@@TriAngulumStudiosAudioComics just saying it like it is - "facts don't lie" after all 😀 Also, kudos for tackling these objections head on, I've really enjoyed your approach in the last 3 vids
Eddington nailed it with this speech ‘ I know you. I was like you once. But then I opened my eyes. Open your eyes, Captain. Why is the Federation so obsessed with the Maquis? We've never harmed you. And yet we're constantly arrested and charged with terrorism. Starships chase us through the Badlands, and our supporters are harassed and ridiculed. Why? Because we've left the Federation, and that's the one thing you can't accept. Nobody leaves Paradise, everyone should want to be in the Federation! Hell, you even want the Cardassians to join. You're only sending them replicators because one day, they can take their rightful place on the Federation Council. You know, in some ways, you're even worse than the Borg. At least they tell you about their plans for assimilation. You're more insidious, you assimilate people - and they don't even know it.
I really think as fans of Star Trek, we all seem to forget something from time to time. As lofty as the ideals of Star Trek and the United federation of planets are, in reality they are entertainment. And if those lofty ideals have to be tarnished or outright broken from time to time to create that entertainment value the writers will be more than happy to oblige. Plus as fans it gives us the added advantage of being able to sit around and discuss which ship, captain, and crew disobeyed the prime directive the most times.
"Jameson does something bad and is promoted to Admiral by Starfleet for a good long time." Janeway: "See, CONTINUITY is on my side! Now hand me my Rear Admiral rank!"
@@TheDuck632 Beer? No, hold my coffee. (Janeway was/is a well known caffeine addict after all.) (I mean, wasn't there an episode where she ignored the Prime Directive, snuck onto a planet and held a few people at phaser point to threaten planetwide bombardment, all just to get parts to repair her coffee machine?? Pretty sure I remember that one, at the least it's part of my head cannon. 😵)
Most are confusing the ideal of Starfleet vs the reality of Starfleet. The ideal is this utopian society where everyone is "evolved" to be about the pursuit of self fulfillment. The reality is that sometimes down right terrible acts are needed to ensure "paradise" remains so. This is really shown in Sisko's character arc, as he goes from idealistic to realistic over the course of the series. Picard does this as well, although it shatters him a bit more when he is confronted with it. Nail hit on the head squarely.
This is why I love ds9 because it shows the gritty undertones of what Starfleet is capable of doing. The writers had freedom to portray Starfleet in a more realistic approach than Gene would have allowed it in the original series or TNG. You are 100% right about the prime directive being disregarded.
yeah I really didn't get that. a planet in "Federation space" that already had people living on it for 300 yrs. at least that lady called out Picard for a directive that didn't prohibit spying on people
i think the meaning of Movie 9 was that the paradise they thought the federation would be is facing reality, and those in leadership were corrupted. A danger any free society has. and it showed that even if the leadership is compromised, the middle ranks keep it all together.Nothign like "i was just following orders". compared to the past and today, thats progress.but it was more a testamonie for picrads ethics than for the federations,thats true.
Personally, I think it just flows with the times. In the 60's we weren't as cynical about the politicians that governed us. As time marched on and people became more conspiracy-minded, and times got darker, then so did the star trek franchise.
RCR PT cruiser episode strangely explained it. Star Trek is Modern and New Trek is post modern. Modern is about building greatness. Post modern is the realization that some can destroy your hard work easily. So there is no point to building greatness as someone will easily destroy it with a nuke when you try to exercise your greatness. Much like a body builder attacking an old guy that defends himself an automatic gun. The body builder waisted his time bulking up as any gun will kill him just as fast as any man that didn’t bulk up.
If anybody thinks the Federation itself is some sort of utopia everywhere, one need only point at Tasha Yar's childhood and ask whether a utopia would allow part of itself to fall into sheer anarchy like that. And if there's one place like that within the Federation, you can bet on there being more.
yeah.. 'officially' Turkana IV wasn't part of the federation in the 2360's, but it apparently had a functional government before 2310, and membership of the federation prior to that. it seems really unlikely that the federation would just stand aside and allow the planet to collapse into anarchy. especially given the examples from the video, where the federation violated the whole "leave other cultures to themselves" aspect of the prime directive for cultures with far less connection than the Turkana IV inhabitants. the idealized good starfleet so many claim would have sent peacekeepers to try and maintain order and rebuild the government, as well as technical aid to help fix any infrastructure issues. but nope, starfleet and the federation just said "good luck dodging the rape gangs" and allowed a world to declare independence and cut off all contact.
Also my analysis of TNG-era Trek was always that starship captains are Starfleet putting their "best foot forward" and showing off how moral and good they were to the outside world, while behind the scenes the admiralty was always being kinda shady and making tough (and often totally immoral and contradictory-to-their-values) decisions. You can see it in Picard's face every time Nechayev comes to visit.
So what I take away from this is that Q was right about humanity whenever he turned up and started judging humans. I say this cause Starfleet and the UFP always appears to majority humans on screen instead of the various and vast combination of races that are allegedly part of the federation.
I wouldn't call Q the best judge based on Q's past "pranks". Learn from what you just heard: this is real life, no one and nothing is pure - everything is bad to some degree whether cat, dog, human or Tellarite - you just can't use anyone as an arbiter of justice. Q might be "better" and humanity is a work-in-progress.
They show up mostly as humans for two reasons. 1. the Federation is based on Earth, so there would be far more humans around than other species. 2. It would be too expensive to have that many aliens around on the shows.
At the end where you say "you can have an opinion but you don't have the right to shove it down anyone's throat", You are absolutely correct! I just wish the rest of society would get that through their heads!
I for one like that the UFP is imperfect. We should work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity....err....the galaxy. We wouldnt be able to do that if society is "perfect".
Maybe Starfleet promoted Captain Janeway to get her out of a ship. She was probably seen as a hero by the public, and prosecuting her would have been a public relations nightmare.
“All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.” John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton (10 January 1834 - 19 June 1902) English historian and moralist. Reality is always a struggle between the idealist and those who lust after power. For most people, their only hope is that they do not get caught in-between when they are struggling.
and it was a trap Too! Both a way to embarrass the UFP\starfleet, possibly gain good intel if picard broke, and set themselves up for a retaliatory war that the Cardassians had built up for, planned and were ready to excute.
I have always disagreed with the idea that Starfleet isn't a military. They have big ships, with big guns, the Naval style hierarchy, military JAGS and they are always the ones who answer the call when war comes to the Federation. They are a military, with a science wing.
I’m not one to hate anything within this awesome channel, nor do I hate the narrator at all. You go out of your way to bring us all information we’re looking for, clarifying certain aspects and points, & you bring truth to each wonderful episode! I deeply appreciate & respect everything you do to bring us enjoyment & knowledge within our Star Trek Universe. You’ve always been noble, honorable, intelligent, humble, & brilliant; & you continue to do so. I, for one, am grateful for this wonderful & cool channel, & for you to go out of your way for us. Thank you for doing so, & sharing everything we may or may not know about all things Star Trek. A fan & friend, Michael
This is very true. Some of things you mentioned, I did not pay attention to when first watching and rewatched those episodes. It's good to revisit those series to discuss what happened, was it morally sound, etc. The more I think about all forms of "imperfect" government is shady as long as it benefit them and their cause. Great job as always to bring up thought provoking questions. Keep up the great works.
Thank you very much Robert! I firmly believe that bringing up these types of things and open a forum for discussion OF those things, allows us to better understand the human condition :)
@@TriAngulumStudiosAudioComics You're very welcome. Exactly. If we don't discuss them, we are doomed to repeat mistakes and miss a rare opportunity to reflect and learn from them.
