test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
The Prime Directive getting misunderstood
crappyturbo
Member Posts: 201 Arc User
To my knowledge the prime directive applies if the planet DOES NOT have faster than light travel capacity. So how does it apply when the planet has it but does not want to join the Federation, it does not. The Federation council, imho, has put a directive in place to limit aid to Federation members only or those who will jump through nearly endless diplomatic hoops.
Post edited by crappyturbo on
0
Comments
The reason pre-FTL-travel civilizations are highlighted by this order is because Federation starships are FTL-capable, and therefore would seriously impact the development of said civilization.
When a species says they do not want to join the Federation, or do not want assistance, then the order applies and the Federation cannot interact with them without the approval of that species.
The universe has a wonderful sense of humor. The trick is learning how to take a joke.
Grated, the rule is ignored on a regular basis, but it's not limited to non-warp species.
The first in its particular application to pre-warp peoples, preventing Starfleet from using its advanced technology to dazzle and indirectly dominate them, even if it has benevolent intent.
The second in its application to everyone else. The Federation is not supposed to arm one side of conflicts in which it remains ostensibly neutral, stir colonial proxy wars, topple or preserve governments in crisis, etc.
It limits contact on all non-warp capable species, so you don't artifically advance them to a point they are not ready for, but it does not stop there. It also means you are not to interfer with the society's culture and political structure.
For instance, Worf was repremanded by Picard for Killing Duras under the prime directive, becauee by Killing Duras, Worf effected the outcome of who was the next High Chancellor.
The Prime Directive does not stop with a civilization obtaining warp drive. Though the level of contact and interference is less, as it is determined that the more advanced a population is, the less likely any given form of contact will have an adverse effect on it.
http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-reviews/prime-directive-analysis-5638650
Suffice to say, it has grown from a doctrine intended to prevent Captains getting involved in situation that they shouldn't, to being an inflexible law, in which no action is acceptable. Frankly, any contact with any person or society will have an effect on the way it will develop. You can't get around that. The more you trade, the more cultures will be blended. And this is a normal thing.
Now getting involved in others fights when you have nothing at stake, is just bad policy. And mucking about pre warp civilizations is just bad, because many times the other culture is not ready to be introduced to the rest of the universe.
but to sit back and let disasters that aren't being caused by the civilization that you can prevent is just moral cowardice, no matter how you justify it. As Kirk once pointed out to spock, It's better to change these people, then to let them die.
Now I think every captain has to act in the best interest of every body, and maybe get a hold of Star Fleet command to get guidance and permission on certain involvements is good policy, but the captain is out there change cultures through both action and inaction a like.
There is one word for this.
Maquis
Worf killing Duras and getting reprimanded under the prime directive was, imho, an easy out for the writer of the show because people watching the episode knew what the prime directive was and that explained it easier than another 5 min explanation of exactly the same thing.
^^
That was re-conned with TNG - in TOS it was specifically stated to only apply to pre-warp cultures that had no knowledge of spaceflight or of other intelligent life in space.
Also, it wasn't automatically applied everywhere - there was usually a survey done, and a recommendation was made to Star Fleet as to whether the Prime Directive should be invoked for said world.
^^
(My canon source for all the above: The TOS episode - "A Private Little War"
IMO - the TNG era shows took the Prime Directive to a ridiculous level as in effect, if we were to apply the TNG version, the Federation should not be trading or interacting with ANY planet that is not already a member world - and if you take the TNG Prime Directive as that series interpreted it, it would be impossible for ANY world to apply - as the Federation would now be interfering (especially if something surfaced to make the Federation reject the application, OR the planet decided to terminate the application process; which almost happened with Bajor a couple of times during the DS9 series.
Thus the ONLY interpretation of the Prime Directive that makes an sort of sense and allows the Federation to operate as it does is the original TOS interpretation. (Again, IMO)
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
This Prime Directive is not an absolute prohibition of action of regards to pre-warp civilisations. As we have seen it's in place to make Captains and other Starfleet Officers think through and question any action they may take. I do agree that some writers taking the absolutely prohibition interpretation is silly. The best example of that I've seen is the TNG Episode "Penpals". Data was at fault for talking with the girl. The I find Picard's initial refusal to help save the civilisation to be silly. It seems so unlike Picard.
