• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Was Dukat really evil?

The Federation knew that Hagath had been selling weapons to the Bajorans during the Occupation and secretly patronized it. It is in the novel “Dawn of the Eagles.” That is why Sisko looked the other way when Hagath started selling weapons on DS9.

Operatives such as Elias Vaughn and Alynna Nechayev were involved with covert operations on Bajor. It is in the novels “Day of the Vipers” and “Dawn of the Eagles.” The Federation supported the Bajoran politicians on Valo II and made sure that a pro-Federation Provisional Government was elected.
 
Occupations are geopolitical events that always include at least two parties. What is more geopolitical events are never fair they simply suit one of the parties better. The question is whether the weaker party can avert it or not. In love and in war there are no rules. Each of the parties is trying to get the upper hand, no hard feelings.

As for the Bajorans, their pre-Occupational government and standing army were a joke – even a fleet of Nausicaan pirates could take them over. For 10 years, province governors like Kubus Oak and Jaz Holza cashed in on their cooperation with the Cardassians. The Cardassians did not want to occupy Bajor, this was their Plan B, they wanted Bajor as an affiliated world. They simply got sick and tired of greedy intermediaries.

I really like your parallel with the Vishy government. Hitler marched over Western Europe without any resistance and managed to install puppet government and supportive administrative structures everywhere. No one could stop him because all counties involved were too disunited and cared about their national interest only. So there are plenty of RL examples of Bajoran behavior. Hitler did what he did because Western Europe let him and the Cardassians took over Bajor because the Bajorans let them and the Federation did not interfere because it did not suit their political agenda at the time.

That “pretence” stopped the Federation from intervention. Even they reluctantly recognized that they have lost this world to Cardassia. They wanted Bajor as a foothold because it was only 5 light years away from Cardassia. So their propaganda might consider it an act of aggression but it was justified enough to stop them from intervention.

My original question was “ What options were left for him (Dukat) and for Cardassia?” I did not mean the Occupation but the events from 2370 onwards. You started talking about the Occupation but that is fine with me.

As for the Federation, they display the so called “military humanism” – they use force and violence to further an alleged “humanitarian” cause. They fly ships brimming with proton torpedoes, they have Starfleet which is a military organization, they expand and bring more and more worlds under their agenda. There humanistic babble does not change what they are – a big power that wants to win as much as the Cardassians want. In other words, the Federation profits from intimidating smaller planets while talking about peace and humanism. They are no better, just more hypocritical and self-righteous.

Good and evil are a matter of point of view. What is good for Cardassia is bad for the Federation and vice versa.
 
What made Dukat really interesting to me is that no matter what he did he never thought of himself as being evil. He really could not understand why there was not one statue honoring him on Bajor.
He did have a quality to bounce back- no matter what happened to him either personal or career wise he could be as down as possible and a while later be running things again. He had a supreme confidence in himself and his destiny, even if everyone in the room was laughing at him.
Dukat evil?- yes, he did horrible things which would be considered war crimes for sure, but he never saw it that way himself.
 
Gul Dukat was evil, but not pure evil. He did terrible things, but he had a few redeeming traits, like caring about members of his family.

Emperor Palpatine would be pure evil or Davros from Dr. Who. You can argue some Star Trek villains are pure evil, like Fajo, Jev, Lore, maybe Dolim, but I don't think Dukat is.
 
Without digging into the degree of villainy, I guess Dukat as a character motivation was much better developed than Palpatine. Simply Dukat had more screen time, he appeared in all 7 seasons whereas Palpatine was more or less the grey cardinal behind the events or the master of puppets pulling the strings.

His character motivation has never been particularly well explicated in the episodes, at least. I guess it was some mixture of theosophical disagreement within the SIth/Jedi schism and a dissatisfaction with the corruption and ineffectiveness of the Old Republic.
 
Without digging into the degree of villainy, I guess Dukat as a character motivation was much better developed than Palpatine. Simply Dukat had more screen time, he appeared in all 7 seasons whereas Palpatine was more or less the grey cardinal behind the events or the master of puppets pulling the strings.

His character motivation has never been particularly well explicated in the episodes, at least. I guess it was some mixture of theosophical disagreement within the SIth/Jedi schism and a dissatisfaction with the corruption and ineffectiveness of the Old Republic.

