Also, as Picard pointed out, Jameson did not initiate hostilities. Even before his interference the two parties were trying to wipe each other out. It seems likely that the war would have had similar casualties either way.
That's true, Jameson didn't initiate the hostilities, but he did still become involved in what was an internal affair... Perhaps that was what made him (Picard) steer clear of the Klingon civil war (although he was, of course, then happy to intervene on behalf of the Ba'ku...)
One point, Mudd - it was in fact Sisko who said those words (and I had occasion to cite his speech in another context not long ago), not Eddington. Other than that, though, I can't say I disagree, and I prefer the TOS Prime Directive, General Order One - which forbids interference in the normal development of a viable, pre-spaceflight society. If someone else (the Klingons, for instance, or a rogue history professor) has already interfered, the development can no longer be called "normal"; some societies, such as the people of Va'al in "The Apple" or the Betans in "The Return of the Archons", aren't really terribly viable; and once a species has achieved spaceflight, they should be expecting alien contact.
The TNG version, on the other hand, does indeed seem to be an excuse to stand back and pretend to be impartial because it's easier than trying to figure out what the right thing to do would be. I can't really call Picard a coward for following his orders, but it wasn't exactly heroic of him either. And there's no excuse for invoking the PD in cases involving interstellar empires (for instance, when they found the Romulans working with one side of the Klingon civil war), or former interstellar powers like the Bajorans.
Yeah, I think Kirk would've laughed in a 24th-century captain's face, and rightly so, at the idea of anyone suggesting the PD somehow applied to the Klingons. And similarly, the Bajorans were in no way ignorant of the outside galaxy (which is the sort of people the PD was originally intended to protect). If anything, the PD should've been used as an excuse for the Federation to kick the Cardassians off of Bajor, not to condone the Occupation.
Almost as bad to my mind is that Starfleet is inconsistent with the application of this so-called "principled stand". When Sisko was assigned to DS9 and immediately became a religious figure to a large portion of the Bajoran population, by the then-current interpretation of the PD he should have been immediately recalled and another officer assigned in his place. Jolee Bindo would have been ashamed of Starfleet in this instance.
Sisko, as I recall, did his darnedest to get out of that position and actually took such an opportunity at least once. Things only began to change when the attempt to ditch the Emissary thing caused negative repercussions, and even then he was always uneasy with it. Interestingly, when it comes to cultural interference, Sisko was largely hands-off, aside from a few instances like a) warning the Bajorans off from joining the Federation at a time when it could have caused the Dominion to come down on them, and b) a few ceremonial/figurehead duties, like officiating the start of the Gratitude Festival, where he didn't tell anyone what to do...he just read off the lines they asked HIM to read. The Bajorans did as they pleased. In contrast, Akorem Laan was the one who attempted drastic (and retrograde) changes to Bajoran society, that were out of step with the direction the Bajorans had decided they wanted to go with for themselves. (The Cardassians may have been the ones to eliminate the d'jarra system--but until Akorem, no one was in a hurry to reinstate it.)
Definitely it was a very grey, very uneasy and debatable position no matter what, but those are some of the counterarguments.
(And I would actually say, for reasons I am not going to get into here because of the territory it would require me to cover, that the entities to be faulted as regards the Emissary are the Prophets, not Sisko.)
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Jolee would still have been ashamed. (Character from the Star Wars game Knights of the Old Republic; Jolee Bindo had been a Jedi during the Mandalorian Wars who had secretly fallen in love with and married his padawan. She fell to the Dark Side during the war, and he was forced to kill her; he later exiled himself from the Jedi Order and disavowed the group when they refused at his trial to punish him for marrying - which is, after all, against the Code...)
I wanted to point out one interesting thing here, regarding the Jedi of the Old Republic versus the Jedi of the New Order under Luke Skywalker. That is, the Jedi Order actually does show evidence in the pre-Empire timeframe of being corrupt. Not that it made Anakin's slaughtering younglings and other atrocities of his okay, but it DOES make Luke's decisions to run his Jedi Order differently very much okay. What we have in Star Wars is a scenario opposite to that in Star Trek, where instead of the growth of political and moral hypocrisy occurring as we move forward in time and being claimed as progress, all of the old hypocritical cobwebs were swept away. In a way they went FROM a 24th-century type mentality TO a 23rd-century, more reasonable one.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
The PD was definitely expanded between the 23rd century (where the Enterprise crew explicitly but covertly intervened in saving a primitive population from being wiped out from a "natural" disaster - TOS "This Side of Paradise", aka "the one with the Indians") and the 24th (where it apparently not only forbade such secret interventions, but also applied even to the affairs of other manifestly post-warp states). I suspect this expansion was a case of the sort of "noble", conceited, self-righteousness often on display in the first couple of seasons of the show, being used as a fig leaf for a more practical and cynical streak of realpolitik (which we got to see later on). As Eddington said, "it's easy to be a saint in Paradise" - and it's easy to declare that you're more evolved and morally superior beings if you find excuses to never have to actually act on or question or test those principles, never get your hands dirty, just stand around on top of your cloud patting each other on the back about how very special and pure you are.
You cannot observe a system, let alone be part of it, without influencing it. It is absurd for the Federation to claim "we're not getting involved" when they already are. Inaction is also a choice - often the easiest, most selfish one. Figuring out what the proper or best available action is in a situation, that's hard. It requires effort, and wisdom, and often giving up something. Let's not, and frame that as a position of principle.
I also find that strong/hard interpretations of the PD, both conventional and temporal, are uncomfortably close to the notion of Fate - that things are "meant" to follow a certain path, and woe to those who try to turn them aside, who will be punished for their hubris. Isn't that one of those superstitions which 24th century humanity boldly claimed it had outgrown? Clearly not, IMO - just repackaged into a more palatable form, where it lets them justify inaction as the result of humility in the face of God's Will (by any other name) rather than simple cowardice.
