USS Cortez? Really?

[Sci]

Ronald D. Moore addressed this question ten years ago on his AOL board.

From the archives:

<< One question, who comes up with the references to Xicano history? First
a ship called the Malinche. Then Cortez. Now all the references to the
Alamo. All these show Mexicans in a disgraceful way. Malinche was the
traitor. Cortez
was the conquistador. Ask Xicanos about the heroes who stole Texas from
Mexico.
I do not think there is a nefarious plot to disgrace la raza but it can make
you wonder.>>

All I can tell you is that Hans Biemler is Mexican and that he's the one who
named the ships Malinche and Cortez and that he's into the Alamo as well.

ETA:

For my money, I don't buy that the Federation would ever name anything after a murdering imperialist like Hernán Cortés. I choose to interpret the U.S.S. Cortéz mentioned in DS9 as being named after someone else -- perhaps a key figure in the establishment of United Earth, or of the Federation, or of the post-WW3 peace, or a founder of the Martian colonies, or something.

I can't really come up with a plausible alternate explanation for the U.S.S. Malinche, though.

Just an off-remark regarding that fan's question: La Malinche is certainly a controversial figure since she was Cortes loyal aide in his conquest, but I see no reason to call her a 'traitor'. Based on the known facts from this woman's biography, I don't see what loyalty she should have had towards the people who sold her into slavery (her own family, in fact) or to the her Maya slave masters who gave her to Cortes.

And that's fair enough -- but I think reasonable people can also agree that, whatever the ethical standards of her culture at that point in history, today the idea of assisting imperialism is still unacceptable and should disqualify her from having a Federation starship named after her.

I like the "it's named after the resort" retcon better.

 

[DevilEyes]

And that's fair enough -- but I think reasonable people can also agree that, whatever the ethical standards of her culture at that point in history, today the idea of assisting imperialism is still unacceptable and should disqualify her from having a Federation starship named after her.

I agree with that.

I like the "it's named after the resort" retcon better.

I believe the right term is fanwank.

 

[Sci]

And that's fair enough -- but I think reasonable people can also agree that, whatever the ethical standards of her culture at that point in history, today the idea of assisting imperialism is still unacceptable and should disqualify her from having a Federation starship named after her.

I agree with that.

I like the "it's named after the resort" retcon better.

I believe the right term is fanwank.

I'll happily take a little bit of fanwank over the idea of naming a Federation starship after the 16th Century's equivalent of Eva Braun.

 

[USS Triumphant]

Of course, maybe we're thinking about this wrong. Let's give the ships some context, and then see if the names seem quite so bad:

U.S.S. Werner von Braun - a (Excelsior-class?) ship used almost exclusively as a testbed for experimental engine designs.

U.S.S. Malinche - one of many ships intended when built to fulfill a long-term mission to place long range communications platforms along the borders of the Federation that translate news and entertainment from within the Federation into whatever languages are spoken in the neighboring space and retransmit them outward, ala the Radio Free transmissions of the present era CIA. (The woman La Malinche was a (in)famous translator.) Obviously diverted from its primary mission somewhat due to the War.

I'd still have a hard time with U.S.S. Cortez, so I'm liking the idea that it's named after the captain of NX-04, instead. Or maybe this guy - a future President er sumtin, perhaps?

 

[T'Girl]

Still have a problem with the USS Crazy Horse.

In the lakota language it should be called USS Tȟašúŋke Witkó .... (his horse is crazy).

How many Japanese, military and civilians, were killed by the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise? certainly many thousands.

 

[USS Triumphant]

I believe the right term is fanwank.

No. I already have one person agreeing with me, so I'd say the correct term is potential fanon.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

T'Girl--How many Americans were killed by the Imperial Japanese warship Kongo?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_battleship_Kongō

Incidentally, a modern Japanese ship belonging to the reconstituted Japanese military bears the same name.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JDS_Kongō_(DDG-173)

And I believe there's also a USS Kongo in Starfleet.

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Kongo

 

[Myasishchev]

I find it especially ironic because so much of DS9 was about Cardassian Occupation of Bajor, which works as a pretty good analogy to colonialism (better, IMO, than those Nazi analogies everyone seems so fond of). Am I using this opportunity to take another swipe at Behr? Oh yes, yes I am. But I do find it funny that he was so upset by the possibility that some percentage of the audience might not have acknowledged just how evil this fictional occupation was, and not just that, he claimed that the writing team was devastated by the mere fact that some fans found something likable in their fictional former head of occupation, or that the show might have contained any kind of moral ambiguity on the matter ... But at the same time, those same writers apparently don't have the same problem with a real world, historical example of imperialism, subjugation of another culture and mass murder?

I think that's a good point about Dukat and the Occupation there. It's much more (Very ) White Man's Burden than a Final Solution. As I've said before, if the Cardies wanted the Bajorans dead, it wouldn't have taken them fifty years.

