This is why Discovery has so much potential, because you can draw comparisons between the Klingons and Russia, Pope Urban II, Osama Bin Laden, ISIS, Tokugawa Ieyasu, Imperial Japan, etc.
Russia is another angle you can still view the Klingons from, because Putin's main dispute with the west has been the expansion of NATO and the European Union further toward Russia's borders. It raises a lot of moral issues. Russian political identity is often said to be based around protecting it's huge steppes (easy invasion routes), from becoming vulnerable. Putting as much friendly land between itself and Germany as possible. Avoiding a repetition of the founding memory of Russia; conquest by the Mongols, or the second and third national memories, invasion by Napoleon/the Nazis. The Hur'q?
So the Federation expanding membership and outposts closer to Klingon space is going to antagonise them in a similar way. The issue is, shouldn't states like Georgia and Ukraine be allowed self-determination? Or, in the interest of political realities, is is better to respect the wishes of one of the most powerful nations on the planet/galaxy, in the interest of not provoking an unnecessary nuclear stand-off? Putin's fans argue that America and the EU deliberately pressured former Soviet satellites into becoming increasingly in their sphere, and that he was a good partner to the west prior to about 2004, he just wanted Russia to be powerful on it's own terms. Proponents of democracy may argue that Ukraine and Georgia had the right to self-determination, and Putin has clearly murdered political opponents. But when the Cuban Missle Crisis happened, the western powers removed missiles from Turkey, recognising that it was a hypocrisy in the eyes of the Soviets, and seeing that it wasn't worth putting humanity on the edge. The USSR had Gulags, full of innocents, but Kennedy offered this to Khrushchev knowing he wanted it, because it pacified the Soviets, and gave Khrushchev (a practical man) something out of the deal, rather than have him replaced by an unknown factor.
I would still argue, from my own experiences, that at the end of the day, T'Kuvma is a horrible figure, with far less redeeming features than any Russian or Japanese leader fearing for his country, much more of a measly Bin Laden figure, obsessed with being the next prophet to walk out of the desert. He even compares himself to Kahless/Muhammed, like some Saladin/Paul Artreides/Luke Skywalker wannabe. He isn't a head of state, but a private individual who, instead of being critical of whether his own civilization is actually worth the loyalty, and agitating for a fairer Klingon Empire, projects all his civilization's problems outwards onto others, just like the conspiracy-obsessed anti-intellectuals you find in jihadist movements. Vladimir Putin, whatever we think of him, isn't so stupid as to think 'the west' is the secret source of every misfortune that happens to him, or any Russian, the way religious extremists do.
I'm personally on the side of democracy, as its been proven by history to be the system that has prevented the most deaths, and given the most to humanity.
But that isn't to say I would have deliberately antagonised Russia the way the neo-conservatives did by pushing hard for the expansion of NATO, even whilst Russia offered to help in the 'war on terror'. Putin is probably a murderer of innocent citizens, but I think perhaps Star Trek was right in suggesting societies should be left to their own devices and encouraged to change with private words, especially when they could launch a horrible war if provoked, and as long as they aren't actively attacking you, should be left to reform on their own time. If it should emerge Russia was already subtly attacking the west and interfering in the EU before things were inflamed, then I'm wrong, and Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld and co. were perhaps right.
We have no idea if the Federation did anything to antagonise the Klingons in Star Trek, other than exist, so they have no blame in this, in DSC.
Russia is another angle you can still view the Klingons from, because Putin's main dispute with the west has been the expansion of NATO and the European Union further toward Russia's borders. It raises a lot of moral issues. Russian political identity is often said to be based around protecting it's huge steppes (easy invasion routes), from becoming vulnerable. Putting as much friendly land between itself and Germany as possible. Avoiding a repetition of the founding memory of Russia; conquest by the Mongols, or the second and third national memories, invasion by Napoleon/the Nazis. The Hur'q?
So the Federation expanding membership and outposts closer to Klingon space is going to antagonise them in a similar way. The issue is, shouldn't states like Georgia and Ukraine be allowed self-determination? Or, in the interest of political realities, is is better to respect the wishes of one of the most powerful nations on the planet/galaxy, in the interest of not provoking an unnecessary nuclear stand-off? Putin's fans argue that America and the EU deliberately pressured former Soviet satellites into becoming increasingly in their sphere, and that he was a good partner to the west prior to about 2004, he just wanted Russia to be powerful on it's own terms. Proponents of democracy may argue that Ukraine and Georgia had the right to self-determination, and Putin has clearly murdered political opponents. But when the Cuban Missle Crisis happened, the western powers removed missiles from Turkey, recognising that it was a hypocrisy in the eyes of the Soviets, and seeing that it wasn't worth putting humanity on the edge. The USSR had Gulags, full of innocents, but Kennedy offered this to Khrushchev knowing he wanted it, because it pacified the Soviets, and gave Khrushchev (a practical man) something out of the deal, rather than have him replaced by an unknown factor.
I would still argue, from my own experiences, that at the end of the day, T'Kuvma is a horrible figure, with far less redeeming features than any Russian or Japanese leader fearing for his country, much more of a measly Bin Laden figure, obsessed with being the next prophet to walk out of the desert. He even compares himself to Kahless/Muhammed, like some Saladin/Paul Artreides/Luke Skywalker wannabe. He isn't a head of state, but a private individual who, instead of being critical of whether his own civilization is actually worth the loyalty, and agitating for a fairer Klingon Empire, projects all his civilization's problems outwards onto others, just like the conspiracy-obsessed anti-intellectuals you find in jihadist movements. Vladimir Putin, whatever we think of him, isn't so stupid as to think 'the west' is the secret source of every misfortune that happens to him, or any Russian, the way religious extremists do.
I'm personally on the side of democracy, as its been proven by history to be the system that has prevented the most deaths, and given the most to humanity.
But that isn't to say I would have deliberately antagonised Russia the way the neo-conservatives did by pushing hard for the expansion of NATO, even whilst Russia offered to help in the 'war on terror'. Putin is probably a murderer of innocent citizens, but I think perhaps Star Trek was right in suggesting societies should be left to their own devices and encouraged to change with private words, especially when they could launch a horrible war if provoked, and as long as they aren't actively attacking you, should be left to reform on their own time. If it should emerge Russia was already subtly attacking the west and interfering in the EU before things were inflamed, then I'm wrong, and Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld and co. were perhaps right.
We have no idea if the Federation did anything to antagonise the Klingons in Star Trek, other than exist, so they have no blame in this, in DSC.
