this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
15 points (100.0% liked)

Star Trek Social Club

10754 readers
151 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.

New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?

Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.

2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.

3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.

4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.

5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.

6 Keep on-topicAll busmittions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.

7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.

Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"
12-12 LD 5x09 "Fissure Quest"
12-19 LD 5x10 "The New Next Generation"
01-24 Film "Section 31"

Episode Discussion Archive

In Production

Strange New Worlds (TBA)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)

In Development

Untitled theatrical film

Untitled comedy series

Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.

Allied Discord Server

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
15
The Stars of Star Trek: Section 31 Know Why You're Nervous About the Movie (gizmodo.com)
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

“The people in the Federation exist in a bubble of safety and happiness, but there are outsiders to that sphere of the Federation—surrounded by the Dominion, the Founders, the Klingons [of this era], the [Romulan secret police] Tal Shiar, that don’t have the same moral relativity that we do. They would see [the Federation] destroyed to fit their moral relativism,” Kazinsky argued. “People need to understand why people don’t like the idea [of Section 31], but it hasn’t changed the idea.”

This kind of logic implies that stooping down to barbarism is OK as long as you are hypocritical about it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

I agree, that logic has been used to justify atrocities throughout history, including right now. It's exactly what Israel says about Palestine, China about the Uyghurs, Trump about Mexican immigrants. And it's completely antithetical to Star Trek's values.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

To be honest, that's always been the core argument.

I don't know where the line is - obviously, the morphogenic virus in DS9 was beyond the pale, but is it wise to expect hostile neighbours to be won over by sunshine and rainbows?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

There's a very clear line between having a military and intelligence services and having a MKULTRA-era-CIA-in-space.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 17 hours ago

Go on...

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m disappointed that they clearly don’t. The same tired justifications which amount to the ideals of Star Trek are a luxury made possible by hard men doing bad things in the dark.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah. Reading the article, Section 31 seems great if you just want to just shit on everything else in the franchise. Nope, not for me.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

@toast

I mean, in DS9, section 31 were clearly villains, right?

Not heroes in the shadow. This is what they told themselves in order to justify their shit.

@ThirdMoonOfPluto

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what Section 31 is supposed to be. Sloan wasn't a good guy. 31 actively tried to commit genocide.

The idea behind them is that arguments of ends justifying the means and "getting dirty" to preserve higher ideals is morally, philosophically, and practically bankrupt. The Federation didn't need 31 to win the war, and in fact, their methods would have made it much worse. Section 31 as a plot device exists to show us that there will always be those looking to use higher ideals to support terrible actions, and we must be constantly vigilant against them.

It truly pains me how that message has been twisted, and people think Section 31 are not only good guys but also cool.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The Federation didn’t need 31 to win the war

Do we know that for certain? The cure to the virus was actually pretty fundamental to the Female Changeling ordering the Jem'Hadar to stand down. She refused to surrender until Odo linked with her and cured her.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

i think that the existence of the disease is more of a maguffin than the point that the solution was achieved without section 31… the “problem” could have been any number of unrelated things (eg some spacial anomaly threatening the founders for some reason, etc) and the fact that it’s s31 is more an interesting plot device to create other narratives around, rather than degrading the ultimate point

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What, then, is the message in the episode where Sisko "would do it all again" concerning assassinating a political rival and faking evidence to bring the Romulans into the war against the Dominion? It's an example where I can still see the show trying to say "sometimes good people must do bad things for the good of all" that doesn't even concern Section 31.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

episodes shouldn’t be assumed to be exploring the same moral or philosophical points… it’s very difficult to explore complex logical arguments through innuendo whilst also maintaining a consistent grounding for all of them

and also, the decision is left up to the viewer: by presenting situations that both (perhaps) cross, and do not cross the line it allows us to form our own opinions, rather than the shows writers convince us of their idea of what’s right and wrong

people are fallible: the shows writers, and the characters. in some of that inconsistency, we can form our own ideas of what we believe

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

@astronaut_sloth

This is actually, how I understood it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Sorry if I wasn't clear; I didn't mean to make it sound like an attack or a lecture. Section 31 is just one of my pet peeves in Trek for a while. We are in agreement! 😊

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Villains or heroes isn't the issue. It's the argument that we need a group that doesn't play by the rules that apply to the rest of society that I find problematic.

Shouldn't we strive for a world in which the rules really do apply to all? Can't we hope to conceive of a set of laws standards by which we should all be judged? Isn't the world of Star Trek meant in some way to be aspirational, rather than just a reflection of what we have now?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

We live in a world that has ~~walls~~ federation worlds, and those federation worlds have to be guarded.

Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Barclay?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They were definitely villains in the series...but I don't think DS9 ever made a strong case that they weren't necessary (nor do I think they were trying to).

Right up until the end, the morphogenic virus was critical to the end of the war.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

@ValueSubtracted

I wanted to watch the series again, anyway. It's been a time.

As I remember it, they left it rather ambiguous, which is the actual point.

If moral choices were easy, we wouldn't have to think about them too much.

Yes, the virus ended the war, but at what price?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

I completely agree.

I've often thought that there must have been plenty of Section 31 operations that didn't rise to the level of, you know, genocide, and that those operations were likely more ambiguous.

I'm hoping that whatever they're up to in this movie is more in that vein - almost certainly illegal, but probably more ethically murky?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Villains who's engineered virus forced the Dominion to the negotiating table... just saying.

"Good and evil isn't as black and white as TNG portrayed it" is kinda DS9's whole deal.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

~~inb4 someone on lemmy says a single piece of media they haven't even seen is responsible for "shitting all over the entire franchise"~~

EDIT: nvm