Prime Directive? Us only?

[Noname Given]

Temis the Vorta said:
TOS doesn't get enough credit for being honest in the way BSG is honest. Kirk et all were often depicted as struggling to do the right thing. It was only with TNG that you got this simplistic, preachy version of Star Trek where being holier-than-thou was easy. (And I certainly hope that that version of Star Trek is gone for good.)

QFT! - If you bother to watch TOS; you'd realize that MANY times, the Federation waived the Prime Directive when a planet or culture had resources be it Dilithium Crystals (watch Fridays Child); or a strategic location (see Errand of Mercey when at first it was believed the Orgainians were just a primative people).

As stated above very well - you didn't get the simplistic/preachy version of Star Trek until TNG (and Captain Picard in particular who OFTEN seemed ready to see the Federation go down in flames rather than violated a being's 'Human Rights'(tm) - see I Borg as a prime example.

 

[ancient]

Timo said:

Somehow, this mutated during TNG into: Do not have ANY foreign relations.

More exactly: "Do not have any foreign relations, you military men - leave it to us civilians". Which is a highly sensible policy to have.

I don't see anything to support that. Starfleet was the only group with the power to actually help people, and they decided not to. Otherwise we would've seen someone else doing something, rather than Picard sitting on his hands all the time with no one else around.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I think people are stretching what the Prime Directive was shown to be in The Next Generation. In Pen Pals, they explicitly say that, if someone asks for help, you can help.

In fact, that idea seems to be true for both pre-warp and post-warp societies (The Federation could rebuild Bajor as long as the Bajorans continued to want help). The only problem is that they aren't supposed to contact pre-warp civilizations, so they can't ask you for help.

 

[Non-Trekkie Trekkie]

Janeway had the Prime Suggestion.

 

[Noname Given]

Alidar Jarok said:
I think people are stretching what the Prime Directive was shown to be in The Next Generation. In Pen Pals, they explicitly say that, if someone asks for help, you can help.

In fact, that idea seems to be true for both pre-warp and post-warp societies (The Federation could rebuild Bajor as long as the Bajorans continued to want help). The only problem is that they aren't supposed to contact pre-warp civilizations, so they can't ask you for help.

Actually, as I recall Pen Pals- even AFTER hearing that Data was in contact with one of the inhabitants; Pacard called a 'Staff meeting' to discuss the situation; and wasdressing down Data, and was all ready to let the inhabitants die - but when Data then played a message (for the child); Picard GRUDINGLY decided to try and help.

Hell, in TOS, the 'Prime Directive' usually only applied to non-spacefaring civilizations, period. In TNG, at times they even tried to claim the 'Prime Directive' applied to 'less advanced, but still spacefaring civilizations.'

For example, the TOS episode A Taste of Armageddon would NEVER have been a possibility, since neithe Emeniar, nor Vendicar had FTL capability; thus the UFP (under the 24th cetury PD implementation) would NEVER have wanted to establish relations.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

That's right about Pen Pals, however, watch the debate they have (which it was more than a dressing down). Granted, the whole thing seems to us to be an artificial way to create drama, but it's the most in depth and philosophical discussion of the Prime Directive around. There's a lot of philosophical stuff about playing God and where to draw the line, but the specific part I'm mentioning is this:

Picard: The Prime Directive serves many purposes. Not the least of which is to protect us. It keeps us from allowing our emotions to overrule our judgement.

(skipping a bit)

Geordi: If the Dremans asked for our help?

Data: Yes, Sarjenka's transmission could be viewed as a call for help.

Picard: That's sophistry and you know it.

Pulaski: Hell, I'll buy that excuse. We're all jigging madly on the head of a pin anyway.

Worf: She cannot ask for help from people she does not know.

Data: She knows me.

Riker: What a perfectly vicious little circle.



Basically, the way I see it, Data shouldn't have contacted her, so she shouldn't have been able to ask for help. But, if they ask for help, it should be allowed (provided efforts are taken to keep cultural contamination to a minimum so futuristic rescuers aren't seen as gods). It means, in practice, you can't help in almost all situations. But I do think that Picard could justify that he wasn't breaking the Prime Directive in that case.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

We'll help if you ask for it, but we're not allowed to let you know we're here to help you if you need it.

And they say Star Fleet isn't the military...

 

[Sci]

I occasionally wonder what the world would be like if the United States adopted a policy akin to the Prime Directive. Certainly disasters like the Iraq War would be averted, as would violations of foreign states' sovereignties, such as Operation Ajax. But by the same token, how would the world have reacted if the United States had refused to provide any aide in the wake of, say, the 2005 Tseunami disaster, insisting that it would interfere in the "natural development" of Indonesia and other affected countries?

