• 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!

What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Their world was literally on fire. It definitely was not living and growing. It was dying a fire death.
What I mean is that this was an exploding planet problem, not an ongoing cultural stagnation problem. There's no point where the characters have a reason to bring up the rule about living cultures, as the conversation is about dying planets.

Though the rule being there certainly implies that helping other planets that are in trouble is at least permitted!
 
War is not the only reason races go extinct.

The T'Kon ("The Last Outpost") and the people of Sarpeidon ("ALL OUR YESTERDAYS") died out from a supernova. The people of Kataan died out from drought ("The Inner Light"). The people of Exo III ("WHAT ARE LITTLE GIRLS MADE OF?") had an ice age.
Fallout reference get missed?
 
The world Star Trek envisions and reaches for is no longer what the majority on Earth want. People want racism, seperarion and conflict, all the things humanity in Trek left in it's fictitious past and battles against the return of.

On one hand it means we need Trek's vision of the future more than ever, but I fear it is becoming a relic in a world being moved by billionaires and propaganda towards straight white male supremacy.
 
The world Star Trek envisions and reaches for is no longer what the majority on Earth want. People want racism, seperarion and conflict, all the things humanity in Trek left in it's fictitious past and battles against the return of.

On one hand it means we need Trek's vision of the future more than ever, but I fear it is becoming a relic in a world being moved by billionaires and propaganda towards straight white male supremacy.

People still want a better future. It's just we are more divided than ever on how to get it. Also billionaires don't dictate what people want. They like most modern entertainment simply caters more to our fears and offers less things that are aspirational. Cynicism and hopelessness I would say is the dominate world view these days.
 
People still want a better future. It's just we are more divided than ever on how to get it. Also billionaires don't dictate what people want. They like most modern entertainment simply caters more to our fears and offers less things that are aspirational. Cynicism and hopelessness I would say is the dominate world view these days.
It's always been that way. Cynicism is easy; optimism is hard.


People often choose the easy way.
 
I think what impacts Picard's views on the Prime Directive is he is a student of history. He understands past cultures and how most of them died. So he is someone who very likely buys into the idea that what might seem like the right thing at the moment, especially on a emotional level, could have a lasting impact on that part of space many centuries into the future. He takes the Starfleet should not play GOD idea very seriously.
Again though I wonder why the point at which "playing god" is invoked tends to be drawn along incredibly arbtirary lines.

Like, why wouldn't the same logic apply to warp-capable worlds, or even worlds within the Federation - if Betazed is struck by a plague that's uniquely fatal to Betazoids, saving them would present identical stakes to saving Sarjenka's race, if not moreso given that they're a more powerful and politically influential planet, and the exact same "well, people die all the time, natural selection is what it is" attitude should surely apply.
 
Again though I wonder why the point at which "playing god" is invoked tends to be drawn along incredibly arbtirary lines.

Like, why wouldn't the same logic apply to warp-capable worlds, or even worlds within the Federation - if Betazed is struck by a plague that's uniquely fatal to Betazoids, saving them would present identical stakes to saving Sarjenka's race, if not moreso given that they're a more powerful and politically influential planet, and the exact same "well, people die all the time, natural selection is what it is" attitude should surely apply.
Because Betazed (using your example) already knows about the existence of other life and is warp capable.
 
The world Star Trek envisions and reaches for is no longer what the majority on Earth want. People want racism, seperarion and conflict, all the things humanity in Trek left in it's fictitious past and battles against the return of.

On one hand it means we need Trek's vision of the future more than ever, but I fear it is becoming a relic in a world being moved by billionaires and propaganda towards straight white male supremacy.

I don’t want racism, separation and conflict.

Neither do my wife and friends.

I’m pretty sure we qualify as people.
 
Would have been nice if at some point, the differing interpretations of the Prime Directive had been made an actual plot point. (As a teenager I had a fanfiction idea for some kind of Prime Directive Crisis within the Federation that locked it down one way or another — probably with Picard and Riker being on opposite sides.)
 
What's weird about Prime Directive stories is they never really discuss the possible consequences of breaking the rule to save a pre-warp planet and why this would be worse than letting them go extinct.

I mean it has to be a really really terrible consequence for the kindest, most selfless heroes to be willing to sacrifice billions of lives just to prevent the possibility of it happening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top