Palpatine has shown up in the various Star Wars spin off media: cartoons, video games, novels, etc and he is always portrayed as a pure evil, power mad psychopath. He has never been given any real sympathetic qualities and has a huge rap sheet. He murdered his own parents in one novel, he is clearly not a sympathetic villain with good intentions.

This video makes a good argument on how Dukat is not pure evil, but is still a bad person:

http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-reviews/a-look-back-on-dukat-5829507
 
Yes, I am familiar with this video and it is a fairly good exercise in character analysis. However, there are certain inconsistencies that don’t make sense.

1. Dukat in “Waltz” was a person suffering from a severe nervous breakdown, he was only a shadow of his former self so Sisko should have known better than to argue with a raving madman.

2. Accusing Dukat of hating Bajorans was pointless because hating Cardassians on Bajor is a national sport. Both species are not likely to overcome their mutual hatred soon. Why should Dukat like aliens who tried to kill him five times? What is more, everything what Sisko says is what the Bajorans say or what the Federation’s official position is so Dukat was the only one who was talking about events that he had witnessed.

3. Not liking Dukat as a person, administrative practices, or species is one thing but blaming Dukat for political developments outside his scope and capacity was strange at the best. Sisko could not hold Dukat liable for carrying out policies endorsed by the Detapa Council and Central Command unless he leveled similar charges against Dukat’s superiors.

4. Even if Dukat had not been stationed on Bajor and made Prefect, the Occupation would have taken place. The Cardassians came from poor, harsh world devastated by a natural disaster and plagued by epidemics and famine. In human terms, this can’t serve as an excuse, of course, but it was enough for the Cardassians. They did not entertain any illusions about their role in the cosmic pecking order – if they could dominate they would, if they had to fight they would. Compassion, mercy and empathy don’t come easily in worlds where life is an everyday struggle and only the strong survive. In this sense, blaming Dukat for being ruthless, cunning, self-serving and ambitious is pointless because his culture favors this type of personality.

5. I have always wondered why Dukat was moving freely on DS9 after the Occupation and participated in joint missions involving Federation personnel and Bajorans. If the Bajorans and the Federation had considered him that guilty, they could have arrested him and pressed charges against him. They did not do it because they did not want to jeopardize their relations with Cardassia and settled for petty bickering between Sisko and Dukat. When Dukat was captured as a commander-in-chief of the joint Dominion-Cardassian task force, he was suddenly accused of crimes during the Occupation. So guilt and innocence obviously depend on the political context.

Too bad that the SW franchise has not tried to develop Palpatine more realistically in the books and the comics – they have limited the character’s potential by presenting him as evil for the sake of it. TPTB has its reasons and fans have theirs. Still, I love his “So be it, Jedi.”
 
The thing about Dukat, and the element that is at the root of what makes him evil (in my eyes), goes beyond the selfishness, the racism, the self righteousness, or the obsession with greatness. Its his critical unwillingness to examine himself. It doesn't just separate him from our heroes, it contrasts even eventually with his own kind.

Damar and Garak are two of the most patriotic and steadfastly passionate Cardassians in the history of the series, for all the good and bad that comes with that. Both extraordinary loyal to very flawed men (Dukat and Tain), enduring a lot for the nations, and loving their homelands more than anything. But both in the end still realized how fundamentally flawed the Cardassian Union was, and each one concluded that it was likely unjust for the old Cardassia to remain as it was.

That's not even going into those in the dissident movement or someone like Marritza who realized that "my country, right or wrong" cannot cover up the monstrous sins of an immoral entity. Cardassian culture emphasized a loyalty and duty to the state, but time and time again we see people look inside themselves, rethinking their views, and change whom they are.

Dukat never truly does this. He makes half hearted gestures with the sparing of Ziyal and the cooperation with the Federation/Bajor. But every major action of his always serves to reinforce his own pre-existing views. Even the shift in Waltz in the grand scheme of things is him simply doubling down on his internal beliefs: Not only was I not wrong for oppressing the Bajorans, I should have done it more. I didn't lose to them due the flaws in my actions/myself, it was the Bajoran Gods who defeated me. Benjamin Sisko isn't my better, he's the lesser Emissary to my status as the true Emissary.