If humans, and/or the other races of the Federation, truly wish to be pure and uninvolved, they can always pull back to their homeworlds, never go anywhere, and spend all day contemplating their navels and how perfect they are. They can all be like the officer that Picard tried and thought he wanted to be, when given an opportunity to tidy up his past and act more mature - people who never do anything, never take chances, always play it safe, and never matter to anyone. The rest of the universe can go on without them, and when they inevitably die off, in the "natural order" of things, it will be as if they never existed at all. Just the sort of "zero impact" a truly moral civilization should aspire to.
Superb post! I'd especially like to point out that no, you can't observe a system without affecting it. If the Federation can cure a plague in a pre-warp society but doesn't, that will affect the relationship between them when the race develops warp. Inaction is a value decision just as much as action.
Alex, I think there's a Rush song with a line like that! Not everything about that song is my cup of tea, but I LOVE this line: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" Applies to SO many things in life, not just what that song's main topic was.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Alex, I think there's a Rush song with a line like that! Not everything about that song is my cup of tea, but I LOVE this line: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" Applies to SO many things in life, not just what that song's main topic was.
I think Chuck Sonnenburg said it best in his analysis video of the Prime Directive, which is unfortunately still waiting to be migrated to the new video service. His analogy went something like:
"If you see a child in a burning car, do you brave the flames and save it, or do you decide it's not your place to play God and that 'nature' decided the kid should die?
"Bonus question: If you choose option #2, do you then defend that to other people as the more moral of the two choices?"
That's exactly the scenario that PD strict constructionists try to defend, writ small. If you consider it unconscionable to treat one person that way, then how can you possibly do it to billions of them?
Sisko, as I recall, did his darnedest to get out of that position and actually took such an opportunity at least once. Things only began to change when the attempt to ditch the Emissary thing caused negative repercussions, and even then he was always uneasy with it. Interestingly, when it comes to cultural interference, Sisko was largely hands-off, aside from a few instances like a) warning the Bajorans off from joining the Federation at a time when it could have caused the Dominion to come down on them, and b) a few ceremonial/figurehead duties, like officiating the start of the Gratitude Festival, where he didn't tell anyone what to do...he just read off the lines they asked HIM to read. The Bajorans did as they pleased. In contrast, Akorem Laan was the one who attempted drastic (and retrograde) changes to Bajoran society, that were out of step with the direction the Bajorans had decided they wanted to go with for themselves. (The Cardassians may have been the ones to eliminate the d'jarra system--but until Akorem, no one was in a hurry to reinstate it.)
Definitely it was a very grey, very uneasy and debatable position no matter what, but those are some of the counterarguments.
(And I would actually say, for reasons I am not going to get into here because of the territory it would require me to cover, that the entities to be faulted as regards the Emissary are the Prophets, not Sisko.)
I also recall Sisko at one point actually explicitly obeying the Prime Directive regarding his status in Bajoran society, in refusing to endorse a particular candidate in the Bajoran general election. Although given that the candidate in question was Winn Adami I think we can call that one a win-win.
Post edited by starswordc on
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Alex, I think there's a Rush song with a line like that! Not everything about that song is my cup of tea, but I LOVE this line: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!" Applies to SO many things in life, not just what that song's main topic was.
Also, as Picard pointed out, Jameson did not initiate hostilities. Even before his interference the two parties were trying to wipe each other out. It seems likely that the war would have had similar casualties either way.
That's true, Jameson didn't initiate the hostilities, but he did still become involved in what was an internal affair... Perhaps that was what made him (Picard) steer clear of the Klingon civil war (although he was, of course, then happy to intervene on behalf of the Ba'ku...)
I would argue that Picard's actions in ST: Insurrection were done to repair the breach of the Prime Directive that Ruaf'o tricked Dougherty into. As Picard said: You've dragged the Federation into a civil war!
Also the Ba'ku were not a pre-warp civ. Thus there was no good reason for the Feds to avoid peaceful contact.
Then there's the matter of who owned the planet. The Feds had no proper legal claim to it. The territorial claim they made prior to the movie was based on the assumption that it wasn't inhabited. But the Ba'ku had been living there longer than the Federation had existed.
Just realized/remembered another error in my post - the TOS episode in question was actually "The Paradise Syndrome". ("This Side of Paradise" was "the one with the joy pollen.")
I would argue that Picard's actions in ST: Insurrection were done to repair the breach of the Prime Directive that Ruaf'o tricked Dougherty into. As Picard said: You've dragged the Federation into a civil war!
Also the Ba'ku were not a pre-warp civ. Thus there was no good reason for the Feds to avoid peaceful contact.
Then there's the matter of who owned the planet. The Feds had no proper legal claim to it. The territorial claim they made prior to the movie was based on the assumption that it wasn't inhabited. But the Ba'ku had been living there longer than the Federation had existed.
At a core point, yes, they (Picard's actions) were, but, Picard's decision to intervene was also massively motivated by his feelings for Anij (and Plot....) as arguably, he owed Gowron a much bigger debt, but he refused to get involved on that occasion in what was again, ultimately, a civil war, and one which would have significantly higher casualties than the Ba'ku and the Son'a... Given the way the mission was proceeding prior to Data getting shot, the mission was (as Ru'afo angrilly mocked) proceding according to Federation guidelines, so I would argue that the mission itself was not itself a breach of the Prime Directive.
