Is Starfleet Actually the Bad Guy?

▶Watch more Trek, Actually videos at: • Trek, Actually
▶Listen to our Trek-themed comedy podcast, The Ensign's Log:
▶RSS: / sounds.rss
▶Soundcloud: / the-ensigns-log-podcast
▶Website: www.lemmelistenpodcasts.com/th...
▶Patreon: / steveshives
▶PayPal: www.paypal.me/SteveShives
▶Twitter: / steve_shives
▶Facebook: / thatguysteveshives
▶Instagram: / steve.shives
Listen to the Late Seating podcast:
▶RSS: / sounds.rss
▶Soundcloud: / late-seating
▶Website: www.lemmelistenpodcasts.com/la...

[@camilofonseca6981]

Steve got through a whole video covering Starfleet’s shady shit and barely talked about Deep Space Nine. Now that’s what I call self control.

[@dwc1964]

probably saving it for the "darkest moments" video

[@peenworm]

i mean, because DS9 handled it coherently

[@BioGoji-zm5ph]

To be fair, talking about Starfleet's behavior in DS9 would have probably made the video at least an hour in length or longer in order for him to cover all of the necessary material.

[@Locktwiste72]

...while wearing a DS9 baseball cap...

[@fisheyme47]

Just reminds me of Sisko's quote: Just because a group of people belongs to the Federation does not mean that they are saints. ... The trouble is Earth. On Earth, there is no poverty, no crime, no war. You look out the window of Starfleet Headquarters and you see paradise. Well it's easy to be a saint in paradise. He was talking about the Maquis and how they 'betrayed' the Federation's values in their struggle against the Cardassians, but I think this also highlights some of what is wrong with Starfleet as an organization.

[@SolidAvenger1290]

This is where the greyness of humanity, and thus the Federation can lean either way to tyrannical idealism - where they ignore the greater consequences of a decision to where long-term grievances and potential war will occur or pragmatic realism - the idea that they must analyze the potential outcome of a decision outside of their own paradise & consider other opinions that could disagree with their idealistic stance. Example: Captains Jellico, Pressman, Maxwell, Late-Sisko, and other Starfleet military war dogs were the pragmatists of the Federation who saw the fly on the wall that the Federation was screwing themselves from a military science perspective. In contrast, Picard, the Enterprize crew of TNG, and others were more leaning towards idealistic utopian appeasement alongside diplomacy without any military science to back up their efforts to prevent any lingering consequences to their actions. - basically screw the Peace Through Strength approach of Kirk's era. The Federation should have been more pragmatic when considering that other member planets could possibly violate the Dominion's territory and how Federation citizens on the boundary of their space would feel about their treaty with the Cardassians. The Federation acted like the Republic in Star Wars leading up to the Clone Wars - outer colonies of non-humans dominantly rebelled against the Terran-lead core colonies, which aren't far-fetched to how Starfleet mishandled the tension with Cardassians and the piss poor treaty that led to the rise of the Maquis and eventual chain of events of war to the Dominion finding new allies against the Federation.

[@Jehayland]

“They’re only really our values if we’re trying to live by them.” Well said.

[@shepwillner7507]

Too bad that principle didn't apply to the Jewish passengers aboard the S.S. St Louis back in '39 when they asked the US Government to take them in. Nope. Didn't happen. Back they went, to face German destruction in the death camps during War 2. Thank goodness for the French, Italians and other folks who ran the Mossad Aliyah Bet refugee smuggling operation of Jews into Palestine. Following War 2 and later wars such as Vietnam, Iraq, and other conflicts, our so-called principles still didn't get held up as exemplars: we didn't let too many refugees from Vietnam emigrate, and then there was the Mariel boat armada of Cuban refugees during the Reagan Era. Fast forward a few decades later, and we still didn't take in the Syrian refugees, even though they're Christians. But other countries did do just that, especially Greece and Italy. Well done, Greece and Italy!

[@videocrowsnest5251]

It's a very good way to sum things up indeed! I personally have a massive dislike of hypocrisy (lived experiences, which I won't get into due to being unpleasant), and it's maddening how much hypocrisy is so common play. Take human rights, for example - or any other amazing set of values, be they equality, caring for one's fellow human being, or whatever have you. Many people claim to care. Yet do not. It's just a show, because to claim otherwise without first sliding the scope of acceptability to that "nobody needs to care" side, it's going to make em look bad. Very few people are willing to straight up say they don't care about human rights. And claiming to care gives a lot of "good people (tm)" points. But when it's time to walk the walk, so many people are utterly incapable of doing that. Because in reality, they don't care, they despite the very premise, and are simply pretending to get personal benefits or sabotage things while spouting empty dribble. It's honestly just insufferable to see how widespread this kind of destructive hypocrisy is. I want to know when the point came - or if it was here all the time-where words and actions became so separate from one another that simply spouting empty dribble is seen as being enough. Rather than actions - choices, living by the values, doing - being the judge of character. A bigot is a bigot. No matter what the bigot claims, actions speak louder than words. And I wish more people would be able to call this kind of empty worded nonsense out, rather than taking bigots at their word. Because to be horrible to someone is a choice. They could just as easily choose to not be bigots. If they dislike being called bigots, perhaps they should just stop being bigots. Contemplating, "are we the baddies?" every now and then does a person good.

[@AlexFariaOliveira]

It´s interesting to think that in TNG almost ALL admirals, if not all, were douchebags... I always felt they sort of tried to point that out. The rank of captain as an honorable one, admiralty seems a more political one, bureaucractic.

[@alanpennie8013]

In Nu Trek The Evil Admiral is being replaced by The Douchey Admiral Who Does Kinda Have A Case.

[@mrbojangles8133]

so you want to be an Admiral in Starfleet. I see, are you a massive asshole? Yes, excellent, I see you're just tge kind of guy you're looking for

[@CypressConroy]

What about janeway

[@Moxypony]

"It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of sumbitch or another."

[@BioGoji-zm5ph]

@@CypressConroy I don't see how Janeway being an Admiral changes anything about them being evil. If anything, Janeway becoming an Admiral only reinforces the notion. The only true exception is James Kirk, but he also got demoted back to Captain at the end of the fourth movie for, you know, stealing the Enterprise and getting it blown up in the third movie.

[@glyphsaiyan858]

I never really noticed myself, how egregious Starfleet was, even after having seen certain episodes when I was younger. It's also a point, that Picard, despite his age and debilitating health, is still someone who should be recognised and revered as someone who has held up Starfleet's principles AND literally saved Earth and the Federation several times from extreme crises. The Borg going back through time, and stopping Shinzon from eradicating Earth with thalaron radiation, for instance. Yet, when he becomes inconvenient, they discard him, Admiral Clancy denounces him as just some guy trying to relive his glory days. So dismissive of a man who saved your wrinkly old arse, Admiral. Great job you're doing, quivering behind your desk at a man who could speech you into submission.

[@kaitlyn__L]

I read recently that they actually had Clancy show up to save Picard, and apologise for not taking him seriously and congratulate him in his job, but then when Frakes was in Toronto directing Discovery a while later they shot the scenes with Riker, and reshot the scenes on Picards end of the conversation back in California as well. It was good getting closure about Riker's being in the reserves was nice, but having closure with Clancy's attitude to Picard and complacency as the chief of Starfleet would also have been nice, especially considering how big her other scenes were and then just... nothing? Not really related but they also had a little scene of Narek remaining prisoner on the synth planet, which was cut for time even though it's a streaming show. Quite a few people were like "uhh what happened to Narek???" all for the sake of 20 seconds of runtime. So I feel like maybe the original shooting draft of that script was narratively much neater and more satisfying, and then had various meddling for MOMENTS and stuff? I dunno.

[@jacobdrj101]

In a way, yes; he should have a certain reverence... However, after he was assimilated, he was never again fully trusted... And TBH, had this been IRL, he should never have been given back command of the primary fleet ship... Or any other... At least not for many years... He should have been put on a long leave, and then promoted to admiral as a consultant on the Borg... I know, then we lose our leading man...

[@DavidHeffron78]

But you're defending a problem that the writers created themselves. They decided to create a character who didn't care about someone who "has held up Starfleet's principles AND literally saved Earth and the Federation several times from extreme crises. The Borg going back through time, and stopping Shinzon from eradicating Earth with thalaron radiation". It was bad writing.

[@gurthus9540]

It was just really bad writing. Picard was literally the most influential mortal being in the galaxy. He saved earth from Shinzon, he prevented the Borg going back in time and taking over the ENTIRE galaxy. No intelligent being would just claim that Picard is crazy and trying to relive his glory days, that argument had already happened at the end of tng when future Picard was wrote off due to iromadic syndrome yet he saved the galaxy again from the anti time thing so....

[@timthorson52]

@@gurthus9540 Lots of other captains in starfleet probably have dealt with a few major threats that could have led to the destruction of the federation. Sure, we can say that each ship/captain/crew we meet are the only extraordinary ones, but each captain we see has dealt with massive threats to the galaxy, usually multiple such threats. There are countless random beings with the powers to wipe out entire civilizations with extreme powers, dormant empires, time travelling threats and many other things.

[@OldJerzyDevil]

"-Not interested. Your mission this week is to go kick 'em off their planet. " Best paraphrase of a bad pollitical decision EVER!!

[@shepwillner7507]

Actually, Admiral, I have a better idea: I'm resigning from Starfleet. Before I do, I'm handing command of the ship to Riker. Here's my rank insignia, my comm badge, my PADD, and my security clearance. Lastly, as a personal favor, I will ask him to toss you and your luggage out of the nearest airlock. Give my regards to Bob Leyton as you fly down to Dorvan V as a crispy steak dinner."