The second directive non-interference directive is political. The Federation doesn't want a Starfleet Officer to take an action to drag the Federation into an unwanted conflict. That political choice is the purview of the Federation Council and President.
The premier example of the second political non-interference directive is the Klingon Civil War from ST:TNG. The Federation didn't want to get sucked into the conflict. The Federation/Picard clearly wanted Gowron forces to win, but they would not/could not take any direct action in the conflict. As we find out that doesn't prevent them from taking indirect actions in uncovering and stopping the Romulan's's aid to the forces of the House of Duras.
The problem with this is that even with all the technology and knowledge of the Federation behind them, a Starfleet Captain cannot solve every problem, plus when dealing with these problems the consequences of aiding them aren't always obvious.
For instance in TNG's 'The Masterpiece Society' the very fact that the colony was helped to save it caused harm to the colony by triggering their curiosity about life other than on their world. As a tightly-controlled colony it needs all the manpower it has and them leaving harms the colony.
There's also the case of preventing hubris, for instance in 'Homeward' where one observer decides the fate of an entire race by saving them as their planet's atmosphere dissolves. During his efforts one of the people he saves finds out that they are on the Enterprise and both the culture shock as well as being unable to fulfill his role in society (as the Lorekeeper/Truthteller) causes him to commit suicide. Which the entire race could have done as well simply from the culture shock alone.
Finally some societies simply aren't ready for the ramifications that come with intergalactic travel, such as the Malcorians in 'First Contact' who held the belief of being 'superior in the galaxy.' A belief that had them mistrust the Enterprise as representatives of the Federation and who some people actively went about sabotaging the efforts of First Contact out of cultural fear. (The Malcorian who forced Riker to shoot him, not knowing about Phaseer Stun settings.)
Ultimately it's also partly about choosing the lesser of two evils and absolving a Captain of fault should they choose to uphold the Prime Directive instead of trying to save a species and fail while doing so, often because of your own actions.
So the prime directive is more of a dont interfere in internal planet development, weather that be via technology political or religiously.
this is where the directive get tricky, as starfleet does its best to uphold its directive they also know things like this could destabilize the entire quadrant.
But like real military's if you are given a order such as pull back knowing that you will leave men who could die and you ignore it and end up saving them, most militrays dont punish you for such actions sort of a ends justify the means
"It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok
But it's a captains job to make the best decision based on all the facts available, and then live with the consequences. Not all actions are going to result in a good out come, nor can some one see into the future. But that is where good judgment, a sense of morality to do the right thing, and above all, respect for others really comes into play.
Any captain who sits there while others suffer with out lifting a finger is a coward, and frankly unfit to command a ship, in which any action will affect not just them selves, but future generations. Even avoiding direct involvement in other cultures will not guarantee that you can avoid hurt a culture. Simply loosing a section of hull that drifts into another civilizations world could have unforeseen consequences, but that doesn't mean that Star fleet should just withdraw back into their own space to avoid consequence.
Instead, a captain must rely on his training, and abilities to make the right decisions, which sometimes might include not doing anything. A captain should try to redirect an asteroid bound to hit the planet, but not stop a side from using a nuke in a war against them selves. There are differences to consider.
Also keep in mind, that in most cases, anything is better then total annihilation. And if that means that the federation has to deal with the ramifications, most people would still do it. Does that mean that the Captain should just do as he feels? not always, and informing Star Fleet should be high priority to at least get guidance.
again, these are very specific examples, where their reaction was not desired, despite their best help. But I would like to point out, in most of these situations, they were guaranteed to die, but ended up dying by intervention, the out come was the same, but at least the people trying to save them made the effort. The out come would have been the same if they did nothing, and worst yet, what if this was a race that wouldn't have suicidal upon contact? Not lifting a finger would have actually doomed them based on the possibility that they would not survive anyway.