It has always been too easy for people with questionable motives and morals to gain rank and influence in Statfleet or the federation. Even if the Federation as a whole isn't shady it is too easy for those people to gain too much power. Which is a flaw of the federation itself. It allows people like Leyton, or Satie to abuse the power they gain.
I think it's more that star trek in the past was light hearted with a bad seed showing up every once in a while. While in new trek that's all there is.
yes but television and arguably our culture have moved on from light hearted space romps into more mature, serialised fare with deep weighty matters at the heart of the shows. Light hearted isnt as thought provoking I would argue. But again, thats a matter of opinion
Daniel Gritty and dark is not the same as mature, and light hearted is not the same as immature. The older Trek dealt with weighty topics all the time.
I think this is the nature of a franchise that had built on layers of detail and complexity for many series and movies. All aspects of the universe have gotten darker as each series progressed and built on the lore of the previous series'. Change is always scoffed at - I remember reading about when TNG came out and people were writing to the studio saying how they have ruined the franchise. Similar things happened with DS9 and it's long ark format, Voyager, Enterprise and now the new shows. Some portions of fandoms don't like change - static is good but change is necessary for a franchise to grow. That said, the current era of trek is dark and maybe they can use the story ark to take it towards lighter/brighter times.
That was nice in universe explanation, but I believe there should be a also an explanation for these shady Starfleet deals from writers perspective. For example in ST VI it was in the plot that some admirals wanted war with the Klingons. In Star Trek TNG some admirals were more like a villain of the week, without to much thinking about consequences before or after like with Jameson, especially since it was Season 1 of TNG which was infamous for its writing. That point of view behind scenes and out of the universe would be also interesting. Nice video as always!
i've noticed that throughout all the series, they seem to have so many admirals and high ranking officers with bad morals or that are willing to break the rules to fit their needs
The Wizard's First Rule. People will believe what they want to believe. If someone, with their mind set, sees something that bolsters their view they will latch on to it and not let go.
Emeniar/Vendicar...wow. Never thought of that one. I can't argue with that one. Nicely done! Shady Ambassador. Didn't see that one coming. Peace and long life, TriAngulum!
Another great video, excellent points. Also, let's remember how a few starfleet personnel conspired to block peace between the federation and klingon empire
I agree with you on almost all of your points except with rapture. Sisko is speaking as the Emissary of the Prophets in that episode when he tells them not to join the UFP. And starfleet are very much aware of how much stock the Bajorans put into that, so they do follow the prime directive, in the respect that although Bajor is petitioning to join, and thus would abide by Federation rules, they still have sovereign status so the wishes of the Bajorans had to be respected. just my viewpoint.
What a breath of fresh air. I came here from Overload Doomcock, and among others, all they could do is say how Patrick Stewart ruined Picard, but no one can give a specific instance. Thank you!
To be honest i like the fact that Starfleed and United Federation of Planets are not 100% good and even they make you question their actions it adds some realism and to be honest not all fictional and real governments are 100% good.
Amen. However, I think this also shows that their is no true "Paradise" outside whatever your higher power is. In physical form, it does not exist. People can strive to be the perfect human being, organization, UFP, but there will always be flaws. That's how I take it, at it's core it 90% does the "right thing" but from time to time rules need to be broken
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”― Edmund Burke. Yes Star fleet has a history of getting their hands dirty but more often than not the reasons are for the greater good, and whether its seen as such at that particular moment are often unimportant and are left for history to decide.
Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth, sometimes people don't want to see the truth, and sometimes people don't want to experience the truth.........
Bottom line, the Trek of the 60's-90's is gone and it is not coming back. Each show since TNG ended has been more and more different than the previous show. You can either accept that old Trek is gone forever and give newer trek a try, or watch endless reruns of the older shows on Netflix. Personally I like having some Trek that carries on the lore than none at all.
Retired, Full bird Colonel OSS Shado Unit Retired. All of your obsverations are spot on. Just one little problem. Star Fleet is not shady. As we used to say in the OSS. "America says may things. Believes some of it, and acts inaccordance with even less." Or better quote. "All accidents are just that accidents, espically if they are made to appear so."
I would go a bit further: the whole Federation is shady, since the federation at least tolerated the things Starfleet has done if not actively ordered them to do them, if we assume that Starfleet is controlled by a democratically elected officials (the President or the council of the Federation or a similar institution), which should be the case in a utopian society.
Some of those points I agree with, but Starfleet is always a good orgization that can sometimes be manipulated by ambasidors or other parts of the UFP.
He literally listed cover-ups that needed to be orchestrated by Starfleet's own admiralty. Starfleet might be, by and large, a good organisation, but let's not kid ourselves that given a choice between the pragmatic and the idealistic choice, they usually pick the former.
Once an officer reaches admiral in Starfleet they seem to be corrupt and do alot of shady dealings it seems, and some captains do as well, and yet these instances are probably never noticed, with porbable log entries being encrypted and classified from the history books. Starfleet is seen as a utopia, but behind that utopia there is alot of darkness too, you cannot have one without the other
Was it Admiral Dougherty in “Star Trek: Insurrection” who was willing to forcibly remove an entire planet’s population just so Starfleet could have access to a fountain of youth? Shady, indeed. And Picard even calls him out on it!
As usual it's a fine video with a clear point. Don't allow that bunch of haters of your perspective to bring you down. It's just their social bias in combination with their own private flaws they're trying to compensate by their complaints. Star Trek delivers an optimistic perspective and encourages people to do their part in achieving such a future. But good science-fiction also mirrors the contemporary reality of its audience. So it requires shady aspects here and there. And since such things are very likely to lack time and resources for the production, flaws are inevitable too. 8)
The only point i disagree with in this video is about the crashed Dominion ship Capturing of Enemy Ships during war time is a well established practice or even if you don't accept that there are also maritime salvage laws that in in effect in international law now and have been for hundreds of years that could logically be extended to space as Starfleet is essentially a navy but yeah everything else seems pretty spot on to me excellent video
The one and ONLY thing that according to some perpectives that made it not was the fact the Bak'ku were secretly warp capable, but even then THAT provision only covers making contact in the first place. Non-interferance in the internal affairs of a government applies rather they are pre-industrial or they have quantum-slipstream-transwarp-hyperspace-temporal engines.
Sometimes I wonder if what the haters actually dislike about newer shows is that we have better lighting, sets, and cameras these days, removing the need to flood the set with light and giving us better dynamic range without blowing out the picture.
Fantastic to keep hearing strong arguments, with cited facts to explain the events presented in your videos. Sad to say the naysayers of New Trek will always have fingers in ears behaviour when it comes to common sense or facts. We say they're free to not watch it, but to have them constantly poo on it with mad, directionless rhetoric just irks me.
In reality, ANY large government is going to have some sort corruption within it. The question is does it also have a police force an anti-corruption department. UFP seems to be singularly lacking such.
It seems from the latest trailer, that it wasnt exactly decay, but a "GREAT burn" cosmic event... My guess would be something to do with subspace which would make warp travel impossible... Thus Discovery and her spore drive could begin to reassemble the Federation....
