Torchwood Children of Earth Ending: What would you have done?

[Sci]

So many people had died, what would be the point in stirring up open rebellion once the 456 were defeated?

Excuse me, but exactly how many of its citizens does a government have to murder, betray, and enslave before it becomes necessary and proper to overthrow it?

I rather think that deciding you're going to enslave 10% of all your children ought to count, especially if you decide to turn it into an act of class warfare the way Brian Green's government did.

And remember, Sci, if the British government deserved to fall then every government on the planet deserved to fall, because they were all guilty of the same actions.

I don't know if I agree that Children of Earth clearly establishes that every government followed the UK's lead. Certainly it doesn't establish that every government followed the UK's example by specifically targeting certain socio-economic classes for 456 enslavement.

But, yes, if every other government on the planet was willing to commit treason by willfully handing over 10% of their children, then every other government deserved to be overthrown. That is a fundamental violation of the social contract from which governments derive their privilege of governing.

I'd quibble as well about the government ordering the murder of innocents worth remembering those innocents, like Jack, had delivered truly innocent children into the hands of the 456. State sponsered murder can't be condoned, but lets not kid oursevles these were sweet old age pensioners.

I was referring to Ianto and Gwen, who had nothing whatsoever to do with the 456 incident in the 1960s, and both of whom the government tried to murder. To say nothing of all the innocent lives the government risked when they decided to bomb Roald Dahl Plass in the middle of Cardiff.

Green's ultimate toppling as PM wasn't nearly payback enough for what he'd done, but it was more punishment than likely the American President, German Chancellor, Russian president etc would have gotten.

And yet he was apparently replaced by the Home Secretary -- the same woman who was responsible for proposing that the British government use the 456 crisis to engage in class warfare by only targeting "undesirable" children for enslavement. If anything, Denise Riley was even worse than Brian Green. At least Green apparently never thought not to betray all Britons equally. Riley decided only to betray the "lower" classes.

Like I said, i'm self aware enough to realise I'm taking a very pragmatic stance over the decision not to release the tapes, but frankly I think certain people are being equally naive about the same decision, as if reducing the world to death filled anarchy is somehow ok because it's the moral thing to do?

It's not so much that I think reducing the world to death-filled anarchy as:

1. I disagree that it would be nearly as awful as you're claiming, and

2. Even if it were -- it would still be preferable to such a fundamentally corrupt government retaining power.

 

[Yminale]

Here's something I don't understand. In "Stolen Earth/Journey's End" humans were prepared to blow themselves up rather than be slaves of the Daleks. In "Children of Earth" this option wasn't even considered. Morally speaking this would be the best option outside of some Deus Ex Machina solution (which is what happened).

As for Cpt. Jack, if actions were so correct why does he sulk away in shame (and possibly deny us a 4th season of Torchwood). Honestly if Torchwood can deliver this level of quality, then I want it to continue forever.

 

[Sci]

Here's something I don't understand. In "Stolen Earth/Journey's End" humans were prepared to blow themselves up rather than be slaves of the Daleks. In "Children of Earth" this option wasn't even considered.

1. The Osterhaggen Key didn't exactly work real well then, did it?

2. The Doctor told Martha to have UNIT get rid of that plan at the end of "Journey's End."

Morally speaking this would be the best option outside of some Deus Ex Machina solution (which is what happened).

I'm sorry, but in what possible sense would self-imposed genocide have been superior to alien-imposed genocide? And how is that a morally superior option to overthrowing the corrupt governments and fighting the 456?

 

[DWF]

Morally speaking this would be the best option outside of some Deus Ex Machina solution (which is what happened).

I'm sorry, but in what possible sense would self-imposed genocide have been superior to alien-imposed genocide? And how is that a morally superior option to overthrowing the corrupt governments and fighting the 456?

Who said anything actually using it? Just the threat of destroying the earth would be enough to drive the 456 away. But then what happened to all that technology that Torchwood One had in their basement and what happened to the canon that was used in The Christmas Invasion?

 

[Yminale]

Excuse me, but exactly how many of its citizens does a government have to murder, betray, and enslave before it becomes necessary and proper to overthrow it?