Regardless of the ownership of the planet (which was never actually addressed onscreen, beyond it 'being in Federation space') immortality was never part of the Ba'ku's natural lifecycle, and arguably, they were not just culturally stagnant, but culturally back-sliding due to their lifestyle on the planet. That kind of 'stagnant culture' was the kind of thing Kirk fought to orevent for other cultures. He would have been repulsed at the idea of a group who voluntarily sought that kind of stagnancy, and cultural dead-end. Removing the Ba'ku from the planet, strictly speaking, was not interfering with the development of their society, as they had none. What they had, was an artisan's commune, and certainly an idylic one, but not anything with the capacity to become a flourishing society, as seen in other areas of Trek... So in that regard, I would argue, as Artan did upthread, that the benefits to countless billions, is of more value, and that it is morally wrong to place such a minority figure as the counterbalance. Under other circumstances (ie plot dictates) Picard would have just turned the Enterprise round and done nothing...
I would argue that Picard's actions in ST: Insurrection were done to repair the breach of the Prime Directive that Ruaf'o tricked Dougherty into. As Picard said: You've dragged the Federation into a civil war!
Also the Ba'ku were not a pre-warp civ. Thus there was no good reason for the Feds to avoid peaceful contact.
Then there's the matter of who owned the planet. The Feds had no proper legal claim to it. The territorial claim they made prior to the movie was based on the assumption that it wasn't inhabited. But the Ba'ku had been living there longer than the Federation had existed.
At a core point, yes, they (Picard's actions) were, but, Picard's decision to intervene was also massively motivated by his feelings for Anij (and Plot....) as arguably, he owed Gowron a much bigger debt, but he refused to get involved on that occasion in what was again, ultimately, a civil war, and one which would have significantly higher casualties than the Ba'ku and the Son'a...
The difference is that Dougherty had already dragged the Federation into the Ba'ku-Son'a war, whereas Picard had avoided dragging the Federation into the Klingon Civil War.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
The difference is that Dougherty had already dragged the Federation into the Ba'ku-Son'a war, whereas Picard had avoided dragging the Federation into the Klingon Civil War.
Well, Admiral Dougherty was acting under official orders from the Federation Council, so that really falls on them, rather than his shoulders (despite Picard's self-righteous accusations) but even then, it was not known that the Son'a were in fact the same people as the Ba'ku, so the Council would not have known they were involving themselves in a civil war, simply re-locating a group of Space Hippies so the benefits could be brought to the Federation (in the middle of a war)
[Edit to add]
And of course, Picard did still get Federation personnel involved in the Klingon civil war, albeit chasing Romulan agitators, rather than standing by his boy Gowron, but involvement none the less...
I would argue that Picard's actions in ST: Insurrection were done to repair the breach of the Prime Directive that Ruaf'o tricked Dougherty into. As Picard said: You've dragged the Federation into a civil war!
Also the Ba'ku were not a pre-warp civ. Thus there was no good reason for the Feds to avoid peaceful contact.
Then there's the matter of who owned the planet. The Feds had no proper legal claim to it. The territorial claim they made prior to the movie was based on the assumption that it wasn't inhabited. But the Ba'ku had been living there longer than the Federation had existed.
At a core point, yes, they (Picard's actions) were, but, Picard's decision to intervene was also massively motivated by his feelings for Anij (and Plot....) as arguably, he owed Gowron a much bigger debt, but he refused to get involved on that occasion in what was again, ultimately, a civil war, and one which would have significantly higher casualties than the Ba'ku and the Son'a... Given the way the mission was proceeding prior to Data getting shot, the mission was (as Ru'afo angrilly mocked) proceding according to Federation guidelines, so I would argue that the mission itself was not itself a breach of the Prime Directive.
Regardless of the ownership of the planet (which was never actually addressed onscreen, beyond it 'being in Federation space') immortality was never part of the Ba'ku's natural lifecycle, and arguably, they were not just culturally stagnant, but culturally back-sliding due to their lifestyle on the planet. That kind of 'stagnant culture' was the kind of thing Kirk fought to orevent for other cultures. He would have been repulsed at the idea of a group who voluntarily sought that kind of stagnancy, and cultural dead-end. Removing the Ba'ku from the planet, strictly speaking, was not interfering with the development of their society, as they had none. What they had, was an artisan's commune, and certainly an idylic one, but not anything with the capacity to become a flourishing society, as seen in other areas of Trek... So in that regard, I would argue, as Artan did upthread, that the benefits to countless billions, is of more value, and that it is morally wrong to place such a minority figure as the counterbalance. Under other circumstances (ie plot dictates) Picard would have just turned the Enterprise round and done nothing...
Again... possession is 9/10 the law. It's actually something Picard confronted Dougherty about. Dougherty even seemed to admit that it was true that the planet wasn't really Federation territory.
As for the Ba'ku culture.... This is a civilization which does have technology. They left their former home to come to the Briar Patch several centuries ago. They are not in a situation even remotely similar to that of Landru or Vaal... Therefore they fall into the "general non-interference" section.
Also, there is no reason to force the Ba'ku to leave. Not if your goal is to peacefully study the radiation. Ru'afo wanted to force them to leave for personal reasons.
The difference is that Dougherty had already dragged the Federation into the Ba'ku-Son'a war, whereas Picard had avoided dragging the Federation into the Klingon Civil War.
Well, Admiral Dougherty was acting under official orders from the Federation Council, so that really falls on them, rather than his shoulders (despite Picard's self-righteous accusations) but even then, it was not known that the Son'a were in fact the same people as the Ba'ku, so the Council would not have known they were involving themselves in a civil war, simply re-locating a group of Space Hippies so the benefits could be brought to the Federation (in the middle of a war)
On the other hand, the inferred rule (no direct involvement in civil wars) was broken regardless of the Council's awareness of the situation. Seeing as this particular rule was easier to break than to unbreak...
[Edit to add]
And of course, Picard did still get Federation personnel involved in the Klingon civil war, albeit chasing Romulan agitators, rather than standing by his boy Gowron, but involvement none the less...
Technically, by monitoring the border with the intent of exposing the Romulans, Picard could involve the Federation in the conflict without a military confrontation. If it works, it works. If not, you can still say you didn't participate in the war. (Then there's also the matter of whether exposing the Romulans would affect the outcome of the war - in the end, it did, but it could have been insufficient to allow Gowron's victory. Clearly, Starfleet is fond of technicalities like that...)