[@DylanOLeary1163]

It's funny, because when I first watched Picard, I heard that interview where the reporter says "something, something Romulan lives" and Picard responds "No, Lives!" and it really set the whole tone of the series for me. Picard was fighting to essentially save the soul of the Federation and remind everyone what it was supposed to be about, warts and all. It seemed like a natural progression of the Federation sliding down a slippery slope from the Dominion war (and before now that Steve pointed out all the previous issues), and I kinda liked the idea that Picard was going to try to get the Federation back on track. Whether that's actually what happened or not I suppose is a matter for debate. Or for season 2.

[@fireproof78]

I think Picard actually handled the Federation well. Starfleet probably did loose track and the wounds from the Dominion War, the Borg fight and the Romulan battle all took its toll. At some point in time even the best are going to go "Enough."

[@MattMcIrvin]

I thought the series went astray to some degree after that first episode by getting bogged down in a conspiracy plot only tangentially related to these issues. (Everyone's fear of synths turns out to be... well-founded and justified? Sort of.) The basic idea of Starfleet losing its way and Picard saving its soul is a good one. But Picard seemed like a peripheral character in a lot of what followed.

[@alanpennie8013]

@@MattMcIrvin Agreed. Plus Starfleet security had apparently been controlled by Romulan moles for years so The Federations decline could be blamed on The Russians, oops I meant The Romulans.

[@a.morphous66]

@@alanpennie8013 Steve kinda addresses that point in the video, circa 2:10

[@BioGoji-zm5ph]

I think it's funny that Picard cares about saving millions of lives when he willingly let everyone on Boraalis die without making any attempts to save even a small fraction of the population in ANY capacity. Members of his own crew had to go behind his back to save even a handful of people from that planet before its atmosphere disappeared.

[@colewilliams1563]

"Star Trek: Picard RUINED Starfleet! Starfleet are supposed to be honorable and honest!" Did any of these people watch Deep Space Nine?

[@trekjudas]

Shit! I was gonna make that point!

[@Kirifairy]

The funny thing is, most people who say stuff like that, have ds9 as their favorite show and in the pale moonlight and for the uniform as their favorit episodes. sooooo yeah...

[@carriesnider3209]

You mean the space station where the Security Chief worked for genocidal maniacs, or the (whatever Kira was) being a literal ex-assassin terrorist? Or how about the captain who C3PO's an entire race of people by becoming thier messiah? Yeah, I could go on, cough, Garek, cough, Quark got blackmailed to stay. I loved Ds9, but if you take off the nostaligia glasses Starfleet has never had clean hands.

[@WilliamHostman]

I wonder how many skipped it because Avery Brooks wasn't caucasian....

[@ShamrockParticle]

Thankfully DS9 did it better.

[@maggiebailey4093]

There's a line in "In the pale moonlight" where Sisko says that the entire operation is sanctioned by Starfleet command. If that isn't proof of they're shadyness then I don't know what is

[@lorcannagle]

My take on that scene is that Starfleet were OK with Sisko trying to bring the Romulans into the war, and may have known about the attempt to forge evidence of the Dominion planning to invade Romulus. And of course they were aware that Sisko had Bashir prepare bio-mimetic gel because Bashir wanted the order in writing and logged an objection. But I feel that they didn't know about how far it went or that Garak flat out went murdering again in order to sell the fake evidence. There's a DS9 tie-in novel where Sisko has to justify his decisions to Starfleet and they exonerate him in the end, but I haven't read it so I don't know how they handled it there.

[@Raguleader]

@@lorcannagle The key of it all isn't whether Starfleet *knew* exactly what Sisko was going to do, it's that they didn't *want* to know. "Just make it happen, the survival of the Federation hinges upon your success. Now I'm gonna go get a cup of coffee and leave you to your own devices." If you read between the lines, it's clear that the Federation brass knows Sisko is likely to do something unpalatable, and they're washing their hands of the matter. If it goes bad, then a rogue captain is made an example of to show the Romulans that Starfleet wasn't on board with it. But it succeeded, so...

[@thewerefrog2354]

What about Star Fleet giving Sisko an award for making a planet uninhabitable in order to bring in one criminal? That's a greater thing. That should have been treated as a war crime.

[@thecynicaloptimist1884]

I mean, Starfleet were desperately fighting a race of genocidal theocratic fascists in a war of extermination, it's not a stretch to see them being pushed to the point of "ok, tell the Romulans a fib to get them into the war". It's hardly like Starfleet is doing shady shit like that _all the time._

[@thomaszinser8714]

I mean, if we're talking DS9, though, worth pointing out that Starfleet, while officially disavowing Section 31, is more than happy to let the infection of the Changelings that they created rage out of control, even if it led to the extinction of all Changelings.

[@CaptainPikeachu]

I honestly never thought the “a few bad apples” excuse ever really worked because a lot of those bad apples are high ranking officers. To get to the point they are at without anyone confronting them on their behavior before they reached the positions of influence they have got means that not only have they been allowed to get away with such behavior but that they are also influencing younger officers and cadets and thus affecting the next generation of leaders. This speaks to so much more of a systemic corruption within Starfleet than anything else. And out of the universe, it means that the writers didn’t really consider the implications of how it could really look. Funnily enough, the reasons that might excuse the whole Cardassia and Maquis thing of an “impossible position” is the same one that Clancy uses in Picard, the idea that they either had to let Romulans go or the Federation itself could fall apart with worlds threatening to leave. One could argue that sacrificing non-Federation people was a choice they had to make for the sake of keeping their Federation together.

[@trekjudas]

THANK YOU! People use that excuse to excuse the horrible behavior of the police and its bullshit!

[@CaptainPikeachu]

Kevin Thomas I agree. If anything I think the “badmirals” are more or less representation of what Starfleet actually is in reality while our heroes and their captains are the outliers. Think about it, with ships out there on their own, each Captain is more or less running their own kingdom so to speak. And if they’re far away enough, they aren’t really affected by everyday Federation and Starfleet dealings. It’s like Sisko said, it’s easy to be a saint in paradise and each of those ships are basically its own floating paradises. So away from Starfleet Command, our hero captains are basically creating the paradise and doing all the things that Starfleet’s highest ideals should be. So really we have been looking at everything the wrong way. And that it’s more or less these captains out on the frontiers that’s keeping Starfleet holding up its higher ideals.

[@mgs85]

That’s some seriously flawed thinking based entirely on the assumption that they were doing these bad behaviors though out their career. They weren’t, we know that these bad apples often weren’t. They get to these positions of power and then they decide to take unilateral action because they now have the means to do so.

[@Taniseth]

I like this point a lot. The "Bad Apples" theory might work with characters like Eddington, because it shows that when people's ideology goes against the ideology of starfleet, they are recontextualized as rogues and terrorists. But when your Bad Apples are admirals and other positions of leadership, you can't escape from the conclusion that on some level their ideologies are institutional within StarFleet. That would be like trying to convince people that President Trump is just a Bad Apple, and that the rest of the Republican party is the standard bearer of truth, integrity, and justice. You can't join the leadership of an organization without a support system within that organization, which means you can't have oppositional ideologies of that organization.

[@CaptainPikeachu]

mgs85 People don’t magically one day just start doing bad behaviors. You aren’t a perfect angel of an officer all your life and suddenly once you reach a rank and you become a rogue terrorist or whatever. That’s not how it works. These kinds of behaviors are systemic, these kinds of behaviors are institutional, and it means someone allowed them to think this is okay and allowed them to move forward in ranks despite the signs. Once again, you don’t just one day magically seize unilateral power out of the blue, you don’t get to that point without signs of that behavior, and if you did, then it means nobody paid any attention. So either you are looking at it as Starfleet has systemic issues of corruption or that Starfleet is too stupid and naive to notice. Neither of which presents a very flattering view of Starfleet or its capabilities.

[@SiriusMined]

I thought about the way the Starfleet treated data and his offspring. First they treated him as property, then his offspring is property. Even though he was a distinguished officer. They were prepared to throw over his rights for their own gain.

[@rinehardt6837]

Thank you thank you. Great point they were just going to take his kid from him and study her

[@TheMsLourdes]

Again and again and again they do it, absolutely correct.. Android slaves are a big want. And they get it pre Picard with synths just dumb enough to not be sentient and they crank em out by the thousands and network em together. Starfleet I don't think ever wanted a sentient android.. they just happened to be sentient and exist. Course the only difference between them and holograms really is that the androids can go anywhere whereas the holograms are genies very much stuck in the bottle.

[@johnpowers9058]

Yet, when it comes to labour Starfleet/Federation is more than willing to put up holoprojectors all over the place to have decommissioned Holo-Doctors doing hard labour. Indeed in spite of all available evidence that holograms can become sentient the Federation continues to experiment, create and dictate their existence.

[@sanityisrelative]

@@johnpowers9058 I *really* would be interested to see what has happened to the Doctor in season 2 of Picard.

[@ttintagel]

Right. The roots of the synth ban and the exploitation of synthetic life forms were there all along.

[@SiriusMined]

"Your General Order 24" My favorite episode

[@BioGoji-zm5ph]

A Taste of Armageddon.

[@shepwillner7507]

@@BioGoji-zm5ph Yep. Can you imagine being at war with another planet for 500 years and having a tacit agreements to kill X inhabitants in those disintegration machines? The people enter those huge phone booth-sized machines and they don't come out. Channeling Charleton Heston, from "Soylent Green": "Our food is made of people!" What we don't know is how exactly they get disintegrated: flame throwers, gassed with toxic fumes, sent below the surface to the fires of hell, flown into the atmosphere to burn up, etc.

[@Viguier89]

Do you imagine if the Earth's most powerful nation, a democracy, would decide to invade illegally, under false pretext, a small nation in a extremely fragile region, that would result to the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians, a huge civil war and years later a wave of terrorist attacks all over the globe, a huge increase in military tensions, that would be insane.

[@lokiaverro4196]

@@YumLemmingKebabs You just accidentally explained the entire problem with angry "starfleet-is-pure" fans. They don't understand allegories.