The reason that they promoted Janeway was that then she wouldn't be able to affect things directly like she could on a Bridge of a Starship. If you read into the books she wasn't directly promoted to Admiral that took 18 months with 9 of those months being debriefings every day and explaining the modifications that they made to Voyager. Then after the 9 months of debriefing, the entire crew except for Chakotay, Paris, and Seven got 10 weeks of leave. Then she was put on as commander of Task Force 29 when the borg came through in 2379, one of three task forces against the borg. Her task force consisted of Voyager, 2 Luna class vessels, 2 Cheyenne class, and 7 Miranda class vessels which would later be augmented by 2 Vorcha Class Cruisers, and 10 birds of prey. Then be augmented again by Squadron 3, which consisted of the USS Robinson and Excalibur [two named Galaxy class] and a further non-named one, two Akira's and three Sabers. After her run-in with the borg only then did she get promoted to Admiral because throughout some of the novelizations Starfleet had to make a choice about the crew of Voyager. Thus, when it was decided that they should promote Janeway to Admiral and scatter the crew among other ships with Tuvok on the Titan, B'Elanna on the Robinson as Chief Engineer, along with the junior crews on other ships the only people still left on Voyager of the TV crew were Chakotay as Captain, and Tom Paris as XO of Voyager.
It's sad to see that you are right. However most of the old trek instances I always interpreted as being due to a rogue few and not representative of the whole. Pressman for instance says he has friends in high places, he doesn't say he was under orders, suggesting a rogue operation. Sisko had some kind of political protection in being the Emissary of the Prophets. Then Janeway was in an unusual situation and didn't have the option of asking for help or permission from star fleet, which I think weighed heavily on the crew, knowing they were on their own. The biggest problem is Section 31 who have apparently been around since the beginning, but no one knew. Maybe they were behind a lot of the shady stuff all along...but they are supposed to be "non-existent" and only slip up in DS9. Discovery portrays them like just another branch of star fleet (like star fleet intelligence), and everyone knows about them, which for a "non-existent" organisation seems a little odd.
In TOG you can argue most of your examples were either the actions of an individual or basic spycraft. Now after that the series did venture into the dirty sides of politics. Early on it was also assumed that there was a level of technology that the Prime Directive applied to.
Starfleet, specifically random admirals of the week, were usually foils for the main cast/stars, all the way back to TOS. So Starfleet being 'shady' is not a surprise to me.
I was ready to be annoyed. Then you proved your point so outstandingly. It is Starfleet's flaws that should motivate us to be better. Food for thought, when thinking about these Captains and Admirals: What would Ensign Kim do?
Absolutely correct with this content. I have basically thought the same myself, and if any viewer tries to use misdirection to divert the subject matter, then to me they don’t understand Star Trek. The Prime Directive is a bit of subjective legislation at best.
I have to be honest, this is the most realistic approach I've seen in regards to Star Trek and the hypocrisy of fanboys/girls of Gene's supposed benevolent UFP and Starfleet. The only problem, I do counter your statement that "Facts Don't Lie". Facts most certainly do lie, it just depends on who's facts your listening to, and who stands the most to lose or gain when they're skewed off-center. This is has been seen since episode one of TOS. Otherwise, my friend, your video was spot on!
i love the new trek shows they are my favorite trek series and for me i like the changes both to the visual and universe wise retcons and the additions made from characters to ships to planets it just adds to the overal universe
As with your video on Star Trek inconsistencies, you are making some valid points in this one, too. I commend you for that. This being said, I wish to add a little behind-the-scenes view on the topic, in attempt to adress the question whether there has been a change in quality in to what extend Starfleet and the UFP are portrayed as "shady" in "New Trek" and this seems to upset some people. First of all, personally, I don't have any fundamental issue with the portrayal of Starfleet and the UFP in "New Trek", mostly because they were in fact never portrayed as being as pristine and flawless like some seem to claim. It may be argued though that there indeed has been a change in quality in how this is done. Promotion for Star Trek Picard even made a point that this was going to be a major plot point and difference between STP and TNG - In contrast to the utopian organisations they were shown to be during most of TNG were the crew of the Enterprise and Starfleet by extension usually had the moral high ground, Starfleet in STP was announced to be more shady and morally dubious than we had previously believed. So, maybe opinons pointing this out are not utterly born from thin air. As to the shadyness in previous Star Trek iterations, most of these are a story-telling device serving the individual episode, rather than being a well-established fact of background info. Especially in TNG, the shadyness of certain Admirals like Admiral Pressman was explicitly confronted and challenged by the crew of the Enterprise. Both TOS and TNG more or less prohibited writers from having the main characters being in conflict with eachother. While this makes for a pleasing sense of an utopian society, it certanly creates troubles for writers trying to write drama which is all about conflict. Since the main characters could never be in conflict, this conflict had to come from somewhere else - so sometimes, "evil" Admirals or ambassadors had to step in. And most of the time this was done to put them in conflict with our heros, so their higher morality could be proven. Since Star Trek has always been a mirror of its contemporary real-life society, this has indeed shifted somewhat in the newer iterations of Trek in the way that the organisations themselves are portrayed more morally complex shall we say than they had been in the past (where it was mostly said "evil" individuals acting in contrast to the canonically "good" organisations they were serving). While some do not like this shift, I personally think that Star Trek today may indeed be less relevant if it was not discussing this aspect of our real world. Summing up a way too long comment: Have there been portrayals of shadyness in Starlfeet and the UFP before "New Trek"? Yes. Has there been a shift in the form of presentation of these topics in "New Trek"? Yes. Is that a bad thing? In my opinion, it is not. I wonder why you did not mention Admiral Satie from TNG's "The Drumhead" (an excellent episode protraying not a shady but outright evil representative of Starfleet) or Admiral Dougherty from Star Trek Insurrection who on behalf of the Federation Council was attempting to relocate a planetary population? That was some shady politics if there ever was in Star Trek. Stay safe.
Well said, TAS! I liked your opinion on this topic. There's just so much inconsistency mentioned on screen about the UFP that makes me wonder if it's simply a world building mechanic built to suit the next villian / adventure of the week. Gene preferred it to be an ideal utopia, though it is quite interesting to see it more like a functional dystopia instead. And of course... All for good storytelling!
To me the event that puts Starfleet morality into question is TNG 5x16 where Worf is paralyzed. The visiting doctor used a trauma patient as a test case for her new wonder drug and kills him. And as far as we know nothing happens to her. To my knowledge this was the first murder in ST that wasn't explained as justified or culturally acceptable.
Gene Roddenberry wanted a hopeful view of the future. After he died the narrative changed. But honestly he wasn't blind to how people worked. A lot of his work in Tos was allegory for politics of the time. TNG was ALOT more utopic but it wasn't like the federation didn't have issues in TNG. The whole mess with synthetic rights for example.
My biggest find to date was the most shadiest of all the corruption of Starfleet and the Federation was section 31. Existed since the Federation's founding, it was the Federation's secret Dagger, though often despised by the Federation itself, and is disavowed to keep the Federation's image in tact. You can argue that the Federation and the Romulan Star Empire are basically the same in terms of espionage. Take the Tal Shiar. It is almost the same as Section 31, if you compare the methods used by both organizations. But in my opinion, I think that the Federation as being a shady organization is a very interesting twist, and as you stated in the video, that even in TOS it is evident that the Federation is a shady organization to an extent. And in Picard, that shady business comes full circle.
I believe a lot of fans get passionate mainly because the message of high morals Gene wanted to instil. However there is a difference between aiming to be better and to be perfect ... saying its flawless. You can aim to be better while still having bumps on the road which gives the story more depth and something to learn from. Star trek still needs to be rooted in reality, both in good and bad, in order to be relatable with a wider audience. So yeah ... Star fleet can be shady
Janeway was promoted to Admiral to keep her under close watch. A court marshal of the captain of Voyager who managed to become a hero to the people of Earth would hurt Starfleet. And Section 31 was something Starfleet could easily disavow. Starfleet is an organization like any other...something looking out for itself...just like the Romulans or Klingons. And if it means they need to use shady tactics...so be it. So, yes, I agree with you about Starfleet. In fact, if they were that clean cut, the series as a whole would be dull. It’s the shadiness that’s adds spice to Star Trek and makes it very relatable.
