Sisko's racial rant in Badda-Bing Badda-Bang
- Thread starter John200
- Start date
I'm part English, and part Scottish. At least I probably am. You see, in the 16th and 17th century the English monarchs, and later Cromwell, decided to "civilise" Ireland by sending loyal English and Scottish settlers to live here. The earliest of these plantations weren't successful, rather than converting the native Irish to English customs, the native Irish managed to convert the settlers to Irish customs. But the English monarchs didn't give up and with each plantation they learned valuable lessons and improved their strategy. By the late 17th century Ireland was firmly under the control of an elite protestant ascendancy.I dunno. I may not be African-American, and thus, I may not really understand.
However...I am part Cherokee. As you know, the Cherokee tribe suffered a great deal under some rather unfortunate policies (to put it mildly) of the US, under Jackson and Van Buren.
I also have a great deal of Irish blood in my veins (which helps explain my occasional flairs of firey temper). The Irish, of course, have endured quite a bit of strife at the hands of the British.
Nonetheless...none of this would cause me to refuse to enjoy a fictional program set in the days of early America, or in England, during the time periods I mentioned. I would understand, as Kassidy did, that regardless of the opression of the past, I could enjoy the good of that time, without enduring the pain of the bad.
Am I ignoring the Trail of Tears, or the Irish oppresion? Perhaps...but then...perhaps not. That does not make me an "Uncle Tom", any more than Kassidy is.
So, with all those English people that came over here I wouldn't be all that surprised if I found out that over 50% of my bloodline comes from there. That wouldn't make me English, although it might explain my arrogance.
The most obvious effect of those plantations is the existence of Northern Ireland. The plantation of Ulster was one of the most successful and four of the nine counties up there had a protestant majority that favoured union with Britain. The British government couldn't let those regions be a part of the Irish Free State because it would have led to a civil war. They couldn't keep all nine counties of Ulster because demographically they were trending catholic, they couldn't just keep the four counties that were majority protestant because it was felt that would have been too small a region to maintain a political identity. In the end Northern Ireland was made up of six counties, two of which were majority catholic, so that meant that there was a substantial catholic minority living in Northern Ireland. (Ironically, the existence of Northern Ireland was a cause of great friction in the new Irish Free State and it led to a civil war down here here anyway.)
For decades the government in NI suppressed the catholic minority in a number of ways, such as gerrymandering and discrimination in housing policy. In the 1960s the catholic minority created a civil rights group in the hope of creating an equal society in NI, but some people (not all) in the protestant community tried to suppress this movement by attacking peaceful marches. Sometimes the police just let it happen, other times they actually joined in. Because of this the Provisional IRA were created to protect the catholic community, their support grew and they managed to carry out a terrorist campaign demanding NI independence for several decades.
If somebody were to create a holoprogram of 1970s Northern Ireland and failed to include anything about the civil rights movement or The Troubles then I would be offended. I don't come from Northern Ireland, I don't know anybody from Northern Ireland, I'm not catholic (any more), and I don't have a problem with Northern Ireland being a part of the UK as long as the majority of the population living there wish to be so. But to ignore the truth of what happened at that time, to ignore the innocent people that died on either side of that conflict, is just plain wrong.
Northern Ireland is at peace now, but it is still a divided community in too many ways. There are still areas up there where it would be dangerous for a protestant to live, and there are areas where it would be dangerous for a catholic to live, and they have disputes over who can march down what roads and when, and they have disputes over what to call Derry/Londonderry. The nationalist community still mostly votes for the SDLP or Sinn Féin and the unionist community still mostly votes for the DUP or the UUP. I hope that one day they will be able to put all that behind them and all this sectarian BS will be consigned to history... but that doesn't mean that people should ever forget the truth about what really happened in the past.
The same principle applies to the civil rights movement in the US.
Learning about the existence of inequality does not inhibit learning equality. It further motivates it.
It's far easier to be committed to egalitarianism if you know what oppression leads to.
I don't think you have to forget the truth to imagine what it would've been like if things were different.