[@mostlyguesses8385]

In the movie the Sona-a drove off their youngsters, by end of movie the youngsters with powerful ships are coming to take their home planet back, this is an internal matter. If a planet drives off half their citizens do they not have a right to return. There is no sign of a real democracy, there seems to be a nature cult run by offscreen priests. Many countries are run by the small portion who are more aggressive and power hungry, heck most of Third World is this way, is the Fed or USA supposed to stop the jerks and also supposed to not make trade deals with half of Africa and Asia. The Enterprise was used to try to make the removal less violent -- this was a mistake and the Feds should just have waited until after the returnees did their revolution. The movie avoided all the fun issues, and since the nature people had hot women off course they were the good guys - - - but if you made them Ugly the case can be made that they were jerks fighting from their youngsters returning...

[@a.morphous66]

​@@YumLemmingKebabs Except the Federation has always been a metaphor for America, whether it was intended to be so or not. It is what the USA could be if it really tried to achieve its high ideals without all of that old-fashioned all-American bigotry, and because of that it has been misconstrued by some (cough conservatives cough) to be what America already is. It's very important to show that the Federation is just as vulnerable and fallible as any nation, because we as viewers will always read the predominantly-human protagonists in any sci-fi show as an allegory for the United States, and by making the Federation have similar practices to those of the USA and then criticizing it, Star Trek is by proxy criticizing America.

[@HywelapDafydd]

And Nimbus 3, the Planet of Galactic Peace. The Federation enters into a tripartite agreement with it's two principle opponents and completely fails to make any meaningful investment into the project leaving it's population to rot.

[@seannorton]

I have always thought this especially since I watched the episode where counselor Troy told Mark Twain (rather angrily) that humans don't still act the same way as he is used to. But it's funny about the maquie because they are outcasts only because they believe differently (hate to say that in this case Starfleet reminds me of A.n.t.f.a but if you turn on the news you'll see how Starfleet treats them is similar. )

[@erdood3235]

​@@seannorton what's A.n.t.f.a ?

[@kickencloud]

Don't forget Section 31

[@ArgonTheAware]

Don't forget that Section 31 won the Dominion War by infecting the Founders, so they do get results, no matter the ethical implications. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hqC7dp2onr6fmMk

[@lloroshastar6347]

@@ArgonTheAware Yes, but that doesn't get the Federation off the hook though does it, nor does it make the Federation in Picard any less believable.

[@BattlestarZenobia]

ArgonTheAware no, Odo won the Doninion War by giving the Founders the cure and teaching them about living amongst solids. Something they would have given up the Alpha Quadrant for anyway, although Odo never knew that. All Section 31 did was make an already bad situation catastrophically worse and it was only Odo’s intervention that stopped their incompetence leading to millions, perhaps billions of deaths.

[@ttintagel]

I’ve always thought that whole plot line was a bit silly, but yeah, I can’t deny that it existed canonically.

[@MichaelHaneline]

I was looking for someone who made this comment. I'm honestly shocked section 31 didn't even get a mention.

[@joshdaniels2363]

"ST:P RUINED STARFLEET!" *stares in Deep Space 9*

[@sanityisrelative]

This 100%!

[@bemasaberwyn55]

Wouldn't that be in Dominion? 😛

[@SiriusMined]

One minor nitpick. Regarding the values of a Nation, the values are not what we are professed to be. Those are our ideals. Our values are what we actually live. Very often, our ideals and values are in conflict....

[@Taniseth]

I don't know what distinction you're making. People can, and often do, live incongruously to their values. Someone might value the lives and welfare of animals, and still eat meat. Someone might value the lives and welfare of children, and still knowingly buy shoes made from sweatshops. Someone might value healthy living, and still smoke cigarettes, and watch 10 hours of TV everyday. We don't always live our values.

[@lloroshastar6347]

The US, from the outside, seems to live in a bubble, and I'm saying this coming from one of the most closed off nations in history, the British Isles. One thing that always seems strange to me watching US media is how unaware of the world the US appears to be, so dismissive as if it doesn't exist. the US doesn't seem to realise that the majority of nations on Earth don't have ideals or values written on a piece of paper somewhere. They have laws, yes, which change from government to government. Certain political parties and leaders like to invent ideals which also change. I grew up being told that British values included inclusivity, acceptance of my fellow human, understanding, diversity, now it seems like according to our current ruling goverment's (and the media they control) these are the antithesis of our ideals. Even the most progressive government, the SNP, still have a pretty anti-inclusivity based message. Point is, nation states are temporary, they are constructs, they rarely last much longer than a century and when they do its usually because those nation states destroyed other nation states either militarily or economically. Ideals and values are fluid, not fixed. If you understand anything about history, real archaeological history not just the re-written text books or online propaganda sources, you will know that a national ideal is about as meaningful as a fashion statement, gone in the blink of an eye. It's unrealistic to ever believe that the Federation has fixed values, and governments and media in the US, from an outside perspective, reinterpret the constitution to mean whatever the hell they want it to in order to suit their agenda.

[@fortunatejeremy]

@@lloroshastar6347 - *mic drop

[@RyanDB]

I can't help but totally agree. For me, the key example here are the Marquis. They may not always be in the right, but at their core they *are* right, and I think the franchise has gone to some lengths to make it clear that that's not an unreasonable interpretation, even if it's not the one the captains have chosen Not to mention Star Fleet's proclivity for lying about its purpose. It's totally "not a military force". Yeah.

[@artemiswallace8716]

sisko himself at one point says something like he thinks the marquis were right, but that now isnt the time. i'd love a trek series about the marquis, seeing starfleet from the other side for once.

[@vtmarik]

"Pound Sand = "Go Mine an Asteroid!"

[@ErzengelDesLichtes]

VTMarik Make like an EMH mark I and mine dilithium.

[@robertt9342]

VTMarik . That doesn't seem like the same message.

[@mikefitzgerald5956]

I.prefer, go scrub a plasma conduit.

[@benholroyd5221]

Go replicate gold pressed latinum?

[@timthorson52]

Not quite the right message, mining an asteroid is useful, replicating latinum is just impossible. You can pound sand all you want, its just a worthless activity.

[@Seal0626]

Best Star Trek parents: The O'Briens. Worst Star Trek parents: The Soongs.

[@brianbates8006]

The house of mogh has entered the chat

[@tristanthompson1980]

Best dad? Surprisingly Nog Worst dad? Little bit Worf

[@johnnemesh5459]

Best Trek parent: Gene Roddenberry Worst Trek parent: CBS

[@alanpennie8013]

Judging by Picard: Nepenthe the Rikers are also terrible parents.

[@shepwillner7507]

@@alanpennie8013 No, only Dad Kyle Riker was bad for abandoning Will at age 15. His Mom was already dead by the time he was 5. He deserved better parents.

[@Relius70]

How many times have we watched Starfleet sit back and watch an entire species get wiped out by a natural disaster, thanks to the prime directive? Also weren't genetically enhanced humans discriminated against by Starfleet, just because of how they were born?

[@scaper8]

I don't know if the latter example is Starfleet, but rather the whole of the Federation. And that's mostly from pushing from Earth, and founding and core member. Point does stand, however.

[@shinigamimiroku3723]

Even though it's a different timeline, we see that very issue at the very beginning of the second Abrams Star Trek movie.

[@nathanbrown8680]

Not as many times as we watched the captain wring their hands about the prime directive and then violate it or sidestep around it on a technicality and yes respectively.

[@mostlyguesses8385]

... If before the Prime Directive humans tried to help backward planets and 100s of time it led to disaster, since massive charity or just the shock of First Contact maybe wrecked the psyche of primitive people, then the Prime Directive is a moral rule. I always did get this picture, no one likes the Prime Directive but history has shown it is better. Old Star Trek had the Hitler-planet and Mob-planet showing primitive people do not act rationally and it gets weird -- this is why the Space Aliens can't offer us cancer cures and I can admit it is our own fault for pathetic human nature and I don't blame the Aliens for not visiting with the cures for everything (so then our senior citizens not working would grow old and never die and doom our USA society).... Or are the Aliens not visiting us evil, this is interesting question...

[@BioGoji-zm5ph]

Well, the reason genetically enhanced humans were discriminated against was due to an event in the Star Trek universe's history called "The Eugenics Wars." Basically, watch Space Seed from TOS and it explains pretty much everything. In short... people like Khan Noonien Singh are the reason genetically engineered people are discriminated against in Star Trek by the time of DS9.

[@bendonatier]

A piece of writing advice I've always been fond of is, "Your villain is only important as a tool to tell you about your hero." And when you apply that to star fleet you run into a bit of an issue, since they are both out hero and our villain. Starfleet both has to forge cadets into the paragons of humanity that eventually become our bridge crew, but also allow for enough political corruption to get our evil admirals, I don't think that's inherently a contradiction either. We know section 31 exists as star treks secret police, but we also know because of Sloan that it's agents really are those same paragons of humanity as our heros, just instead being perfect doctor's, or pilots, or captains, they are perfect spies. Star fleet is a true meritocratic utopia, if you are good at what you do, and can keep everything you do just enough above board, you will be rewarded. Of course the best politicians, will come up with some pretty nasty ideas to get them through any bad situation, and we can hope they only implement those plans as a last resort. Thankfully a single man does not an army make. Starfleet has a check to evil admirals, it's officers who are held to the highest standards. Starfleet's perfectionist approach to selecting who gets power, mandates the perfect soldier is a moral soldier, and thus captains are given a great deal of authority and leniency when it comes to their jobs. Unfortunately by the time of Picard, after the dominion war, the war with the Cardasians, Wolf 359, so many of those captains have died, or broken down. Sisco was one of the strongest willed starfleet officers we got to see, and even he broke after wolf 359, barely pulling himself out of his depression. It's on wonder the federation is capable of so many evil acts, when it's moral core, the men trusted to pull the trigger, have been thinned out and broken. So are Starfleet the bad guys? I don't think so, after all Starfleet churns out men like Picard, Kirk, Sisco, and Nog, despite their origins, but they certainly are playing a dangerous game, by not holding their leaders to the same standards as their officers, even those who once we're perfect star fleet officers, and in and around times of war, they are capable of great evil.

