Whoops. That should read "unreasonable." Going to fix.I'm amused that an example that goes so far as to discuss people taking it upon themselves to damage or destroy an airport makes the Maquis sound more reasonable than presented on screen.
Marqi did no wrong change my mind
- Thread starter Crazyewok
- Start date
The Maquis would be more understandable had the Federation not warned them in advance, plus help them move lock, stock, and barrel before the Cardassians arrived.
In the case of invasions, like the historic Maquis from French history, they were not given an option nor the possibility of aid in relocating.
Exactly my point. People are like "These are the Maquis homes!" Except, they are not their historic homes, and they have a choice to relocate, and not choose to renounce their Federation citizenship and become Cardassian citizens. This is not eminent domain, or Manifest Destiny. This is declaring this rock yours and how dare you touch it level selfishness.
But what about their tomatoes? Have you for one moment thought about their tomatoes?
As for whether they are their "historic" homes and whether that matters...for all we know some of those colonies might have very well been settled for several generations.
But I don't think that matters. It just extends the whole "this rock is mine, no touchy!" routine by some generations.
It also still leaves them with the same reality of things...whether they lived their for six months or a hundred years, their planets are now in Cardassian space and they have an option to easily relocate to a planet that will most certainly be just as good as their current one, but safely in Federation space, and they're stupid and stubborn for not taking that option. Whether it's thier "historic" home doesn't change anything and would not make their silly guerilla war any more reasonable, imo.
Really the only thing that would make a particularly old colony more difficult to vacate would by that it'd be more likely to have a larger population and might turn into a logistical nightmare to move everyone in time.
Last edited:
The settlers on Dorvan V in "Journey's End" had only been there 20 years. However, that does not negate your statement, but it might be typical for the Maquis settlements.
Two years, 20 years, 200 years...the only point that's relevant to me is whether the settlers knew they were colonizing planets in contested territories where the borders might be subject to change in the future, and by all indications they did know that. Never mind that there was an actual war there not that long ago, in case any of them had forgotten.
Honestly, I feel in retrospect "Progress" foreshadowed this whole situation...except that we can assume that Mullibok and his friends weren't explicitly told that they might need to relocate in the future...though they perhaps should have anticipated that that could be the case given that the whole reason they settled on Jeraddo was to escape the Cardassian occupation.
Honestly, I feel in retrospect "Progress" foreshadowed this whole situation...except that we can assume that Mullibok and his friends weren't explicitly told that they might need to relocate in the future...though they perhaps should have anticipated that that could be the case given that the whole reason they settled on Jeraddo was to escape the Cardassian occupation.
That people are willing to have a war continue and violate a treaty in the name of their home is something that is very difficult for me to comprehend.
I'm amused that an example that goes so far as to discuss people taking it upon themselves to damage or destroy an airport makes the Maquis sound more reasonable than presented on screen.
I'm amused that an example that goes so far as to discuss people taking it upon themselves to damage or destroy an airport makes the Maquis sound more reasonable than presented on screen.
You can say that again.
Really? You can't imagine fighting to stay in your home?
By causing an international war?
No.
By ignoring a treaty and the consequences of my decisions?
No.
By saying my needs trump the thousands who will be impacted by my choice?
No.
Now think about it from the POV of an indigenous native being forced to relocate by an (invading) colonial empire.
Why are they settling here when there is so much unoccupied land available?
Why are they driving me from my ancestral land?
Why is their need for more territory superior to my need to live in my home?
Except it's not an invasion. It's part of treaty negotiations to stop.a war.
Why is my home worth a war?
One I haven't had for very long in a post scarcity environment.
But that's the thing about DS9 as a whole. Their depiction of the Cardassian occupation of Bajor, for example, was a melange of the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews,, combined with the Arab/Israeli conflict and Israel's occupation of Palestine, sprinkled with Imperial Japanese comfort women. "Journey's End" was a blatant allegory of the Trail of Tears and the forced relocation of Native Americans by former European colonists.
