Theory for TOS Enterprise and Disco Enterprise differences
- Thread starter TrickyDickie
- Start date
Oh, boo-hoo. The same self-justifying, unprovable claptrap every monster in history has used. They're not butchers and sadists, they're the strongest, smartest people, making the hard decisions that have to be made. Pull the other one.
Let's say 31 is right, that they need to exist to enable society to function. That need can have only one cause; the rule of law in an egalitarian, democratic society does not work. The Federation, or to bring it home, any liberal democracy, is a failure and a lie.
That's not good!
That means there's a fundamental conflict at the heart of their society; the Federation is dedicated to open-mindedness, tolerance, and investigation of scientific, historical, and personal truth, and they also are built upon equal protection under laws that are derived from the consent of the governed. If there is a legitimate, concrete need for something like 31 to exist, then one of those has to go. Either the Federation isn't broad-minded enough to consider that their theory of government is flawed, democracy isn't actually the best system, so their society-wide blinders allow atrocities to be committed in their name without comment, or they should be honest and forthright about the fact that live in a dictatorship run by unaccountable an elite chosen on the basis of being hard men who do hard things, which is directed by some kind of damn murder-computer that tells them who needs to die.
Having 31 be an extra-legal conspiracy that coerces cooperation and operates out of quiet, undetectable cells and rarely-used operatives questions the core assumptions of Star Trek and what the Enlightened Mankind of the Future will look like. Having them be a legitimate, duly-appointed, sanctioned, and, most terrifyingly, objectively necessary aspect of the government shatters those core assumptions. No one's really going to be inspired by the idea that Star Trek's fundamental premise is built on the idea that the problems of today are not insurmountable, that we can get past our differences and disagreements and work together towards common goals in peace, and the solution is a highly-public (branded!) team of assassins. That's just a straight-up dystopia. That's the thing Captain America was fighting against, like, four movies ago. They keep going in this direction, 31 is going to be taken down by a couple of horny teenagers in the next YA smash hit.
At the risk of pedantry is anyone inspired by Star Trek now?
If Starfleet Intelligence can't do their jobs effectively and protect federation citizens by any means necessary then someone has to do it. I'm not saying it's right but i am saying that what Section 31 does is at times necessary.
The kinds of differences one would expect from a show from 2017 compared to 1967.
Members of Section 31 will do things they think are necessary to protect the Federation, one would assume. That doesn't mean that they're always correct, though. They could get faulty intel, or draw the wrong conclusion as to the possible outcomes, or have the wrong person with a grudge making the final call, or they may just plain disagree with head Starfleet brass on the best course of action for a particular situation. That kind of thing happens all the time in the real world. And I think it's a valid story to explore.
Their intentions could be good, in terms of wanting to serve and protect the Federation's interests, but they could still take actions or use methods which are ultimately condemned as going too far and undermining its larger ideals.
Their intentions could be good, in terms of wanting to serve and protect the Federation's interests, but they could still take actions or use methods which are ultimately condemned as going too far and undermining its larger ideals.
Given that even in 21st-century politics there are multiple interpretations of correct courses of action I am going to guess that interplanetary politics are even worse.
Section 31 is hardly the only moral compromise the Federation has needed to accept to in order to survive, there are plenty of stains on Federation moral perfection out there. I'm not certain why the argument continues to be the Federation never compromises its principles ever based even on the history of the Federation. The Federation doesn't need to be Heaven to be inspiring. Imperfect people and institutions inspire people every day.
It's interesting, someone commented in another thread about the Klingon-Federation Alliance and how much the Federation must have to turn a blind eye to the conquering ways of the Empire. The Federation has no doubt ignored many a Klingon atrocity in the name of peace, that is until it didn't serve their interests.
Pretty much this. One review I read regarding TUC cited that as part of their complaint with the film. How much did the Federation concede as part of their peace treaty?
You have a wonderfully generous definition of the concept "moral compromise" if it includes the stuff you do normally that you tell everyone about. It sounds like a sassy t-shirt, "Every day is cheat day."
I'm not the one who made the foundational law of the Federation "Thou shalt not butt in." But it's an ethos, and for better or worse, they stick to it, mostly. Unlike, say, loudly proclaiming the Federation is a society of laws and liberties, except for the above-the-law group of uniformed assassins they also publicly announce.
Luckily, with Section 31, they can have it both ways! Why go to the trouble of, what exactly are you suggesting, conquering and/or exterminating the Klingon civilization to preserve innocents on the far side of their territory? Why do that, when they could covertly subvert their government using their overt, highly public assassination squad that leads directly back to them? No wonder there was another war less than ten years after Burnham's War. I'm more amazed that the Klingons didn't assume Praxis was another Federation plot to coerce them into another surrender and go to war immediately. Hell, maybe it was, and Gorkon was another 31 stooge.
In a less dark-and-gritty version of Star Trek without fully-avowed badass space-assassins, your realpolitik ideals might instead lead you to think a great, sucking wound in the galaxy where the Klingon Empire used to be might not be all sunshine and roses for the peace and prosperity of the larger Beta Quadrant, and maybe the better choice, long term, is to kill them with kindness, and spend a couple hundred years root-beer-ing the Klingons until they become a vibrant part of the Federation cultural tapestry, even if it does mean a few planets get conquered by the Empire in the meantime (planets which probably would've, instead, been conquered and re-conquered by Klingon warlords, Romulan imperialists, and any other parties with an interest in fighting over the wreckage of the Empire).