[@Raguleader]

What's interesting is that Starfleet doesn't just train their cadets to become model young officers, but they also produce more problematic folks like Cadet Nicholas Locarno and his fellow Nova Squad cadets, who very nearly convinced none other than Wesley Crusher to compromise his values before he'd even left the Academy. And as DS9 would show, disbanding Nova Squad and punishing its members for their actions wouldn't prevent similar organizations like Red Squad from forming later on to do even worse nonsense under official sanction of folks like Admiral Leyton (who, fun fact, is played by an actor who had a vaguely similar role on Babylon 5, as a General leading a conspiracy and later an attempted coup against a corrupt Earth government).

[@Nox_Amicus]

I’ve been watching your channel for a while, and always admired your take on things, your attention to detail, and your production values - but this was the first time I was moved to comment on how wonderfully an episode was crafted. You walked us through the lore and through the fiction to deliver us on the doorstep of our present - and without being cliche about art imitating life, challenged us to draw our comparison and our sense of compassion (or moral outrage) from how we view our ‘entertainment’ to how we comport ourselves in our daily lives. Very, very well done!! Thank you!!!

[@SmallWorldFilms]

I’ve been meaning for quite a while to tell you how well done and insightful your videos are. The way you handle this video and it’s dark topic makes this the right time. Thank you!

[@akanthony100]

Star Trek Picard got me into Star Trek, so far I'm loving TNG and DS9

[@Pantherblack]

Welcome, you're gonna love it here.

[@subzero2032]

DS9 is awesome. You’ll love it.

[@RobbyBurney]

Those are the gold standard star trek. Voyager and Enterprise are enjoyable. Picard and Discovery vary in quality and how well they're received

[@danielland3767]

Glad you are here be cautious of the crazies & go back into the lore....lol

[@akanthony100]

@@subzero2032 already loving Sisko

[@scottsaunders5453]

I actually thought the depiction of Starfleet in Picard was a logical progression given that most of the officers in the upper echelons by that point would have lived through the horrors of the Dominion War and a handful of Borg invasions. We saw the progression to a more militant and reactionary Starfleet starting in TNG with the initial Borg invasion - which led to Starfleet developing, among other combat-oriented ships, the Defiant and its overpowered arsenal - and by the time we hit DS9, we also have Starfleet's tacit approval of Ben Sisko trying to fake evidence to bring the Romulans into the Dominion War on their side. To say nothing of Section 31 and their plan to commit genocide on the Founders. Given a generation of Starfleet officers spent their career around that, it's a bit more surprising that Starfleet isn't worse than depicted onscreen in Picard.

[@mostlyguesses8385]

This ""Picard's Starfleet is evil"" video seems a bit sloppy-- but it is good vid so thanks, but: 1. STARFLEET FOLLOWS CIVILIANS. Starfleet is like the US navy, it follows order on what missions to do and what its ships can do, so it cannot be blamed - unless we prefer a military dictatorship to the Federation council of 100s of planets voting on decisions. Maybe replace the word Starfleet with "Federation is evil". Starfleet's main missions were defense and exploration not helping non-citizens --- the Prime Directive for non-space societies actually bans wasting resources to help them so this really is a fatalistic and limited organization not do-gooders. 2. SAVING STRANGERS COMES AFTER CITIZENS. Next, Federation did not ""ban" anyone from saving more Romulans, it just stopped volunteering its Fed ships after feeling Mars losses made them too vital to risk. A person who starts to volunteer is not that evil for not continuing and giving up all their wealth - - if this defines evil then 100% everyone is evil. At least the Fed saved some Roms, so Fed is better than Klingons and Gorn and other 90% of the galaxy. In WW2 the British pulled their planes back in 1941 from France when it seemed likely to fall since they would need them to defend the British island - this made the French VERY angry, a country can reserve resources for slight chance of need for self-defense --- the Klingons and Breen would love invading the corners of Fed space to grab some planets so those Fed planets have First Claim to ship resources not non-citizen Roms. 3. ACCEPTING BORDER CHANGES NOT EVIL. All countries have borders that get pushed around by other countries, this is a fact of the world and not voluntary for the Federation. And no country every guarantees those who live on the frontiers INTENTIONALLY AND AWARE OF BORDER RISKS might not have 1% chance of having to move later -- the USA lost Vancouver Island and 1/4 of Oregon territory to the British and many Americans had to move. 4. LIMITING IMMIGRANTS IS NOT EVIL. Most countries limit the number and manner of immigration, I like immigrants but it is a cheap shot to just label this evil. The USA is in top 10% of Western Countries in allowing immigrants, at some point a country is doing pretty good and not evil. 4. GRABBING SONA-PLANET IS UNPLEASANT BUT NOT EVIL. In the movie those people are not Fed citizens. These people drove off their more adventurous youngsters, who now want their planet back and are immigrating by force back. They do NOT need the Feds to help, the Enterprise is used to make it easier, but by end of the Movie the Sona decide to do the work themselves--- this is mostly an internal political matter where the powerful youngsters are going to show the backward isolationists the stupidity of their ways. ........But I admit it is not great but it breaks no moral law or maybe even technical law. I also admit probably the Fed council is hiding the truth from the public. 5. MORAL ISSUE THIS VID AVOIDS... The big moral question is if these innocent nonhuman people could save Billion lives if their 1 million gave up the planet, what kind of jerks would decline this??? I honestly would give up my home-state of Minessota and move to Hawaii if my home soil could save 1000x more lives --- but these people seemed obsessed with ""nature" so I really don't like them. Some islands in Pacific are mining their entire island to sell as fertilizer and retiring en masse to Australia some as millionaires--- this seems the moral option.

[@shepwillner7507]

I never watched Picard because the show probably requires a subscription to stream it, like Discovery did before the powers that be decided to make it more available on free or cable TV.

[@malachiXX]

​@@mostlyguesses8385 Some of your points are good, some are grey and some are just not well thought out. 1. I agree with Point 1 - the Federation Council are the ones making the questionable decisions and Starfleet are just enforcing them. However, enforcing questionable policies and claiming to be "just following orders" doesn't absolve a military institution of guilt. It's their job to decide if an order is legal or not and not follow an illegal order. 2. Your second point doesn't really reflect reality. Consider the following....A country asks for your help due to some natural disaster that they are unable to deal with effectively. You, being the leader of your country have 1 Billion dollars that you can allocate to 'humanitarian aid'. Do you send that money to this devastated country (ignoring the fact that they are probably in this situation because they have leaders who have been lining their pockets for generations and not protecting their infrastructure) or do you put food on the table of every homeless shelter in your country for a year? Historically, you help the foreign country and here's why....They have a resource that you have no claim on or they border some country that you feel you need to keep tabs on or they represent a major trade route that will cut the price of transport of goods significantly. At the very least, they will be beholden to you. On the other hand, if you feed all those homeless, next year they will still be homeless and hungry, ergo there is No Return on that investment of good will. That is how leaders of large countries think. 3. Your third point depends entirely on where you live. Some countries have had the same border for centuries. Some countries live in disputed territory that has changed hands dozens of times. But that is neither here nor there. You are trying to use this point to justify your previous point of protecting your own over others when the cost becomes too high and I believe I've made the point that a country's own citizens are of less importance than its potential trade agreements and benefits. History is full of such examples. 4. Limiting the number of immigrants may not be evil but what is evil is limiting who may immigrate based on Race, Creed, Color, Religion, Ancestry, etc...BTW, who decides what the correct number from a certain source of people is? Who chooses based on what criteria? It becomes a very sticky situation when you look at it closely. 5. It's interesting that you would so willingly give up a place of harsh winters for a place of no winters just to save lives. Having trouble with that one. In the example you chose concerning the Baku, the only reason they needed to be relocated is so Ruafu could harness the radiation from the rings and concentrate it so that he could save himself and his fellow renegades. Let's be clear....these are people who attempted a coup, failed and were cast out. They used subterfuge and played upon weakness in the Federation (desperate to survive while in a war) to convince people to go against their moral judgement. They also didn't inform the Baku that they would be relocated. It was all to be done on the sly. They wouldn't notice until people began to age. The Sona could only sell this idea to the Federation by making it look like a humanitarian act. Ruafu proved that he would be willing to kill all the Baku to get the benefits of the planet. Once the Baku were aware of the Federation, why didn't the Federation simply contact the Baku officially and ask if they would accept immigrants to their world? It seemed like a lot of wasted space for a single colony. It would have saved a great deal of resources to just locate a federation colony on the other side of the world. Everything about moving those people, regardless of what the benefit to others would be, was wrong. Doubly wrong because they were willing to do it without even telling them.

[@beargiles4062]

@@malachiXX IANAJAG but I think your only legal options are to comply with an order or to resign. You can't simply ignore it, much less act counter to it. According to countless movies you can also relieve your commander of duty if you believe they are violating order but that's a different situation and it might only apply to the Navy. See Crimson Tide for an example of this trope. In practical terms there may be a little bit of wiggle room in terms of taking advantage of any ambiguity or slow walking it but that only works if you expect the order to be quickly reversed and you don't directly refuse to comply.