 

[starburst]

Thats a very good point, the difference is a natural disaster to a planet you have never spoken to is different to a place where many people from your culture have been to and where many may well have died in that disaster.

In terms of "only us" its a Federation thing, so when joining the Federation Id guess you would have to agree to a certain number of rules the PD being one of them...as for the Klingons, Romulans, Ferengi ect you cant go around telling them they cant do this because it breaks your X rule as they will say "well then you cant do that as it breaks our rule Y"

 

[RobertScorpio]

Deciding who and who does not "dies", based on an ethical eddict, certainly sounds like 'playing God' to me, no matter which side you are on.

If the Federation doesn't help a given society simply because they are not warp faring, or have no knowledge of Galactic politics, I think it is a bad selling point for potential new comers.

I think the PD is tactically a bad idea, and morally dubious at best

 

[Sci]

I think the Prime Directive is more about maintaining Federation technological supremacy than about protecting anybody.

 

[Kubwulf]

Temis the Vorta said:
TOS doesn't get enough credit for being honest in the way BSG is honest. Kirk et all were often depicted as struggling to do the right thing. It was only with TNG that you got this simplistic, preachy version of Star Trek where being holier-than-thou was easy. (And I certainly hope that that version of Star Trek is gone for good.)

And the Prime Directive is aimed at pre-warp civilizations only, in case people are forgetting that. So any civilization that is capable of doing the Federation harm would NOT be governed by that rule. The Prime Directive really isn't comparable to BSG not torturing Cylons because Cylons wouldn't be under the PD in the first place. If they can come after ya with ships and guns, it's a whole different ball game.

The PD was not only designed for pre-warp civilizations though. Voyager showed this in "The Omega Directive" A warp civilization had created Omega and Tuvok stated, "I would be remiss in my duties if I did not inform you that doing this would violate the Prime Directive."

Janeway's response was that for the duration of the mission the PD was rescinded. The PD is there to ensure we don't interfere with the natural progression of a civilizations evolution. We can announce our prescence to a warp civilization and begin trade and supply negotiations without breaking PD. In the Voyager example above, not interferring may have left half the sector without warp ability. How would a civilization have evolved then? By destroying Omega it violated PD because Janeway prevented the natural evolution of a civilization.

Now, don't go into the whole "It was Omega, its ok arguement." The PD was still violated for a Federation Order. Whenever the Federation has a goal that they consider "higher" than the PD, the Prime Directive is conviently pushed aside.

Kirk made a living out of violating the PD. Let's not forget that although they claim exploration, the Federation is still a military organization. Exploration ships have weapons and shields to fight with. When military protocols take precedence over the PD, its easy to push it aside. It is a lofty and idillic scenario to have the PD. But it is not logical, effcient, and only serves to cause strife within the Federation. As others have pointed out, if a Captain violates PD, they better have a damn good reason when they go before the board. But in most cases, they are justified and let off the hook for it. So why even have it?

 

[starburst]

This line of morals i think was broached a few months back, I dont think there was a clear winner on the pros and cons, I think it just depends if you want Starfleet to primarily go out and around putting out forest fires all over the galaxy and nothing else.

 

[Kubwulf]

I really don't think its about forest fires. The Prime Directive, as it is alluded to in the series, is an inviolate law. Yet it gets broken constantly with no long term effects on those that break it. It should be an all or nothing approach. You can't go around saying, "We have the Prime Directive and it states blah blah blah..." and then turn around and tell Captains that they can violate the PD under these conditions, or if the Federation interests are deemed more important. The example RobertScorpio and I discussed is the following:

A planet is discovered that somehow produces dilythium. As the crystals are farmed, more grow to replace it. The Romulans will be there in a week. The Federation can be there in less than a few hours. Does the Federation claim the planet despite its pre-warp nature, or does the Federation leave it alone, follow the PD to the letter, and let the Romulans capture the planet, take control, probably enslave the populace, and gain an unlimited supply of dilythium?

The above scenario is black and white. No "well... it depends." Based on past history established in all series, what do you think the Federation would do?

 

[Sci]

Kubwulf said:
It should be an all or nothing approach.

Nothing ought to be an all-or-nothing approach. The lack of inflexibility, of recognition of extenuating circumstances, is a logical absurdity of the highest degree.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Perhaps, but you can see the price of being to flexable as well. You have captains breaking this Prime Directive on all five of the TREK shows. And there are other Starfleet captains we never see. How many of them are breaking it as well?