The United Federation of Planets has always been shady, but with each new series it becomes portrayed more realistically, and some people would rather not have science fiction get too realistic when it comes to things like that. honestly I can't say I blame them, and I would really like a replicater if for no other reason, to have a machine that would make coffee from a voice command
Thanks for the video I agree on that it's more transparent than what use to be almost like how we view the government today. I think a big show of the UFP's character just look at what caused the events in Wrath of Khan and how Kirk was treated at the end of IV.
Of course they were shady and biased but then again their saving Grace is their ability to keep the big picture in mind, even if it's barely there in some cases. The contradictions rarely ever bothered me as it made the franchise more interesting, real, and accessible.
This is not a controversial topic. The trope of the evil admiral has been around for decades. When our heroes do something illegal it's always a matter of the ends justifying the means. I like to see Star Trek as a mirror of our own society. Before the 1960s people tended to trust the government, or believe everything it did was right. That trust was starting to fade right as Star Trek was being produced. It would portray immoral acts as the result of a bad apple, and only hinted at the fact that there was something worse at the higher level. Again, as time progressed and people started to trust the government less we see this more and more. Starfleet is shown as being more corrupt, or at least incompetent, and our heroes have to clean up the mess. Now that people have even less trust in government, and many think it is evil, it's no surprise that Starfleet would be seen as even more overtly evil in newer Star Trek. In short, Trek has gone from our heroes being mostly good but sometimes have to get their hands dirty for the greater good or to fix the mistakes of the higher ups, all the way to Starfleet is so corrupt and incompetent that our heroes had to leave and fight against it.
Starfleet has always been shady. I prefer New Trek's approach of not only being more open & realistic about it, but making it more prominent in the primary plot threads.
Cultural ideals in any society tend to falter when confronted with the need for survival or a critical opportunity. It is human nature to create community for the purposes of survival, opportunity, and protection. This leads to the logic that espoused in Star Trek of the "Needs of the many...". Just like the US Expansion displaced Native Americans to benefit the "many " (many not meaning strict population, rather the culture with the power to apply their will on the situation) which contradicts our current believes as a culture on how that should have been handled, so today we as the US people who want to help those in other nations with less than us turn a blind eye to the manufacturing and profit margin practices that our corporations do every day which underpin our wealth and comfort. Many of the Star Trek examples you gave are on the edges of Federation space and allow for expansion of culture, safety, and resources without the people at home knowing until it is done. This therefore fit the "out of sight, out of mind" concept which our current corporations use in the developing world. I don't say this as a moral judgement, just that it seems unlikely that humanity will out grow these tendencies within the next few hundred years and as such it makes sense that Star Trek would also have to deal with these issues. Excellent video. Thank you.
TriAngulum is like Michael Jordan in the 92 NBA Finals, dropping bombs. In this case, instead of 3 point bombs, he's dropping those truth bombs with a high yield.
I agree wholeheartedly, willful disregarding of the facts is dumb and only breeds more dumbness. However, I think the main reason this topic keeps being brought up isn’t merely because of Starfleet’s shadiness in Disco orPicard. I think it’s more the... “flavor”, for lack of a better term, of the presentation behind that shadiness. With older trek, yes Starfleet obeyed and discarded the Prime Directive & its bylaws as the story dictated, but it was done - as you mentioned in the TOS argument - to promote good morals, and also to provide good storytelling. Gene Roddenberry’s intent was to show how the future was good because of technology and humanity working together; we got rid of pollution (mostly), war, famine, poverty, illness, all because we decided to get off our butts and commit ourselves to getting better. That isn’t to say everything is perfect, of course, but the focus was on the positives. With Discovery & Picard, the focus is more on the corruption and negative aspects. Suddenly the future’s just as bad as the present, and that positive flavor is replaced with a more cynical and almost depressed one. Of course, this is more a point reflecting how our society outside of trek has changed; the 70’s were a comparatively bright and optimistic time compared to the scared and uncertain present days of 2020. But anyways, that’s my thoughts; feel free to rip and tear my opinions apart, I just thought I’d voice mine and see what happens.
Very well put things to think about. I mean yes the ideal Federation I think is something to aspire to but governments have to do really shady, even, let's say, distasteful acts to ensure the well-being and protection of it's citizens as sad as it is to admit. What the people see on the surface would be smiling faces and political stuff but behind everyone is some form of a metaphorical knife as each try to keep control but also to one up another. Really cool to get these topics going as they should be talked about.
Great video/series, personally it's the realpolitik aspects of Star Trek that I've always liked best as it shows the cold reality of the universe that doesn't actually care about idealism, something Q frequently tried to explain to Picard in TNG. Even if your agenda is a noble one you must have power to achieve it and gaining and keeping that power often requires one to get dirty and occasionally violate their own ideals in order to maintain an order built on those very ideals. If you desire universal peace you may have to go to war to eliminate forces who desire conflict for their own power and will prevent peace from ever being achieved. Sometimes the ends do justify the means, even if we'd rather not admit it in polite company. Just like in the real world the realpolitik in Star Fleet/U.F.P. is hidden behind the smoke and mirrors of ideological politics that is merely designed to convince people to support the agenda(s) while those at the top rarely actually believe that fluff and are merely doing what they believe needs to be done to maintain power(personal or communal). To me new trek is just a more real version of Star Fleet where the smoke and mirrors are removed and we actually get to see more of the "shady" realpolitik underbelly that IS reality. I think that's the real reason many hate it - it shatters their "utopian" illusions to reveal the uncomfortable reality that was always there but they were able to ignore before.
I love this channel's "warts and all" approach to Trek
Well said sir!
Thank you so much Matt! I firmly believe in "The First Duty" :)
@@TriAngulumStudiosAudioComics just saying it like it is - "facts don't lie" after all 😀
Also, kudos for tackling these objections head on, I've really enjoyed your approach in the last 3 vids
Eddington nailed it with this speech ‘ I know you. I was like you once. But then I opened my eyes. Open your eyes, Captain. Why is the Federation so obsessed with the Maquis? We've never harmed you. And yet we're constantly arrested and charged with terrorism. Starships chase us through the Badlands, and our supporters are harassed and ridiculed. Why? Because we've left the Federation, and that's the one thing you can't accept. Nobody leaves Paradise, everyone should want to be in the Federation! Hell, you even want the Cardassians to join. You're only sending them replicators because one day, they can take their rightful place on the Federation Council. You know, in some ways, you're even worse than the Borg. At least they tell you about their plans for assimilation. You're more insidious, you assimilate people - and they don't even know it.
This is right up there with Quark and Garak's conversation about root beer and it's similarities with the Federation.
Well the Klingons eventually joined the Federation so I guess it’s true.
Well said. Eddington.
I really think as fans of Star Trek, we all seem to forget something from time to time. As lofty as the ideals of Star Trek and the United federation of planets are, in reality they are entertainment. And if those lofty ideals have to be tarnished or outright broken from time to time to create that entertainment value the writers will be more than happy to oblige. Plus as fans it gives us the added advantage of being able to sit around and discuss which ship, captain, and crew disobeyed the prime directive the most times.
The shadiest part of Starfleet has always been the Admirals.
Indeed, those which control Starfleet!
It seems to be a requirement for admirals to be insane, controlled by an alien parasite, or otherwise compromised.
Which indicates to me there is a number of shady Captains that get the promotions.
Making Picard and Kirk aberrations.