[@DStrormer]

From a storytelling perspective, a genuinely perfect Starfleet would make for a terrible Star Trek series. The nobility of our heroes must be set against some conflict for it to be interesting and while that conflict and, and often has in Trek, come from outside forces some of the most engaging stories grow from internal conflict. You mentioned The Drumhead which is am incredible episode, but I'd point even more strongly at Measure of a Man and The Offspring where we see clear examples of how Starfleet personnel, up to the highest levels, who've not lived and worked with Data extensively view synthetics. In The Offspring we see that even after their rights have been clearly established Starfleet includes many at a leadership level who see them as property. This sort of entrenched racism never abates of its own accord. It is intentionally rooted out or else it festers and manifests in other policy decisions. This clearly explains the ban and the ease with which the Zjhat Vash infiltrate Starfleet. Seeing more parallels with America? Good, that's the point. As for abandoning the Romulans? No surprise there in a post-Dominion-war federation. They're scared, they're weakened, and losing a very tentative ally to a natural disaster before they can betray the alliance? Well, that's so unfortunate. Considering the events of In The Pale Moonlight, an absolutely incredible episode, we must assume that Starfleet leadership retains significant distrust of the RSE. After the political instability created by Shinzon being nearly wiped out by disaster, all of which the Federation could genuinely claim no responsibility for, must've seemed like a gift to a terrified Starfleet admiralty. Then here comes moralizing Picard who's never appreciated the "big picture" in their minds. Honestly, it's all very fitting.

[@peenworm]

There’s no conflict if there’s no nobility to fall short of though A tiny number of planets threatening to leave if the federation wouldnt be as racist as them is not really any threat to the federation

[@ttintagel]

I think at the best of times, we can see that Starfleet HAS high ideals but is not always able to live up to them. And there’s a lot of potential for human drama in that.

[@LanMandragon1720]

​@@peenworm Entierly depends on which systems are going to leave. For example Andor leaving is probably a way bigger deal then say Betazed.

[@Dnosirrom]

This video all the way. So glad somebody finally discussed this. Good job!

[@jakedge3]

remember that one time sisko, with full permission of starfleet command, proceeded to render an entire planet inhospitable to life, all just to get one man? Pepperidge farm remembers....

[@MedalionDS9]

This is an oversimplification of a larger issue of Star Trek PIcard and Discovery... if Starfleet are bad now, it's a larger symptom of the type of view/tone and storytelling Kurtzman Trek wants to tell. It's ok to have some dissent in the ranks on occasion like evil admirals, but from an overall point of view... Starfleet ought to be a force for good with the best that humanity and their allies represent in the Federation.

[@Direwolf1771]

Steve’s whole point is that these issues have been present since TOS. This isn’t Kurtzman just going off with new ideas.

[@audreyandremington5265]

@@Direwolf1771 but he turning them from issues to main themes. Even if the side themes were there since TOS, the main idea was that humans can be better.

[@SebastianWeinberg]

Don't you just love how the meaning of "bad apple" has mutated from, "One bad apple spoils the barrel," (because that's how it works in real life; rot _spreads,)_ into the minimising handwave, "Oh, it's just _a few_ bad apples. That doesn't reflect on the whole barrel!"

[@siennajohanna]

I'm so glad you went there. Thank you!

[@alenefitzgerald4454]

But starfleet was founded on the principal of... wait, slone is at my door.

[@jessewilley531]

In the books the Federation Council Thing was retconned just a little bit. What they approved was a medical research group in the sector. The project was co-opted and run by Section 31. (It did a similar retcon to Star Trek VI.)

[@thomasnorman8369]

Your incisive analysis are great fun, I hope you continue to explore concepts in the series with these expositions.

[@andrewcomerford9411]

Wasn't, "Directive 24," a coded message, giving Scott 24 hours to resolve the situation, or get the Enterprise to safety ? I'm sure later in the episode someone remarks, "There IS no Directive 24."

[@NeilBlumengarten]

Putting aside the many, many times we see instances that Starfleet/the Federation are bad guys, have you seen people come up with a thought as to why Starfleet is the way it is in Picard? It was pointed out that the senior officers in 2399 would have been heavily involved in the Borg invasions and the Dominion War. It's thought that stresses of the mid 24th Century negatively impacted them, making them more militaristic and more xenophobic.

[@sanityisrelative]

Ooh. That is something I hadn't given much thought about before.

[@scaper8]

Ah. Not that is an interesting angle that I hadn't considered. Still don't love the way the show showed things, but I do think that that would certainly make more of a logical through-line.

[@bemasaberwyn55]

THANK YOU

[@josephm6770]

I just finished a long post criticizing Star Trek: Picard, but I actually agree with you. Part of what I was saying, if you read it, is that I don't mind the show showing a morally ambiguous Starfleet, I just mind its execution. But I wanted to note that your explanation is actually one that I've used for why TOS may seem a little regressive now (General Order 24 included). It's a little more of a stretch since there was supposed to be about 100 years in between, but given their longer lifespans, I imagine that many in Kirk's era had a cultural and social outlook influenced by the Romulan War - a far more destructive and catastrophic war than any conflict with the Borg or Dominion, as I understand it. The Romulans were originally presented as a means of depicting bigotry among Starfleet officers and even the sexual liberalism of Kirk's Enterprise could be the result of angst-filled baby boomers born from the Romulan War generation.

[@robertt9342]

Neil Blumengarten . I could buy that, it seems like that this is even expressed in Insurection. It's not that Starfleet and the federation have never done questionable things (as seen in the video), it's that the culture of the bureaucracy that's changed. The bureaucracy in Picard makes sense given the trending line, but it would have been nice to see the artificial veneer.

[@trekjudas]

But yeah people are seriously overreacting, Starfleet has ALWAYS been shady!

[@Dreamspawn1978]

Federation always having to clean up Starfleets mess and do the actual governing and peace making.

[@JeanLucCaptain]

lets not forget how in TNG they are constantly screwing around on the Romulan Neutral zone and pointlessly endanger civilians by putting them on their ships.

[@Kuribohcoast]

You're right and you should say it. Admittedly, I took away something slightly different from the recent treks, especially from Picard, that being "We can achieve this paradise society, but we have to work on maintaining it. Problems don't go away forever on their own."

[@PerSchjonsby]

That was incredibly thoughtful, thank you for making this.

[@blueray15]

I liked some of Picard my biggest compliant was the pacing (some episodes were so slow) and the lack of good character development, seriously took me episodes to get character's names. Both can (and probably will) be fixed next season. That being said, I also didn't like the dark tone that much and did miss the 90's trek. Its not so much Starfleet is it the whole show. There wasn't a single happy character introduced on the show, everyone including returning characters had something horrible happen to them. I missed the somewhat light hearted scenes that would be there occasionally. Even shows such as DS9 which depict an actual war have scenes where the characters are shown doing something the enjoy doing.

[@KuraIthys]

Yeah, a few of the things going on seemed utterly gratuitous and pointless. But my overall complaint is indeed the pacing. Due to it's presentation as a single ongoing story rather than the old self-contained episodes, most of the episodes felt a bit... Aimless. And because it's a single plot, rather than multiple, it felt thin, and drawn out. It's like a movie script that's been stretched to fit 10 episodes instead, even though that's more than 3 times the length. Put differently it felt like about 3 episodes of content drawn out into 10 episodes... That's my main issue with the show...

[@Shoddragon]

i think this is fair. DS9 struck an excellent balance between Dark and brooding mixed in with the promise of a happy future people have come to expect from Star Trek. I think mayhaps ST:P was just a bit too... obsessed with the dark and terrible aspects of Star Trek as a whole that it really kept forgetting it needs to be strongly counterbalanced with the good nature and hope inherent in Star Trek's DNA. I think you've put into words more why I've had problems with it.

[@andromidius]

Its morally grey, for sure. They usually do the right thing... eventually. After dragging their feet and trying to sabotage the efforts.

[@kellywsmar]

Amazing video, especially the last parts about real life. You just gained my like and subscription.

[@JTan74]

Your best video by far. This episode is like a Star Trek episode in itself in terms of how a point is illustrated. 👍🏽

[@fortunatejeremy]

Steve proves again and again that people who criticize and complain about "Star Trek today" simply have short memories or selective memories. I just want to add that I'm really curious how the expression "a few bad apples spoil the bunch" has been shortened to "a few bad apples" which seems to mean "a few bad apples excuse the rest of the apples." How did this expression come to mean the exact opposite of what it originally meant?

[@tsdobbi]

"complain about "Star Trek today" simply have short memories or selective memories." People that have the "back in my day" view are always viewing back in their day with rose colored glasses. Even our own memories of times we actually lived through can get tainted by pop culture over time.

[@AnthonyIlstonJones]

I think the 'bad apples' saying has been hijacked by a society in decline that doesn't want to sort it's shit out. They're saying "don't tarnish us with the same brush as the person acting in my name," but if that person has their permission then they are just as culpable.

[@clubtepes2046]

As always, very well thought out and well presented. I feel that some of the problem, is that in the past, the episodes where Starfleet acted in a shady manner, was typically one or two episodes in any particular 26 episode seasons....... Remember 26 episode seasons?? So the ratio of that type of story was only a small percentage in the greater whole. Insurrection was of course an anomaly to this and also generally not regarded that well in the overall lineup of the features. Today, between ST: Into Darkness, Discovery and Picard, those themes seem to play as the general rule. Not the exception. Maybe people are just tired of that, since they aren't the unique storyline, they are now the typical storyline. As a tangent, whatever did happen to the 26 episode season?? With the amount of money put into sets, (regardless of what sci-fi property it might be) doesn't it seem to make more sense to amortize the cost of sets and props over a longer season? I also don't care for the idea of hanging the success of a show in a single story line carried throughout a complete season. For a show like a Star Trek, in a streaming environment, I wonder if 3-4 episode story arcs, with 24-26 episodes a year, might not be better concept. I know producers have their reasons for doing things, I'd just like to know what the reasoning behind a 10 episode 'season' is from a money standpoint.

[@zen_of_chloe]

This commentary is *also* a reflection of our aspirations. Thank you.

[@edoethalesmo]

The best way to show the importance of a value is to show people responsible for upholding it fail to do so and the consequences of it.

[@DATA-qt3nb]

We all know his real name is Gene-Luck Pickerd anyways

[@kingbeauregard]

That's what it says on the delivery tag.

[@wallacewallaby5782]

I just finished watching that episode 5 minutes ago.

