Robert Beltran says the Prime Directive is 'fascist crap'

[Triskelion]

Man, f* elk.

No point.


Just stuff we know, or should know.


Aspects of the Prime Directive still applies to fresh species who know about warp and aliens, but have inferior technology to the Federation, whatever trade pact is eventually formulated between the Federation and any specific species is specific to that races sophistication, detailing what exactly can and cannot be "given" to each trading partner.


Picard: "Hey! We are aliens! Aliens exist, but we are not going to give you photon torpedoes to hunt elk for sport."


The Prime Directive telling Starship Captain's to stay out of the way only holds sway until the Federation has a formal relationship as a friend or an enemy with any given species that Starfleet may happen to run across in space.


The Federation Council tells Starfleet what to do, within the limits of what Starfleet is allowed to do. Checks and balances, you see. The two easiest ways for a species to become except to the prime directive's Technology embargo might have to be declaring war on the Federation, or joining the Federation.


Starfleet works for the Federation, not the other way around.

This also would explain why they occasionally cite the PD for situations involving warp-capable species (for ex., the Cravic/Pralor Bots). I suppose the actual law would be a good deal more complex than just the line in the Starfleet General Order 1:

"No starship may interfere with the normal development of any alien life or society."

 

[Guy Gardener]

The simple line pretty much covers it.

The Cravic/Pralor Bots were sterile and couldn't do anything about it, but their military technology was a couple generations ahead of Voyager, and therefore MORE advanced than the Federation, but even Janeway could see that the PD applied.

 

[locutus101]

The simple line pretty much covers it.

The Cravic/Pralor Bots were sterile and couldn't do anything about it, but their military technology was a couple generations ahead of Voyager, and therefore MORE advanced than the Federation, but even Janeway could see that the PD applied.

They didn't look advanced to me. I haven't seen such ill-defined robot since the tinman in the Wizard Of Oz.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Voyager lost in a fair fight.

Voyager never usually loses, even when the other guys are cheating.

Better shields, better blasters.

Voyager can fight a Borg Cube to a stand still.



Therefore this lot have bigger guns and tougher shields than the Borg.

Who are also more powerful than the Federation where it's important.

 

[Triskelion]

The simple line pretty much covers it.

"No starship may interfere with the normal development of any alien life or society."

What is a starship?
What about Neelix's shuttle? The USS Voyager while grounded, or frozen in ice? Crashed relic shelters like the Raven or many others?

What is "interfere"? Scans use particles. Outposts obviously get discovered. Isn't withholding your tech also a choice that very much also has an impact?

What is "normal"? Normal for whom? What if Q or Nagilum (or a transdimensional array or two) "adopted" the species? Wouldn't doing nothing also be a kind of interference?

What is alien? We all sprang from the Progenitors genetic material.

What is "life"? Are the nanites alive? How about katra orbs, or even a virus? Are the Pralor alive?

What is "society"? Is the Link a society, for social interaction? How about the Borg, surely they are a society. What about the Borg children? They were doing just fine alone. What about Workforce - they could have all been brainwashed conscripts. Is that a society?

Details. Vague laws are practically engraved invitations for exploitation. (Like modern business contracts - or constitutions - written in ideograms, for example, which are Swiss cheese for loopholes).

 

[2takesfrakes]

"Starship" refers to any space-faring agency officially representing the Federation's interests.

 

[Guy Gardener]

"No starship may interfere with the normal development of any alien life or society."

What is a starship?

As this is a Starfleet regulation, they are talking about Starships in Starfleet, which is a class of ship designated by tonnage and task remit.

What about Neelix's shuttle?

That's a ship, and not affiliated with Starfleet or bound to Starfleet regulations.

The USS Voyager while grounded, or frozen in ice?

The dead don't make decisions. The crew was dead, so although they were potential contamination, they didn't wilfully decide to be contamination.

Crashed relic shelters like the Raven or many others?

The Raven was not a Starfleet vessel, and the Hansens were not starfleet either, so it and they were not bound to Star Fleet Regulations, and the ship was Borg when it was set adrift.

What is "interfere"?

To actively make a decision to create change on purpose.

Scans use particles.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Outposts obviously get discovered.

Yes, they do. But that's an alien culture going into space, to discover life at a point of it's choosing and finding life. That's one possible natural development, that is fairly common.

Isn't withholding your tech also a choice that very much also has an impact

Yup. The Ferengi bought Warp drive from some jokers passing through, and now they sell it to any one with an appropriate currency or relative sum of equivalent resources.

What is "normal"?

Without external influence. Some species may prefer to skip over childhood, but they don't have he tools to say that they have no interest in being treated like children because no one has pointed out the adults to them yet.

