Was Natasha human?

[LMFAOschwarz]

I'd never thought about this before, but I was watching Symbiosis, and Tasha was talking about how things were on her "home planet". It got me to wondering if she was a human colonist, or an alien.

Does anyone know, or am I putting my usual ignorance on bright, shiny display?

 

[Chris3123]

Tasha was human, just not from Earth.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

She was human from the failed colony of Turkana IV, so you could dub her a Turkanan if you wanted.

 

[Ensign_Redshirt]

Since her colony had broken away from the Federation she was in fact an alien - in a legal, but not in a biological sense.

She was of the human species though.

 

[Finn]

"Alien" seemed to be used for unknown races in the TNG area. I think the term was used in Voyager when they knew nothing of a given race.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

I always found it weird how her homeworld failed, after all it was populated by humans from the idyllic 24th century. What caused them to revert to raping and pillaging? Was the UFP experimenting with PAX before the Alliance?

 

[desfem79]

The Federation may not have recognised a secession, so even though she was human she may still have been considered a Federation citizen. As a weird analogy, it's like the CSA vs. USA. I doubt Lincoln would have considered Southern troops as an army of another sovereign state.

 

[Lance]

Tasha is a human descendent, but is emphatically not a native of the planet Earth. Most likely she hadn't even been there until she escaped Turkana IV.

I always found it weird how her homeworld failed, after all it was populated by humans from the idyllic 24th century. What caused them to revert to raping and pillaging? Was the UFP experimenting with PAX before the Alliance?

I've forgotten: how long before TNG season one was it said that Turkana IV went bad?

 

[Unicron]

^ That detail was never established onscreen, nor any details as to why the Federation pulled out and made no attempts to fix things. "Legacy" made it pretty clear that the factions on Turkana considered themselves to be independent from the Federation.

 

[Lance]

^ That detail was never established onscreen, nor any details as to why the Federation pulled out and made no attempts to fix things. "Legacy" made it pretty clear that the factions on Turkana considered themselves to be independent from the Federation.

Interesting. So (in theory) it could have happened at any time in Trek history?

Colony planets "going wrong" has certainly got prescedent in the Star Trek of the 23rd century. For example, Nimbus III.

 

[E-DUB]

You probably had a lot of groups starting their own colonies in efforts independent of any "UESPA/Starfleet/Federation" efforts. The folks in "Masterpiece Society" come to mind.

 

[Hober Mallow]

I always found it weird how her homeworld failed, after all it was populated by humans from the idyllic 24th century. What caused them to revert to raping and pillaging? Was the UFP experimenting with PAX before the Alliance?

That's one thing that always seemed to contradict Roddenberry's idealized humans and Picard and Riker's claim to Q that "humanity is no longer a savage race." Yar's history seemed to say the opposite, that humans are naturally savage and without the state as a correcting mechanism, they'll revert back to savagery.

 

[Silvercrest]

You probably had a lot of groups starting their own colonies in efforts independent of any "UESPA/Starfleet/Federation" efforts. The folks in "Masterpiece Society" come to mind.

The "Space Boomer" concept in ENT supported this. Not just the independent shipping outfits like the one Travis came from, but the apparently independent colonies they supplied.

James Blish's adaptation of "Miri" established Miri's world as a lost Earth colony. (He ignored the "parallel Earth" aspect, or maybe it wasn't in the script he used.) That world was an independent colony which dropped contact due to extreme isolationism and was later forgotten.

Of course, Blish also suggested that something like 700 years had passed since that time, so we can't quite take the whole explanation literally....

 

[Unicron]

It would also fit into the organizational scheme FASA suggested for the Federation, in which there are some planets within its borders that are not actual members. They derive some benefits from such an arrangement, such as protection from races like the Kingons, but have not yet potentially decided to seek representation within the organization. So the Feds could probably make some decisions for such planets within their space, but that doesn't meant the population would necessarily agree with them or be comfortable with perceived "interference."

 

[Hober Mallow]

Of course, Blish also suggested that something like 700 years had passed since that time, so we can't quite take the whole explanation literally....

Why not? There was never a firm date established during the series' run for when TOS took place, and the indirect references to the time period contradict each other.

 

[Mutai Sho-Rin]

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Hober Mallow, I just finished rereading Asimov's "Foundation" which reminded me how I know your username. You were quite the clever trader and seemed to have invented the lifespan of the average iPhone. ;-)

 

[Hober Mallow]

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Hober Mallow, I just finished rereading Asimov's "Foundation" which reminded me how I know your username. You were quite the clever trader and seemed to have invented the lifespan of the average iPhone. ;-)

Someone beat me to the username Hari Seldon.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I always found it weird how her homeworld failed, after all it was populated by humans from the idyllic 24th century. What caused them to revert to raping and pillaging? Was the UFP experimenting with PAX before the Alliance?

That's one thing that always seemed to contradict Roddenberry's idealized humans and Picard and Riker's claim to Q that "humanity is no longer a savage race." Yar's history seemed to say the opposite, that humans are naturally savage and without the state as a correcting mechanism, they'll revert back to savagery.

I never got the impression it was the state as a correcting mechanism that made humans non-savage. In DS9's Quark's theory it was their comfort, but in TNG it's more that humans were a correcting mechanism for the state, not vice versa. In TNG, the state does not need to exercise power because humans participate voluntarily.

Also I see no reason to think the Federation presents people from breaking off and seceding.

For Tasha's home planet I think Quark's theory applies better. They ran short on resources and it made them all savages.