 

[Kubwulf]

Hats exactly my point Sci. If there are going to be so many infractions and exceptions and blatant disregard for the PD, why have it? Either you don't interfere at all in a culture's evolution or you do. Its great to say that, from a scientific standpoint, that you will only observe. But from a logical standpoint it is a hinderance to all of Starfleet. I find it hard to believ that the Vulcans with all their logic, actually went along with the idea. It binds a captain's hands in military situations, humanitarian situations, and, in some cases, negotiations.

On the flip side of this, if you have a PD that is rigidly enforced, you have people that will lose their commissions when they do what they feel is in the best interest of the Federation, even if it goes against the PD.

There are some things in life that are all or nothing.

Caring for your children is all or nothing. You don't go half-way.

War is all or nothing. You either devote all your attention, all your effort to winning, or you lose. (Lets not get into a public opinion on this one please. I'm not talking whether war is right or alluding to current political blunders. Just the idea of war in general)


Granted, these can be considered obscure examples, but still, its all or nothing. The PD, as depicted in the series, ALL of them, is a flimsy set of words. It gets broken constantly by the 5 captains portrayed. How many of the others are there that we don't see who break it as much or more? How about doctors? They take a hippocratic oath to help. Do you think Bashir, or Crusher would let the PD stop them if a planet were dying of plauge and they had the cure on-board? They'd help the people and then face the board. And what would happen then? Dismissal from Starfleet? Boo hoo. Others have stated that civilians aren't bound by the PD so why tie the hands of your military in such a fashion? Often it is the military that makes first contact with people. There are officers and enlisted folks trained to do this kind of thing. You think Troi, as daft as she was, wouldn't be good at a first contact mission?

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Kubwulf said:
I really don't think its about forest fires. The Prime Directive, as it is alluded to in the series, is an inviolate law. Yet it gets broken constantly with no long term effects on those that break it. It should be an all or nothing approach. You can't go around saying, "We have the Prime Directive and it states blah blah blah..." and then turn around and tell Captains that they can violate the PD under these conditions, or if the Federation interests are deemed more important. The example RobertScorpio and I discussed is the following:

A planet is discovered that somehow produces dilythium. As the crystals are farmed, more grow to replace it. The Romulans will be there in a week. The Federation can be there in less than a few hours. Does the Federation claim the planet despite its pre-warp nature, or does the Federation leave it alone, follow the PD to the letter, and let the Romulans capture the planet, take control, probably enslave the populace, and gain an unlimited supply of dilythium?

The above scenario is black and white. No "well... it depends." Based on past history established in all series, what do you think the Federation would do?

Based on Errand of Mercy, I would think the Federation would intervene. The logic I would give is that the natural evolution of the society would be violated in a week, so they need to protect them now. Of course, there was strategic concerns in Organia. If those didn't exist, they might try to defend the space around the planet to shield it from the Romulans without making direct contact (or they might do nothing).

I think in many ways, Romulans of the 24th Century or Klingons on the 23rd Century were considered enemies even when at peace. Because of this, strategic concerns could easily overwrite the prime directive. I think that's one of those "It's easy to be a saint in paradise" things. Moral gray areas exist when it comes to political interests and people turn a blind eye to something that would be enforced in peacetime.

 

[Timo]

The Feds already dealt with that scenario at Capella in "Friday's Child", really. Based on what we saw, they would engage in trade negotiations while trying to inflict minimal influence on the natives. And they'd take "no" for an answer, as we in turn saw in "Mirror, Mirror".

It's not as if we ever really ran into a scenario where contact with natives would have been a good thing yet our heroes shied away from it. Contact with Sarjenka's people in "Pen Pals" would not have helped anybody - the tectonic trouble was not in any way related to interstellar awareness or anything like that. Contact with the folks among whom Worf's stepbrother lived would not have helped any, either - there was no help to be given, as Starfleet was powerless to do anything to counter the calamity. In contrast, contact with Miramanee's people was unnecessary, as Starfleet did possess the means to divert the asteroid strike without the involvement of the natives, or so they thought.

It's difficult to imagine a scenario where contact for contact's sake would somehow save the day. Worf's stepbrother managed to save a few people from a dying world, but he did that without actually initiating contact. What he really accomplished is difficult to judge. In any case, he seems to have set the precedent for what was attempted in ST:Insurrection...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[starburst]

Kubwulf said:
It binds a captain's hands in military situations, humanitarian situations, and, in some cases, negotiations.

If you go by First Contact and Enterprise, I would say the Vulcans are probably the driving force behind the PD