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Again... possession is 9/10 the law. It's actually something Picard confronted Dougherty about. Dougherty even seemed to admit that it was true that the planet wasn't really Federation territory.
I believe the Admiral's words (and I am working solely from memory from my last viewing several years ago) were: "We have the planet, they have the technology -- technology we can't duplicate..." I acknowledge that there is plenty of stuff on Alpha which has retroactively placed the Ba'ku on the planet before the Federation was formed to mend the plot-hole, but from what was on screen, I have to disagree... All that was shown, was that Admiral Dougherty was simply a rube operating under orders from the Council...
As for the Ba'ku culture.... This is a civilization which does have technology. They left their former home to come to the Briar Patch several centuries ago. They are not in a situation even remotely similar to that of Landru or Vaal... Therefore they fall into the "general non-interference" section.
It was a single commune which had technology, but refused to use it. Their stagnation was not put upon them as by Landru or Vaal, it was put upon them by themselves... That kind of mindset, would have been utterly anathema to someone like Kirk... And yes, while they might fall under the general non-interference section, but again, the plan was that they would have been returned to their natural lifecycle as a result of their relocation, and then presumeably benefitted from the metaphasics like every other Federation member (except that the Ba'ku weren't Federation members, but an independent commune in the middle of Federation space)
Also, there is no reason to force the Ba'ku to leave. Not if your goal is to peacefully study the radiation.
But the goal of the mission was not 'to peacefully study the radiation', so that's a totally moot point... The goal of the mission was to gather the metaphasic radiation so it could then usher in a new era of Federation medical science... That was why the Ba'ku were to be safely relocated aboard the holoship...
Ru'afo wanted to force them to leave for personal reasons.
Yes, but the Council did not know that. Nor did Admiral Dougherty. Nor any of his staff (including Data)
And to touch back on your point about Picard's actions being to repair a breach of the Prime Directive... Picard resigned his commission prior to lending assistance to the Ba'ku (signified by him deliberately removing his uniform's rank insignia) That means that he (and his away team) were acting as civilians... The Prime Directive only applies to Starfleet officers, not Federation civilians (a point made clear when Worf's foster-brother broke it under very similar circumstances) Civilians have no place engaging in military operations or commandeering military ordinance and vehicles... Plot was on Picard's side that time. Other circumstances could paint someone doing the same thing as being, at best, an activist... Armed activists are not typically well-received...
By Doctor Crusher's admission (or was that Dougherty or Ru'afo...?), some of the Son'a may not have enough of a remaining lifespan to allow natural exposure to the metaphasic radiation to restore their health. That means that Picard's destruction of the collector, was effectively condemning many Son'a to death... They may have undertaken questionable adtivities (ie Slaving) but they still clearly had their own culture and impact on galactic affairs. If the way of life the Ba'ku had, is to be considered 'a culture', and protected as such, then by extension, the culture of the Son'a merits equal protection from extinction -- Protection Picard denied them simply because they were not the side he wanted to help...
@starswordc: it's interesting that you refer to the 24th century PD interpretation shown by Picard as "strict constitutionist." I think it is at least possible that it's the other way around and the 23rd century version is in fact the strict interpretation following the letter of the law (though yes even if that is the case, Kirk still broke it on occasion ), whereas the 24th century version has a lot of bureaucratic detritus and inappropriately added subregulations and precedents that were not meant to be there by the original in-universe authors.
I like to think, though I *cannot* prove it, that seeing Archer and Phlox's actions, the original framers would have tried to formulate the PD to avoid a repeat of that scenario. When I am in a generous mood, I even like to think Archer, in his matured confidence and wisdom (which I think we DID start to see, albeit in an abrasive, very un-PC, but for me, fun to watch way in Season 4), had regrets about that episode and was himself an advocate for a modified PD that reflects what we see in the 23rd century. But by the 24th century those attempted checks and balances failed. Ultimately that part is headcanon, but I think there's at least grounds to say that is *one* justified approach to it.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
On the other hand, the inferred rule (no direct involvement in civil wars) was broken regardless of the Council's awareness of the situation. Seeing as this particular rule was easier to break than to unbreak...
That's true, but, as I mentioned above, it is not the place for civilians (which is what Picard and co were on the planet) from correcting the breach of a rule which only applied to Starfleet officers (hence Riker needing to bring the information to the Federation Council in an official capacity.) Now as a civilian, Jean-Luc picard can most certainly go to the assistance of his Squeeze-of-the-week, but that undercuts even more the cowardice of his refusal to assist Gowron, with whom he had a mutual friendship, simply because of 'Starfleet Policy' At the very least, bros before hoes...
Technically, by monitoring the border with the intent of exposing the Romulans, Picard could involve the Federation in the conflict without a military confrontation. If it works, it works. If not, you can still say you didn't participate in the war. (Then there's also the matter of whether exposing the Romulans would affect the outcome of the war - in the end, it did, but it could have been insufficient to allow Gowron's victory. Clearly, Starfleet is fond of technicalities like that...)
But it was still, no matter how remotely, involving the Federation in a civil war, by favoring one side over the other... At least Admiral Jameson gave arms to both factions so he could recover hostages...
@rambowdoubledash: A couple points on the Prime Directive and whether it should always be followed. Point 1 is that there seems to new major difference between the PD as it exists in the 23rd century and the 24th, so in-universe it might be possible to offer an argument that the 24th century version (which is kind of like what Phlox espoused) is an off-base or even corrupt interpretation of the rule that does not conform with the original intention of the PD...which was to prevent egregious abuse resulting from disparity of power. NOT to callously condone and aid abuse or be cold to suffering as Phlox was, or to allow an escape from responsibility just because it would be inconvenient. That is a debate that if fully pursued in universe would have yielded some good plot drama
TOS gave us some very clear examples of the kinds of abuse-of-power that can happen when interfering with lower-technology societies with the Iotians (A Piece of the Action), Magna Roma where Captain Merik has made himself First Citizen i.e. Imperator (Bread and Circuses), and Ekos (Patterns of Force), where John Gill has created a TRIBBLE-derived planetary government with himself as leader.
