Spoilers Section 31 General Discussion Thread

[fireproof78]

Some sins are so grievous that it is irrelevant if the sinner makes peace with them. She is canonically a genocidal maniac. I'm not saying it's impossible for the writers to sell an arc that makes her a sympathetic protagonist in the face of this but it's definitely a tough needle to thread and even if they do it I'm not sure how this fits into the overall Trek philosophy to the extent it's been made explicit.

The overall Trek philosophy is built on the optimism that humans can change. That we can become better as a people, and work with our differences rather than battle because of them.

So maybe she can't make peace with her past sins, though that was in another universe. Maybe she works to be better because that's the only way she can atone? Why is that a negative story?

I struggle so hard with this because humanity is dark. We have savage nature, and people struggle with it on a daily basis. I see the darkness of humanity daily sometimes. And I have to safety plan around it and work to aid people in making changes.

If we say the worst of us cannot be changed then there is no hope for any of us.

It's not looking down on someone who gained her power by slavery, bigotry, and a soul crushing environment of fear, along with a dash of cannibalism and heaps of torture and cruelty. If the show was about Adolf Hitler getting a puppy and learning the true meaning of friendship, a lot of people would rightfully have a problem with it. That signifies growth for this "ignoble, savage race," wouldn't you think?

It does, but we are also talking about someone who grew up in a place where killing and such was a sign of strength. At what point in time is growth not acceptable? Hitler is not acceptable because we know that his morals could be taught to him and he ignored them in favor of dominating the world. Georgiou grew up in a world were savagery was honed to a fine heart as a means of power and survival. Now she has a choice. I welcome exploring that choice.

 

[Rahul]

The worst part is:
Either this succeeds, and we will get more Trek where unabashed fascist are portrayed as the only rational heroes.

Or this fails as hard as it should, and will also bury all future one-off Trek streaming movies with it.

Just don't glorify fascists! It shouldn't be that hard, people...

 

[Q2UnME]

Well, seems like a win-win for Paramount+ and Michelle Yeoh. Paramount spends 30-40 million and gets 2-3 hours of product, allowing them to market the hell out of the fact it stars and Oscar winner. Probably also tidies up any "use me or loose me" paper they had with her. As for Michelle, she's only signing on for 60 - 90 days of filming, versus 7 - 8 months of time if this had been a series season. Allows her to fit something in she seems to really feel passionate about into her crammed schedule.

 

[James Cole]

The project will be written by Craig Sweeny and directed by Olatunde Osunsanmi, both Discovery veterans.

Craig Sweeny was attached to the most recent iteration of Section 31 a few years back. He's worked with Ira Steven Behr, Robert Hewitt Wolfe, and Rene Echevarria in the past.

He was one of the people brought in to stabilize DISCOVERY when Bryan Fuller "left" and his lieutenants Harberts and Berg took over, in fraught cohabitation with Akiva Goldsman.

Many people in different silos of the fandom have always accused NuTrek of taking a movie idea and stretching it out into a season. Here it looks like either the reverse happened, or they'll just film the pilot and leave it open ended.

So as a NuTrek "hater"... this doesn't seem that damaging to me, knock on wood. It lets them resolve a piece of unfinished business from DISCOVERY, work off what commitments Yeoh has on the books, and write off what work the various Section 31 mini-rooms did.

Short of them graphically yanking out eyeballs I'd watch it.

 

[fireproof78]

The worst part is:
Either this succeeds, and we will get more Trek where unabashed fascist are portrayed as the only rational heroes.

Or this fails as hard as it should, and will also bury all future one-off Trek streaming movies with it.

Just don't glorify fascists! It shouldn't be that hard, people...

They're not. She's not the same person from Discovery Season 1. People change.

That's the heart of Star Trek is that people can change. Why is this so hard, people?

Short of them graphically yanking out eyeballs I'd watch it.

Sorry, that's the first short, and the second and the third.

 

[Tomalak]

I'm up for this.

I think they made some conceptual mistakes in DSC season 1 by making Empress Philippa the worst person in history if the plan was to 'redeem' her.

But putting that aside, Yeoh is great and was the best thing about Discovery, and the show has missed her.

I think the prospect for one-off films and/or mini-series is quite interesting too. Just give me my Rachel Garrett show already.

 

[Amaris]

The overall Trek philosophy is built on the optimism that humans can change. That we can become better as a people, and work with our differences rather than battle because of them.

So maybe she can't make peace with her past sins, though that was in another universe. Maybe she works to be better because that's the only way she can atone? Why is that a negative story?

I struggle so hard with this because humanity is dark. We have savage nature, and people struggle with it on a daily basis. I see the darkness of humanity daily sometimes. And I have to safety plan around it and work to aid people in making changes.

If we say the worst of us cannot be changed then there is no hope for any of us.

It does, but we are also talking about someone who grew up in a place where killing and such was a sign of strength. At what point in time is growth not acceptable? Hitler is not acceptable because we know that his morals could be taught to him and he ignored them in favor of dominating the world. Georgiou grew up in a world were savagery was honed to a fine heart as a means of power and survival. Now she has a choice. I welcome exploring that choice.