Heck, the Cardassian he has most in common with is one he would have despised; Enabran Tain. Like Dukat, Tain is a steadfastly stubborn man whom never really critically examines himself either, spending his final days, blind and weak. He never admits the extent of his own mistakes, allowing only a small note of praise to his own son with his dying breath amidst the cursing of his enemies.

Any sort of redemption or genuine morality requires some introspection, which Dukat can't or won't do because he already decided his role a long time ago. Everything else is simply him determining what place the other players will have in his own grand drama. Kira and Sisko could have been his respective lover and friend, but chose to be his enemies. Ziyal was once his loyal daughter, yet has ended up a victim of his enemies in the Federation. The Pa-Wraiths were superstitious nonsense however they have become the guides to his destiny.

Trek is littered with evil characters that saw reflections of who they were, but still chose horrible actions. Dukat is a certain kind of evil that never even looked in the mirror.
 
Dukat, like most (if not all) of DS9's characters, was a delightful shade of grey (no puns intended). He did some horrendous things, but also had genuine love for his family (as shome with Ziyal), a great sense of duty and loyalty to Cardassia.

Look at any of the main or recurring characters and you'll be hard-pressed to find one who can be summed up in only one light.
 
Dukat only cared about Cardassia to the extent that he himself could rule it. He would never have accepted his homeworld where he was not the ruler.
 
I agree, and further; for all that is made of his love for Ziyal, I find that love to be narcissistic at its root. He loved her (and presumably his other children) only as an extension of himself.

Dukat was a well-rendered, complex character, and brilliantly played by Marc Alaimo, but I do, unequivocally, consider him to be evil.
 
This may sound strange but I fully agree that Dukat was a lousy father, not only to Ziyal, but to all his children. He missed their childhood, he was never there for them, they were part of his image of a successful Cardassian.

Fans love Dukat/Ziyal arc and if Dukat is not fully condemned, it is because of his decision to recognize Ziyal and take her with him to Cardassia. However, it does not make any sense, he could send her away to Lissepia, as his original intention was, and spare himself all the complications that Ziyal’s presence inflicted on his social and political standing. Leaving her on a Bajoran station where she could be swayed by the Bajoran sentiments was quite dubious as well.

What I value about Dukat is the perfect blend of self-serving hunch and global political instinct. His predatory nature and Machiavellian intelligence were a treat to watch. The alliance with the Dominion was a great political move that was made at a time when the Dominion was likely to win and Cardassia could benefit from it. Had it not been for the divine interference from the Prophets, (an impotent plot twist) the Dominion and Cardassia could have won.

In fact, Dukat, Garak and Damar all represent different aspects of the Cardassian mentality. Dukat’s lack of remorse stands for the end-justifies-the-means type of thinking that the Cardassian Union fostered, Garak’s mimicry and cooperation with the Federation highlights their survival potential and adaptability and Damar’s rebellion symbolizes their internal grittiness to fight to the very bitter end even against the odds.

I don’t think that Damar and Garak regretted the Occupation, Damar was devastated by the loss of his family but there was no telling whether Kira’s remark made him change his views on the Occupation. Garak sniffed that Cardassia was to lose and made sure to be among the “trusted” Cardassians in post-Dominion Cardassia.

Dukat’s “stubbornness” is another significant trait of the character. He refused to end up as a slobbering, penitent sinner, the way Vader did, which rarely happens nowadays when moral message is tightly interwoven with the plot. He was absolutely convinced of his views and did not see any reason to change them and in a way he was right because neither the Federation nor the Bajorans were likely to change theirs about him in particular or about Cardassia in general. So the “stubbornness” was mutual and reciprocal.

As for the Bajorans, his appraisal though unflattering is not untrue – they really demonstrated political immaturity, excessive religiousness, too much passion and too little common sense.
 
As for the Bajorans, his appraisal though unflattering is not untrue – they really demonstrated political immaturity, excessive religiousness, too much passion and too little common sense.

I don't fully agree, but even if that were all true, those things are not crimes and I cannot at all get behind the notion that they justify the Occupation. That is "look how she was dressed" victim-blaming on a global scale
 
Hey Shada, I'm curious...you blame the Bajorans for *this* Occupation, so what might your attitude be about, shall we say, a certain real-world analogy that happened, oh, say 70 or so years ago?
 