As far as the last example, it was not the time for first contact, and that eventually got worked out by Picard, so that the over all society was not drastically influenced. It wasn't pretty, but Picard acted in a manner that made him have to not only think, but also act to what was best for the culture.
the real question is this. Not knowing what all the ramifications will be, based on the knowledge that you can save a people by preventing the catastrophe, or sit idol and let them die, which would you do? and would you feel good about your decision? And can you call you actions morally right, given the context that life is too precious to waste and that we consider people letting others die because of inaction just as bad as the ones killing people?
A sign that the particular species is ready to be approached by the greater galactic community. This was adopted from the Vulcans.
Exactly curing them may not be enough
The Enterprise episode Dear Doctor explains this very well, for those who didn't watch it they encounter a race that is dying of a illness that they cant cure, at first they try to help but they later learn that another species lives on the planet but are considered primitive and are treated as such by the dying ones.
Yet the doctor discovers that this primitive species is starting to adapt and evolve and could rise to become a dominant species on the planet if they get the chance.
So do you cure the ones who are already evolved thus interfering with the planets development and letting the lesser species remain treated as primitives or let billions die so that these primitive species may one day get the chance to develop their own culture and society.
"We could stay and help them."
"The Vulcans stayed to help Earth 90 years ago. We're still there."
"I never thought I'd say this, but... I'm beginning to understand how the Vulcans must have felt."
- Archer and T'Pol
"It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok
Except that is a flawed argument. Lets work with your plague as an example. If you have the power as a captain to stop this plague, which we know will wipe them all out and there will be no survivors unless you do something, you can do the following.
a) Sit there and do nothing. they are a pre-warp civilization, that is now doomed to fail. You catalogue this planet for future expeditions. You have let millions die because the prime directive says not to interfere and you decided to follow it blindly. Other Civilizations then look upon that as the fact the federation is weak, because despite claiming to be moral and upstanding, they are willing to sit back and watch people die.
b) You can give them the technology to make a cure, giving away valuable technology that they might not be ready for. There is a chance that they can then use this against each other to kill more. Since you decide to hell with the whole prime directive, might as well just blindly jump in and do the most idiotic things possible. At least some survive, but you directly stepping in with out further investigating whether they might use this technology for weapons. But hey, people who don't sit back to watch civilizations fall must be idiots, why not give them schematics to warp engines and photon torpedoes on the way out, because that's the sort of thing that makes sense.
c) Investigate what is causing this plague, and start making a cure. contact Star Fleet command to let them know what you are doing and getting advice, after all, Star Fleet is about improve other peoples lives and humanitarian aid is what Star Fleet is all about. See if there is any way to disseminate the cure so that you don't have to make direct contact, and barring that, try to find solutions where you make contact with the least amount of people possible to reduce the effects of cultural contamination.
You don't give them technology, as you don't know enough to know what they are going to do with it, but that doesn't mean you can't give them the cure. Then report to Star Fleet of your actions and maybe have them check in to make sure that they are doing alright, after all, life is precious, and exploration does not preclude helping those out that you meet.
D) other permutations on option C.
See, with a bit of restraint, planning ahead, and thinking skills, you can both prevent them from having foreign technology that might not be ready to handle, and also save them. You also attempt to keep contact as minimal as possible as culture shock can be a problem, so if you have to make full contact, then at least you know you made every effort to minimize it first. Also, keeping Star Fleet in the loop, and getting advice from your superiors on these sensitive matters goes a long way to helping you make the best decisions. You didn't sit around and calmly watch people die, but you also didn't just say here is the whole new world you didn't know, and hey, look free technology you can abuse just because we can.
Situations like these don't need to be the bane of thinking, but rather represent a greater challenge, one which all captains must be ready to undertake, otherwise they aren't fit for command.
the flaws with your argument is this. You assume that doing something requires the abandonment of the purpose of the prime directive, as it should be. That in order to save a society, you must go all in and break all the rules, with reckless abandon, and that letting a species die is far better then potentially giving them means to do evil, which you have no control of any way.