In a lot of ways, Vic is a native of an AU. I would not be surprised, as I mentioned before, if he were fully aware of the fact and I suspect he would not, if asked, hide from that fact in the slightest. Unlike the "Irish" people in "Fair Haven," Vic would be fully aware that he's not necessarily historically accurate and very likely considers his programmed reality as Felix's idea of an alternate timeline. I think a perfectly valid way to address this disparity would have been to have Sisko and Vic actually sit down and discuss it as sentient being to sentient being. Now, since I believe that the fact that Vic is alive overrides any personal sentiments, however strong (just as it had to with Kejal--who may have had some Cardassian-ness in her but was not a real Cardassian), I think a conversation of this nature would have been more appropriate in light of the fact that Vic was a living being who, during the jack-in-the-box scenario, was in danger of dying.
I think the divide between "timelines" could have been covered--but the writers should have given more thought to the implications of Vic's sentience and how it made Sisko look to be dismissing the fact that Vic was going to die if he wasn't given ALL of the help he needed.
In a lot of ways, Vic is a native of an AU. I would not be surprised, as I mentioned before, if he were fully aware of the fact and I suspect he would not, if asked, hide from that fact in the slightest. Unlike the "Irish" people in "Fair Haven," Vic would be fully aware that he's not necessarily historically accurate and very likely considers his programmed reality as Felix's idea of an alternate timeline. I think a perfectly valid way to address this disparity would have been to have Sisko and Vic actually sit down and discuss it as sentient being to sentient being. Now, since I believe that the fact that Vic is alive overrides any personal sentiments, however strong (just as it had to with Kejal--who may have had some Cardassian-ness in her but was not a real Cardassian), I think a conversation of this nature would have been more appropriate in light of the fact that Vic was a living being who, during the jack-in-the-box scenario, was in danger of dying.
I think the divide between "timelines" could have been covered--but the writers should have given more thought to the implications of Vic's sentience and how it made Sisko look to be dismissing the fact that Vic was going to die if he wasn't given ALL of the help he needed.
Sure. But I don't think that being made aware of historical oppression is an inhibition to learning egalitarianism, either.
Which was the point of the whole rest of my post. Discuss it--but in a manner that respects the fact that Vic is a sentient being in his own right. The appropriate thing would've been to sit down and talk with him face-to-face and find out what Vic's awareness of the differences is (which based on what else he knows, should be no less than full awareness): once he gets sentience, then he needs to be given the same consideration due to a flesh-and-blood being. Or due to Data, or the Doctor. Sisko should've talked with him, instead of acting like Vic was just a mindless toy that he didn't like.
After rewatching the clip, I honestly have to ask: what's the big deal? If he holds a grudge, he sure got over it rather quickly. I also don't see the cringe-worthiness of it, either; it's neither conservative nor liberal to remember actual history and act upon it.
I'm sorry, but this thread is fuckin' hilarious....
Isn't it? Where else would you find a poster arguing for the "human rights" of a computer simulation while at the same time trying to argue that "we're not racist anymore, so we shouldn't be reminded that once upon a time we were."
Many, many years ago, black performers took a lot of abuse from a segment of the black audience for accepting roles such as Butterfly McQueen's portrayal of Prissy in Gone with the Wind.
Their "argument" was that her speech pattern was insulting to blacks. No one of any color could convince them that, Hey, guess what? Black slaves in the South did not speak like Ivy League graduates!
The attempt to say "That's the past, let's pretend it never happened" is a disservice to generations coming up behind you...who think that the mere mention of racism is taboo.
Sisko's speech is as legitimate in the context of that episode as any of Kirk's "risk is our business" speeches. It's meant to place the episode authentically within the context of 1960s Earth, and it does so.
Well, I don't have any real strong feelings for Sisko's comments in this episode either way. But: Hmmm, just to throw this out there- a lot of the holodeck programs we see Bashir and O'Brien playing are war-based (Battle of Britain, Alamo, etc). Given my strong opinions on the historical treatment of adolescent boys and young men in regards to war, would you mind if I or someone like me interrupted a light-hearted story of a fun holodeck adventure with B and O'B in a war game to make a "rant" about history and how this is glamourizing or sweeping under the carpet my people's maltreatment? I imagine you'd be peeved, whoever you are- whether you agree with me or not doesn't matter, you'd be peeved because I'm interrupting a light-hearted story with a rant about history and politics and so on. It would be especially irritating if we lived in a world where that was only history.
