"...one crew, a Starfleet crew." Really...WHY?
- Thread starter Gotham Central
- Start date
That really depends on the individual. Victims of mass murders and genocides vary in their opinions as much as any other group of people.
Only someone who has never been in prison could claim that it's "not that bad." It may not be eternal torture, but it's still pretty awful.
Nonsense. Plenty of people who register as being perfectly normal and not mentally disturbed have participated in mass murders and genocides. Hell, the reason the Rwandan genocide was as successful as it turned out was that a large percentage of the Hutu population participated in the mass murders of Tutsis and Hutu moderates.
In any event, I understand that you disagree with the idea that life imprisonment is an adequate punishment for mass murder or genocide. That's a perfectly valid opinion.
But to say that anyone who depicts, in his/her work of art, life imprisonment as an adequate punishment is actually saying that mass murder and genocide is okay? That's just absurd and dishonest. You can disagree with the message a work of art is putting out without trying to twist its message around.
It's still Karma Houdini. It's basically this:
"You killed millions if not billions of sentient life, show no remorse or justification for your actions beyond simple laziness and greed. So we'll stick you in a room secure enough that no one can target you for revenge and we'll give you food for the rest of your life."
That's not a real punishment for their crimes.
In your opinion, it's not sufficient punishment for the crime of genocide. And that's fine; that's a perfectly valid opinion.
But that doesn't mean that the meaning of the artwork becomes, "Genocide is okay."
The very nature of their organization would seem to suggest that no, they didn't.
I don't think enough was ever established about the Maquis' methods of operation to make that determination one way or the other.
A real resistance movement (or in their case, a semi-separatist movement) would have to have actual codes of conduct and organization. They aren't just some space pirates (and even then they'd need real organization), these people wanted their own independent nation.
Seeing how most of the higher-ups and veterans would have been Ex-Fleeters themselves I'd say it's not beyond reasoning they were already semi-Fleet in some aspects of how they ran things to begin with. They weren't even ideologically opposed to the Federation and what it stood for.
I just don't see there being enough of a difference between the two groups for there to be raw animosity to span 7 years.
If they wanted real tension the other crew should have all been Romulans or Cardassians.
Seeing how most of the higher-ups and veterans would have been Ex-Fleeters themselves I'd say it's not beyond reasoning they were already semi-Fleet in some aspects of how they ran things to begin with. They weren't even ideologically opposed to the Federation and what it stood for.
I just don't see there being enough of a difference between the two groups for there to be raw animosity to span 7 years.
If they wanted real tension the other crew should have all been Romulans or Cardassians.
Agreed.
Yes, they were. Michael Eddington was the leader of the Maquis, and he fairly explicitly described his objections to Federation ideology in "For the Cause" -- noting that in his view, the Federation was guilty of cultural imperialism, and that it neither had the right to hand over the colonists' homes to the Cardassians nor had the right to prevent them from gaining independence.
Nor do I. Wanting there to be more tension is not the same thing as wanting raw animosity.
All polities are guilt of cultural imperialism one way or another. If the Maquis Nation was ever created and meant to last they'd have to do it too eventually, unless they wanted to be some isolationist group. I don't think Eddington was thinking it through when he did all his blathering, he was just shooting off his mouth to stroke his own ego. The Federation are NOT worse than the Borg, when the Feds go around destroying civilization on a galactic scale and mutilate the survivors into mindless robo-drones THEN they're on Borg level.
Probably true. But that doesn't mean that the Maquis didn't have an ideological objection to the Federation and its cultural imperialism, even if that objection was hypocritical or based on inaccurate premises. However valid or invalid it might have been, an ideological objection to the Federation did exist.
I thought about bringing this up myself. AFAIK there was never any evidence to establish that he was more or less influential than Cal Hudson or Chakotay, for instance.
^ Indeed, I have always viewed the concept of a "Maquis leader" to be a contradiction in terms. The Maquis were terrorists, and had little respect for any kind of authority. So why would they have even wanted a leader? I always assumed that they pretty much did whatever they wanted, as long as it was attacking the Cardassians.