In TNG we also saw a glimpse of that sort of thing in "Who Watches the Watchers", where the Mintakans mistake Picard for a god. That is what the Prime Directive is meant to prevent, not "we don't meddle with multi-stellar nations who are our equals".
Similarly, the hero captains often are so (except Picard) for being unconventional and being rulebreakers sometimes. The tension and the interest in the plot comes from knowing there is this "rule" but choosing to violate it and working through the reasoning why. In a way such a plot also becomes about putting the right thing (in cases where the violation is the right thing) above politics and self-interest (selfishly putting one's career first). Those are good for plot and character drama. So the rule becomes most effective as a plot device in its violation (even more so since I consider it to be a certain road paved with initially good intentions at times).
Yes--in any story with Lawful Good heroes, a great source of plots is the conflict between what is Good and what is Lawful when the Law commands them to do something which is not Good.
Star Trek has a long history of likable doctor characters.... Well, except for TNG. Crusher was little more than a space hausfrau and Pulaski came in acting like a jerk to Data, and man, was that a mistake on Gene's part... and I think Phlox was one of the few (only?) likable characters on Enterprise.
However, my head-canon has "Dear Doctor" as an explanation as to why we don't see Denobulans in the Star Fleet medical corps in the 24th century.
As for the Ba'ku culture.... This is a civilization which does have technology. They left their former home to come to the Briar Patch several centuries ago. They are not in a situation even remotely similar to that of Landru or Vaal... Therefore they fall into the "general non-interference" section.
It was a single commune which had technology, but refused to use it. Their stagnation was not put upon them as by Landru or Vaal, it was put upon them by themselves... That kind of mindset, would have been utterly anathema to someone like Kirk... And yes, while they might fall under the general non-interference section, but again, the plan was that they would have been returned to their natural lifecycle as a result of their relocation, and then presumeably benefitted from the metaphasics like every other Federation member (except that the Ba'ku weren't Federation members, but an independent commune in the middle of Federation space)
If it's not your planet a forced relocation is wrong. Deciding that the Ba'ku are unworthy of choosing their own culture because you dislike the culture they have chosen for themselves is the epitome of playing God.
or Crusher's admission (or was that Dougherty or Ru'afo...?), some of the Son'a may not have enough of a remaining lifespan to allow natural exposure to the metaphasic radiation to restore their health. That means that Picard's destruction of the collector, was effectively condemning many Son'a to death... They may have undertaken questionable adtivities (ie Slaving) but they still clearly had their own culture and impact on galactic affairs. If the way of life the Ba'ku had, is to be considered 'a culture', and protected as such, then by extension, the culture of the Son'a merits equal protection from extinction -- Protection Picard denied them simply because they were not the side he wanted to help...
And now you're trying to create a fake choice of which civilization is more worth saving. The movie made it clear that the Son'a were not the sort of people you would want to have as neighbors. Why sacrifice a culture you have reason to like in order to try "saving" a culture you have reason to shoot? (The Son'a were allies of the Dominion during the Dominion war, yes this was also mentioned in a DS9 ep)
One thing you seem to be intentionally avoiding is the destructive nature of the collector. The source of the energy was unknown. It was possible that the collector would have destroyed the source of the energy. Ru'afo's plan to collect it was only needed because of the condition of the Son'a. Federation interests in studying the energy could have been served quite well simply by looking at it in orbit of the planet. Also, that would have avoided that nasty side effect the collector had of destroying the biosphere.... and anything else the wasn't shielded heavily nearby.
Also, the Son'a weren't going to be completely destroyed if they failed to get 'unnatural exposure' to the radiation. The Ba'ku, had Ru'afo had his way, would.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
As for the Ba'ku culture.... This is a civilization which does have technology. They left their former home to come to the Briar Patch several centuries ago.
And before you repeat 'possession is 9/10ths of the law', it doesn't work like that... If I lose my watch in the street and you find it, you don't get to keep it (that is called Theft By Finding) You would either be obliged to hand it in to the police as lost property, or try and find the legitimate owner, by requiring people trying to claim it, as being able to prove it is theirs (such as the serial numbers on the case etc) If someone breaks into a (even abandoned) property they are illegally occupying the building aka squatting, and can be legally removed...
The Ba'ku did not constitute a planet-wide social community, it was six hundred people who wanted nothing to do with the rest of the galactic community... As mentioned upthread, to try and balance so few, against the benefits which would have been brought to the multiple billions, is simply unethical and distasteful...
Deciding that the Ba'ku are unworthy of choosing their own culture because you dislike the culture they have chosen for themselves is the epitome of playing God.
As the Ba'ku were playing God with the lives of everyone else in the quadrant by keeping the Fountain of Youth to themselves?
Again, they had no discernible culture -- beyond agriculture and handycrafts -- and no longer had any drive to develop one, they were simply an isolated commune... This truly is a 'needs of the many' situation...
As the Admiral pointed out;
"They were never meant to be immortal..."
It also has to be noted, that the plan was not to kill the Ba'ku, or move them violently, hence the presence of the holoship and the use of isolinear tags to enable their transport off the planet...
And now you're trying to create a fake choice of which civilization is more worth saving.
I'm not making it 'a choice', I'm simply saying that if one group is to be considered worthy of continuing, the same consideration must be extended to the other...
The movie made it clear that the Son'a were not the sort of people you would want to have as neighbors. Why sacrifice a culture you have reason to like in order to try "saving" a culture you have reason to shoot?