Picard: “How many people does it take, Admiral, before it becomes wrong? A hundred? A thousand? A million? How many people does it take, Admiral?!”
Absolute power corrupts absolutely
Starfleet and the UFP are lead by Humanity... Of course it's shady, we invented shady
LOL
We're tied with the romulans!
@@travisbishop782 I still think the Cardasians have everyone beat
Not true, consider Vulcans and the listening post which was aimed at Andoria?
"Jameson does something bad and is promoted to Admiral by Starfleet for a good long time."
Janeway: "See, CONTINUITY is on my side! Now hand me my Rear Admiral rank!"
LOL
Salen are you saying Janeway said hold my beer ? lol
@@TheDuck632 It will be interesting to see what her characters like in prodigy
@@TheDuck632 Beer? No, hold my coffee. (Janeway was/is a well known caffeine addict after all.)
(I mean, wasn't there an episode where she ignored the Prime Directive, snuck onto a planet and held a few people at phaser point to threaten planetwide bombardment, all just to get parts to repair her coffee machine?? Pretty sure I remember that one, at the least it's part of my head cannon. 😵)
Most are confusing the ideal of Starfleet vs the reality of Starfleet.
The ideal is this utopian society where everyone is "evolved" to be about the pursuit of self fulfillment. The reality is that sometimes down right terrible acts are needed to ensure "paradise" remains so.
This is really shown in Sisko's character arc, as he goes from idealistic to realistic over the course of the series. Picard does this as well, although it shatters him a bit more when he is confronted with it.
Nail hit on the head squarely.
This is why I love ds9 because it shows the gritty undertones of what Starfleet is capable of doing. The writers had freedom to portray Starfleet in a more realistic approach than Gene would have allowed it in the original series or TNG. You are 100% right about the prime directive being disregarded.
Thank you :)
Agree. HATED DS9 as a kid, as a 34yr old man it's grown to be my favorite series that I've binge watched 3-4 times
Not to forget Star Trek 9 the trick the Ba'ku, to transport them en masse to a new location away from their planet. Starfleet are Shady
yeah I really didn't get that. a planet in "Federation space" that already had people living on it for 300 yrs. at least that lady called out Picard for a directive that didn't prohibit spying on people
i think the meaning of Movie 9 was that the paradise they thought the federation would be is facing reality, and those in leadership were corrupted. A danger any free society has. and it showed that even if the leadership is compromised, the middle ranks keep it all together.Nothign like "i was just following orders". compared to the past and today, thats progress.but it was more a testamonie for picrads ethics than for the federations,thats true.
Ah yes, Star Trek: Insurrection, ANOTHER Great example :)
My first thought was the episode “The Enterprise Incident” where Starfleet breaks it’s treaty with the Romulans to steal tech
In retrospect it diffently seems like that was a section 31 operation
At least that WOULD be an explanation, but Kirk and Spock does say it's a Starfleet Operation....
@@TriAngulumStudiosAudioComics 31 was never above using someone else to do it's dirty work. Just ask Dr. Bashir...
Personally, I think it just flows with the times. In the 60's we weren't as cynical about the politicians that governed us. As time marched on and people became more conspiracy-minded, and times got darker, then so did the star trek franchise.
RCR PT cruiser episode strangely explained it. Star Trek is Modern and New Trek is post modern. Modern is about building greatness. Post modern is the realization that some can destroy your hard work easily. So there is no point to building greatness as someone will easily destroy it with a nuke when you try to exercise your greatness. Much like a body builder attacking an old guy that defends himself an automatic gun. The body builder waisted his time bulking up as any gun will kill him just as fast as any man that didn’t bulk up.
@@greyfox78569 more like humans are humans and will always have to battle our basic instincts, like Kirk said, decide I will not kill, today.
If anybody thinks the Federation itself is some sort of utopia everywhere, one need only point at Tasha Yar's childhood and ask whether a utopia would allow part of itself to fall into sheer anarchy like that. And if there's one place like that within the Federation, you can bet on there being more.
That's a great point, thanks Keith :)
yeah.. 'officially' Turkana IV wasn't part of the federation in the 2360's, but it apparently had a functional government before 2310, and membership of the federation prior to that. it seems really unlikely that the federation would just stand aside and allow the planet to collapse into anarchy. especially given the examples from the video, where the federation violated the whole "leave other cultures to themselves" aspect of the prime directive for cultures with far less connection than the Turkana IV inhabitants. the idealized good starfleet so many claim would have sent peacekeepers to try and maintain order and rebuild the government, as well as technical aid to help fix any infrastructure issues.
but nope, starfleet and the federation just said "good luck dodging the rape gangs" and allowed a world to declare independence and cut off all contact.
Also my analysis of TNG-era Trek was always that starship captains are Starfleet putting their "best foot forward" and showing off how moral and good they were to the outside world, while behind the scenes the admiralty was always being kinda shady and making tough (and often totally immoral and contradictory-to-their-values) decisions. You can see it in Picard's face every time Nechayev comes to visit.
So what I take away from this is that Q was right about humanity whenever he turned up and started judging humans.
I say this cause Starfleet and the UFP always appears to majority humans on screen instead of the various and vast combination of races that are allegedly part of the federation.
I wouldn't call Q the best judge based on Q's past "pranks". Learn from what you just heard: this is real life, no one and nothing is pure - everything is bad to some degree whether cat, dog, human or Tellarite - you just can't use anyone as an arbiter of justice. Q might be "better" and humanity is a work-in-progress.
They show up mostly as humans for two reasons. 1. the Federation is based on Earth, so there would be far more humans around than other species. 2. It would be too expensive to have that many aliens around on the shows.
@@imkluu A humans only club (or was it homosapiens?) from Undiscovered Country. That line alwyas pissed me off.
At the end where you say "you can have an opinion but you don't have the right to shove it down anyone's throat", You are absolutely correct! I just wish the rest of society would get that through their heads!
I for one like that the UFP is imperfect. We should work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity....err....the galaxy. We wouldnt be able to do that if society is "perfect".
Oh I do too :)
Thats because Starfleet was scared of Sisko.
LOL
Maybe Starfleet promoted Captain Janeway to get her out of a ship. She was probably seen as a hero by the public, and prosecuting her would have been a public relations nightmare.
Yes, I have the same theory and presented that in multiple videos... Most people tend to agree ;)
Thanks for the video. Every good organizations have moments they aren’t proud of. No one wants to admit the star fleet’s short comings.
You're very welcome :)
“All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton (10 January 1834 - 19 June 1902) English historian and moralist.
Reality is always a struggle between the idealist and those who lust after power. For most people, their only hope is that they do not get caught in-between when they are struggling.
TNG 2 part, "Chain of Command". Picard is caught in an act of espionage. On orders from Starfleet.
Another great example :) Thank you :)
and it was a trap Too! Both a way to embarrass the UFP\starfleet, possibly gain good intel if picard broke, and set themselves up for a retaliatory war that the Cardassians had built up for, planned and were ready to excute.
Why don't you watch new trek?
Picard: "Because it was no longer starfleet!"
whether Gene liked it or not starfleet IS a military, so it makes sense they do shady military things
I have always disagreed with the idea that Starfleet isn't a military. They have big ships, with big guns, the Naval style hierarchy, military JAGS and they are always the ones who answer the call when war comes to the Federation. They are a military, with a science wing.