Normal for whom?

Every society that isn't invaded by an elder race, strip mined and sold off as slaves and food. Innocence means that you don't have to worry about shit above your paygrade.

What if Q or Nagilum (or a transdimensional array or two) "adopted" the species? Wouldn't doing nothing also be a kind of interference?

Nagilum and the Q are not members of Starfleet bound by Starfleet Regulations.

What is alien? We all sprang from the Progenitors genetic material.

Not everyone. By alien they certainly mean anyone without a diplomatic/trade relationship with the Federation.

What is "life"? Are the nanites alive? How about katra orbs, or even a virus? Are the Pralor alive?

Those are all mediums where life can harbour, but not necessarily always.

What is "society"? Is the Link a society, for social interaction?

The great Link had a trade alliance with the ferengi, and then persisted in a state of war with the Federation, and accepted conservatorship over the Dominion worlds as their absolute rulers.

How about the Borg, surely they are a society. What about the Borg children? They were doing just fine alone.

The Federation and the Borg are in a state of war. Being nice to the Borg is treason. Nacheyev said so. Janeway should be taken to the woodshed for keeping a lid on Icheb's Borg AIDs.

What about Workforce - they could have all been brainwashed conscripts. Is that a society?

Sounds like procreation. There's nothing atypical or weird about that place. Skeevy businessmen using brain washing to cover up slavery? That happens in the real world too.

Details. Vague laws are practically engraved invitations for exploitation. (Like modern business contracts - or constitutions - written ideograms, for example, which are Swiss cheese for loopholes).

The PD is huge, we in the real world however have not read the full thing, maybe Discovery with help us out a little?

 

[Triskelion]

CLIPPED
The PD is huge, we in the real world however have not read the full thing, maybe Discovery with help us out a little?

It depends on what your definition of "is" is.

Well that was quite a lot of input and I appreciate your effort getting through my post, GG. My point, during those random examples I haphazarded on the subway ride home, is that each one of those terms in the General Order is, in fact, subject to extenuating interpretations. A position which you have just illustrated by your own effort to further define each term for the sake of clarity. Thus your refutation defends my original point that, without detailed legal explanation, General Order 1, as it stands, is inadequate to the task of preventing abuse. Therefore I surmise that the PD must need a complex, detailed set of laws and regulations, at least moreso than we see onscreen.

Let me distill it to just one example to illustrate:

Voyager's 30 Days:
Had Tom just taken Neelix's shuttle during his off-duty hours, there could be, arguably, nothing Starfleet could say about his Prime Directive interference in aiding that water planet. Especially upon a direct request for aid from a citizen of that fully-modern, spacefaring, warp-capable planet. Janeway's reasoning? The government wants to sit on their hands, and it's their prerogative.

Or:
Well she may consider Neelix a member of the crew - but he is not, in fact, a graduate of the academy, and enjoys no rank whatsoever in her crew other than a position. Had Neelix decided to help fix the planet's technobabble macguffin, it could be argued it was not, in fact, a violation of the PD. It was, in fact, an attempt to prevent a planetary catastrophe that some locals were fully aware of. So - you could argue that this water planet was not ready for Federation membership - but you couldn't argue that helping prevent catastrophe here was a PD violation. Based on GO1's wording:
"No starship may interfere with the normal development of any alien life or society"
- as it stands, you could say that: Here is a society that was built around alien technology itself. So relying on alien technology is their normal development.

Well, I'm sure a lawyer could do much better gymnastics than I can, but the point is, with a crew of 150 you could have 150 interpretations of Voyager's legal range of responses according to that single sentence. I mean, once the ocean dissipated you could hardly call it a society any more, so the truth is, they were actually a lame duck society, as good as dead and just not aware of it yet. What's the difference between grave desecration and archeology? When does a grave become open for repurposing?

(BTW I didn't know Raven wasn't a Starfleet ship. The LCARS interface threw me. Come to think of it, not sure if LCARS is Starfleet or Federation).

 

[KelisThePoet]

A piece of the action? You mean because the culture had already been polluted? I think at the very least the PD discourages action under any circumstances.

In the original Star Trek the prime directive applied to non-contaminated pre-warp cultures. Some of its philosophical principles of restraint and noninterference surely do carry over to accidentally contaminated pre-warp cultures, which is why in "A Piece of the Action," the Starfleet characters try to minimize their footprint on that planet. Of course, McCoy's carelessness with his communicator (or was it his tricorder? I don't remember) leads to further contamination, but that was a mistake. When a cop in a police procedural accidentally contaminates a crime scene, you don't say that the rules for quarantining crime scenes are stupid dramatic crutches inconsistently broken by the characters.