She did, yes, but she's being portrayed to people who do not have that background. If the idea is anyone can be redeemed, that could be worth exploring on a philosophical level, but this story is likely going to be full of stereotypes and tropes that have long been associated with, as I said before, police procedurals.

In short, it's a very fine line to walk, because it's one thing to show that people can be redeemed, can change, and another to make palatable a person who has engaged in analogues of some of the worst atrocities of humanity.

Because we're not from a mirror universe where everyone is evil, there's no biological or cosmological force that has made us "lucky" by birthright, and I don't know if the writers are going to be up to the challenge of portraying a Hitler who couldn't help how she was born as someone who has fundamentally changed on a fundamental and universal level, because that is a nature vs nurture question outside of the cosmological constant, it's something that can't be tested in real life, but it can be made more appealing, more fashionable, more fun for audiences.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Fingers cross for a Prime Lorca appearance.

 

[El Maestro]

The overall Trek philosophy is built on the optimism that humans can change. That we can become better as a people, and work with our differences rather than battle because of them.

So maybe she can't make peace with her past sins, though that was in another universe. Maybe she works to be better because that's the only way she can atone? Why is that a negative story?

I struggle so hard with this because humanity is dark. We have savage nature, and people struggle with it on a daily basis. I see the darkness of humanity daily sometimes. And I have to safety plan around it and work to aid people in making changes.

If we say the worst of us cannot be changed then there is no hope for any of us.

It does, but we are also talking about someone who grew up in a place where killing and such was a sign of strength. At what point in time is growth not acceptable? Hitler is not acceptable because we know that his morals could be taught to him and he ignored them in favor of dominating the world. Georgiou grew up in a world were savagery was honed to a fine heart as a means of power and survival. Now she has a choice. I welcome exploring that choice.

You are making a good and erudite argument. We will have to wait and see how deftly (or not) this issue is navigated. I will say, though, that in every case in history, fascism is only defeated when enough people say "no." We are in a perilous time in our culture and I am wary of anything that makes the advance of fascism easier and not harder. Of course, this is vastly overrating Trek's ability to affect a wider political economy, but fascism succeeds when it is normalized. The normalization is a death by a thousand cuts as the water slowly rises to a boil. We are the frog. Sorry about the mixed metaphors.

I don't for a second think that the creators of Trek are fascists or pro-fascists. I just don't want them to be the unwitting handmaidens that are replete throughout history.

 

[urbandk]

Section 31 is a genocidal organization. If it takes a génocidaire to put an end to this depraved blot on the Federation once and for all, I'm all for it. I'm fascinated by this. I've waited ages for this to happen, and I can't wait to see what they do.

Between this and the 32nd century academy show, I'm getting excited about Trek again!

 

[Amaris]

You are making a good and erudite argument. We will have to wait and see how deftly (or not) this issue is navigated. I will say, though, that in every case in history, fascism is only defeated when enough people say "no." We are in a perilous time in our culture and I am wary of anything that makes the advance of fascism easier and not harder. Of course, this is vastly overrating Trek's ability to affect a wider political economy, but fascism succeeds when it is normalized. The normalization is a death by a thousand cuts as the water slowly rises to a boil. We are the frog. Sorry about the mixed metaphors.

I don't for a second think that the creators of Trek are fascists or pro-fascists. I just don't want them to be the unwitting handmaidens that are replete throughout history.

Indeed, this has always been my fear with a Section 31 series. A show that glorifies torture, mass murder, the complete violation of civil rights in the name of a secure and orderly society. That is the hallmark of fascism.

Honestly, the writers kind of screwed us all over by making it so the evil nature of mirror universe humans isn't because history diverged, but because the universe itself is "evil." The moment they did that, they took agency away from the antagonists, and made them a product of their nature rather than of their upbringing. It was a stupid thing to do, because it gave Space Hitler room for compassion and accommodation, to let her step away from her actions as just being products of the universe in which she was born.

 

[James Cole]

Sorry, that's the first short, and the second and the third.

That said, I think this might turn out well written, and I'd hope Section 31 would have more advanced techniques to extract information from people than brute force body horror violence.

 

[fireproof78]

You are making a good and erudite argument. We will have to wait and see how deftly (or not) this issue is navigated. I will say, though, that in every case in history, fascism is only defeated when enough people say "no." We are in a perilous time in our culture and I am wary of anything that makes the advance of fascism easier and not harder. Of course, this is vastly overrating Trek's ability to affect a wider political economy, but fascism succeeds when it is normalized. The normalization is a death by a thousand cuts as the water slowly rises to a boil. We are the frog. Sorry about the mixed metaphors.

I don't for a second think that the creators of Trek are fascists or pro-fascists. I just don't want them to be the unwitting handmaidens that are replete throughout history.

I understand the reticence but I just don't see it the same way. If we are to say that humanity can change then why can't we explore what that change would look like for people were fascism was the norm but now has choice?

 

[Campe]

I’m excited for more Michelle Yeoh in Trek, post Oscar win! Not entirely sure how this project would have dealt with the moral gray issues around Section 31 as a regular series so I’m hopeful that this does that well.