I’m not one to hate anything within this awesome channel, nor do I hate the narrator at all. You go out of your way to bring us all information we’re looking for, clarifying certain aspects and points, & you bring truth to each wonderful episode! I deeply appreciate & respect everything you do to bring us enjoyment & knowledge within our Star Trek Universe. You’ve always been noble, honorable, intelligent, humble, & brilliant; & you continue to do so. I, for one, am grateful for this wonderful & cool channel, & for you to go out of your way for us. Thank you for doing so, & sharing everything we may or may not know about all things Star Trek. A fan & friend, Michael
This is very true. Some of things you mentioned, I did not pay attention to when first watching and rewatched those episodes. It's good to revisit those series to discuss what happened, was it morally sound, etc. The more I think about all forms of "imperfect" government is shady as long as it benefit them and their cause. Great job as always to bring up thought provoking questions. Keep up the great works.
Thank you very much Robert! I firmly believe that bringing up these types of things and open a forum for discussion OF those things, allows us to better understand the human condition :)
@@TriAngulumStudiosAudioComics You're very welcome. Exactly. If we don't discuss them, we are doomed to repeat mistakes and miss a rare opportunity to reflect and learn from them.
Another great example is 1998's Star Trek: Insurrection. "let's just move these people while they're sleeping. They'll never notice it!"
It has always been too easy for people with questionable motives and morals to gain rank and influence in Statfleet or the federation. Even if the Federation as a whole isn't shady it is too easy for those people to gain too much power. Which is a flaw of the federation itself. It allows people like Leyton, or Satie to abuse the power they gain.
Indeed it has!
I think it's more that star trek in the past was light hearted with a bad seed showing up every once in a while. While in new trek that's all there is.
yes but television and arguably our culture have moved on from light hearted space romps into more mature, serialised fare with deep weighty matters at the heart of the shows. Light hearted isnt as thought provoking I would argue. But again, thats a matter of opinion
Daniel Gritty and dark is not the same as mature, and light hearted is not the same as immature. The older Trek dealt with weighty topics all the time.
I think this is the nature of a franchise that had built on layers of detail and complexity for many series and movies. All aspects of the universe have gotten darker as each series progressed and built on the lore of the previous series'.
Change is always scoffed at - I remember reading about when TNG came out and people were writing to the studio saying how they have ruined the franchise. Similar things happened with DS9 and it's long ark format, Voyager, Enterprise and now the new shows.
Some portions of fandoms don't like change - static is good but change is necessary for a franchise to grow.
That said, the current era of trek is dark and maybe they can use the story ark to take it towards lighter/brighter times.
I like we grew up and had paradise but there was still we still have a shady side
Honestly ds9 section 31 we needed
That was nice in universe explanation, but I believe there should be a also an explanation for these shady Starfleet deals from writers perspective. For example in ST VI it was in the plot that some admirals wanted war with the Klingons. In Star Trek TNG some admirals were more like a villain of the week, without to much thinking about consequences before or after like with Jameson, especially since it was Season 1 of TNG which was infamous for its writing.
That point of view behind scenes and out of the universe would be also interesting. Nice video as always!
i've noticed that throughout all the series, they seem to have so many admirals and high ranking officers with bad morals or that are willing to break the rules to fit their needs
It actually seems like MOST are :P
The Wizard's First Rule. People will believe what they want to believe. If someone, with their mind set, sees something that bolsters their view they will latch on to it and not let go.
Which is quite sad.... Side note, I didnt know you were a wizard :)
Emeniar/Vendicar...wow. Never thought of that one. I can't argue with that one. Nicely done! Shady Ambassador. Didn't see that one coming. Peace and long life, TriAngulum!
Thanks so much Moose :)
This was very good, and answered a few of those lingering questions I already had about the entire canon. Well done :-)
It’s true Starfleet isn’t perfect, I still don’t see why those people can’t grasp that concept.
Because they dont want too :)
Another great video, excellent points. Also, let's remember how a few starfleet personnel conspired to block peace between the federation and klingon empire
Thank you, and yes! Another great example :)
Yet they worked together to keep the status quo with the kliono.
I love all trek in all its forms
I do as well :)
I agree with you on almost all of your points except with rapture. Sisko is speaking as the Emissary of the Prophets in that episode when he tells them not to join the UFP. And starfleet are very much aware of how much stock the Bajorans put into that, so they do follow the prime directive, in the respect that although Bajor is petitioning to join, and thus would abide by Federation rules, they still have sovereign status so the wishes of the Bajorans had to be respected. just my viewpoint.
What a breath of fresh air. I came here from Overload Doomcock, and among others, all they could do is say how Patrick Stewart ruined Picard, but no one can give a specific instance. Thank you!
The Truth shall set you free! Star Trek V, corruption galore.
Star Trek V? Do you mean VI?
To be honest i like the fact that Starfleed and United Federation of Planets are not 100% good and even they make you question their actions it adds some realism and to be honest not all fictional and real governments are 100% good.
Amen. However, I think this also shows that their is no true "Paradise" outside whatever your higher power is. In physical form, it does not exist. People can strive to be the perfect human being, organization, UFP, but there will always be flaws. That's how I take it, at it's core it 90% does the "right thing" but from time to time rules need to be broken
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”― Edmund Burke. Yes Star fleet has a history of getting their hands dirty but more often than not the reasons are for the greater good, and whether its seen as such at that particular moment are often unimportant and are left for history to decide.
Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth, sometimes people don't want to see the truth, and sometimes people don't want to experience the truth.........
So sad, but SO true...
UFP/SF "Oh, you have a resource we want? Looks like you could use some freedom"
Bottom line, the Trek of the 60's-90's is gone and it is not coming back. Each show since TNG ended has been more and more different than the previous show. You can either accept that old Trek is gone forever and give newer trek a try, or watch endless reruns of the older shows on Netflix. Personally I like having some Trek that carries on the lore than none at all.
Retired, Full bird Colonel OSS Shado Unit Retired. All of your obsverations are spot on. Just one little problem. Star Fleet is not shady. As we used to say in the OSS. "America says may things. Believes some of it, and acts inaccordance with even less." Or better quote. "All accidents are just that accidents, espically if they are made to appear so."
Even I know Starfleet isn't perfect and lots of bad Admirals!
I would go a bit further: the whole Federation is shady, since the federation at least tolerated the things Starfleet has done if not actively ordered them to do them, if we assume that Starfleet is controlled by a democratically elected officials (the President or the council of the Federation or a similar institution), which should be the case in a utopian society.
And yet some people refuse to see that! :)
Thank you the video. I didn't know about how shady Star Fleet and UFP. Keep up the good videos. Thank you
Thanks, will do!
Some of those points I agree with, but Starfleet is always a good orgization that can sometimes be manipulated by ambasidors or other parts of the UFP.
He literally listed cover-ups that needed to be orchestrated by Starfleet's own admiralty. Starfleet might be, by and large, a good organisation, but let's not kid ourselves that given a choice between the pragmatic and the idealistic choice, they usually pick the former.
Once an officer reaches admiral in Starfleet they seem to be corrupt and do alot of shady dealings it seems, and some captains do as well, and yet these instances are probably never noticed, with porbable log entries being encrypted and classified from the history books.
Starfleet is seen as a utopia, but behind that utopia there is alot of darkness too, you cannot have one without the other
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Actually, by definition, you can NOT have a Utopia if there is shadyness ;)
Was it Admiral Dougherty in “Star Trek: Insurrection” who was willing to forcibly remove an entire planet’s population just so Starfleet could have access to a fountain of youth? Shady, indeed. And Picard even calls him out on it!
As usual it's a fine video with a clear point. Don't allow that bunch of haters of your perspective to bring you down. It's just their social bias in combination with their own private flaws they're trying to compensate by their complaints.
