is your problem. We'll leave some scientists to make your new culture something more like ours. Bye!"

How can mass rape and physical violence be considered stable?

 

[Anwar]

Watch the news.