So, I don't mind Sisko's "rant" here at all, but I fully understand why it's annoying to some people. You might say he's right to make a point of it. Well I'd say I'm right to make the war point above. But if I popped up every time you sat down to watch a show or episode with a war setting and started making my rant, you'd get irritated quite quickly. And you'd be quite right to be irritated.
Maybe for some people "race rant for pre-civil rights setting" popped up once too often while they were simply trying to watch a fun show "set there"? Maybe Sisko broke the camel's back- possibly because he lives in a world where the effects of that racism are long gone.
So, I don't mind Sisko's "rant" here at all, but I fully understand why it's annoying to some people. You might say he's right to make a point of it. Well I'd say I'm right to make the war point above. But if I popped up every time you sat down to watch a show or episode with a war setting and started making my rant, you'd get irritated quite quickly. And you'd be quite right to be irritated.
Maybe for some people "race rant for pre-civil rights setting" popped up once too often while they were simply trying to watch a fun show "set there"? Maybe Sisko broke the camel's back- possibly because he lives in a world where the effects of that racism are long gone.
Garamet--I'm not saying forget what happened. If you read, you'll see that I'm saying there would be an appropriate place to put a discussion into the episode...i.e. actually talk it out face-to-face with Vic. As a living AI, he should be approached with the respect due to a living being, rather than talking behind his back. If Sisko feels the problem is sufficient to merit discussion, then take it straight to Vic--don't sit back and act like it's OK for Vic to die. I think the writers just didn't think that one through. B'Elanna and Kejal aired their problems to each other's faces...the same should've happened here.
But, forgive my stating this so powerfully but in many regards it is indeed this blatant: shoving a "you're a victim" self-image down their throats to the point that people feel eternally oppressed leads to inequality and suffering disguised as equality, which is where modern Western left-wing politics has all too often brought us (and NO, this is not a pro-right wing comment, I am opposed to them too. Both the left and the right are as bad as each other when it comes to hypocrisy and ideologically-driven blindness). It leads to inequality that is denied because "EVERYONE knows this is the oppressed group, right?" Ideology trumps truth. Convincing people to see themselves as oppressed and so entitled when they aren't, where they have a chip on their shoulder over perceived slights and are constantly attacking society with their calls for "equality" where they're actually victimizing others...is not equality.
Believe me, it's quite a headache trying to penetrate blind pro-equality ideology to get people to see they are not in fact promoting equality at all- instead they are damaging it.
Now I don't think the Sisko "rant" is an example- I'm quite convinced it isn't- but saying "awareness of inequality leads to equality" is simplistic and incorrect- it may just as likely lead to further inequality.
As always, ideology gets in the way and blinds people- particularly those involved in politics, who are the ones who need to be least biased.
Is that not in a sense what Kassidy said to Sisko in this episode? See the reality, here and now, not your bringing-past-into-present blinded-to-your-own-obligations victim-complex? You have obligations to help Vic, but you won't because you can only see that your people are (in this case "were") the victims, not him!!! But Vic is suffering. He needs you. And Sisko sees she is right and does the right thing by going to help Vic, and setting aside his own ideology in order to do his duty to a friend and help them when they're suffering. He did the noble and correct thing- unfortunately very few leaders will in our reality. They're too busy inisting through their blindfolds that these people are victims to see that they are aiding in the victimization or suffering of others, and doing nothing to help. I apologise for the undertones of bitterness, but all too often pushing for equality does not get that result because everything's skewed and victimization is a concept applied selectively and in keeping with ideological demands, rather than truth.
And spiralling resentment and cycles of distaste, hate and factionalism result.
Last edited:
I'm part English, and part Scottish. At least I probably am. You see, in the 16th and 17th century the English monarchs, and later Cromwell, decided to "civilise" Ireland by sending loyal English and Scottish settlers to live here. The earliest of these plantations weren't successful, rather than converting the native Irish to English customs, the native Irish managed to convert the settlers to Irish customs. But the English monarchs didn't give up and with each plantation they learned valuable lessons and improved their strategy. By the late 17th century Ireland was firmly under the control of an elite protestant ascendancy.I dunno. I may not be African-American, and thus, I may not really understand.