Star Trek delivers an optimistic perspective and encourages people to do their part in achieving such a future. But good science-fiction also mirrors the contemporary reality of its audience. So it requires shady aspects here and there. And since such things are very likely to lack time and resources for the production, flaws are inevitable too.
8)
Thank you so much :) And dont worry, you cant be a UA-camr without having a very thick skin :)
The only point i disagree with in this video is about the crashed Dominion ship Capturing of Enemy Ships during war time is a well established practice or even if you don't accept that there are also maritime salvage laws that in in effect in international law now and have been for hundreds of years that could logically be extended to space as Starfleet is essentially a navy but yeah everything else seems pretty spot on to me excellent video
1 Point out of a dozen, Im doing pretty good then :P
@@TriAngulumStudiosAudioComics indeed that a good ratio
Spot on analysis. 👍🏻
Thank you Tony :)
Well, Insurrection is all about this from the very title on, right? 😅🖖
Indeed it is :)
The one and ONLY thing that according to some perpectives that made it not was the fact the Bak'ku were secretly warp capable, but even then THAT provision only covers making contact in the first place. Non-interferance in the internal affairs of a government applies rather they are pre-industrial or they have quantum-slipstream-transwarp-hyperspace-temporal engines.
Sometimes I wonder if what the haters actually dislike about newer shows is that we have better lighting, sets, and cameras these days, removing the need to flood the set with light and giving us better dynamic range without blowing out the picture.
Fantastic to keep hearing strong arguments, with cited facts to explain the events presented in your videos. Sad to say the naysayers of New Trek will always have fingers in ears behaviour when it comes to common sense or facts.
We say they're free to not watch it, but to have them constantly poo on it with mad, directionless rhetoric just irks me.
Thank you so much :)
Excellent analysis. Thank you!
My pleasure! Glad you liked it :)
In reality, ANY large government is going to have some sort corruption within it. The question is does it also have a police force an anti-corruption department. UFP seems to be singularly lacking such.
Indeed, it would seem that they dont!
I will be very interested to see how the federation falls after centuries of apparent decay.
It seems from the latest trailer, that it wasnt exactly decay, but a "GREAT burn" cosmic event... My guess would be something to do with subspace which would make warp travel impossible... Thus Discovery and her spore drive could begin to reassemble the Federation....
What's shadier UFP/Starfleet or The Terran Empire ?
That's a great question :)
Terran Empire was at least, in your face, about it.
The reason that they promoted Janeway was that then she wouldn't be able to affect things directly like she could on a Bridge of a Starship. If you read into the books she wasn't directly promoted to Admiral that took 18 months with 9 of those months being debriefings every day and explaining the modifications that they made to Voyager. Then after the 9 months of debriefing, the entire crew except for Chakotay, Paris, and Seven got 10 weeks of leave. Then she was put on as commander of Task Force 29 when the borg came through in 2379, one of three task forces against the borg. Her task force consisted of Voyager, 2 Luna class vessels, 2 Cheyenne class, and 7 Miranda class vessels which would later be augmented by 2 Vorcha Class Cruisers, and 10 birds of prey. Then be augmented again by Squadron 3, which consisted of the USS Robinson and Excalibur [two named Galaxy class] and a further non-named one, two Akira's and three Sabers. After her run-in with the borg only then did she get promoted to Admiral because throughout some of the novelizations Starfleet had to make a choice about the crew of Voyager. Thus, when it was decided that they should promote Janeway to Admiral and scatter the crew among other ships with Tuvok on the Titan, B'Elanna on the Robinson as Chief Engineer, along with the junior crews on other ships the only people still left on Voyager of the TV crew were Chakotay as Captain, and Tom Paris as XO of Voyager.
It's sad to see that you are right. However most of the old trek instances I always interpreted as being due to a rogue few and not representative of the whole. Pressman for instance says he has friends in high places, he doesn't say he was under orders, suggesting a rogue operation. Sisko had some kind of political protection in being the Emissary of the Prophets. Then Janeway was in an unusual situation and didn't have the option of asking for help or permission from star fleet, which I think weighed heavily on the crew, knowing they were on their own. The biggest problem is Section 31 who have apparently been around since the beginning, but no one knew. Maybe they were behind a lot of the shady stuff all along...but they are supposed to be "non-existent" and only slip up in DS9. Discovery portrays them like just another branch of star fleet (like star fleet intelligence), and everyone knows about them, which for a "non-existent" organisation seems a little odd.
I hope the Fandom Menace sees this. Maybe they'd have to have some second thoughts. 😋
I doubt it, but we can hope :)
First rule of Starfleet: Never trust the Admiral.
The truth hurts, well done and keep up the good work! While we can evolve as a society we are still human.
In TOG you can argue most of your examples were either the actions of an individual or basic spycraft. Now after that the series did venture into the dirty sides of politics. Early on it was also assumed that there was a level of technology that the Prime Directive applied to.
Thanks for making this video. I appreciate the clarification on some of the criticisms of the new shows. I am a big fan of all Trek, so thanks.
Starfleet, specifically random admirals of the week, were usually foils for the main cast/stars, all the way back to TOS. So Starfleet being 'shady' is not a surprise to me.
I was ready to be annoyed. Then you proved your point so outstandingly. It is Starfleet's flaws that should motivate us to be better.
Food for thought, when thinking about these Captains and Admirals: What would Ensign Kim do?
This is like the world we are living in right now. One has to live in the world as it is not what we want.
Absolutely correct with this content. I have basically thought the same myself, and if any viewer tries to use misdirection to divert the subject matter, then to me they don’t understand Star Trek. The Prime Directive is a bit of subjective legislation at best.
I have to be honest, this is the most realistic approach I've seen in regards to Star Trek and the hypocrisy of fanboys/girls of Gene's supposed benevolent UFP and Starfleet. The only problem, I do counter your statement that "Facts Don't Lie". Facts most certainly do lie, it just depends on who's facts your listening to, and who stands the most to lose or gain when they're skewed off-center. This is has been seen since episode one of TOS. Otherwise, my friend, your video was spot on!
Thank you for reminding us of what we choose not to see! Great!
Great video 👍 totally agree, UFP and starfleet has and continues to be a shady organisation, in both old and new trek.
i love the new trek shows they are my favorite trek series and for me i like the changes both to the visual and universe wise retcons and the additions made from characters to ships to planets
it just adds to the overal universe
You are spot on. Starfleet has a history of shady decisions
Thanks you for doing this video I wish more star trek UA-camr's wold acknowledge this fact about star trek.
You're very welcome Stephen :)
As with your video on Star Trek inconsistencies, you are making some valid points in this one, too. I commend you for that. This being said, I wish to add a little behind-the-scenes view on the topic, in attempt to adress the question whether there has been a change in quality in to what extend Starfleet and the UFP are portrayed as "shady" in "New Trek" and this seems to upset some people.
First of all, personally, I don't have any fundamental issue with the portrayal of Starfleet and the UFP in "New Trek", mostly because they were in fact never portrayed as being as pristine and flawless like some seem to claim.
It may be argued though that there indeed has been a change in quality in how this is done. Promotion for Star Trek Picard even made a point that this was going to be a major plot point and difference between STP and TNG - In contrast to the utopian organisations they were shown to be during most of TNG were the crew of the Enterprise and Starfleet by extension usually had the moral high ground, Starfleet in STP was announced to be more shady and morally dubious than we had previously believed. So, maybe opinons pointing this out are not utterly born from thin air.
As to the shadyness in previous Star Trek iterations, most of these are a story-telling device serving the individual episode, rather than being a well-established fact of background info. Especially in TNG, the shadyness of certain Admirals like Admiral Pressman was explicitly confronted and challenged by the crew of the Enterprise.
