Star Trek: The Discussion Thread

[Steerpike]

Originally Posted by fleinn

Just living, is that enough?

The alternative for them living peacefully was to be executed by the Romulans. The camp commander mentions that. He was also forced to stay as camp commander as a price for keeping them alive, so he too gave up something.

Originally Posted by fleinn

*nods* DS9. Missed a lot of those.

Some consider it an epic series. It does do something none of the other series do. We see character development for numerous semi-regular characters over the course of the series. And unlike any of the prior series, they had to deal with repercussions of things which transpired. For example, in season one Vedek Winn establishes an adversary relationship with the regulars and then she becomes Kai which they then have to deal with.

Originally Posted by fleinn

But failing to be able to act on principle makes her capable of justifying anything.

Can you cite any examples where she justifies something because she is not able to act on principle?

Originally Posted by fleinn

That's right, I'm mixing up with "A private little war", I think. Do you remember if Enterprise just leaves..?

It's the starfleet creed that's been switched around. Not the rest of the universe. So, rule by force, scare people into submission. Suppress rebellion and infinitely expand the empire. Seems to me mirror Spock suggests there's a small ways to go from one end to the other, philosophically speaking.

The Enterprise leaves once they have their crew back. It can appear that the Halkans are there merely to provide the moral dilemma which is probably why the "Mirror, Mirror" versions of them also held on to their ethical principles.

No it went further than just "Star Fleet creed." In Star Trek Deep Space Nine, they re-visit the "Mirror, Mirror" universe both by going there and by having characters from there visit the "regular" universe and it does go further. For example: The Bajorans in that other universe were not spiritual and were more aggressive. The Ferengi weren't placing greed above all else (their version of Brunt was nice to Quark and Rom).

Originally Posted by fleinn

In the sense of setting a planet- destroyer on fire and forget - yeah, a little bit :p But I don't think she would've sacrificed herself to save complete strangers.

So then you think she has gotten more responsible being on Voyager?

[fleinn]

Originally Posted by Steerpike

The alternative for them living peacefully was to be executed by the Romulans. The camp commander mentions that. He was also forced to stay as camp commander as a price for keeping them alive, so he too gave up something.

Good point. But in a way I think they forgot about the war by dying in every way that made them who they were.

Some consider it an epic series. It does do something none of the other series do. We see character development for numerous semi-regular characters over the course of the series. And unlike any of the prior series, they had to deal with repercussions of things which transpired. For example, in season one Vedek Winn establishes an adversary relationship with the regulars and then she becomes Kai which they then have to deal with.

Is it the same type of continuity as in Voyager..?

Can you cite any examples where she justifies something because she is not able to act on principle?

In the sense that she says it's not on principle but does it anyway, no. But the Equinox would be one. The decision to ally with the Borg. Bombing species 8472 with nano- bots. She makes a decision about a larger context in a setting she is unable to control.
[quote]The Enterprise leaves once they have their crew back. It can appear that the Halkans are there merely to provide the moral dilemma which is probably why the "Mirror, Mirror" versions of them also held on to their ethical principles.

No it went further than just "Star Fleet creed." In Star Trek Deep Space Nine, they re-visit the "Mirror, Mirror" universe both by going there and by having characters from there visit the "regular" universe and it does go further. For example: The Bajorans in that other universe were not spiritual and were more aggressive. The Ferengi weren't placing greed above all else (their version of Brunt was nice to Quark and Rom). [quote]
Oooh. Way to ruin the nice plot- driver in TOS :p (and make it seem as Starfleet morality was as natural as the world around it).

So then you think she has gotten more responsible being on Voyager?

Yes, I think so. She's facing herself on the Dreadnought.

[Steerpike]

Originally Posted by fleinn

Good point. But in a way I think they forgot about the war by dying in every way that made them who they were.

Were they better off with who they were than who they became?

Originally Posted by fleinn

Is it the same type of continuity as in Voyager..?

What do you mean? There are no overt continuity errors with the original series a la "Threshhold". Voyager we see some character development of regulars, but very little of the other characters (Seska and Culla being exceptions).

In Star Trek Deep Space Nine, what the crew does one week is kept and they have to deal with ramifications. The Dominion War constitutes a multi-year story arc.

Originally Posted by fleinn

In the sense that she says it's not on principle but does it anyway, no. But the Equinox would be one. The decision to ally with the Borg. Bombing species 8472 with nano- bots. She makes a decision about a larger context in a setting she is unable to control.