Stalin killed 25 million Russians and they still begged (not just allowed) him for leadership when the German's invaded. People will sacrifice a lot for stability.

I rather think that deciding you're going to enslave 10% of all your children ought to count, especially if you decide to turn it into an act of class warfare the way Brian Green's government did.

In this case RTD I think overplayed it. The lowest 10% unfortunately would not be missed. In America at least, some poor kid gets abused killed or raped; People get outraged, and then nothing gets done. Seriously you need to have some serious development problems to score in the bottom 10% and most people would be like good riddance.

But, yes, if every other government on the planet was willing to commit treason by willfully handing over 10% of their children, then every other government deserved to be overthrown. That is a fundamental violation of the social contract from which governments derive their privilege of governing.

The social construct is just THEORY. Arbitrary judgments on what is good and evil is the reason why America is stuck in a quagmire called Iraq. Sometimes bad governments that do bad things is the best you can hope for.

1. I disagree that it would be nearly as awful as you're claiming, and

2. Even if it were -- it would still be preferable to such a fundamentally corrupt government retaining power.

Sci have you ever been inside a Civil War. The Congo, Darfur, Sri Lanka, The Troubles in Northern Ireland, the Intifada. Think of the worse case scenerio and multiply it by a 100 and you might get close. The fact you can even claim this stupidity shows that you're another Monday Quarterback who doesn't know anything of the world.

 

[Yminale]

1. The Osterhaggen Key didn't exactly work real well then, did it?

2. The Doctor told Martha to have UNIT get rid of that plan at the end of "Journey's End."

1. The option existed. It didn't work but how were humans to know that.

2. "Children of Earth" proved that unless the Doctor is willing to protect Earth full time, he has no right to interfere with our development.

I'm sorry, but in what possible sense would self-imposed genocide have been superior to alien-imposed genocide?

We would control our own fate. NOT THE ALIENS. That was the whole point. If we could not fight back at least we could deny the aliens final victory.

And how is that a morally superior option to overthrowing the corrupt governments and fighting the 456?

The problem with TV shows is that the good guys ALWAY win which makes them not reflective of reality. Suppose there was no Doctor, no Cpt. Jack and no Torchwood, how would fight the 456. You couldn't.

 

[Snaploud]

Morally speaking this would be the best option outside of some Deus Ex Machina solution (which is what happened).

I'm sorry, but in what possible sense would self-imposed genocide have been superior to alien-imposed genocide? And how is that a morally superior option to overthrowing the corrupt governments and fighting the 456?

Who said anything actually using it? Just the threat of destroying the earth would be enough to drive the 456 away.

I don't see why that would be true... What would they have to lose by calling our bluff?

 

[DWF]

I'm sorry, but in what possible sense would self-imposed genocide have been superior to alien-imposed genocide? And how is that a morally superior option to overthrowing the corrupt governments and fighting the 456?

Who said anything actually using it? Just the threat of destroying the earth would be enough to drive the 456 away.

I don't see why that would be true... What would they have to lose by calling our bluff?

Their own life and their drug supply.

 

[DWF]

Well as Prime Minster I think I'd remind people of the great speech by Winston Churchill.

We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the Old.

 

[Kelthaz]

I preferred Data's speech myself.

I could reduce this pumping station to a pile of debris... but I trust my point is clear. I am one android with a single weapon. There are hundreds of Sheliak on the way... and their weapons are far more powerful.

And the Sheliak may not even offer you a target. They can obliterate this colony from orbit. You will die never having seen the faces of your killers.

A valiant struggle against an unstoppable foe is admirable, but when you don't even have a target to aim for it's more of a slaughter.

 

[David cgc]

So many people had died, what would be the point in stirring up open rebellion once the 456 were defeated?

So that when the 789 came around demanding all the pensioners so they could devour their succulent, memory-filled brains, the same bunch of spineless losers wouldn't roll over for them, too.

 

[DWF]

I preferred Data's speech myself.

I could reduce this pumping station to a pile of debris... but I trust my point is clear. I am one android with a single weapon. There are hundreds of Sheliak on the way... and their weapons are far more powerful.

