I remember the scene is Wrath of kahn where they visits the Klingon home...
No, wait, there were no Klingons in WoK.
Or the scene where Kirk and Khan both jumped...
No, wait, William Shatner and Ricardo Montalb
Everywhere I look, people are screaming about how bad Cryptic is.
What's my position?
That people should know what they're screaming about!
(paraphrased from "The Newsroom)
Stalin massacred anyone who spoke out against him. Khan didn't. Stalin was the iron fist in the velvet glove - Khan seems to have been the velvet fist in the iron guantlet.
Comparing Khan to Stalin is like comparing Mussolini to Hitler.
TBH, the only reason Mussolini didn't engage in mass murder was because Italy didn't offer him the same chances to engage in it as Germany offered Hitler.
And of course Italy's war machine was broken from the start, so he was basically Hitler's lapdog for the entire war.
Don't think it was ever said anywhere Khan was sympathetic toward his "subjects"? You never would have found anyone in Russia to openly badmouth Stalin while he was in charge. That doesn't mean he was a nice person.
Agreed!
IMHO Khan Noonien Singh was every bit as cold as Stalin ... he believed himself to be "superior" in every way to every one! As a ruler he was able to exercise his will as he saw fit.
He was a dictator!
He was ruthless.
He was the sort of person who thanked Kirk for his hospitality by taking over his ship and killing anyone who tried to stop him .. including Kirk!
As long as you gave Kahn what ever he demanded or took and gave him complete subjugated obedience he was happy. He and his genetically altered followers (we're not told to what degree that they were ALL altered .. only that they were) .. believed that they had the right to rule and do as they wished because they were "superior".
At any rate: he was not just your "average" bad guy.
It should also be noted that Kirk's original admiration was not for the ruthlessness of Kahn, but rather the ability he had to conquer and rule ... NOT the brutality of which he was able to maintain it!
(just my thoughts)
What makes you think Khan didn't? "There were no massacres under is rule" does not mean what you think it does. Perhaps there were no massacres because people knew Khan would kill them if they spoke out against him?
Kirk tells you all you need to know about him, if you just pay attention to the language ...
"He was the best of the tyrants and the most dangerous."
Look at the words he uses to describe Khan... tyrant and dangerous.
Look at what happened in Germany post WWI up to WWII. Does that mean Hitler was a great leader and a nice person? Most certainly not.
Face it, Khan wasn't the nice guy.
That doesn't mean that Khan was a moustache-twirling villain. Keep in mind that Gene Roddenbury made little attempt in TOS to hide the fact the UFP is based on the US. Roddenbury fought in the war, and the US was embroiled in the war against Communism at this time. If you were a dictatorship, you were a tyrant.
Fidel Castro is considered a tyrant, when he's actually one of the most mild dictators in the modern world (not to say that he's a kind leader, but he isn't particularly oppressive either). Tyrant is used synonymously with dictator, especially during the 1960s. I wouldn't put it past Roddenbury to have used tyrant incorrectly given the period.
Also, 'dangerous' does not mean 'evil'. The United States is dangerous; it has a massive military and nuclear arsenal. It's also not evil. Dangerous means Khan was a threat to anyone who made him an enemy, not that he made his own enemies.
Also, it's hard to prove you will commit massacres without actually committing massacres. Something which has been proven consistently throughout history.
Khan didn't seem to have any issue torturing or killing anyone who disagreed with or opposed him. This is a nice person to you?
Why don't you actually read our posts? We have both said that Khan was a bad guy without question. That isn't the point. The point is he is not a black-hat villain!
He is in no way the "nice dictator" (if there is even is such a thing) as you're attempting to paint him as for sure.
We don't have any evidence to that effect. What Kirk said in know way implies a hitler-style monster, and the entire dialogue suggests that he was a somewhat fair ruler.
He is in no way the "nice dictator" (if there is even is such a thing)
Of course they can be, complete control doesn't mean they have to kill thousands a day or anything. Most Emperors through history were Dictators there through strength of arms, most of the running of the country was left up to the same people it would have been in a Republic or democracy.
Besides Tyrant or Dictator was originally a elected position in Rome, the idea Khan started of as Caesar and didn't relinquish his power at the end of his term as Dictator is an amusing one.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Of course they can be, complete control doesn't mean they have to kill thousands a day or anything. Most Emperors through history were Dictators there through strength of arms, most of the running of the country was left up to the same people it would have been in a Republic or democracy.
