• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wil’s got a point, guys.

    Also, yes get a bigger fence, but also fuck the Prime Directive whenever you feel like it, apparently.

    • Stamets@startrek.websiteOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To be fair they wanted to execute a child for tripping. Fuck the Prime Directive in that case and fuck that planet. There should very much be a clause for protecting your own citizens provided they’re literal children.

      • CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Its definitely a case of “um, yeah, your application to ever join the Federation has been denied, pending you not having incredibly stupid laws”.

        • Melllvar@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which is a real thing in canon. Bajor’s application was put in jeopardy when they briefly reinstated a caste system, which violated Federation equality rules.

            • VindictiveJudge@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              1 year ago

              They’re actually a republic. The Vedek Assembly has a lot of influence, but they’re fully separate from the Provisional Government. And they only have that much influence because the vast majority of the population follows the Bajoran faith. Think of the Assembly like the Vatican - powerful when everyone cares (Pope during the Middle Ages), but virtually powerless when nobody does (Pope now).

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        provided they’re literal children

        Yeah, you could just remove that part. There’s no sense on holding the non-intervention principle so high that you comply with every crazy request from the natives.

        • Stamets@startrek.websiteOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, no, it must be left in because if you stick with your part of “every crazy request” then it completely ignores the entire spirit and purpose of the Prime Directive. Starfleet isn’t the be all and end all of morality. Their decisions affect them and the people within it but they’re not “Team America: Space Police.” They don’t go around judging which laws are good and which aren’t. ESPECIALLY when that perspective comes from them and them alone. Different cultures have different beliefs. Ignoring them and imposing your own on everyone is imperalistic as hell and directly against what Starfleet stands for.

          Adding a clause to children works for me because the only purpose is to protect the children. The Prime Directive is still able to stand and work between cultures but this way Starfleet is able to say “Our cultures matter too and our culture says children whos brains aren’t done developing shouldn’t be executed for a mistake.” Sure it’s still fucked up that they’d do it to adults but they’re adults. They made their decision and their decision led to them doing stupid shit on an alien planet, fucking around and finding out.

          • marcos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not complying with requests is not the same as imposing your morality. Nopping out of the contact with some population because they believe your people must be killed won’t destroy their culture.

            But then, yeah, the show would have to contain hard decisions, and would be completely different from Star Trek (at least the newer ones).

            • Stamets@startrek.websiteOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              If you want to make a point you can do so without needing to bash newer Treks for absolutely no reason. Just tired of this petty behavior. I’m out. I’ve got no time for this nonsense.

              • marcos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                To be fair, I would probably hate a series like Star Trek but with the hard decisions. (I don’t like TOS and it’s only minimally less utopian.)

                But I’m looking into this one. I have the impression it’s a comedy?

                • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It has comedic elements, but I wouldn’t call it a comedy. It’s hard for me to describe honestly. Perhaps an homage to trek? A lot of trek fans enjoyed it, some going to far as to say it was “more trek” than discovery.

                  They also have a lot of trek cast members make guest appearances, which is always a treat.

          • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah but the principle of it is to let them evolve on their own, when you’re already on their planet and they try to kill one of you then it’s different rules.

            If it wasn’t then the romulans could just announce their new law makes being human illegal and Starfleet would just have to power down their shields and let them kill us all.

            • Stamets@startrek.websiteOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I think you’ve considerably misunderstood what the Prime Directive is… It doesn’t just apply to unevolved people. It also applies to civilizations that have warp too.

              Also literally no, that is not what it means and is an insane comparison.

              • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                No you’ve just got it compartmentalized in your head into happy little feel good boxes because you don’t want to think about the actual complexity of reality (well fictional reality)

                It’s insane not because it’s a bad comparison but because it makes clear the insanity in your worldview (or galactic view I guess)

                • Stamets@startrek.websiteOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  No. You just don’t know what you’re talking about lol

                  Might as well be listening to a Republican scream about climate change. Same ignorant/uneducated energy lmao

      • Stamets@startrek.websiteOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wrong. I dunno why so many people falsely believe this. The Prime Directive applies to EVERY civilization. Not just pre-warp ones. By that logic, Picard wouldn’t have had a problem taking Wesley in that episode because those people had warp access.