Maybe. If they explored that full-on, they'd probably have to show Federates realizing the Federation's hypocrisy in that regard, too. The Maquis may be guilty of the things they accuse the Federation of, but so's the Federation.
Either way, there are real ideological conflicts between the Maquis and Federation, and such an exploration would have made for a much better program than we got.
I don't have the Eddington episodes, but I'm thinking specifically of the DS9 Companion and Ronald D. Moore's old AOL comments, wherein it's specified that the writers considered Eddington to be the leader of the Maquis.
Well, insofar as there's a question over just what independence meant for the Maquis. Did they intend to establish a new multi-planetary state comprised of the former Federation colonies that the Federation Council had tried to trade to the Cardassians? Did they intend for each of those colonies to individually become independent with their own militias? Did they intend for each of those colonies to become individually independent, with the Maquis serving as a sort of allied defense force?
What, exactly, makes you think that engaging in an act of terrorism means that one has little respect for any kind of authority? Osama bin Ladin is a terrorist, yet his goal is to establish a worldwide fundamentalist Islamic theocracy. "Terrorist" != "Anarchist."
And there's no evidence that the Maquis "had little respect for any kind of authority." Some individual members of the Maquis had little respect for authority, but others did not. The Maquis weren't there for shits and giggles, they were there because they believed that the colonists on the worlds the Federation tried to trade to the Cardassians had a right to live on those worlds and to keep them, no matter what the Federation or Cardassian governments thought about it.
I don't think that was ever established, actually. There's a clear distinction between terrorism and guerrilla warfare - what is it the Maquis did? Was Eddington an aberration?
The sad excuse that the same people might do both does not excuse the confusion; many people both drive and walk, but we don't therefore label everyone who walks a "driver."
I agree that it would not have made sense for the Maquis to be hostile toward the Starfleet crew for the entire series.
I do have a problem, though, with the fact that the Maquis were only hostile to the Starfleet crew for about an hour. We were sold a premise that there would be tension between both crews, and we got that for only part of two episodes (Caretaker and Learning Curve). For the rest of the series, the only things that even reminded us that there was a Maquis crew were the "Old Maquis Tricks" they used to get out of tight spots.
Starfleet plays favorites when it comes to decorum. They let Worf wear his sash, and they let Neelix and Kes (who were made crewmembers, albeit without a rank) wear whatever they wanted. Riker was being a tool with Ro's earring.
Granted, both the Bajoran Maquis and Ensign Ro (at the time) were both criminals, so maybe it was warranted. Regardless though, I maintain that Riker is a tool.
It would have been a military dictatorship on the Maquis ship with Chakotay as captain.
The way I saw it:
Janeway: You have a choice -- confinement to quarters for 75 years or become a member of the crew. If you're in the crew, you follow decorum. Besides, my First Officer, which is YOUR Captain agrees with me.
Seska: But...
Chakotay: STFU bitch. You wanna do this the Maquis way?
(scene - Seska in an escape pod, launching from the ship with rations)
The Maquis crew already chose their Captain -- Chakotay. The Starfleet crew was already assigned their Captain -- Janeway.
By joining Chakotay's crew, the Maquis made a choice to have him speak for them when dealing with other Captains and ships. When Chakotay told Torres "She's the Captain," Chakotay may as well have just added "and I'm YOUR Captain, so STFU or grab an escape pod."
The Maquis crew already had a means of replacing Captain Janeway if she showed poor judgement -- their Maquis Captain was Janeway's First Officer. A balanced command structure is exactly why Janeway chose Chakotay as First Officer. In fact, I'll bet good money that had Cavit survived, Chakotay would have been made First Officer. Cavit would have bitched tho.
In summary, the minute Chakotay agreed with Janeway to have a Starfleet crew with Chakotay as first officer, the Maquis needed to STFU. The Maquis got off EASY.
*Edit to add: (OFF TOPIC)
Disclaimer: Having said the above, I fully support the actions of the Maquis in defense of their home planets in the DMZ, minus Eddington's biological attacks. Additionally, when the Maquis started their offenses against the Cardassians, the Federation should have told the Cardassians to handle their own problems -- it wasn't Federation territory anymore and Starfleet had no business involving itself with the Maquis/Cardassian conflict.
Similar threads
