So its ok to move Indians but not the Baku?
- Thread starter GeneHunt
- Start date
Picard sleeps under a smallpox blanket.
It really doesn't make sense.
If Dougherty had clearance to take the Ba'ku, why even bother with a cloaked ship? Just tell them to pack, if they refuse, beam them away.
This is really no different from Picard ordering Worf to secretly transport the dudes away in JE.
if Dougherty did not have clearance, then what orders DID he have?
To watch them secretly and look if they're leaving on their own? They didn't even try to tell the Ba'ku what's up and nicely ask them to leave or something. And considering they had the cloaked ship, they never were going to.
If Dougherty had clearance to take the Ba'ku, why even bother with a cloaked ship? Just tell them to pack, if they refuse, beam them away.
This is really no different from Picard ordering Worf to secretly transport the dudes away in JE.
if Dougherty did not have clearance, then what orders DID he have?
To watch them secretly and look if they're leaving on their own? They didn't even try to tell the Ba'ku what's up and nicely ask them to leave or something. And considering they had the cloaked ship, they never were going to.
The bastard wanted to look like the good guy, or the real victim....most of these greedy types often act like that.
Glad the douche' bag got it in the end. Though I would have rather given him a phaser enema.
The Anij chick made him realize the truth.
quite a funny episode, this journey's end. doesn't the chief blame picard for an ancestor named picard who alledgedly massacred an indian tribe in the year 1680? mathematics is evidently not a strength of spriritual people, otherwise the good chief would have realised that 680 years later, capt picard isn't only the descendant of picard the indian slayer, but also a descendant of each single victim. a poor episode.
Naah. The Indians had pledged themselves to the laws of the UFP, expressly giving the government the right to deport them if necessary. The Ba'ku were to be deported without their consent.
If the PD were in force in ST:INS, the Indians could be equated to consenting adults, while the Ba'ku could be compared to children whose consent was not needed. But the PD did not apply to the Ba'ku, not in the sense of "these are primitives who don't know of space aliens, so any action revealing space aliens to them is forbidden, and any action keeping them from finding out or otherwise being harmed by outer space is encouraged". So the "let's move them in secret from themselves so they come to minimum harm" rationale wouldn't work after the nature of the Ba'ku as starfarers became known.
So there could really be three sets of truths.
1) The Ba'ku are ignorant natives who sit on a treasure, and the PD not only allows but requires them to be moved in secret. The Council can legitimately order this.
2) The Ba'ku are knowledgeable starfarers who sit on a treasure, and the PD does not protect them from alien influences but UFP laws do grant them self-determination rights. The Council cannot legitimately order their deportation without contacting them, but Dougherty can justify his actions with "greater good".
3) The Ba'ku are the mother culture of the Son'a, and victims of a dastardly plot. The Council cannot legitimize any part of the operation, and Dougherty has no moral leg to stand on, either.
Considering how the events transpired, it would thus seem logical to assume that the Council knew the first set of facts, and Dougherty may have gone in believing it, too. Dougherty would soon learn the second set of facts, however, and would formulate his "greater good" plan which he wouldn't drop even after Picard learned the second set and challenged the legal justification of the plan. And Picard would be the first to learn the third set of facts which pulled the rug from under the whole thing.
That way, the Council did no wrong and nothing illegal. Dougherty went illegal in not informing his superiors of the second set of facts, but probably acted in good faith and with good intentions in persisting with the plan. He knew he should have contacted the Ba'ku, but he thought things would go more smoothly if he didn't. Data learned the second set of facts, too, but he thought differently from Dougherty - even though (or because?) he didn't know the nature of the treasure the Ba'ku were hoarding. That's why he rebelled.
Dougherty wasn't so completely rotten that he would have been wanting eternal youth for himself, that was made clear. But he was rotten enough to cheat the Council, and to sacrifice the E-E to the Son'a, in order to secure eternal youth for the Federation. He was misled about what it took to get that eternal youth, though.
Picard acted illegally in rebelling, but he also rebelled against orders that had become illegal due to new facts.
Rua'fo acted in hate, with a plan to exterminate the Ba'ku. His henchmen probably were more concerned with getting to the fountain of youth, and less with revenge.
And the Ba'ku merely acted selfishly and probably deserved to be deported or at least locked up in a reservate.
Timo Saloniemi
Picard was obviously in love with the Baku woman and that influenced his judgment
There it is. He never fell for an Indian woman. That's usually all it takes for the Prime Directive to get violated.