However...I am part Cherokee. As you know, the Cherokee tribe suffered a great deal under some rather unfortunate policies (to put it mildly) of the US, under Jackson and Van Buren.
I also have a great deal of Irish blood in my veins (which helps explain my occasional flairs of firey temper
Nonetheless...none of this would cause me to refuse to enjoy a fictional program set in the days of early America, or in England, during the time periods I mentioned. I would understand, as Kassidy did, that regardless of the opression of the past, I could enjoy the good of that time, without enduring the pain of the bad.
Am I ignoring the Trail of Tears, or the Irish oppresion? Perhaps...but then...perhaps not. That does not make me an "Uncle Tom", any more than Kassidy is.
So, with all those English people that came over here I wouldn't be all that surprised if I found out that over 50% of my bloodline comes from there. That wouldn't make me English, although it might explain my arrogance.
The most obvious effect of those plantations is the existence of Northern Ireland. The plantation of Ulster was one of the most successful and four of the nine counties up there had a protestant majority that favoured union with Britain. The British government couldn't let those regions be a part of the Irish Free State because it would have led to a civil war. They couldn't keep all nine counties of Ulster because demographically they were trending catholic, they couldn't just keep the four counties that were majority protestant because it was felt that would have been too small a region to maintain a political identity. In the end Northern Ireland was made up of six counties, two of which were majority catholic, so that meant that there was a substantial catholic minority living in Northern Ireland. (Ironically, the existence of Northern Ireland was a cause of great friction in the new Irish Free State and it led to a civil war down here here anyway.)
For decades the government in NI suppressed the catholic minority in a number of ways, such as gerrymandering and discrimination in housing policy. In the 1960s the catholic minority created a civil rights group in the hope of creating an equal society in NI, but some people (not all) in the protestant community tried to suppress this movement by attacking peaceful marches. Sometimes the police just let it happen, other times they actually joined in. Because of this the Provisional IRA were created to protect the catholic community, their support grew and they managed to carry out a terrorist campaign demanding NI independence for several decades.
If somebody were to create a holoprogram of 1970s Northern Ireland and failed to include anything about the civil rights movement or The Troubles then I would be offended. I don't come from Northern Ireland, I don't know anybody from Northern Ireland, I'm not catholic (any more), and I don't have a problem with Northern Ireland being a part of the UK as long as the majority of the population living there wish to be so. But to ignore the truth of what happened at that time, to ignore the innocent people that died on either side of that conflict, is just plain wrong.
Northern Ireland is at peace now, but it is still a divided community in too many ways. There are still areas up there where it would be dangerous for a protestant to live, and there are areas where it would be dangerous for a catholic to live, and they have disputes over who can march down what roads and when, and they have disputes over what to call Derry/Londonderry. The nationalist community still mostly votes for the SDLP or Sinn Féin and the unionist community still mostly votes for the DUP or the UUP. I hope that one day they will be able to put all that behind them and all this sectarian BS will be consigned to history... but that doesn't mean that people should ever forget the truth about what really happened in the past.
The same principle applies to the civil rights movement in the US.
And yet somehow Miles O'Brien managed not to whine about it in DS9. Nor did his Japanese wife whine about her people being put into concentration camps in the USA a couple of decades before the 1960s. I could go on but you get the picture.
Two things. (A) Brooks, like Shatner, is a trained Shakespearean actor, and the writers used that to good effect here. Sisko's outrage creates a dramatic moment that has far more emotional impact (as witness the reactions here) than a quiet little tete-a-tete with Vic would have. The speech stands out.
(B) GR blurred the lines between organic being and AI the minute he created Data, and the constant hand-wringing over whether or not he was "human" was one of the - many - aspects of TNG that had some of us pounding our heads against the wall.
The ultimate fulfillment of that "just because I was created in a lab/computer sim doesn't mean I'm not just as human as you are" concept is, of course, the Doctor in VOY.