I have no reason to like the Ba'ku... They're a back-sliding stagnant artists commune who are essentially squatting on a planet to enjoy the fountain of youth, and refusing to share it with the rest of the galactic community... The Son'a, at least, pay their own way in the grand scheme of things...
Once upon a time, Kirk had reason to shoot Klingons, and look what happened...
(The Son'a were allies of the Dominion during the Dominion war, yes this was also mentioned in a DS9 ep)
And is it any wonder they sided with the Dominion? The Dominion are masters of genetic engineering and cloning -- they (the Son'a) likely brokered the alliance to obtain the means for maintaining their species... Consider the number of Ba'ku and Son'a... There are six hundred Ba'ku. If the Son'a are taking an active part in the Dominion war, providing White (and possibly isolytic weapons) it is reasonable to assume that they were doing so on an industrial level, rather than traveling around like roving dealers... That involvement (and the equipment they had in Insurrection) is sign that they had to have more facilities and resources than just three ships and their attendant crew (admittedly bolstered by slave labour) which were seen... Given the Ba'ku's frankly sketchy and reluctant revelations of the situation, it would be logical to view what they say with a certain amount of scepticism...
One thing you seem to be intentionally avoiding is the destructive nature of the collector.
I never avoided the point at all, and pointed out, that the plan was to safely relocate the Ba'ku via the holoship (and presumably other species where possible) The impact on the biosphere is an irrelevant issue as it is not going to affect anyone...
It was possible that the collector would have destroyed the source of the energy.
According to their simulations, the process worked perfectly. When Picard arrogantly suggested to get his people to look at it (as if they're the only people who could) Admiral Dougherty pointed out that it had already been investigated by Federation scientists, with the conclusion that they could not duplicate the Son'a process. The Council would not have committed the resources for the duck-blind mission, if it was not a reasonably proven and sustainable process, so it is reasonable to assume that the reaction would be ongoing and sustainable...
Ru'afo's plan to collect it was only needed because of the condition of the Son'a.
Absolutely. But the benefits were also going to be shared with all the people of the Federation (as far as the Council and Admiral Dougherty had been told) It was only the arrival of Picard which messed everything up. Had they simply transmitted Data's schematics as requested, Data could have been overcome, presumably repaired, and then ordered to eternal silence over the relocation...
Federation interests in studying the energy could have been served quite well simply by looking at it in orbit of the planet.
Yes, it was all being achieved in orbit, but the Federation was not interested in 'studying the planet', it was aiming to harvest the metaphasic radiation so it could be utilised across the Federation... The 'studying' had been done...
Also, that would have avoided that nasty side effect the collector had of destroying the biosphere.... and anything else the wasn't shielded heavily nearby.
Pure hyperbole...
As was pointed out in the film, the metaphasic radiation was location specific, and the results were unavoidable. The benefits far outweigh the consequences, and that is the fact, regardless of what Picard (a proven moral coward) tried to claim with the benefit of Plot Armour at maximum...
The whole argument over whether to remove the Ba'ku is nothing but a pointless red herring. Once again Star Trek forgets that it's a PLANET population 600, not a NEIGHBORHOOD population 600. Plop a hospital complex down on another continent and forget the whole thing. And if the Son'a object, that should tell you they have an ulterior motive.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Also, the Son'a weren't going to be completely destroyed if they failed to get 'unnatural exposure' to the radiation.
Actually, they were... As mentioned upthread, I'm sure it was noted that some of the Son'a would not live long enough for natural exposure to reverse their conditions. And, as mentioned directly above, the level of technology the Son'a used, and their involvement in the Dominion war, strongly implies numbers considerably larger than what was seen on screen in Insurrection...
The whole argument over whether to remove the Ba'ku is nothing but a pointless red herring. Once again Star Trek forgets that it's a PLANET population 600, not a NEIGHBORHOOD population 600. Plop a hospital complex down on another continent and forget the whole thing. And if the Son'a object, that should tell you they have an ulterior motive.
I believe the planet itself would have become uninhabitable, which was why the Ba'ku were being relocated...
Comments
Yeah, I think Kirk would've laughed in a 24th-century captain's face, and rightly so, at the idea of anyone suggesting the PD somehow applied to the Klingons. And similarly, the Bajorans were in no way ignorant of the outside galaxy (which is the sort of people the PD was originally intended to protect). If anything, the PD should've been used as an excuse for the Federation to kick the Cardassians off of Bajor, not to condone the Occupation.
Sisko, as I recall, did his darnedest to get out of that position and actually took such an opportunity at least once. Things only began to change when the attempt to ditch the Emissary thing caused negative repercussions, and even then he was always uneasy with it. Interestingly, when it comes to cultural interference, Sisko was largely hands-off, aside from a few instances like a) warning the Bajorans off from joining the Federation at a time when it could have caused the Dominion to come down on them, and b) a few ceremonial/figurehead duties, like officiating the start of the Gratitude Festival, where he didn't tell anyone what to do...he just read off the lines they asked HIM to read. The Bajorans did as they pleased. In contrast, Akorem Laan was the one who attempted drastic (and retrograde) changes to Bajoran society, that were out of step with the direction the Bajorans had decided they wanted to go with for themselves. (The Cardassians may have been the ones to eliminate the d'jarra system--but until Akorem, no one was in a hurry to reinstate it.)
Definitely it was a very grey, very uneasy and debatable position no matter what, but those are some of the counterarguments.
(And I would actually say, for reasons I am not going to get into here because of the territory it would require me to cover, that the entities to be faulted as regards the Emissary are the Prophets, not Sisko.)