Generation-era Trek applied the prime directive to contaminated cultures and even warp culture on occasion, which I think was a mistake. Again, similar principles to those of the prime directive may be in play, and perhaps even other, more complicated regulations in the same general spirit; but not the prime directive itself.

 

[jmidnight_99]

Philosophy should have to adapt to accommodate different circumstances, otherwise its nothing more then dogma and that is often case with TNG era PD.

If a civilization is destroyed, the results are disastrous and inferring is not likely to be worse for them then allowing them to die. We wouldn't think developed nations who help devolving nations deal with a natural disaster are being immoral, to help is the compassionate and thus the human thing to do.

I think episode where the Federation thinks allowing an civilization to die, because that is their "evolutionary fate" makes the Federation look foolish at best; cold, unfeeling elitist and indifferent to suffering of others at worst. That does not seem enlightened, not in the least.

There is a huge middle ground between allowing worlds to die and imposing your will by force, the Federation should occupy that middle ground, rather then going from one extreme or the other.

It's a short hop from not allowing worlds to die to playing God. One species is dying out while another is slowly evolving. The species that is dying out asks for help. Helping them irreparably alters the future of the second species. What do you do? The only answer is mind your own business. Or fly around playing God.

 

[Guy Gardener]

The Cardassian Occupation.

"Howdy, we're only going to completely enslave 15 percent of you to strip mine your planet, criminals you'd send to a prison yourself, nothing to worry about, we'll change the curriculum in your schools to pull you forward 400 years, so you'll be smart like us, and smart people don't worship "prophets" so if we see any of that, we'll make you dig your own damn grave, but on the bright side, mass transit, improved healthcare and replicators for everyone!"

I wonder if this model ever worked out well for the Cardassians, or if this was the first time they tried subjugating and civilizing aboriginals?

 

[marlboro]

The Cardassian Occupation.

"Howdy, we're only going to completely enslave 15 percent of you to strip mine your planet, criminals you'd send to a prison yourself, nothing to worry about, we'll change the curriculum in your schools to pull you forward 400 years, so you'll be smart like us, and smart people don't worship "prophets" so if we see any of that, we'll make you dig your own damn grave, but on the bright side, mass transit, improved healthcare and replicators for everyone!"

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Destructor]

A piece of the action? You mean because the culture had already been polluted? I think at the very least the PD discourages action under any circumstances.

Well, I don't think we should criticize the PD on what we *think* it does, we should criticize it for what we SEE it doing. In a number of episodes, Kirk encounters a society which has already been fucked up by a prime directive violation. Either they're space nazis or space gangsters or space romans or they are engaged in space Vietnam. In all of these circumstances, Kirk has zero problem going into those cultures and getting involved. Because the culture has been corrupted, he won't corrupt it more by going in and 'polluting' it with additional knowledge. But when they encounter a pristine culture that WOULD be corrupted by knowledge of space and space-faring, well, it would be their duty to NOT corrupt the culture. Y'know, for fear of creating space nazi/gangsters/romans.

 

[Destructor]

I wonder if this model ever worked out well for the Cardassians, or if this was the first time they tried subjugating and civilizing aboriginals?

Great example- GREAT example! Although maybe the 'Bajoran model' did work well for the Cardassians? Maybe they got all the resources they wanted and then, the moment it became too much trouble, they got the heck out of there?

 

[The Overlord]

It's a short hop from not allowing worlds to die to playing God. One species is dying out while another is slowly evolving. The species that is dying out asks for help. Helping them irreparably alters the future of the second species. What do you do? The only answer is mind your own business. Or fly around playing God.

That is using the slippery Slope logical fallacy, not a valid logical argument.

Not acknowledging the huge middle ground between imperialism and absolute indifference is not logical or enlightened.

Also how is letting species dying due to natural disasters good for them, if everyone is dead, how is anyone supposed to develop? This just seems like callous apathy rather then anything moral, again you expect protagonists in fiction to be proactive, if protagonist is making excuses to do nothing, they don't seem like good protagonists.

This makes the Federation seem like spoiled first world countries, that look down on developing countries and see every bad thing that happens to developing countries is their own fault. Does anyone think providing aid to developing countries who have been devastated by a natural disaster as a bad thing?

Again I don't see how treating the PD as a unquestionable orthodoxy is logical or enlightened, it makes the Federation look like they are trying to appease some deity, they way they present it in the 24th century, as noted with this video:

http://sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/e113.php

 

[KelisThePoet]

I often hear people say that the "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy, but that label is not necessarily true on its face. Sometimes, one thing leads to another. Sometimes small developments have bigger consequences later. It's only a fallacy to make implausible connections between one thing and another. So for instance, it's a slippery slope fallacy to say that if you give Starfleet captains discretion in interfering with non-warp cultures, they'll start taking over all the non-warp planets and using the resources to topple the Federation and launch an unprovoked war on the Klingon Empire, because there's no logical reason to presume the first thing must lead to the second and third things. By contrast, it's not a slippery slope fallacy to say that if you give Starfleet captains discretion in interfering with non-warp cultures, they'll gradually become more comfortable with interfering in a wider range of problems, because there's a logical reason why such a thing would indeed happen.