Picard was obviously in love with the Baku woman and that influenced his judgment
There it is. He never fell for an Indian woman. That's usually all it takes for the Prime Directive to get violated.
Or whiny kids begging for help!
@ Timo
great explanation as usual.
I think the best way to think of it is that indeed they did not know intitially that the Ba'ku were spacefarers who took the planet. Maybe such a case is unique to the Federation, so Picard could hope to overthrow any orders from Starfleet if he could get to the council.
But again, this shows Picard in a bad light. According to Dougherty, the PD not applying to the Ba'ku would make things easier, not harder. And Picard, who is trying to make a case in that dialogue, IIRC has no argument to counter that.
Are there no regulations for such a case? A hearing like in "The measure of a man?".
But they needed this to be a rebellion for some reason...
It certainly seems that it was Anij who persuaded Picard to "fight for their rights". What rights?
Last edited:
Wow.
Dictator much?
Bingo!
Legal schmeagal.
All this talk of "legalities" saddens me somewhat- I guess I expect more of a humanitarian sense of right & wrong from fellow Trek fans as opposed to a law school "Moral Vacuum 101."
They had a planet that had an effect no one was in desperate or immediate need of (near eternal youth). Its effects are a PLUS, not a necessity. AND they were on that planet before the Federation even existed.
This is so idiotic.
What if by strangling an irritating child, you could get back anyone you ever lost to cancer? I could have my Mom back, but I wouldn't want her back at such a moral cost.
You don't get to enjoy the good effects of an immoral act you yourself commit, unless you are more animal than human somewhere in your cortex.
The fact is the Federation seems to have authorized the translocation of the Ba'ku. If we were to assume they didn't know some facts like the Ba'ku being a Warp-capable people, there are obviously planets that the Federation owns, and where they can legally move the natives.
And that's more interesting than the Ba'ku case. The Ba'ku may have special rights as a Warp culture, and the Federation took their planet into possession without knowing (and that's maybe the grey area).
I would assume, if there are non-Federation planets with Warp capabilities that are incorporated in Fed space, this would require a strict protocol of First Contact procedures and treaties, eventually making them members, souvereign exclaves or affiliates.
But that obviously implies pre-Warp cultures in Federation space don't enjoy such rights. Nor does the PD seem to matter much in those cases.
On the other hand that makes Picard arguing with the Prime Directive here even more stupid. If the legal situation had changed due to new facts and/or this was an unprecedented case, someone like Picard should have brought it up and used it to challenge Dougherty's command.
The concept of "ownership" as it applies to a planet is a nebulous one at best. How does one claim ownership of a planet? Is it determined by what is the dominant indigenous species on the planet? Is it determined by who happens to currently live there? Is it determined by who's general territory it falls into? Or is it simply determined by who has the biggest guns?
Can the Federation claim ownership of the planet the Bak'u were on? I suppose so. At least on the grounds that (1) it was within Federation space and (2) they have bigger guns than the Bak'u. But certainly no Federation citizens we know of are native to that planet. On the other hand, neither are the Bak'u.
So is the Federation's claim of ownership an ethical one? I don't know. Is it enforceable? Well, they do have big guns...
Can the Federation claim ownership of the planet the Bak'u were on? I suppose so. At least on the grounds that (1) it was within Federation space and (2) they have bigger guns than the Bak'u. But certainly no Federation citizens we know of are native to that planet. On the other hand, neither are the Bak'u.
So is the Federation's claim of ownership an ethical one? I don't know. Is it enforceable? Well, they do have big guns...
I see your point, but that doesn't diminish for me that Picard was standing against the Federation authorizing an illegal or unethical action.
I odn't recall the Indians givingtheir consent either for that matter and I doubt if they signed the peace treaty that meant they had to lose their homes. It might've been legally right but it was morally wrong.
Gee, did we ever see a non-corrupt admiral in Trek? Dougherty, Leyton, Cartwright, Kennelly. Picard was right to turn down the promotion. Being an admiral would have made him a conspiratorial nutcase!
Agreed, even Kirk wasn't stupid enough to stay an Admiral for too long!
Well...one admiral I DO remember coming off very well was J.P. Hanson. Unfortunately he got killed.
Well there was Komack, Brooks, Kirk, Fitzpatrick, Janeway, Hayes, Marrow, Bill and Nechayev among others.
Similar threads