[@Turbobuttes]

You can indeed argue that there have been lots of instances in the past when high ranking Starfleet personnel were portrayed as corrupt or malicious. The difference to ST Picard is that back then you always had a feeling that those individual characters weren't the norm, and that orderly procedures would eventually uncover them or that there would be someone courageous to stop their doings. In ST Picard on the other hand things are looking so bleak people barely find time to stop for a pizza between all the death, drinking and dramatic mystery boxes thrown at them. It's a universe that for the most part seems to have abandoned all hope. Which is doubly bad, because the show was propagated as promoting female power and optimism, so not only have we been lied to in the latter regard, but the implication of what we actually see in the show is that the world turns to shit when women are in power? That's absolutely not the message I want to get from Star Trek, Mr. Kurtzman. What the hell were the producers and writers thinking?

[@Mr_Lemon_Law]

Whatever the message is, your videos are always extremely well written and presented. It's always a pleasure taking the time to hear what you have to say.

[@NeilBlumengarten]

I loved the "Ensign's Log" episode where you talk about the General Orders and how insane they are!

[@OpinionsNoOneCaresAbout]

"What happened to our bright, hopeful future, free of prejudice and inequality?" What happened is that Star Trek shows sometimes reflect the time in which they were created...

[@lloroshastar6347]

As has sci-fi since the day it was conceptualised.

[@fenrisvermundr2516]

It's only White Liberals that think the world is in a terrible place. At best, the only problems left are Ch1na.

[@HannibalHanslaughter]

@@db7213 Yeah but in the 70s we also weren't on a straight road towards earth being potentially uninhabitable because of the greed and widespread propaganda of a few billionaires. It's hard to believe that something good can come after all the savagery that lies in our future. It's so much easier to imagine a dystopia at this point than a utopia.

[@Shoddragon]

yea but you can reflect real life without giving up the bright, hopeful future. DS9 is like the pinnacle of this where half the series is a violent war and yet it has some of the brightest moments in the entire franchise. Nog growing from a delinquent Ferengi into an honorable Starfleet officer, being injured in battle and facing his demons brought about by PTSD and his injuries, then eventually recovering from the help of his friends. I can't really think of anything in ST:P that is particularly bright or hopefuly, much less on the level of a single characters like Nog.

[@ttintagel]

Sometimes? Always!

[@tparadox88]

Star Trek TNG: "we have mostly outgrown our prejudices and we are an enlightened people. Our ability to cooperate has rewarded us with technology that makes our lives better. If everyone else just joined us, they could have the benefits that we enjoy." Me, a kid in the 90s: "this is pretty much today but with cool tech we haven't figured out yet." Star Trek Picard: "our prejudices have led us to make terrible, backward decisions. Some in our borders live in comfort and leisure, but others languish, excluded. The former easily forget the latter. It is our own cowardly actions that often motivate marginalized people to become what we feared them as. We're just completely blind to other subjugated people doing our dirty work right next to us." Me, in 2020: "yeah, that sounds about right."

[@maria263]

That summary of "Journey's End" was *chef's kiss*. Honestly think a mini series of videos of just you summarizing Trek episodes (or doing fan commentary) would be interesting to watch.

[@martinbaxter4783]

Thanks again, Steve! (Both for the thought-provoking material *and* for showing me how to pronounce 'Zhat Vash'.)

[@renatocorvaro6924]

People always talk about "a few bad apples" as a way to excuse people acting against the supposed ideals of their institution, but it doesn't go "a few bad apples are okay in a pie," it goes "a few bad apples spoil the batch". If you're suffering from a few bad apples, then you really need to look into why.

[@ComradeOgilvy1984]

Yes, the modern usage is an inversion of the original meaning of the phrase. "A few bad apples" used to mean that serious moral vigilance is absolutely necessary, or the entire institution will be considered besmirched, for good reason.

[@shinigamimiroku3723]

@@ComradeOgilvy1984 Unfortunately, in this day absolute moral values are seen as oppressive, bigoted, and ultimately against the progress of society. Clearly that's working out, both IRL and in Star Trek...

[@AnthonyIlstonJones]

@@shinigamimiroku3723 The sarcasm is strong in this one.....:-D

[@tempest20000]

And here’s my argument for the movement of the civilians in the demilitarized zone. “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” Yes, it is awful that happened. People losing their homes, their livelihoods are incredibly tragic. But think of what the repercussions of not doing that could be. Years upon more years of war. If the Federation is so obstinate in saying “No you can’t have even a couple planets. It’s our territory and I’ll never give it up!”, they could doom themselves to several more years of a costly and deadly war. Thousands more die, maybe millions more just for a couple planets. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Millions of lives over a few thousand losing their houses. As awful as that sounds, homes can be rebuilt. Lives can’t be resurrected. It’s sad but I do side with the Federation. And then Insurrection. So, this is in the middle of the Dominion War. And if you remember in Deep Space 9, they said that if the Federation loses, then over 800 BILLION PEOPLE WILL DIE! 800 BILLION! And the Federation NEED whatever help they can get. If they don’t get the help of the Sona, the Federation could lose and millions will die. And the regenerative properties from the rings could help heal millions. How bout Nog and that 1 leg? For what, a just a couple hundred people being moved? Needs of the many. Yep. Still on the side of the Federation.

[@mkang8782]

Some really excellent insights and points, as always.

[@tristanthompson1980]

I am 12 minutes in and I am loving this. This was the Barkley promoting, Paris worshipping Steve I was craving. Well done

[@rinehardt6837]

Is Starfleet the bad guys no but they're not always the good guys either. They've only tried to commit genocide on three different occasions. Steve your of course right people who complain about Star Trek Picard or Discovery for that matter they have selective memory. They only remember the things that they want to remember forget all those times that Starfleet Admiral ordered people that do unscrupulous or they just did them themselves. The time Admiral Layton attempted a military coup to replace the president of the Federation. People say it's one guy no he didn't do all of that by himself. I think it brings more realism to the show to showed it every organization has its dark side

[@briancastro7758]

What are the three occasions? I can only think of two. The S31 engineered virus to kill the changelings in DS9 "Extreme Measures" and the (computer) virus to kill the Borg in TNG "I, Borg". Both times the main characters took actions to prevent in

[@rinehardt6837]

Star Trek discovery season 1. Starfleet assassin emperor georgiou posing as Captain georgiou and she had a hydro bomb that they were going to put near the core of the planet of Kronos and detonated. Effectively destroying the planet. Of course Michael Burnham talked her out of doing it. But just the same they were going to do it until birnam called them out on it.

[@CassandraHouse]

It’s so funny watching this now with you saying that you liked the Picard series.

[@Madmadrox]

Thank you! Perfect analysis!

[@richardbuckley1232]

Fantastic vid Steve.

[@Shoddragon]

I'm not sure if I'd say it's a nitpick but I feel like the writing for Starfleet in ST:P is strange not because Starfleet is shown to be shady (as the video proves, Star Fleet has always been shady and it's not even a matter of opinion) but because of how Starfleet and the Federation as a whole acts post-Dominion War. The end of the Dominion War required the help of major Alpha Quadrant factions and although some questionable means were used to get there (Garak assassinating a Romulan Senator to frame the Dominon, Worf killing Gowron, Kira kinda sorta helping Cardassians become terrorists albeit for a good cause, etc), the end of the war seemed to signal a newfound brotherhood. With Martok at the head of the Klingon Empire, the Tal'Shiar/ Obsidian Order destroyed, Cardassia being rebuilt into new civilization post- Dominion War (With blatant exposition from characters like Damar and Garak that the New Cardassia would have to change from the old one to survive), Romulus suffering heavy losses themselves, Sloan was killed and Section 31 was partially exposed,etc, it feels like the future is setup for a significantly more peaceful, more accepting Alpha Quadrant over all. Hell, the Ferengis even undergo massive social reforms. To think a Federation who went through all of this and only succeeded due to the help of other races (especially the Romulans who were constantly stated to be enough to turn the tide of the war in favor of the Alpha Quadrant and even Odo, who managed to END THE WHOLE WAR by convincing the female changeling to surrender) would suddenly show extreme racism and prejudice again on such a massive level, even counting the Synth attack, just feels like a massive stretch to me. I can accept that people with prejudices still exist in the Federation because of course, that's just realistic. You've mentioned many scenarios where this is the case. However on a scale big enough for the Federation to ban synths and very little help being offered to the Romulans? It's stuff like that which doesn't feel like the next logical leap of a post-Dominion War Federation and for me it breaks my immersion.

[@mostlyguesses8385]

The Fed still faces threats from Klingons and Breen and dozen others who would love to invade Fed border planets and kill its people and grab resources and planets, and Starfleet morally has to put its own defense first and after Mars attack it felt it couldn't spare the ships. The show does say this, they felt they couldn't spare the ships after massive Mars losses, it was not racism just having priority to own citizens. . . . The Feds did something for as long as it safely could, in the books the Romulan elites were super-jerks and even downplayed the problem and man the Feds under Picard had to fight to even start their effort, so honestly to call the Feds the most evil seems wrong,,,,,, Limiting one's charity is what we all do, this is not evil , but I admit it is not great and we should try to give at least 10% in good times...

[@Aaron-pj3ky]

I think one of the appeals of Star Trek is being relevant to the time that it's in. Picard does a fairly good job using pre-established events (the destruction of Romulus) to weave together a setting that reflects our own, where we're forced to evaluate our values, where they came from, and if it's possible to uphold them even when those in power are fundamentally opposed to them. What I do hope is that Picard does lead towards a hopeful note. In classic Trek, shows were not serialized, so there was a bow tied on the end of each episode to say "Hey the Federation fucked up, but the heroic Captain set it all straight!" We're in a different kind of storytelling here and I think that this narrative thread of Starfleet's decay is a story beat that can and should be addressed. With the fantasy element of Star Trek, Picard might even be able to inspire or cause institutional change in the Federation that will have lasting effects and bring it back in line with its core values. (It's a fantasy I wish I lived in!) I think there's a fair chance Picard will do that, but it's not going to happen in a single episode or even a single season. A serialized show like Picard (whether you love or hate that format) is going to carry that kind of story beat for awhile until it arrives at a conclusion for it. Basically we don't have a full picture of the Federation's depiction yet. To compare it to the Drumhead, we've only seen the first act of the story.