The Maquis story was intentionally muddied from the start by the creators.
I feel you. I agree with you. The fact is, though, that our history is filled with just such occurrences, as I listed above.
You are right, the Maquis were not responding to an invasion but, rather, politics and a treaty. Then again, initially Native American land was claimed by European settlers by treaty, purchased in exchange for beads and trinkets. Israel's return to Palestine after WWII was negotiated by treaty.
There are possibly other examples of aggression by citizens whose homes were sold out from underneath them by means of treaty.
20 years before 2370 was just before the Cardassian war where O'Brien cut his teeth.
That place was a warzone moments after it was settled.
That place was a warzone moments after it was settled.
I'm not sure that Star Trek in general presented the issue of sense of place very effectively. The fact that there are other places to develop doesn't mean everyone can move there. The Herero and Nama, after suffering huge losses in what was a genocidal war, were exiled in large numbers from the plains and deserts of Namibia to an island in the Atlantic. They were subjected to harsh forced labor,but what killed them in large numbers was the cold, wet weather and being given rice, when they were accustomed to dry environments that supported herding and dairy diets. Their bodies could not make the adjustments to the new environments, and their population further dwindled.
The people, like Eddington, who worked to grow tomatoes probably don't deserve sympathy. They are not doing much better than "paving paradise to put up a parking lot." People who lived on a planet twenty years are unlikely to have adapted to such an extend that moving would endanger their health. However, that might reflect the experiences of all colonists.
Moreover, some of those colonies might have developed beliefs and rituals connected to place. The DMZ seems to be a poor example, but what if we were talking about the earliest human colonies? Some of those might be older than 200 years, enough time for religious practices to be tied to specific places in nature or to houses of worship that were built.
Diasporas can retain powerful memories of the places wherefrom the people came, with the potential of being politically power and legitimate. But this is where I must, once again, emphasize that the Maquis we meet are largely the disaffected Star Fleet officers, not the actual colonists. In the visual language of the franchise, the colonists are going to move from a planet that bears a strong resemblance to Southern California to another planet that bears a strong resemblance to Southern California. It looks like a fair exchange. That isn't always the case.
The people, like Eddington, who worked to grow tomatoes probably don't deserve sympathy. They are not doing much better than "paving paradise to put up a parking lot." People who lived on a planet twenty years are unlikely to have adapted to such an extend that moving would endanger their health. However, that might reflect the experiences of all colonists.
Moreover, some of those colonies might have developed beliefs and rituals connected to place. The DMZ seems to be a poor example, but what if we were talking about the earliest human colonies? Some of those might be older than 200 years, enough time for religious practices to be tied to specific places in nature or to houses of worship that were built.
Diasporas can retain powerful memories of the places wherefrom the people came, with the potential of being politically power and legitimate. But this is where I must, once again, emphasize that the Maquis we meet are largely the disaffected Star Fleet officers, not the actual colonists. In the visual language of the franchise, the colonists are going to move from a planet that bears a strong resemblance to Southern California to another planet that bears a strong resemblance to Southern California. It looks like a fair exchange. That isn't always the case.
No, but in the context of the thread the question is "Did the Maquis do anything wrong?"
My answer is yes. For a long list of reasons, but the biggest one is what I quoted above. They are not being "displaced." They are being given a home of equal size in the name of stopping a war.
From a franchise standpoint, were "The Needs of the Many Outweigh the Needs of the Few" is espoused as wisdom and that humanity has "evolved" and they work to "better themselves and humanity" the Maquis behavior is completely antithetical to this idea.
I can feel some sympathy but if the choice is my home and thousands dead, or a new home that looks like the old one and stopping a war then one seems to have a greater benefit.
Call me stupid.
Which is what makes it an exceptional case, not one to make rules by. What if the narrative focused on the resettlement of the Novans? No just their culture, their biology was deeply affected by the adaptions they made to survive.
Similar threads