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
I wanted to point out one interesting thing here, regarding the Jedi of the Old Republic versus the Jedi of the New Order under Luke Skywalker. That is, the Jedi Order actually does show evidence in the pre-Empire timeframe of being corrupt. Not that it made Anakin's slaughtering younglings and other atrocities of his okay, but it DOES make Luke's decisions to run his Jedi Order differently very much okay. What we have in Star Wars is a scenario opposite to that in Star Trek, where instead of the growth of political and moral hypocrisy occurring as we move forward in time and being claimed as progress, all of the old hypocritical cobwebs were swept away. In a way they went FROM a 24th-century type mentality TO a 23rd-century, more reasonable one.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
(For context, the punk rocker and old librarian lady are actually avatars of God)
"If you see a child in a burning car, do you brave the flames and save it, or do you decide it's not your place to play God and that 'nature' decided the kid should die?
"Bonus question: If you choose option #2, do you then defend that to other people as the more moral of the two choices?"
That's exactly the scenario that PD strict constructionists try to defend, writ small. If you consider it unconscionable to treat one person that way, then how can you possibly do it to billions of them?
I also recall Sisko at one point actually explicitly obeying the Prime Directive regarding his status in Bajoran society, in refusing to endorse a particular candidate in the Bajoran general election. Although given that the candidate in question was Winn Adami I think we can call that one a win-win.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Also the Ba'ku were not a pre-warp civ. Thus there was no good reason for the Feds to avoid peaceful contact.
Then there's the matter of who owned the planet. The Feds had no proper legal claim to it. The territorial claim they made prior to the movie was based on the assumption that it wasn't inhabited. But the Ba'ku had been living there longer than the Federation had existed.
My character Tsin'xing
Regardless of the ownership of the planet (which was never actually addressed onscreen, beyond it 'being in Federation space') immortality was never part of the Ba'ku's natural lifecycle, and arguably, they were not just culturally stagnant, but culturally back-sliding due to their lifestyle on the planet. That kind of 'stagnant culture' was the kind of thing Kirk fought to orevent for other cultures. He would have been repulsed at the idea of a group who voluntarily sought that kind of stagnancy, and cultural dead-end. Removing the Ba'ku from the planet, strictly speaking, was not interfering with the development of their society, as they had none. What they had, was an artisan's commune, and certainly an idylic one, but not anything with the capacity to become a flourishing society, as seen in other areas of Trek... So in that regard, I would argue, as Artan did upthread, that the benefits to countless billions, is of more value, and that it is morally wrong to place such a minority figure as the counterbalance. Under other circumstances (ie plot dictates) Picard would have just turned the Enterprise round and done nothing...
The difference is that Dougherty had already dragged the Federation into the Ba'ku-Son'a war, whereas Picard had avoided dragging the Federation into the Klingon Civil War.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
[Edit to add]
And of course, Picard did still get Federation personnel involved in the Klingon civil war, albeit chasing Romulan agitators, rather than standing by his boy Gowron, but involvement none the less...
As for the Ba'ku culture.... This is a civilization which does have technology. They left their former home to come to the Briar Patch several centuries ago. They are not in a situation even remotely similar to that of Landru or Vaal... Therefore they fall into the "general non-interference" section.
Also, there is no reason to force the Ba'ku to leave. Not if your goal is to peacefully study the radiation. Ru'afo wanted to force them to leave for personal reasons.
My character Tsin'xing
On the other hand, the inferred rule (no direct involvement in civil wars) was broken regardless of the Council's awareness of the situation. Seeing as this particular rule was easier to break than to unbreak...
Technically, by monitoring the border with the intent of exposing the Romulans, Picard could involve the Federation in the conflict without a military confrontation. If it works, it works. If not, you can still say you didn't participate in the war. (Then there's also the matter of whether exposing the Romulans would affect the outcome of the war - in the end, it did, but it could have been insufficient to allow Gowron's victory. Clearly, Starfleet is fond of technicalities like that...)
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
It was a single commune which had technology, but refused to use it. Their stagnation was not put upon them as by Landru or Vaal, it was put upon them by themselves... That kind of mindset, would have been utterly anathema to someone like Kirk... And yes, while they might fall under the general non-interference section, but again, the plan was that they would have been returned to their natural lifecycle as a result of their relocation, and then presumeably benefitted from the metaphasics like every other Federation member (except that the Ba'ku weren't Federation members, but an independent commune in the middle of Federation space)
But the goal of the mission was not 'to peacefully study the radiation', so that's a totally moot point... The goal of the mission was to gather the metaphasic radiation so it could then usher in a new era of Federation medical science... That was why the Ba'ku were to be safely relocated aboard the holoship...
Yes, but the Council did not know that. Nor did Admiral Dougherty. Nor any of his staff (including Data)
And to touch back on your point about Picard's actions being to repair a breach of the Prime Directive... Picard resigned his commission prior to lending assistance to the Ba'ku (signified by him deliberately removing his uniform's rank insignia) That means that he (and his away team) were acting as civilians... The Prime Directive only applies to Starfleet officers, not Federation civilians (a point made clear when Worf's foster-brother broke it under very similar circumstances) Civilians have no place engaging in military operations or commandeering military ordinance and vehicles... Plot was on Picard's side that time. Other circumstances could paint someone doing the same thing as being, at best, an activist... Armed activists are not typically well-received...
By Doctor Crusher's admission (or was that Dougherty or Ru'afo...?), some of the Son'a may not have enough of a remaining lifespan to allow natural exposure to the metaphasic radiation to restore their health. That means that Picard's destruction of the collector, was effectively condemning many Son'a to death... They may have undertaken questionable adtivities (ie Slaving) but they still clearly had their own culture and impact on galactic affairs. If the way of life the Ba'ku had, is to be considered 'a culture', and protected as such, then by extension, the culture of the Son'a merits equal protection from extinction -- Protection Picard denied them simply because they were not the side he wanted to help...