[@originalblackplate]

Well done Steve!

[@adamm.6595]

You snide remarks are very well placed... nicely done. 👍

[@mr51406]

And if Starfleet is shady, then maybe the Federation is too? I think a “West Wing” style series in Star Trek would be a good idea. Or maybe a more satirical “Yes, Minister.” We should see which UFP minister or councillor authorized those actions. After all Starfleet is supposed to be the navy+NASA, simply executing the decisions of the Federation government. If not, does that means that Starfleet is a law onto itself? Sometimes it sure looks like it. I think the creators want us to think the UFP is democratic loose federation like the EU. Logical Vulcans, hedonistic Terrans but also some authoritarian planets too. But the rogue admirals are always the Terrans. ST writers should show that we Terrans still have our problems too. Democracy is fragile. One criticism of ST was to always show the “other” as having odd behavious and bad actions, but it’s good that they show that the enemy can still be us.

[@pbagosy]

Yeah, there are *really* blurred lines between Starfleet and the UFP. Sometimes they're used interchangeably, sometimes the Federation is simply an afterthought. Most of the time, though, Starfleet seems to be the Military Industrial Complex run rampant. The civilian government seems to have very little sway in the face of their benevolent exploration wing (which is, curiously, loaded for space-bear). And the size and scope of Starfleet is sort of amazing. It's divided into entire fleets that are fully capable of performing a military role. Yes, I know that Starfleet bulked up after Wolf-359, but look at the collection of ships in Favor The Bold. Elements of the 2nd and 5th fleets comprised of a few Galaxy class, more than a handful of Excelsior class, but mainly Miranda class vessels. The Excelsior and Miranda classes were nearing (if not over) 100 years old at that point. Yes, Starfleet was pushing new designs into production like the Sovereign and Nova classes, but of the TWELVE HUNDRED ships assembled at Starbase 375 (made up of ELEMENTS of only two out of at least nine fleets), the overwhelming majority of them were ships the Federation had laying about for nearly a century. In the face of that the only real defense against the charge that Starfleet is anything other than an incredible war machine is that they fought a long and bloody war against the Cardassians (that we have strangely very little evidence of in-universe, other than O'Brien having served on a ship that took part - none of the other crew of the FLAGSHIP seem to have any actual combat experience) when clearly they had more ships. Cardassians needed vast Dominion forces to outnumber the task force 2-1. How did Starfleet not manage to enforce their will in the Cardassians during that conflict? I'm guessing sheer incompetence, especially considering the Dominion War was going pretty badly for the Federation until a recently-promoted captain with no ship command experience who lost his last command to hostile forces (a shore post at that), took over as chief tactician and fleet commander.

[@roy1701d]

I suspect Picard was using Reaganesque "shining city on a hill" rhetoric to describe Starfleet (especially in First Contact), when the organization was obviously enjoying its Golden Age. The United States thought of itself in similar terms in the last half of the 20th Century. Thing is, though, human will be humans, whatever century they might live in, always vulnerable to groupthink and mob mentality. And the exploration of the human condition is what Star Trek has always been about. 🙂

[@Raguleader]

Picard isn't describing the Starfleet and Federation that he actually serves, he's describing the one he believes in. Part of his character arc is him gradually coming to terms with the reality that the organization he believes in doesn't *really* exist. And of course, we get to compare him to characters like Raffi (even more disillusioned than him, indeed, disillusioned *with* him for not living up to the ideals he made her believe in) and Clancy (still willing to slog it out and try to make it work despite it being what it is, and perfectly willing to help Picard when he actually gives her something to work with). On Babylon 5, there are a couple of characters in a sort of similar situation, more explicitly stated to be deluding themselves about it. Ambassador Delenn, one of the leaders of the Minbari Religious Caste, believes her fellow Caste members to be loving and peaceful, far better than the violent and warmongering Warrior Caste that they find themselves struggling against. As her loyal assistant, Lennier, points out, the Religious Caste Minbari are in fact just as capable of betrayal and violence as the Warriors are, and even Delenn is more than happy to go into battle and lay her enemies to waste for her righteous cause. Lennier however is devoutly loyal to Delenn and doesn't want to disillusion her. The thing of it is, Lennier has the same problem regarding Delenn, and his own blind devotion to her eventually causes no shortage of problems for him later on.

[@WoohooliganComedy]

Thanks, Steve! 💖

[@davemack7577]

Just brilliant Steve!

[@jessewilley531]

Second, the Ba'aku isn't a Federation world... so they had to invent a semantic reason to explain that what they were doing wasn't a Prime Directive violation.

[@johnpowers9058]

It was very much a Prime Driective violation. Non interference with the development of another world.

[@williamnelson9747]

@@johnpowers9058 What he was saying is the line in the movie that the "Ba'ku are not native to this world" bit. Because they weren't native the Admiral claims the Prime Directive doesn't apply. A weaselly justification if there ever was one.

[@jessewilley531]

@@williamnelson9747 Of course it was. Hence, inventing a semantic reason.

[@chrisg7882]

@@williamnelson9747 the admiral didn't know they weren't native until Picard stopped Data and actually talked to the Ba'ku.

[@johnpowers9058]

The point is that even if the Admial thought they were colonists the Prime Directive would still be in play. These was not a human colony, nor a Federation colony. The Federation had no prior or current claim to the world. The "colony" had been established and successful for centuries. Starfleet had no jurisdiction or authority to remove them. Yet Starfleet and the Admiral were still doing it.

[@SSecularScholar]

General order 24 sounds like Exterminatus from Warhammer 40K Where everybodies the bad guy.

[@pofruin]

Even Vulkan?

[@MrDesmorto]

@@pofruin Unless you are an eladar then yes.

[@lloroshastar6347]

@@MrDesmorto Even the Aeldari/Eldar aren't free from being the good guys. I mean there are the Dark Eldar for a start who are arguably the most sinister of all (I mean, at least the Chaos gods are compelling people to do evil things, the Dark Eldar do it because they want to). Eldar have to live a tough life, constantly on the run in fear of being destroyed, so they have to implement a pretty unpleasant regime in order to keep their species alive. Humans are only slightly nicer than the bad guys, but not really. It's more like the Imperium of Man is doing horrible things because if they didn't it would mean the Chaos Gods and all the other races would wipe them out, but they are still doing those horrible things, so they are hardly the good guys. Tau are controlling people, but at least they aren't working them to death like the Imperium are. Necrons are kinda like the borg (kinda not, closer to the Cybermen really) except they are also supremacists so they are definitely evil. Tyranids want to consume everything, not evil exactly but well not particularly nice either. Orks just love a good fight, its what they were built to do, but they don't stop fighting and make the Klingons look peaceful. Am I missing anyone? Maybe, but I'm sure whoever it is they are totally evil as well.

[@SSecularScholar]

Aivaras Braziulis If you happen to be a Xenos, yes. He may have be cuddly with the humans, but if you were Xenos, no mercy, even if you were a baby and your race was not a threat.

[@klblissdish]

I love when you paraphrase the dialogue :-D

[@GreenspudTrades]

This was a great analysis. I've always thought an interesting series they could do is to follow a set of characters not in Starfleet, conducting some sort of important mission of their own, but frequently run into Federation ships who constantly stick their nose in their business and make a bureaucratic mess of things under the guise of idealism or trying to help.

[@SuspiciousKoala]

Thank you Steve! I was looking forward to this discussion from you! Honestly, I think it connects with the ideas you mentioned before, how parts of the fanbase are "surprised" at how political Star Trek can be, commentary-wise. Those same people are fine with the flaws being shown as other peoples' flaws, ignoring their own. I think that plays a lot into the dislike for the current focus on how fallible StarFleet and the Federation are. It's social commentary on the modern era of politics and distrust of institutions. I'm of the opinion that the modern series haven't gone far enough. I wanted Picard to discuss the fact that the Federation was falling from its principles and ideals. I wanted more discussion of how and why a society so "good" could fall so far. Instead, in my opinion at least, they basically just waved their hands and made everything better in a *very* abridged way. I'm not going to say those people are wrong to have their opinion, but I have to wonder why they're so against the commentary aspect of Trek, which is as old as the series is.

[@scottbennie8299]

In the Pale Moonlight. The darkest ep.

[@johnlewis8156]

Great video! I have noticed lots of moments all throughout the trek shows. I was really happy to see someone who looks like me in ds9 but when sisko posined a planet to get the marque and then later got the Romulans in the war by trading a few lives and a officers moral's, that's when I knew that even great people can do horrible things to do what they think is right. (It also softened up to the antics of Janeway in Voyager). We gotta understand that the goal is to be morally just. And we will always fall short. The hope is that we will have the right people in the right places to keep us from the darkest sides of ourselves. I'm glad the new trek stuff is dark. Pulling back the curtain on what things we are capable of means we can address thoes short comings and do better for the future.

[@jrbaskind]

This is very insightful.