And how much do you think the Federation "conceded"? Are you suggesting they'd been circumnavigating the Neutral Zone to defend unaligned civilizations along the Klingons' other borders, and not just protecting planets in the general area of where the two nations intersected? Indeed, who says they conceded anything beyond demilitarizing the border? The Klingons were the ones over a barrel, scurrying from their own poisoned capital like rats off a sinking ship. I think the fact that the Klingon military is called the "Klingon Defense Force" in the TNG-era is pretty compelling evidence Khitomer wasn't some kind of Munich Conference where the Federation sold out the galaxy because their soft hearts and softer brains couldn't stand to watch the poor widdle Klingons choke to death on their own hubris.
Oh thank god there are some people on this forum that actually realise this and don't think everything Discovery does is completely great and 100% justified. S31 being an official organisation isn't just canon breaking, it's almost just sheer core-concept of Star Trek breaking. I and so many Trek fans don't want to watch another dystopian sci-fi vision where there are evil assassins killing people and brutal Realpolitik is still the status-quo of foreign policy. We want to watch a future that is better than ours and Discovery by making S31 basically the 23nd century CIA just craps all over that. Especially that "nation building isn't pretty" line in E4. Jesus christ I nearly threw up in my mouth. That isn't what Star Trek is about, that is absolutely cynical 21st century war-hawk realpolitik views of the writers sneaking in and justifying things like Libya, Venezuela, Iraq, Syria, Yemen etc.
With due respect that is an oversimplification of the worst kind. It seems to presuppose that there are only two options, either dirty and gritty and sunshine and roses. The Klingons are conquerors and slavers, willing to tramble and manipulate in order to demonstrate their strength. Which part of the Klingons atrocities should be ignored?
I think that TUC presents both the best and the worst of the Federation, much in the same way Section 31 does. My point is that if there is room for the amount of growth demonstrated by the Starfleet officers then similar growth can be demonstrated by the Federation regarding S31.
If there was any indication that Section 31 operates as a Federation 'secret police' internally, then this might be true. Fortunately, virtually everything we've seen of Section 31's activities suggest that it is predominately an external security organisation focused on countering organisations like the Tal-Shiar, Obsidian Order and potentially the Orion Syndicate and Klingon (Imperial) Intelligence, which are a clear threat to Federation interests and security who obviously cannot be countered by diplomacy, and offensive warfare is counter to Federation policy except where absolutely necessary, which leaves covert (counter-)intelligence as the best tool for the job.
I agree that Sloan's cell appears to be somewhat less accountable than is perhaps desirable, but I think the interactions between Leland and Cornwell go along way to suggesting that Sloan's cell was probably rogue (potentially for the reason outlined in IASL) and the Section normally has at least an "assigned objectives" level of oversight from the Starfleet brass (they tell them generally or specifically what they want done, but leave the methods up to the discretion of the Section. Similar to M:I's IMF organisation).
Personally I've felt 31 has been justified since they first appeared in DS9. They're a necessary evil to counter threats that Starfleet is either unable or unwilling to deal with in realistic and pragmatic terms. It's good to think that everyone can get along but the truth is the galaxy is a dangerous place filled with groups and races willing to curb stomp the federation without the slightest regard for diplomacy and ethical means.
Well, finally someone remembered what this thread was started for...
Though it would be from 1965 on.
Yes....this all stirs my thoughts and feelings, as well. There is a tendency on the part of many humans to focus rather narrowly on what is past and what is present and to project that forward, even hundreds of years, with not a whole lot of counterpoint. Crafters of any kind of future-fiction, especially that which is done for commercial purposes, are to an extent hamstrung by the knowledge that if they paint too rosy a picture of the future, too many will object that it is unrealistic....even though no one knows what the future will encompass.
I have found, over the years, that I keep returning to the TOS episode 'The Enemy Within'. It keeps nagging.
It seems to me that for humans to succeed in the long-term, as a species, the reasons for negative excesses need to be found and effectively dealt with once and for all. I don't believe that emotion is the sole root cause. I believe that mental and physical factors are working in tandem. We need to fix what's wrong. We need to find a way to maintain balance at all times. I would not describe the Vulcans as balanced. As presented, they seem to remove emotion rather than actually keeping it balanced. On the whole, as presented, they're not exactly warm and friendly. In general, they seem rather one-dimensional and incomplete. The Klingons, in general, seem to be at the opposite end of the spectrum, where emotion rules to an extreme.
Right now, we really don't have much to compare and contrast ourselves with. Life on this planet....we know of no other. There is the idea of aliens visiting us, but nothing concrete to back that up. At least at this point, you really can't do anything all that meaningful with it. It's shadows and wisps without substance.
So, we project human traits onto the civilizations of our fiction.
But, how realistic is that? And, how realistic is it that in 200 or 300 years from now, we will not be all that much further along than we are now in how we conduct ourselves? Answer: we just don't know. It could go either way.
One could envision a scenario in which the 'normal' development of civilizations in the universe involves that very 'fixing themselves' at some point. Who is to say that the norm is not a universe of civilizations in harmony with each other? Again, at this point, we don't know.
If we take that idea of "Any sufficiently advanced technology would seem like magic" and really apply it, the possibilities are endless.
Our science, at present, tells us that we are able to look far out into the galaxy....and beyond. And that there's a whole lot of emptiness. But, are we being allowed to see what's actually out there? Can we say, with 100% certainty, that we are not in quarantine, behind a veil? No. Because anyone who is not even aware they are inside a box knows nothing of what is outside the box. Going right back to the beginning of Trek, 'The Cage' resonates with that very well.
But, it's all just science-fiction, right?
For the record, personally, I don't believe that joining humans with machines is the ultimate solution. I also don't believe that A. I. will come up to the level of life forms. Not in the near-term and possibly never. If we are able to dig deep and fix what is wrong, I still doubt that we will be able to transfer every last 'thing' of life to a machine. It's sort of like always approaching infinity, but never quite getting there.
Just my thoughts, and Your Mileage May Vary....a lot.
Similar threads