The decision to ally with the Borg and the "bombing of species 8472 with nano-bots" are related. The Borg Alliance is presented as necessary because Kes thinks Species 8472 is the bigger threat. If they are to engage them in combat, then they would require weapons that actually work. The "nano-bots" were what they found would be effective in battle with Species 8472, and she used them for defense. It did turn out that Species 8472 did pose that threat as they intended to "purge" the galaxy.

Originally Posted by fleinn

Oooh. Way to ruin the nice plot- driver in TOS :p (and make it seem as Starfleet morality was as natural as the world around it).

Or expand on the concept to show that the "Mirror, Mirror" universe is an ethical "mirror" universe of the "regular" universe.

Originally Posted by fleinn

Yes, I think so. She's facing herself on the Dreadnought.

What about the Maquis themselves, were they (the Maquis) justified in their cause or were they only terrorists?

[fleinn]

Originally Posted by Steerpike

Were they better off with who they were than who they became?

..for me, it seems fruitless to defeat your demons by denying they exist.

What do you mean? There are no overt continuity errors with the original series a la "Threshhold". Voyager we see some character development of regulars, but very little of the other characters (Seska and Culla being exceptions).

In Star Trek Deep Space Nine, what the crew does one week is kept and they have to deal with ramifications. The Dominion War constitutes a multi-year story arc.

No, that was what I wondered - if they try to have a universe happening independently around the station, or whether they let the universe randomly happen to it, like on Voyager..

The decision to ally with the Borg and the "bombing of species 8472 with nano-bots" are related. The Borg Alliance is presented as necessary because Kes thinks Species 8472 is the bigger threat. If they are to engage them in combat, then they would require weapons that actually work. The "nano-bots" were what they found would be effective in battle with Species 8472, and she used them for defense. It did turn out that Species 8472 did pose that threat as they intended to "purge" the galaxy.

That's true. But how do they know? Neither do they see themselves in the way species 8472 sees them. But at the time, she is convinced, and she knows she's right, because she's in command and she is protecting her ship within the confines of starfleet creed (based on what she's convinced she knows). In other words - she justifies aggressive intervention, non- protocol first contact, an alliance with the Borg, all based on a hunch (and a two year old suddenly awakened psychic).

Or expand on the concept to show that the "Mirror, Mirror" universe is an ethical "mirror" universe of the "regular" universe.

Well, yes. ..It still was more interesting to weigh starfleet inclusion against an imperial rule by force and fear, though. :)

What about the Maquis themselves, were they (the Maquis) justified in their cause or were they only terrorists?

You can be just and still be a careless brat, you know. :p No, I don't know.

Personally, I always have difficulties with that kind of thing. Do you argue that if you kill less people and in less brutal ways than you could, then your cause is just? If so, strategic killing and torture will easily be justified as a means to an end. Do you argue that fighting is always wrong? If so, you accept that any rule with force is as good as any other rule. Or even see the amount of force used as a function of your own resistance. Do you say killing for a cause is justified, well then all bets are off. Do you say killing is sometimes justified when the governing rule is unjust? Then you'd better be ready to accept anarchy as a means to an end, anyway - no matter how good intentions you may have, or how skilled you are in selecting military targets.

[Steerpike]

Originally Posted by fleinn

..for me, it seems fruitless to defeat your demons by denying they exist.

Did the older Klingons defeat them by denying they exist or did they outgrow them?

Originally Posted by fleinn

No, that was what I wondered - if they try to have a universe happening independently around the station, or whether they let the universe randomly happen to it, like on Voyager..

They interact and there are consequences.

Originally Posted by fleinn

That's true. But how do they know? Neither do they see themselves in the way species 8472 sees them. But at the time, she is convinced, and she knows she's right, because she's in command and she is protecting her ship within the confines of starfleet creed (based on what she's convinced she knows). In other words - she justifies aggressive intervention, non- protocol first contact, an alliance with the Borg, all based on a hunch (and a two year old suddenly awakened psychic).

They also didn't know that the Borg started the war with Species 8472.

Originally Posted by fleinn

Well, yes. ..It still was more interesting to weigh starfleet inclusion against an imperial rule by force and fear, though. :)

The Alliance was using the rule by force and fear method in Star Trek Deep Space Nine.

Originally Posted by fleinn

You can be just and still be a careless brat, you know. :p No, I don't know.

If we are to examine whether or not the Maquis are "freedom fighters" or "terrorists", then we need to know motives and methods.

Do you know what the Maquis cause is and how they came to be?