And the Sheliak may not even offer you a target. They can obliterate this colony from orbit. You will die never having seen the faces of your killers.

A valiant struggle against an unstoppable foe is admirable, but when you don't even have a target to aim for it's more of a slaughter.

No, the 456 wanted their drug supply kept intact Children Of Earth was all about terrorism and how you can't really give into it. The Sheliak merely didn't care about the colonists and it was by tready their planet in any event.

Torchwood and UNIT were set up to handle menaces like the 456 and that seems to have forgotten in this story.

 

[Kelthaz]

No, the 456 wanted their drug supply kept intact Children Of Earth was all about terrorism and how you can't really give into it. The Sheliak merely didn't care about the colonists and it was by tready their planet in any event.

Torchwood and UNIT were set up to handle menaces like the 456 and that seems to have forgotten in this story.

Nobody knew what the 456 could do or were willing to do. My point is that it's impossible to rally the world against an enemy when you don't know where they are or how strong they are. Churchill's speeches worked because we knew the objectives and could find Germany on a map.

 

[Yminale]

Torchwood and UNIT were set up to handle menaces like the 456 and that seems to have forgotten in this story.

Actually UNIT and Torchwood were intentionally sidelined since both would have to be informed of the deal the government made with 456 in 1965. My question is why would anyone care what the government did in 1965 with 12 kids. It was better to be open about it but I think RTD made an excellent point on how government protects secrets for immoral reasons and how the conspiracy costs more than the secret itself.

 

[Yminale]

I preferred Data's speech myself.

I could reduce this pumping station to a pile of debris... but I trust my point is clear. I am one android with a single weapon. There are hundreds of Sheliak on the way... and their weapons are far more powerful.

And the Sheliak may not even offer you a target. They can obliterate this colony from orbit. You will die never having seen the faces of your killers.

A valiant struggle against an unstoppable foe is admirable, but when you don't even have a target to aim for it's more of a slaughter.

Picard faced the same problem in "Journey's End" and forced the Cardassians to stand down and accept the Native Americans living on the colony. Put the two episodes together and you realize how corrupt the Federation is. Fighting for their ideals only when they think they can win.

Finally the ending for "The Ensings of Command" was just unrealistic. The colonist should have lynched Data after blowing up the water station and fought the Sheliak to the death.

 

[Kelthaz]

Picard faced the same problem in "Journey's End" and forced the Cardassians to stand down and accept the Native Americans living on the colony. Put the two episodes together and you realize how corrupt the Federation is. Fighting for their ideals only when they think they can win.

Picard didn't force the Cardassians to stand down. It was the Cardassian Captain (Gul Evek?) who refused to return fire on the colonists out of fear of starting a second Federation/Cardassian war that saved the day. And it was the Indians I believe who came up with the idea to live under Cardassian rule. The Federation didn't really do much of anything except make the situation far worse (damn Wesley).

I don't get your second point at all. I'm not sure what you mean by the Federation being corrupt.

Finally the ending for "The Ensings of Command" was just unrealistic. The colonist should have lynched Data after blowing up the water station and fought the Sheliak to the death.

It was only the leader that wanted to stay and fight the Sheliak. The rest of the colonists were partially swayed by Data, but didn't want to abandon their leader. When Data proved that they wouldn't have a chance in hell of even slowing the Sheliak down is when the colonists came to their senses. It made sense to me.

 

[Yminale]

Picard didn't force the Cardassians to stand down. It was the Cardassian Captain (Gul Evek?) who refused to return fire on the colonists out of fear of starting a second Federation/Cardassian war that saved the day.

Picard made an implicit threat that attacking the Native Americans would escalate to another war. The Gul backed down. To Picard's credit he was prepared to fight the Sheliak but only to buy time to remove the colonist. If I was Picard I tell the Sheliak tough cookies, no one said the treaty was retroactive.

And it was the Indians I believe who came up with the idea to live under Cardassian rule. The Federation didn't really do much of anything except make the situation far worse (damn Wesley).

The Federation was preparing to remove the Native Americans by FORCE.