Besides Tyrant or Dictator was originally a elected position in Rome, the idea Khan started of as Caesar and didn't relinquish his power at the end of his term as Dictator is an amusing one.
This^^
Take Oliver Cromwell as another example. He was a dictator. He was also reasonably just (he was an a**hole, but he was just).
Of course you have evidence of what kind of person Khan is. Did you not see him try to take the Enterprise by force? Or put slugs into Terrell's and Chekov's ears? Murder most all the scientists on Regula?
People who run around torturing and murdering people are nice people?
Oh come on, the bloody Ferengi tried to take over the Enterprise (and succeeded :P), every man and his dog has tried to, or actually, take over the Enterprise, Defiant, or Voyager at some point.
Klingons have done two of the things above and still allies of the Federation. They also have a bunch of Centuri slug like things of Rurha Pente (which is where Nero picked them up form).
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Of course you have evidence of what kind of person Khan is. Did you not see him try to take the Enterprise by force? Or put slugs into Terrell's and Chekov's ears? Murder most all the scientists on Regula?
People who run around torturing and murdering people are nice people?
Again you're putting words in my mouth. Where did I say he was a nice person?!
Was Nero in ST:09 a black-hat villain? Was Doc Ock in SM2? No, they weren't, yet Ock tried to murder dozens of people and Nero blew up an entire planet!
Being a bad guy does not mean you're a black-hat moustache-twirling villain!
And, in fairness to him, the Irish and Scottish both rose up against England after Charles I was executed, and those conflicts started before Cromwell dissolved the Rump Parliament.
That said, it doesn't change the fact that his attitude towards the Irish was extremely brutal because the Irish were catholic and he was protestant.
Khan Noonien Singh was a villain. He maintained total control over a quarter of the planetary surface for years. He was a tyrant.
John Harrison was a villain. His only concern was for the 72 people under his care; every other sapient in the universe existed only in service to them, as far as he was concerned.
Now, here's the part you're missing:
Villain != "moustache-twirling"! Khan in The Wrath of Khan was kind of a moustache-twirler, but he was supposed to be insane by that point.
There's a fine line between the first Roman triumvirate and the Empire of Japan circa 1939. Or between Zorg and the Shadow in The Fifth Element.
I think you need to re-read my posts again. Pay close attention to what I said about the differences between villains like Khan from WoK and Magneto.
Nope, false dichotomy. Magneto has repeatedly attempted genocide, and his plans are basically the same as Khan's: Make his group of humanity dominant, then be glorious leader.
Khan in WoK was established to be insane from grief. So bad example there.
Well, no. Magneto's motivations are just a tad more understandable. He didn't wake up one day and say "I'm the greatest" and try to take over the world. His motivations are the preservation of his species. Khan wanted power, pure and simple. Khan was also a bad guy before WoK too. Nice try though.
Anyway, you've completely missed the point of what we were discussing in that there are sympathetic villains (see Magneto) and straight up bad guys, such as WoK Khan, Sauron in LoTR etc.
Don't forget that the Augments were created as supersoldiers.
They were basically created to die. Anybody'd get upset at that. Of course, Khan (like Magneto) went way too far.
But I'd NEVER compare Khan to Sauron. Sauron's basically the devil. Khan's just a screwed-up superman with a scary ideology.
Comments
No, wait, there were no Klingons in WoK.
Or the scene where Kirk and Khan both jumped...
No, wait, William Shatner and Ricardo Montalb
What's my position?
That people should know what they're screaming about!
(paraphrased from "The Newsroom)
TBH, the only reason Mussolini didn't engage in mass murder was because Italy didn't offer him the same chances to engage in it as Germany offered Hitler.
And of course Italy's war machine was broken from the start, so he was basically Hitler's lapdog for the entire war.
Agreed!
IMHO Khan Noonien Singh was every bit as cold as Stalin ... he believed himself to be "superior" in every way to every one! As a ruler he was able to exercise his will as he saw fit.
He was a dictator!
He was ruthless.
He was the sort of person who thanked Kirk for his hospitality by taking over his ship and killing anyone who tried to stop him .. including Kirk!
As long as you gave Kahn what ever he demanded or took and gave him complete subjugated obedience he was happy. He and his genetically altered followers (we're not told to what degree that they were ALL altered .. only that they were) .. believed that they had the right to rule and do as they wished because they were "superior".
At any rate: he was not just your "average" bad guy.