 

[Amaris]

I understand the reticence but I just don't see it the same way. If we are to say that humanity can change then why can't we explore what that change would look like for people were fascism was the norm but now has choice?

It's not just that fascism is the norm, though, it's that these people are fascists on a basic universal level. Their whole universe is tilted towards fascism. It isn't just systemic, it's universally endemic.

Also, we already have that idea in Star Trek. The culture we live in right now is precluded towards fascism, especially the US, the nation of origin for Star Trek and many of its ideas and perceptions, and Star Trek shows humanity pushing beyond those boundaries, to change the system in order to better fit the needs of people rather than the demands of a self-interested State.

Honestly, it's more likely that Section 31 will portray the organization as a systemic good or even a "necessary evil," and all that does is make fascism more palatable. As I said, I will give it a chance, but considering the culture in which we currently live, which normalizes this kind of thing anyway, I'm not holding out a lot of optimism.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

The worst part is:
Either this succeeds, and we will get more Trek where unabashed fascist are portrayed as the only rational heroes.

Or this fails as hard as it should, and will also bury all future one-off Trek streaming movies with it.

Just don't glorify fascists! It shouldn't be that hard, people...

 

[fireproof78]

Honestly, it's more likely that Section 31 will portray the organization as a systemic good or even a "necessary evil," and all that does is make fascism more palatable. As I said, I will give it a chance, but considering the culture in which we currently live, which normalizes this kind of thing anyway, I'm not holding out a lot of optimism.

I guess I don't have the fear around it. Like how can we explore how to change these behaviors if we are not willing to address the need that people feel fascism fills? People assume that freedom and responsibility are ground states for humanity, but they are as much learned behaviors and require positive reinforcement and support in order to grow.

If it isn't great then it can be ignored. Given that it's a one shot I would hardly hold this as a "shinning light of fascism" any more than Spock's praise of Nazi Germany is emblematic of the franchise.

 

[Amaris]

I guess I don't have the fear around it. Like how can we explore how to change these behaviors if we are not willing to address the need that people feel fascism fills? People assume that freedom and responsibility are ground states for humanity, but they are as much learned behaviors and require positive reinforcement and support in order to grow.

If it isn't great then it can be ignored. Given that it's a one shot I would hardly hold this as a "shinning light of fascism" any more than Spock's praise of Nazi Germany is emblematic of the franchise.

We've explored how to change these behaviors. Hell, right now Andor is doing a hell of a job illuminating the idea that people can change, can become better than their upbringing, and they do it while shining a light on people fighting for freedom, in the name of liberation rather than so-called peace and order at all costs.

Instead of doing that, Star Trek is going to give us a show about the evil organization that committed genocide, which previous shows like Deep Space 9 took great pains to point out as vile, antithetical to Starfleet/the Federation/modern humanity, and make the main protagonist a woman who, in her universe, was the analog of Hitler.

Seems like the wrong direction to me, and yeah, it's concerning because Star Trek has been influential for 50+ years, otherwise it wouldn't have survived if people wouldn't have taken it to heart as they have. I'm concerned about where it's going with shows like this. I think it's good to be concerned with such a directional change, because it will be so easy to normalize tactics that we use in the modern day, here in reality, and pass them off as necessary evils, things that have to be done for "the greater good."

The series might be fantasy, but the end results can leak into reality, as they have in the past.

 

[Phily B]

I'm so tired of Section 31 taking centre stage.

 

[fireproof78]

We've explored how to change these behaviors. Hell, right now Andor is doing a hell of a job illuminating the idea that people can change, can become better than their upbringing, and they do it while shining a light on people fighting for freedom, in the name of liberation rather than so-called peace and order at all costs.

Instead of doing that, Star Trek is going to give us a show about the evil organization that committed genocide, which previous shows like Deep Space 9 took great pains to point out as vile, antithetical to Starfleet/the Federation/modern humanity, and make the main protagonist a woman who, in her universe, was the analog of Hitler.

Seems like the wrong direction to me, and yeah, it's concerning because Star Trek has been influential for 50+ years, otherwise it wouldn't have survived if people wouldn't have taken it to heart as they have. I'm concerned about where it's going with shows like this. I think it's good to be concerned with such a directional change, because it will be so easy to normalize tactics that we use in the modern day, here in reality, and pass them off as necessary evils, things that have to be done for "the greater good."

The series might be fantasy, but the end results can leak into reality, as they have in the past.

While I respect your opinion, I will respectfully disagree largely because I do not believe Star Trek has influence, or if any very limited. And two, I think that it would invite the discussion that I think is more pressing and that is what does it mean to change. I don't think Andor does as good of a job with discussing that because Andor presents the same level of violence as acceptable so long as it's in service to the Rebellion. And that's it.

I honestly welcome this in Star Trek because it invites what does it mean for humanity to grow and to change, and become closer to the Trek idea of a growing humanity means exploring all facets of humanity and exploring how we can change. I don't think it glorifies it so much as it shines a light on this behavior and what the consequences can be.