 

[The Overlord]

I often hear people say that the "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy, but that label is not necessarily true on its face. Sometimes, one thing leads to another. Sometimes small developments have bigger consequences later. It's only a fallacy to make implausible connections between one thing and another. So for instance, it's a slippery slope fallacy to say that if you give Starfleet captains discretion in interfering with non-warp cultures, they'll start taking over all the non-warp planets and using the resources to topple the Federation and launch an unprovoked war on the Klingon Empire, because there's no logical reason to presume the first thing must lead to the second and third things. By contrast, it's not a slippery slope fallacy to say that if you give Starfleet captains discretion in interfering with non-warp cultures, they'll gradually become more comfortable with interfering in a wider range of problems, because there's a logical reason why such a thing would indeed happen.

Except its a argument based on fear rather then logic to make the jump to say that saving planets from natural disasters will lead to some truly disastrous consequences, like a Federation captain engaging in imperialism or that somehow saving them from this disaster will "ruin" them (which doesn't explain how letting them all die by a natural disaster they couldn't stop is better for them).

If Star Fleet doesn't trust the Star Fleet captains to use their judgment to do the right thing on their own, without having their hands held all the time, then Star Fleet should abandon exploration, because you can say the very act of exploring can create unintended consequences that could be negative.

The same link I posted about the Prime Directive had a review about "Dear Doctor" and that is the worst PD episode I have seen, where the Enterprise use eugenics pseudo science to justify not giving a cure to a plague affecting half the population of a planet. That made the crew seem callous not enlightened.

Can we at least agree they should never make episodes where Star Fleet officers use the PD to justify doing nothing to prevent easily preventable mass deaths from a natural source. I never want to see episodes like that, ever again.

 

[Tracy Trek]

Except its a argument based on fear rather then logic to make the jump to say that saving planets from natural disasters will lead to some truly disastrous consequences, like a Federation captain engaging in imperialism or that somehow saving them from this disaster will "ruin" them (which doesn't explain how letting them all die by a natural disaster they couldn't stop is better for them).

That never made sense to me either. There could be some affect that might not be positive. So potentially that might affect a society, worst case scenario it might ruin it. But, if they are all going to die anyway if nothing is done, you cannot get more ruined than that. If help can be given without the Starfleet officers revealing themselves, I don't see why there should be a problem.

I realize that in an episode like Homeward, what Nikolai did was just saving a tiny fraction of the planet's people. And in the long run, that might not be enough for them to survive on their new planet. But honestly, I almost wanted to gag when Picard was acting like it was noble to do nothing to help them, but to just honor the end of an entire civilization. I don't recall the exact words that Nikolai said when he left the bridge, but at the time I thought, "That just about sums it up".

 

[jmidnight_99]

That is using the slippery Slope logical fallacy, not a valid logical argument.

Not acknowledging the huge middle ground between imperialism and absolute indifference is not logical or enlightened.

Also how is letting species dying due to natural disasters good for them, if everyone is dead, how is anyone supposed to develop? This just seems like callous apathy rather then anything moral, again you expect protagonists in fiction to be proactive, if protagonist is making excuses to do nothing, they don't seem like good protagonists.

This makes the Federation seem like spoiled first world countries, that look down on developing countries and see every bad thing that happens to developing countries is their own fault. Does anyone think providing aid to developing countries who have been devastated by a natural disaster as a bad thing?

Again I don't see how treating the PD as a unquestionable orthodoxy is logical or enlightened, it makes the Federation look like they are trying to appease some deity, they way they present it in the 24th century, as noted with this video:

http://sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/e113.php

This is a giant load of liberal crap "overlord". For one thing your doesn't your nickname make the point? Second, indifference is a lack of interest, concern, or sympathy. Indifference is an emotional state. Where has anyone argued about anyone's emotional state with regards to upholding the prime directive?

Women in Afghanistan were routinely tortured and/or executed for having the audacity to simply educate themselves. The US stepped in and got rid of that "leadership". Are you a US citizen and a liberal? How did you like the US stepping in and playing God there? I'll bet you didn't.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Yes.

The women.

That's exactly why the US went into Afghanistan .

Don't go mistaking some happy accident for the impetus of an entirely selfish ill conceived act.