Under your logic, the federation would be just as responsible if the ferengi decide to buy medical equipment, find this plague ravaged world, and save them at the cost of become slaves as they set them selves as gods, even if you didn't know that the ferengi were going to use this technology for this purpose, or if they got the technology many years before. Are you going to come back and wipe them out because they should have died, just to prevent a culture that has had cultural contamination?
it is, but you are also right, it's hard to be isolationist when they can find you. But that is a problem with isolationism. While it is noble to not interfere with how other societies develop, eventually cultures will meet, and they will bleed together. That is the natural order of things. The Warp thresh hold is just an arbitrary point in which we can be certain that they are ready to meet new races. Some could handle that before Warp capabilities, and some not even after, but it's still a blind game of chance to figure out which ones, thus pre and post warp.
Yes, but this is also considered on the worst episodes of Enterprise and turned off many people. for several reasons.
1) they already made first contact, thus negating the prime directive. the damage was done. it's not like they can just rewind time and never show up. They are now involved in events, having promised to help them find a cure if they could. Not necessarily a smart decision, as it was not thought through. Also, Archer never contacted Star Fleet, and consult with them about what they should and are capable of doing, including the limits of their assistance. Was it wrong to help? no. But at the same time, if they ended up staying there for fifteen years, then they are not doing any body any good either. this is where critical thinking comes in.
2) they did eventually find a cure, but chose not to use it. This has to be the most F$@ked up thing the did. While the circumstances where not the best they could be, they had already offered to help. albeit a short sighted thing, not necessarily a wrong thing. Once they learned of the other inhabitants and the way they were treated, they decided to impose their own judgement on the situation.
3) Just because they don't agree with the way the people are treated, does not give them the right to then choose how things will unfold. This is why Archer should have at least contacted the Admiral, get some advice, and see what Star Fleet was willing to do, as well as do some home work on the people. In any case, once he offered help, taking it away is just as bad as playing god, because they are deciding who lives and dies.
The worst part is, the more "evolved" society probably figured out what caused Archer to stop helping and wiped away the other species, especially with how bad they were treating them.
4) You're quote of Archer to t'pol is also a straw man. Yes, avoiding people will keep them out of your life, maybe, but one part of exploration is to seek out new life and make contact. Partly to better one self through the exchange of ideas. This means you will have contact with those people for the rest of your civilizations life and maybe beyond. It's true of the Vucans with the humans, the Humans with the Klingon's Romulans, Bajoran's, ect. ect. ect.
If you can't handle being there in some fashion, then you are playing the wrong game. (space exploration, that is.) It's not even like the Vulcans were babying the humans, they kept a presence, like we do with foreign countries, so that we can help out if they need help and keep up with what they are doing. Alliances can be closely compared to friends. You get involved with other people's lives because in the long run, you want some one the share your life with.
And every one treats development like there is a plan some where, and if you so happen to show up, you can tamper with events. A world develops in an organic way, when something new is introduced, it becomes a component in future development. And if there is a divine plan, who is to say you aren't part of it.
Finally, I would have changed the episode so that they gave over the cure, or what they knew, but inform the more "advance" inhabitants that you don't wish further contact because you don't agree with the treatment of the "lesser" beings. This would have had a much greater impact on creating social justice then walking away, and after all, the only reason we could even possibly think the decision not to give the cure is because we want the "lesser" beings welfare to improve.
Except that we are back to giving them the technology and giving them the cure itself. In one instance you are handing over lab equipment and the texts to allow them to use said technology, the other you inject them with the cure.
it's akin to you getting a flu shot. You got one and are now benefiting, but you don't have the knowledge of how to make it or other bio chemical substances.
Can you see the difference?
Regardless of the outcome staying the same, (they all die) doing nothing, by the Prime Directive, absolves the Captain of blame. Where if the Captain does not abide by it then he is responsible for his actions which means that he is responsible for taking part in the destruction of a species. Even if he was trying to help.
Yes it is cowardice but it is a necessary cowardice.
Correct and regardless of the possibility, by not lifting a finger then the Captain had no part in their destruction. For good or ill. At all.