Ronald D. Moore addressed this question ten years ago on his AOL board.

From the archives:

<< One question, who comes up with the references to Xicano history? First
a ship called the Malinche. Then Cortez. Now all the references to the
Alamo. All these show Mexicans in a disgraceful way. Malinche was the
traitor. Cortez
was the conquistador. Ask Xicanos about the heroes who stole Texas from
Mexico.
I do not think there is a nefarious plot to disgrace la raza but it can make
you wonder.>>

All I can tell you is that Hans Biemler is Mexican and that he's the one who
named the ships Malinche and Cortez and that he's into the Alamo as well.

ETA:

For my money, I don't buy that the Federation would ever name anything after a murdering imperialist like Hernán Cortés..

They might have named it after a consensus-builder who bound divergent tribes into alliance, and defeated a murderous autocracy.

If that's what they were going for, I'd rather have a Cortez than an Archer.

Also, how does the Alamo show Mexicans in a disgraceful way? The Mexicans won. It's like saying a game that reenacts the siege of the Krasny Oktyabr tractor factory puts Russia into disrepute.

Now, the Battle of San Jacinto on the other hand...

Does anyone have any problem with a USS Truman? He remains the only leader in history to have ever actually nuked anyone. What about a USS Ohio, named after an "ancient Earth" vessel designed principally to kill civilian populations?

And, on a final note--something I discovered just now--I wonder if the crew of the USS Malinche refer to her as "La Chingada"? That'd make all this academic, I fear, because that would just be too awesome.

 

[DevilEyes]

I find it especially ironic because so much of DS9 was about Cardassian Occupation of Bajor, which works as a pretty good analogy to colonialism (better, IMO, than those Nazi analogies everyone seems so fond of). Am I using this opportunity to take another swipe at Behr? Oh yes, yes I am. But I do find it funny that he was so upset by the possibility that some percentage of the audience might not have acknowledged just how evil this fictional occupation was, and not just that, he claimed that the writing team was devastated by the mere fact that some fans found something likable in their fictional former head of occupation, or that the show might have contained any kind of moral ambiguity on the matter ... But at the same time, those same writers apparently don't have the same problem with a real world, historical example of imperialism, subjugation of another culture and mass murder?

I think that's a good point about Dukat and the Occupation there. It's much more (Very ) White Man's Burden than a Final Solution. As I've said before, if the Cardies wanted the Bajorans dead, it wouldn't have taken them fifty years.
.

The Nazi analogy was present in Duet, since Gallitep seemed like an analogy World War II concentration camps, and Dar'heel, as presented by Maritza, seemed to have been quite eager to kill as many Bajorans as possible. But it is obvious from what we've seen on DS9 that extermination of Bajorans was not a widespread policy or the aim of the occupation authorities - or, as you said, they would have taken steps to actually do it, and wouldn't have needed 50 years to kill 10 million Bajorans (a big number, but a fraction of the planet's population; the Dominion needed very little time to kill over 600 million Cardassians).

And Dukat is very much a White Man's Burden (Grey Man's Burden? ) type. The epitome of that mentality, really.

Does anyone have any problem with a USS Truman? He remains the only leader in history to have ever actually nuked anyone.

How did I miss that one? I guess I wasn't paying attention. No, I certainly don't consider people who order dropping nuclear bombs on civilian population worthy of being honored by having ships named after them.

Morally ambiguous/problematic ship names abound in Federation Starfleet!

 

[Nerys Myk]

What about ships called "Columbus" and "Columbia"? Who are they named after?

 

[BolianAuthor]

Personally, I dislike ANY Federation ship named after a person, in the regard of political, military, or religious figure. I also despise any Federation ship named after a damn Earth military battle.

The UFP is an assembly of over 150 planets... no Bolian or Mizarian or Tellarite would give a rat's ass about Gettysburg, or Crazy Horse, or Lincoln. Only humans would ever care about such things, and it's utterly stupid to have ships with such Terracentric names, in something as vastly multicultural as the UFP.

The UFP is an organization of worlds... here's a totally crazy, stupid, and insane idea... why not name spaceships after, oh, I don't know... SPACE STUFF? Let's have more ships named after stars... a U.S.S. Mirfax, or U.S.S. Serpens or U.S.S. Corvus. Or a U.S.S. Quasar or U.S.S. Pulsar. But no... that's just crazy talk, it is... we can't have STAR ships named after actual space stuff...

 

[USS Triumphant]

What about ships called "Columbus" and "Columbia"? Who are they named after?

Columbus, not so much, but Columbia is a worthy name based on the space shuttle, regardless of why it is named that.

 

[UssGlenn]

What about ships called "Columbus" and "Columbia"? Who are they named after?

Columbus, not so much, but Columbia is a worthy name based on the space shuttle, regardless of why it is named that.