I agree, and further; for all that is made of his love for Ziyal, I find that love to be narcissistic at its root. He loved her (and presumably his other children) only as an extension of himself.

Dukat was a well-rendered, complex character, and brilliantly played by Marc Alaimo, but I do, unequivocally, consider him to be evil.

That still puts him above villains who would happily murder their own children to gain even a slight advantage, Dukat would have been able to further his career in he killed Ziyal in that mine, but he didn't. That is, for lack of a better word, a humanizing trait.

I think Dukat is a pretty bad guy, but he is not pure evil. I have seen many villains that I would categorize as pure evil over Dukat, but that doesn't mean Dukat was a choir boy either.
 
Actually, I have clarified my stances on RL Occupations at length in my previous posts on this thread. Occupations are geopolitical events that happen because it is possible not because they are fair and just. Analyzing a geopolitical event in terms of justice is pointless – it is just for the winners and unfair for the losers, whoever they might be. One can only analyze the moves and motives of the parties involved, the social-political background of the events, one can discuss what weaknesses each of the parties has displayed but stating that something is just or unjust is hilarious. It depends on the perspective. Politics is the art of the possible, if it is possible then it happens.

Bajorans were the prefect prey so it was only logical to be invaded. They did not budge to prevent it, they did not try to stop it. They have the right to be naïve and gullible but Cardassians have the right to take advantage of this.

I think that Dukat is not more evil than any real person because most people in his shoes would do the same things. Of course, they will fervently deny it, but if the worst comes to the worst, they would. So we have to condemn half of mankind, at least. That is why people hate well-developed baddies because they remind them of their own imperfections and the vastness of the grey zone where all their choices dwell. One-dimensional villains do not bother them, they are too unrealistic and exaggerated in terms of motivation or actions.

Dukat was supposed to apply an old Cardassian custom stating that the father had to kill his illegitimate children himself so they couldn’t stand in the way of his family’s interests and social standing. The fact that he spared Ziyal was commendable but the way he handled the situation from then on was stupid. He could spare her without ruining his life and career and without exposing her to Bajoran influences.
 
That does clarify things for me, thank you. If you consider matters of justice or injustice to be "hilarious," then of course the notion of good and evil, or any sort of morality, is equally meaningless.

That is an extremely nihilistic viewpoint that I am pleased not to share, and that I am glad Trek as a whole doesn't espouse.
 
Actually, I have clarified my stances on RL Occupations at length in my previous posts on this thread. Occupations are geopolitical events that happen because it is possible not because they are fair and just.

This is the rhetoric of predators.

Bajorans were the prefect prey so it was only logical to be invaded. They did not budge to prevent it, they did not try to stop it. They have the right to be naïve and gullible but Cardassians have the right to take advantage of this.

No, they do not.
 
Actually, I have clarified my stances on RL Occupations at length in my previous posts on this thread. Occupations are geopolitical events that happen because it is possible not because they are fair and just.

This is the rhetoric of predators.

Bajorans were the prefect prey so it was only logical to be invaded. They did not budge to prevent it, they did not try to stop it. They have the right to be naïve and gullible but Cardassians have the right to take advantage of this.

No, they do not.

I'm fully with Sci on this. Shada, that last part there comes across as rape-apology. "Well, you know, I was horny, she couldn't defend herself, so yeah." Basicly the same thing. Just because someone is without defense, doesn't mean you have the right to take. Never.
 
General humanistic indignation is not enough to stop unpleasant things from happening. People take not because they have the right to do it but because they can. Life is unfair and complex and denying it is like assuming the ostrich position – this is too ambiguous so we will not get into it, we will simply condemn it. Personally, I am happy not to share the prevailing syrupy mood when it comes to nasty truths.

Stupidity and lack of pro-active thinking never pay. Neither in geopolitics nor in messing with the wrong people in the wrong bar.

When a species faces extinction and cataclysms as Cardassians did, there are two types of reaction. The first one is, “I would rather die than do this”, and the second one is, “I would rather do this than die.” Cardassians as a species opted for the second reaction, no matter whether people like it or not. Desperate people don’t care about morality, they simply survive.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top