The Prime Directive's only moral standing is that interference with other cultures is wrong. Even for saving them. A sort of 'only do this if you know you can get away with it' warning in that sense.
However now diplomacy and politics can come into play. Reasons can be provided for why no action was taken and ultimately the species died because of natural or internal causes. Because there was no action taken by the Captain/Federation, it's the species own fault for dying out. (Being unable to cure the plague/engineering it themselves.)
The only issue with this option is if you don't have time to contact Starfleet (say the plague spreads exponentially and mutates rapidly) and there is a particularly extreme situation that would be hard to research (the plague is actually a part of the planet's life cycle and curing it would kill the planet forever.) But overall this is the type of outside intervention that a Captain can get away with ignoring the Prime Directive.
If bad things still happen then at least the Captain did his best with the plague.
The problem with your argument is that you make the assumption that trying to save a species outweighs what actually happens to them. It is a 'do or do not, there is no try' state. You either did something in which case you are responsible for whatever happened, or you didn't do something in which case whatever happens isn't your fault. Which would boil down to:
1. 'You saved and had minimal influence on them so we can play politics around the Prime Directive.'
2. 'You saved them but now they've changed forever, you've abused your power as a Captain of a Starfleet Vessel.'
3. 'You tried to save them and failed, so you've taken part in their destruction.'
4. 'You didn't do anything and upheld the Prime Directive, so it's not your fault.'
Scenarios 2 and 3 would indeed be grounds for a Captain to be removed from duty.
It's far more likely that either Starfleet would stop them (it violates a treaty relating to borders/colonization etc.) or since the Ferengi have decided to make that species problem their problem, they're responsible for it in terms of intergalactic politics.
The Prime Directive is after all only for Starfleet.
Star Fleet even has a F the Prime Directive Directive when it comes to the Omega molecule.
Omega Directive is the only order that has higher precedence than the Prime Directive, as such, a captain is obligated to "F the Prime Directive" when it comes up. This is because the repercussions of the Omega molecule are much wider than just a single species. A single Omega molecule detonated and destroyed 29 Borg vessels, and that type of detonation makes it completely impossible to form a stable warp field, negating the standard manner of faster than light travel. Imagine if a species attempted to weaponize it without realizing this? Entire sectors could be rendered impassable because of their ignorance.
As for every captain breaking the directive, the shows would have been really boring if they never did anything because it would interfere with another species.
The universe has a wonderful sense of humor. The trick is learning how to take a joke.
How can you be sure that the scenario you propose will occur? What you know is that the present scenario shows millions of deaths. And you have the means to stop it. What may or may not happen is neither here or there. It's a possibility not a certainty. Obviously that every action we take may cause more harm than good on a long run but that is part of life. That's why we help people who are starving, who have illnesses and so on. Pondering consequences is valid and a must, but sitting back and do nothing never solved much.
Here's another follow up to your example you didn't consider:
Species dying. You give them the technology and assistance to develop the cure. They make it. And now, instead of starting making bioweapons, their "primitive" scientists make an accidental discovery that will benefit your own species; say a cure for some sort of degenerative disease, helping millions of your own kind.
If we go into supposition there's no limit.
Plus he never told them they had found a cure, so i doubt the evolved ones knew why they probably just figured they failed like they had to come up with a cure.
In the Future the Prime directive isn't just one rule its a series of rules and guidelines that every starfleet officer must follow some are clear cut and there's no way to get around it, Others were subject to interpretation, with commanding officers in Starfleet being given great discretion regarding how and whether the Prime Directive would apply to specific situations and even then If a decision was made by a commanding officer that could potentially be a violation of the Prime Directive, They would need to be recorded and justified to Starfleet through the ship's or station's log, and then after starfleet could consider that said action wasn't just and could result in a court martial
so my point is that if a planet illness comes into question you have to consider weather helping them may be the right thing or if doing so could make things worse and yes, as a captain you have some leeway on how you act but in the end you have to justify those actions and saying "i did it to help them" or "i did what i thought was right" isn't enough.
"It appears we have lost our sex appeal, captain."- Tuvok