I like to think, though I *cannot* prove it, that seeing Archer and Phlox's actions, the original framers would have tried to formulate the PD to avoid a repeat of that scenario. When I am in a generous mood, I even like to think Archer, in his matured confidence and wisdom (which I think we DID start to see, albeit in an abrasive, very un-PC, but for me, fun to watch way in Season 4), had regrets about that episode and was himself an advocate for a modified PD that reflects what we see in the 23rd century. But by the 24th century those attempted checks and balances failed. Ultimately that part is headcanon, but I think there's at least grounds to say that is *one* justified approach to it.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
But it was still, no matter how remotely, involving the Federation in a civil war, by favoring one side over the other... At least Admiral Jameson gave arms to both factions so he could recover hostages...
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
TOS gave us some very clear examples of the kinds of abuse-of-power that can happen when interfering with lower-technology societies with the Iotians (A Piece of the Action), Magna Roma where Captain Merik has made himself First Citizen i.e. Imperator (Bread and Circuses), and Ekos (Patterns of Force), where John Gill has created a TRIBBLE-derived planetary government with himself as leader.
In TNG we also saw a glimpse of that sort of thing in "Who Watches the Watchers", where the Mintakans mistake Picard for a god. That is what the Prime Directive is meant to prevent, not "we don't meddle with multi-stellar nations who are our equals".
Yes--in any story with Lawful Good heroes, a great source of plots is the conflict between what is Good and what is Lawful when the Law commands them to do something which is not Good.
Mostly the Klingon Civil War.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
However, my head-canon has "Dear Doctor" as an explanation as to why we don't see Denobulans in the Star Fleet medical corps in the 24th century.
One thing you seem to be intentionally avoiding is the destructive nature of the collector. The source of the energy was unknown. It was possible that the collector would have destroyed the source of the energy. Ru'afo's plan to collect it was only needed because of the condition of the Son'a. Federation interests in studying the energy could have been served quite well simply by looking at it in orbit of the planet. Also, that would have avoided that nasty side effect the collector had of destroying the biosphere.... and anything else the wasn't shielded heavily nearby.
My character Tsin'xing
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
And before you repeat 'possession is 9/10ths of the law', it doesn't work like that... If I lose my watch in the street and you find it, you don't get to keep it (that is called Theft By Finding) You would either be obliged to hand it in to the police as lost property, or try and find the legitimate owner, by requiring people trying to claim it, as being able to prove it is theirs (such as the serial numbers on the case etc) If someone breaks into a (even abandoned) property they are illegally occupying the building aka squatting, and can be legally removed...
The Ba'ku did not constitute a planet-wide social community, it was six hundred people who wanted nothing to do with the rest of the galactic community... As mentioned upthread, to try and balance so few, against the benefits which would have been brought to the multiple billions, is simply unethical and distasteful...
As the Ba'ku were playing God with the lives of everyone else in the quadrant by keeping the Fountain of Youth to themselves?
Again, they had no discernible culture -- beyond agriculture and handycrafts -- and no longer had any drive to develop one, they were simply an isolated commune... This truly is a 'needs of the many' situation...
As the Admiral pointed out;
"They were never meant to be immortal..."
It also has to be noted, that the plan was not to kill the Ba'ku, or move them violently, hence the presence of the holoship and the use of isolinear tags to enable their transport off the planet...
I'm not making it 'a choice', I'm simply saying that if one group is to be considered worthy of continuing, the same consideration must be extended to the other...
I have no reason to like the Ba'ku... They're a back-sliding stagnant artists commune who are essentially squatting on a planet to enjoy the fountain of youth, and refusing to share it with the rest of the galactic community... The Son'a, at least, pay their own way in the grand scheme of things...
Once upon a time, Kirk had reason to shoot Klingons, and look what happened...
And is it any wonder they sided with the Dominion? The Dominion are masters of genetic engineering and cloning -- they (the Son'a) likely brokered the alliance to obtain the means for maintaining their species... Consider the number of Ba'ku and Son'a... There are six hundred Ba'ku. If the Son'a are taking an active part in the Dominion war, providing White (and possibly isolytic weapons) it is reasonable to assume that they were doing so on an industrial level, rather than traveling around like roving dealers... That involvement (and the equipment they had in Insurrection) is sign that they had to have more facilities and resources than just three ships and their attendant crew (admittedly bolstered by slave labour) which were seen... Given the Ba'ku's frankly sketchy and reluctant revelations of the situation, it would be logical to view what they say with a certain amount of scepticism...
I never avoided the point at all, and pointed out, that the plan was to safely relocate the Ba'ku via the holoship (and presumably other species where possible) The impact on the biosphere is an irrelevant issue as it is not going to affect anyone...
No, it was clearly stated to be something to do with the concentration in the rings...
According to their simulations, the process worked perfectly. When Picard arrogantly suggested to get his people to look at it (as if they're the only people who could) Admiral Dougherty pointed out that it had already been investigated by Federation scientists, with the conclusion that they could not duplicate the Son'a process. The Council would not have committed the resources for the duck-blind mission, if it was not a reasonably proven and sustainable process, so it is reasonable to assume that the reaction would be ongoing and sustainable...
Absolutely. But the benefits were also going to be shared with all the people of the Federation (as far as the Council and Admiral Dougherty had been told) It was only the arrival of Picard which messed everything up. Had they simply transmitted Data's schematics as requested, Data could have been overcome, presumably repaired, and then ordered to eternal silence over the relocation...
Yes, it was all being achieved in orbit, but the Federation was not interested in 'studying the planet', it was aiming to harvest the metaphasic radiation so it could be utilised across the Federation... The 'studying' had been done...
Pure hyperbole...
As was pointed out in the film, the metaphasic radiation was location specific, and the results were unavoidable. The benefits far outweigh the consequences, and that is the fact, regardless of what Picard (a proven moral coward) tried to claim with the benefit of Plot Armour at maximum...
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
The Ba'ku, on the other hand, were not directly facing immediate death from the plan, merely restoration of their mortality...