What's wrong with Columbia? It has nothing to do with Columbus. if anything Columbus is derived from it not the other way around.

 

[Vance]

Yeah, I got to wonder sometimes that the kneejerk reaction to demonize Cortez (farther than history's account of the man) is a lot more of an 'anti-white' thing. He's celebrated as a hero in Mexico, and even in parts of the United States now as an important historical figure.

Seriously, you guys not pay much attention to the Aztecs - not exactly the 'nice loving warm utopia' that a lot of modern revisionists like to paint.

 

[DevilEyes]

Yeah, I got to wonder sometimes that the kneejerk reaction to demonize Cortez (farther than history's account of the man) is a lot more of an 'anti-white' thing. He's celebrated as a hero in Mexico, and even in parts of the United States now as an important historical figure.

Seriously, you guys not pay much attention to the Aztecs - not exactly the 'nice loving warm utopia' that a lot of modern revisionists like to paint.

Uh... the Aztec Empire was very, very far from loving, warm or any kind of utopia, and this is the first time I've ever heard of anyone allegedly painting them as such. Human sacrifice, slavery, conflicts with and domination over other native tribes, etc., all this is very well known.

But you are suggesting...what? That mass murder, plundering of land and destruction of an entire civilization is fair game as long as the culture was not a nice loving warm utopia? Boy, with such standards, you'd be able to justify almost any such crime, since few civilizations in history have been close to being a "warm, loving utopias".

As for important historical figures, of course he was. So was Hitler, Idi Amin and Pol Pot (just to name the people that DS9 writers like to use as a reference point). So?

Again, looking at the Bajoran occupation through these lens. The Bajorans had their stupid caste system, inequality and internal strife before the Cardassian occupation... So why did DS9 insist on presenting the occupation as a bad thing - they got rid of the caste system, didn't they? Sure, some 10 million of them died, but hey, that's just the price for cultural improvement and greater unity...

 

[Myasishchev]

Now, this is going to sound crass, but 10 million in 50 years is a pretty low-intensity genocide. Only 200,000 a year, for a whole planetfull of people. Hutus with machetes managed 200,000 a month.

 

[DevilEyes]

Now, this is going to sound crass, but 10 million in 50 years is a pretty low-intensity genocide. Only 200,000 a year, for a whole planetfull of people. Hutus with machetes managed 200,000 a month.

Well, as you said, the Cardassians did not have a "final solution" policy and were after subjugating the Bajorans and plundering their natural resources rather than killing them all (although it seemed that there were at least some who would have liked to do the latter), which is why the Nazi/Jewish comparisons don't really work. I think that people are always so quick to apply the Nazis as comparison in order to show how awful something is, simply because it's the lowest common denominator - pretty much everyone (or at least the vast majority of people in the world today) agrees that Nazis were evil, so using them as an example makes things so much simpler. There is no moral ambiguity there. If you use any other real world analogy, you face a higher risk of having people disagree with you and creating controversy. Which is really why Godwin law was invented in the first place.

I personally think that having a fictional work examine themes such as colonization or other, more controversial historical examples of occupation would be far more interesting and challenging than falling back to the Nazis, which seems to me like a safe option that people take when they want a black and white good and evil story or don't want to risk alienating anyone. See, we've started to discuss Cortes instead, and on page 2, we already have a disagreement. Isn't that great?

 

[STR]

Now, this is going to sound crass, but 10 million in 50 years is a pretty low-intensity genocide. Only 200,000 a year, for a whole planetfull of people

That's not even genocide. Genocide, by definition, is the attempt to eliminate an entire race. 200,000 a year is (probably) below birthrate.

 

[DevilEyes]

Now, this is going to sound crass, but 10 million in 50 years is a pretty low-intensity genocide. Only 200,000 a year, for a whole planetfull of people

That's not even genocide.

Whether it is or not, does not depend on numbers, but on the intent behind it.

Legal definition of genocide, according to the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide:

any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

In our fictional example, it is safe to say that, at least, Gul Dar'heel and his men were committing genocide at the Gallitep labor camp.

 

[Sci]

What about ships called "Columbus" and "Columbia"? Who are they named after?

I don't object to ships named Columbia, as "Columbia" is also a geographic term for America, and "Colombia" is the name of a country. They were named after Christopher Columbus, but oh well.

But I have a real problem naming things after the mass murderer commonly remembered as Christopher Columbus.

Yeah, I got to wonder sometimes that the kneejerk reaction to demonize Cortez (farther than history's account of the man) is a lot more of an 'anti-white' thing.

I am white. I'm very proud of my European heritage, and I self-identify as an English-American.

That doesn't mean that I won't acknowledge when a European is a war criminal, an imperialist, and a man guilty of genocide. Hernán Cortés was all of the above, and the fact that the Aztec Empire engaged in those same crimes against humanity does not justify committing genocide against them, either.