Vic Fontaine is in some respects a midpoint between the two. In others, he's a conundrum. Both Data and the Doctor had implanted memories from living human beings. I don't believe it was ever stated that Vic was based on anyone real. So he's as "real" as Dr. Moriarity...which is to say not at all.
YOu have to wonder what Keiko might have said if Vic's was a holoprogram set in the America of the 1940s and showed Japanese-Americans working side by side with other Americans in a USO club.
I am curious, jut how sentient was Vic? Could he actually carry on a conversation with Sisko about the inaccuracies of the program and the inequalities of the era in which its placed?
I am curious, jut how sentient was Vic? Could he actually carry on a conversation with Sisko about the inaccuracies of the program and the inequalities of the era in which its placed?
Because DS9 never had an episode set in a holodeck recreation of Northern Ireland in 1970 where everyone was peaceful and got along. If they had tried to do such an episode you had damn well better believe that Colm Meaney would have bitched at the writers to add in a similar scene as Sisko's because he's a supporter of Sinn Féin.
It never came up. Sisko didn't just walk into Ops one day and say, 'You know what gets my gall? A few centuries ago my ancestors were opppressed in the United States!'; he was reacting to a specific context.
There actually is one little bit of subtext on the issue, though I think it might glide past many viewers: Miles O'Brien's best friend is Julian Bashir, a British guy. That's very classically Star Trek; in the future we'll all get over this sort of attitude.
But I think the reason some people hate the "rant"- and as I say I personally have no real problem with it- is precisely because they thought it was a "slip". The fact that Sisko didn't ever draw attention to his race- that he did never walk into ops and make a point about it- was one of the great things about DS9. The captain and hero is black- but it doesn't make a point of it, he's just Sisko. His race matters not at all. And "Far Beyond the Stars" is okay, because there it's Benny Russell's race that matters, not Sisko's. And Benny Russell's race IS a big deal- but Sisko's still isn't. But in Badda-Bing Badda-Bang, for the first time, Sisko's race is brought up- which strikes many as a shame, I think.
Not necessarily so. B'Elanna and Kejal came face-to-face, and that got pretty dramatic when they both called each other on their stereotypes. Not that I think it needs to be a shouting match in order to be powerful and memorable (and I think that's often a key mistake people made). An actor should know how to use quiet and silence where they are necessary, too, to make a powerful point...and in TV where you can get a close-up, that's very possible.
Moriarty was most likely--in my opinion--the first of the sentient holograms. His history and temperament are based on fiction, but the artificial intelligence that is Moriarty is just as sentient and real as Data. The trouble with him was that like Crell Moset and Lore, his decision-making processes were dangerously flawed and so like a flesh-and-blood being that made those sorts of decisions, he had to be held responsible and confined. (Though in the case of Moset and Moriarty, there is some responsibility on the part of the creators for deliberately creating beings known to be psychopathic. Lore, on the other hand, was not deliberately created to be that way and as such is wholly liable for his own actions.)
He was able to carry on a conversation about events that occurred in a universe entirely outside his experience (he knew what was happening in the Dominion War and so on); that makes me think he could. He was also able to see into alien psychology effectively enough to make happen the "cures" he wanted to happen (i.e. getting Odo and Kira together, getting Nog to face real life). He might frame it in unusual terms, but I strongly suspect he could carry on said conversation.
And GR had his bigotries, too. Q.v. TNG's "Up the Long Ladder."
Don't make me start on that episode. Apparently in the distant future the Irish will revert to postcard stereotypes of cheerful fairy folk. To imagine this was actually written in the late 1980s is a little headache inducing.
It's the first time it's ever mattered. Just like Miles O'Brien never brought up his Irish identity in any meaningful way, or Julian Bashir his British identity. If the hypothetical Northern Ireland 'things are dandy' program was in the holodeck, I'd expect O'Brien to be pissed. I'd be pissed if he wasn't pissed.
Now, Sisko's blackness wasn't invisible prior to this point. He has African art in his quarters, he makes creole food. One can infer it's an identity that matters to him, but this being Star Trek, you don't have to really ever get hot and bothered about it most of the time.