It should also be noted that Kirk's original admiration was not for the ruthlessness of Kahn, but rather the ability he had to conquer and rule ... NOT the brutality of which he was able to maintain it!
(just my thoughts)
That doesn't mean that Khan was a moustache-twirling villain. Keep in mind that Gene Roddenbury made little attempt in TOS to hide the fact the UFP is based on the US. Roddenbury fought in the war, and the US was embroiled in the war against Communism at this time. If you were a dictatorship, you were a tyrant.
Fidel Castro is considered a tyrant, when he's actually one of the most mild dictators in the modern world (not to say that he's a kind leader, but he isn't particularly oppressive either). Tyrant is used synonymously with dictator, especially during the 1960s. I wouldn't put it past Roddenbury to have used tyrant incorrectly given the period.
Also, 'dangerous' does not mean 'evil'. The United States is dangerous; it has a massive military and nuclear arsenal. It's also not evil. Dangerous means Khan was a threat to anyone who made him an enemy, not that he made his own enemies.
Also, it's hard to prove you will commit massacres without actually committing massacres. Something which has been proven consistently throughout history.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
But he's like Fidel Castro (thank you, Ryan!). A jerk, but not a total monster.
Would you rather have Fidel Castro or Adolph Hitler? Khan or Colonel Green the mass-murderer?
If I had no other options, I'd pick Khan or Castro, every time. At least they don't torture or oppress anyone who doesn't get in their face.
Why don't you actually read our posts? We have both said that Khan was a bad guy without question. That isn't the point. The point is he is not a black-hat villain!
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
I explicitly state at multiple occasions that Khan is a bad person. I also state that he's not as bad as several of the alternatives.
We don't have any evidence to that effect. What Kirk said in know way implies a hitler-style monster, and the entire dialogue suggests that he was a somewhat fair ruler.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Of course they can be, complete control doesn't mean they have to kill thousands a day or anything. Most Emperors through history were Dictators there through strength of arms, most of the running of the country was left up to the same people it would have been in a Republic or democracy.
Besides Tyrant or Dictator was originally a elected position in Rome, the idea Khan started of as Caesar and didn't relinquish his power at the end of his term as Dictator is an amusing one.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
This^^
Take Oliver Cromwell as another example. He was a dictator. He was also reasonably just (he was an a**hole, but he was just).
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Well, reasonable unless you were Irish
Oh come on, the bloody Ferengi tried to take over the Enterprise (and succeeded :P), every man and his dog has tried to, or actually, take over the Enterprise, Defiant, or Voyager at some point.
Klingons have done two of the things above and still allies of the Federation. They also have a bunch of Centuri slug like things of Rurha Pente (which is where Nero picked them up form).
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Again you're putting words in my mouth. Where did I say he was a nice person?!
Was Nero in ST:09 a black-hat villain? Was Doc Ock in SM2? No, they weren't, yet Ock tried to murder dozens of people and Nero blew up an entire planet!
Being a bad guy does not mean you're a black-hat moustache-twirling villain!
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Okay, he was reasonable in his home nation.
And, in fairness to him, the Irish and Scottish both rose up against England after Charles I was executed, and those conflicts started before Cromwell dissolved the Rump Parliament.
That said, it doesn't change the fact that his attitude towards the Irish was extremely brutal because the Irish were catholic and he was protestant.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Actually the movie was more Dreadnought! (An 80s Trek novel) with Khan .
Khan Noonien Singh was a villain. He maintained total control over a quarter of the planetary surface for years. He was a tyrant.
John Harrison was a villain. His only concern was for the 72 people under his care; every other sapient in the universe existed only in service to them, as far as he was concerned.
Now, here's the part you're missing:
Villain != "moustache-twirling"! Khan in The Wrath of Khan was kind of a moustache-twirler, but he was supposed to be insane by that point.
There's a fine line between the first Roman triumvirate and the Empire of Japan circa 1939. Or between Zorg and the Shadow in The Fifth Element.
Nope, false dichotomy. Magneto has repeatedly attempted genocide, and his plans are basically the same as Khan's: Make his group of humanity dominant, then be glorious leader.
Khan in WoK was established to be insane from grief. So bad example there.
Don't forget that the Augments were created as supersoldiers.
They were basically created to die. Anybody'd get upset at that. Of course, Khan (like Magneto) went way too far.
But I'd NEVER compare Khan to Sauron. Sauron's basically the devil. Khan's just a screwed-up superman with a scary ideology.