[@Kikilang60]

When you go to conventions, mostly you have actors speaking. There was story that was kicked around each season of Next Generation, after Roddenberry died. The story was called Aladdin. Basically, there was this research facillity around black hole. Que goes to Picard, and want to know what the Federation is doing there, because he doesn't know. What's happening at the reseacher base is hidden from the Continum, by the shifting nature of reality of the area around the black hole. Picard makes a deal with Que, and says he will look into it, if Que promise to leave the Federation alone for a while. Picard says, "I don't promise you anything. I'll just look into it." Picard askes around, and he is invited to the research facility. Picard gets to the facility, and find that the Borg are there. Picard is insensed, and demand to know why Starfleet is working with the Borg. Picard finds out, that the Borg, wants to join Starfleet. The say, conflict is useless. The Borg agree to let those few people who want to leave the collective, go. They have already turned some worlds back. It's then, that Picard finds out, millions of people, and whole worlds join the collective willing, because the Borg are immortal. Also, many cultures, find the Borg a lesser of two evils. Picard hates the Borg, but he talks to them, and finds they are just people too. Picard still doesn't trust the Borg. Picard, also finds out that the Borg have been troubled by the Que Continum. The Borg conflict with Starfleet has been very damaging for the Borg, and the first contact was trick played on the Borg, by Que. It was a pit bull fight, for Ques entertainment. It's then Picard finds out, Starfleet, and the Borg have captured a member of the Continum, and they are using him, to gain the power of the Que Continuim. At first, Picard is happy, that they are not defenseless against the Que. Then he finds out, he was bait. Que, was hidding inside Picard, and Que is captured. Now they have two members of the Continum. Then the Borg go to Picard, and tell him, "Starfleet is torturing the ques, and they are using their power, not for defense, but for it's own means." The Borg have agreed not to do things like this. Their deal to be a better Borg, is sincere. The capture of the Que, is angainst Their beliefs now. With the aid of Picard, the Borg release the Que, and leave Starfleet. "We have evolved" The Borg tells Picard. Picard realizes Starfleet isn't that much better then the Borg, and now, maybe not as moral. The show ends with Picard meeting Que, and he has been kicked out of the continum. The continum is in a dizzy of fear. They are no longer what they once where, they have just been taken down a notch. Que tell Picard, "I was looking for excitment, because I was bored. Now, I'm no longer safe. It's no fun being honestly frighten." The show ends with the Borg have the moral hight ground, and Starfleet not being so clean. Every year they wanted to do the show, but it would disrupt the series. Then they said, it could be our last episode. It never happened, and it became one of the dozens of story lines that never happened.

[@shepwillner7507]

That sounds like a great story, a variation of "Q Who?" Now if only Q gets captured by somebody, e.g. the Kazon or Species 872, or somebody else from the Delta Quadrant and became prey... How exactly does a predator kill a member of the Q Continuum if he or she really isn't there? Well, I wouldn't miss Q--a truly annoying villain like Gul Dukat and Weyoune.

[@peenworm]

The maquis situation shows how Picard's starfleet is much worse. The Federation-cardassian treaty being the least bad option out of nothing but bad options. The federation halting evacuation because a dozen and change worlds decided they were too racist and the federation bent to their demands to be maximum racist is qualitatively different

[@HW-sw5gb]

You could make the exact same statement about the evacuation. You let the leftover refugees on Romulus fend for themselves, which is obviously horrible, but you know the but the Federation will be maintained for the foreseeable future. Or you have dozens of worlds, each individually with multiple times larger populations than the remaining refugees, leave the Federation. If some members start to succeed, who is to say how far it’ll go? Even if it does just stop there, it’ll weaken the Federation overall, and potentially leave everyone involved (both the Federation and those worlds) vulnerable to the aggression of the Klingons and other hostile powers. If the Federation starts to lose foot, whose to say it won’t cause a snowball effect that causes the entire agreement to come tumbling down. At the least, once things do stabilize again, it’d probably ultimately result in a new, much more volatile and aggressive galactic order. Any political change that leaves the Federation lower on the balance of power could ultimately lead to a culmination tragedies and wars that’d kill billions more than otherwise. It’s not surprising that majority of member worlds and majority of citizens decided to call off the fleet within the Federation.

[@Democlis]

You forgot that Starfleet did the whole negotiation BEHIND the colonists back, they never asked for their opinions or insights, and they never brought them to the negotiation tables, they decided unilaterally what would happen without the presence of a single member of those colonies to advocate for their side and hen showed u one day saying they had to be moved, that is just condescending. Even if you argue that it would not make a difference in the end results if they had included the colonists in the negotiation would have shown them that Starfleet cared for and respected them. Many tend to dismiss the whole process and just look at the problem and the end results but HOW you do something matters.

[@peenworm]

@@HW-sw5gb "dozens of worlds" out of hundreds though. It's a naff dynamic to say there might, maybe, possibly, theoretically be a worse outcome to helping the romulans, but that's never demonstrated, so the moral/practical dilemma isn't present the way it was with the cardassians.

[@Tragisk100]

Great episode steve

[@gayboyfriend27]

I LOVE what you do!!!

[@Beacuzz]

This feels a lot like Garak's character arc. Or more accurately the whole Cardassian arc.

[@trekjudas]

Ok, you know how Starship Troopers is basically a propaganda film for their Federation? What if the Star Trek shows and movies we've been seeing are the same? What if its all been propaganda for what is in fact a very dubious interstellar empire!?

[@CaptainPikeachu]

I would love it if they did something like that, but fandom would probably lose its mind 😄

[@starshiptrooper2354]

Do you want to learn more?

[@Dorian_sapiens]

@@starshiptrooper2354 😄

[@Pantherblack]

THIS was the Mirror Universe all along.

[@inquirohaqq1472]

That sounds like a great alt-mirror episode.

[@davidhood6967]

I felt like the bitterness and falling out between Jean-Luc and Starfleet was completely within the character depicted for Picard in the next generation. Two instances specifically come to mind. The first was in The offspring when data was ordered to hand over lal to Starfleet and Picard refuses to allow data to do this. At that moment, he was ready to stake his career on the human rights principles for data, Lal, and other sinthetics to come. the other thing that comes to mind is Picard being forced to relinquish command of his ship, being sent on a mission based on bad intelligence, getting captured by the cardasians, and then tortured for days on end. I imagine in the off screen therapy required for Picard to bounce back from that, there was some bitterness towards Starfleet.

[@johnnybikesalot]

"Evil must be opposed" That episode was awfully dark. People didn't die on TV like that very often back in the 90s.

[@thomasackerman5399]

The Federation and Starfleet were hurt pretty badly by the synth attack on Mars, which destroyed the ten thousand transports that were going to be used for the evacuation armada. So between that and the attack by the synths, it's small wonder that both things were cancelled.

[@SiriusMined]

I'm thinking of canceling my patreon, then reinstating it, so you'll read my name again ;-)

[@mattlavenz4099]

Hey, it worked for me, even though it was accidental. There was a problem on how my subscription renewed payment each month.

[@neiloliver7950]

SirisMined, thank you Siris

[@OCON06]

You bring up some good points. I may not like the focus on this dark side of the coin of Starfleet but yes, I see what you mean. Btw, I Really liked your synopsis of the episode and movie. The humor you throw in is Great. 😊

[@grifonecoronato]

Looking at this from an in-world perspective, I think much of the utopian vision for Star Trek could be due to the fact that the point-of-view for most of the series are star ship crews in the middle of space. They make up isolated communities with no scarcity (replicators, etc.), and duties to keep everyone busy, repeating to each other the mantra that they are evolved and better than the way things used to be.

[@daveherres3374]

Art has always mirrored reality and we are living thru some tumultuous times.

[@lloroshastar6347]

Tumultuous is one way to put it, I call it terrifying. As if the world wars and the cold war weren't bad enough, people still need their regular dose of misery to keep those of us just trying to live our lives from day to day on our toes.

[@kaigreen5641]

I will never understand how The Federation won a war but had to give away territory...

[@Kairamek]

Both sides gave up territory. They were more or less redrawing the border to be a straighter line.

[@nathanbrown8680]

@@Kairamek It's space. Any border that doesn't involve jointly administered star systems is almost equally viable. They took away the livelihoods of millions on both sides of the border not for defensible borders, but merely for a prettier map. I call that evil. If there is ever a time for appeasement it's before the war while you prepare and even then Neville Chamberlin became a byword for cowardice. What the Federation did was like negotiating with Germany in after WWII and not only letting the NDSP remain in power but letting them keep Czechoslovakia in exchange for East Prussia for the sake of "nice borders." And the Cardassians were written as close to the NDSP as the writers could get without falling afoul of German censorship laws. The systemic racial superiority complex, the forced labor camps, the reckless militarism; all of that's cribbed from Germany.

[@alanpennie8013]

Who says The Federation won? Looks more like a draw or a partial Cardassian victory. The write up on Memory Alpha indicates that the attitude of The Federation was defensive throughout. The did not aim to defeat The Cardassians but to induce them to cease attacking Federation outposts.

[@TheMsLourdes]

Great points, Steve. I hope the real life point being made doesn't fly over heads. because both points are spot on. Entirely.

[@ldkellandshaw]

When you said that the next topic was 'darkest episode' my mind jumped in Pale Moonlight before I even saw the picture behind your head. There are many to choose from, but from a personal darkness standpoint, ITPM is my number 1.

[@jacobdrj101]

Did I miss any reference to Eric Pressman and The Pegasus?

[@kaitlyn__L]

You did not.

[@jacobdrj101]

@@kaitlyn__L OK. I think Eric Pressman and the phase cloak showed an even earlier systemic institutional mean streak in Trek in the TNG era... Maybe even shades of Section 31...

[@lizjones2710]

I'm surprised that you didn't mention how when Starfleet learned about what section 31 did to the founders, they just accepted it.

[@kaitlyn__L]

Well it's horrible and of course we don't condone it! Oh, a cure? Hmm, no, they might get a hold of it, and of course they are our enemies in the war. It would be terrible optics to provide aid to our enemies in the middle of the war, after all!

[@gurthus9540]

I dislike the way they treat the murder of all founders as a bad thing. I don’t think genocide is bad if literally all targets except one want to taking over the galaxy and murder billions

[@Shoddragon]

I mean, that was the plan with the borg in TNG with the virus lmfao. The Dominion was an aggressive, amoral force intent on subjugating the entire Alpha Quadrant. The Federation accepting Section 31's actions is ethically debatable but it's not shady or objectively immoral.

[@joesmyth88]

absolutely on point!

[@Professor_Scott]

Another brillant commentary, Steve, and the talk of "ideals" was probably a little too close to home to those who dislike "Picard" and "Disco".