I don't get your second point at all. I'm not sure what you mean by the Federation being corrupt.

Picard is willing to forcibly remove on set of colonist but leaves another set alone in the same circumstance. It's clearly a double standard. It's also racist. The Federation can kick out whites and blacks but we can't touch those Native Americans. One final point, Federation was and still is a mutual defense pact whose protections are retroactive. Picard's duty was to protect the colonist who are Federation citizens not to rationalize a stupid treaty.

It was only the leader that wanted to stay and fight the Sheliak. The rest of the colonists were partially swayed by Data, but didn't want to abandon their leader. When Data proved that they wouldn't have a chance in hell of even slowing the Sheliak down is when the colonists came to their senses. It made sense to me.

First we only saw a handful of people. I don't doubt that some my might want to leave. The problem is people are irrational especially when it comes to their HOMES (which Data called a thing). People will fight to the death when it comes to their homes. It would be more realistic if half joined Data and the other half got slaughtered.

More disturbing is Data using terrorism to frighten the colonist to abandon the planet. Why do people not understand that terrorism is about tactics not ideology. Even if the so called good guys use it, that still makes them terrorists.

 

[Sci]

Excuse me, but exactly how many of its citizens does a government have to murder, betray, and enslave before it becomes necessary and proper to overthrow it?

Stalin killed 25 million Russians and they still begged (not just allowed) him for leadership when the German's invaded.

Stalin didn't sell out one out of every ten Russian children to the Germans. If people knew that the British government had so utterly betrayed them, there would not be enough popular support for the government for it to survive.

Know what the ultimate proof of that is? That the government kept what they were doing secret.

I rather think that deciding you're going to enslave 10% of all your children ought to count, especially if you decide to turn it into an act of class warfare the way Brian Green's government did.

In this case RTD I think overplayed it.

No, it was dead-on accurate. Elites have a tendency to jump on opportunities to engage in class warfare.

But, yes, if every other government on the planet was willing to commit treason by willfully handing over 10% of their children, then every other government deserved to be overthrown. That is a fundamental violation of the social contract from which governments derive their privilege of governing.

The social construct is just THEORY.

No, it is not. You want evidence that it's an actual rule about how governments and their peoples interact? When an electorate feels like a government has violated its rights, it votes the violators out of office.

1. I disagree that it would be nearly as awful as you're claiming, and

2. Even if it were -- it would still be preferable to such a fundamentally corrupt government retaining power.

Sci have you ever been inside a Civil War. The Congo, Darfur, Sri Lanka, The Troubles in Northern Ireland, the Intifada. Think of the worse case scenerio and multiply it by a 100 and you might get close. The fact you can even claim this stupidity shows that you're another Monday Quarterback who doesn't know anything of the world.

The fact that you imagine that any government that's willing to betray its citizens so brazenly would manage to retain enough popular support for there to even be a civil war is laughable.

 

[DWF]

No, the 456 wanted their drug supply kept intact Children Of Earth was all about terrorism and how you can't really give into it. The Sheliak merely didn't care about the colonists and it was by tready their planet in any event.

Torchwood and UNIT were set up to handle menaces like the 456 and that seems to have forgotten in this story.

Nobody knew what the 456 could do or were willing to do. My point is that it's impossible to rally the world against an enemy when you don't know where they are or how strong they are. Churchill's speeches worked because we knew the objectives and could find Germany on a map.

Nobody knew what the 456 could do? This wasn't their first trip and since they weren't destroyed this might not be their last. The difference between 1964 and now is the technology that Torchwood had gathered and which has no seemingly disappeared.

 

[Snaploud]

Who said anything actually using it? Just the threat of destroying the earth would be enough to drive the 456 away.

I don't see why that would be true... What would they have to lose by calling our bluff?

Their own life and their drug supply.

Their drug supply would be gone if they left peacefully, so there's really not much of a distinction on that point. It would make much more sense for them to call our bluff on the off chance that they might still get our children.

As for their lives: I don't see why their lives would be in danger. Their representative might be at risk, but they could always move him away temporarily (assuming they care about his/her life).