Both TOS and TNG more or less prohibited writers from having the main characters being in conflict with eachother. While this makes for a pleasing sense of an utopian society, it certanly creates troubles for writers trying to write drama which is all about conflict. Since the main characters could never be in conflict, this conflict had to come from somewhere else - so sometimes, "evil" Admirals or ambassadors had to step in. And most of the time this was done to put them in conflict with our heros, so their higher morality could be proven.
Since Star Trek has always been a mirror of its contemporary real-life society, this has indeed shifted somewhat in the newer iterations of Trek in the way that the organisations themselves are portrayed more morally complex shall we say than they had been in the past (where it was mostly said "evil" individuals acting in contrast to the canonically "good" organisations they were serving). While some do not like this shift, I personally think that Star Trek today may indeed be less relevant if it was not discussing this aspect of our real world.
Summing up a way too long comment: Have there been portrayals of shadyness in Starlfeet and the UFP before "New Trek"? Yes. Has there been a shift in the form of presentation of these topics in "New Trek"? Yes. Is that a bad thing? In my opinion, it is not.
I wonder why you did not mention Admiral Satie from TNG's "The Drumhead" (an excellent episode protraying not a shady but outright evil representative of Starfleet) or Admiral Dougherty from Star Trek Insurrection who on behalf of the Federation Council was attempting to relocate a planetary population? That was some shady politics if there ever was in Star Trek.
Stay safe.
Isn't one of the TNG films completely about stopping the federation from doing something shady as?
Well said, TAS!
I liked your opinion on this topic. There's just so much inconsistency mentioned on screen about the UFP that makes me wonder if it's simply a world building mechanic built to suit the next villian / adventure of the week. Gene preferred it to be an ideal utopia, though it is quite interesting to see it more like a functional dystopia instead.
And of course... All for good storytelling!
Thank you so much :)
To me the event that puts Starfleet morality into question is TNG 5x16 where Worf is paralyzed. The visiting doctor used a trauma patient as a test case for her new wonder drug and kills him. And as far as we know nothing happens to her. To my knowledge this was the first murder in ST that wasn't explained as justified or culturally acceptable.
I think you are portraying mankind accurately
The truth is what it is!
Gene Roddenberry wanted a hopeful view of the future. After he died the narrative changed. But honestly he wasn't blind to how people worked. A lot of his work in Tos was allegory for politics of the time.
TNG was ALOT more utopic but it wasn't like the federation didn't have issues in TNG. The whole mess with synthetic rights for example.
My biggest find to date was the most shadiest of all the corruption of Starfleet and the Federation was section 31. Existed since the Federation's founding, it was the Federation's secret Dagger, though often despised by the Federation itself, and is disavowed to keep the Federation's image in tact. You can argue that the Federation and the Romulan Star Empire are basically the same in terms of espionage. Take the Tal Shiar. It is almost the same as Section 31, if you compare the methods used by both organizations.
But in my opinion, I think that the Federation as being a shady organization is a very interesting twist, and as you stated in the video, that even in TOS it is evident that the Federation is a shady organization to an extent. And in Picard, that shady business comes full circle.
Wasn't Star Trek insurrection a feature length documentary on star fleet/UFP's complete shadiness lol the Ba'ku and Pepperidge Farms remembers
I believe a lot of fans get passionate mainly because the message of high morals Gene wanted to instil. However there is a difference between aiming to be better and to be perfect ... saying its flawless. You can aim to be better while still having bumps on the road which gives the story more depth and something to learn from.
Star trek still needs to be rooted in reality, both in good and bad, in order to be relatable with a wider audience. So yeah ... Star fleet can be shady
Very intriguing and fascinating! Thank you! 🖖🏻
Glad you enjoyed it!
Much obliged! 😁
Janeway was promoted to Admiral to keep her under close watch. A court marshal of the captain of Voyager who managed to become a hero to the people of Earth would hurt Starfleet. And Section 31 was something Starfleet could easily disavow. Starfleet is an organization like any other...something looking out for itself...just like the Romulans or Klingons. And if it means they need to use shady tactics...so be it. So, yes, I agree with you about Starfleet. In fact, if they were that clean cut, the series as a whole would be dull. It’s the shadiness that’s adds spice to Star Trek and makes it very relatable.
The United Federation of Planets has always been shady, but with each new series it becomes portrayed more realistically, and some people would rather not have science fiction get too realistic when it comes to things like that. honestly I can't say I blame them, and I would really like a replicater if for no other reason, to have a machine that would make coffee from a voice command
Thanks for the video I agree on that it's more transparent than what use to be almost like how we view the government today. I think a big show of the UFP's character just look at what caused the events in Wrath of Khan and how Kirk was treated at the end of IV.
You are very welcome Killer :)
Of course they were shady and biased but then again their saving Grace is their ability to keep the big picture in mind, even if it's barely there in some cases. The contradictions rarely ever bothered me as it made the franchise more interesting, real, and accessible.
The corruption within Starfleet AND Section 31 seems to run deeper than the League of Shadows.
This is not a controversial topic. The trope of the evil admiral has been around for decades. When our heroes do something illegal it's always a matter of the ends justifying the means.
I like to see Star Trek as a mirror of our own society. Before the 1960s people tended to trust the government, or believe everything it did was right. That trust was starting to fade right as Star Trek was being produced. It would portray immoral acts as the result of a bad apple, and only hinted at the fact that there was something worse at the higher level. Again, as time progressed and people started to trust the government less we see this more and more. Starfleet is shown as being more corrupt, or at least incompetent, and our heroes have to clean up the mess. Now that people have even less trust in government, and many think it is evil, it's no surprise that Starfleet would be seen as even more overtly evil in newer Star Trek.
In short, Trek has gone from our heroes being mostly good but sometimes have to get their hands dirty for the greater good or to fix the mistakes of the higher ups, all the way to Starfleet is so corrupt and incompetent that our heroes had to leave and fight against it.
Starfleet has always been shady. I prefer New Trek's approach of not only being more open & realistic about it, but making it more prominent in the primary plot threads.
Cultural ideals in any society tend to falter when confronted with the need for survival or a critical opportunity. It is human nature to create community for the purposes of survival, opportunity, and protection. This leads to the logic that espoused in Star Trek of the "Needs of the many...". Just like the US Expansion displaced Native Americans to benefit the "many " (many not meaning strict population, rather the culture with the power to apply their will on the situation) which contradicts our current believes as a culture on how that should have been handled, so today we as the US people who want to help those in other nations with less than us turn a blind eye to the manufacturing and profit margin practices that our corporations do every day which underpin our wealth and comfort. Many of the Star Trek examples you gave are on the edges of Federation space and allow for expansion of culture, safety, and resources without the people at home knowing until it is done. This therefore fit the "out of sight, out of mind" concept which our current corporations use in the developing world. I don't say this as a moral judgement, just that it seems unlikely that humanity will out grow these tendencies within the next few hundred years and as such it makes sense that Star Trek would also have to deal with these issues. Excellent video. Thank you.
TriAngulum is like Michael Jordan in the 92 NBA Finals, dropping bombs. In this case, instead of 3 point bombs, he's dropping those truth bombs with a high yield.
I agree wholeheartedly, willful disregarding of the facts is dumb and only breeds more dumbness. However, I think the main reason this topic keeps being brought up isn’t merely because of Starfleet’s shadiness in Disco orPicard. I think it’s more the... “flavor”, for lack of a better term, of the presentation behind that shadiness.
With older trek, yes Starfleet obeyed and discarded the Prime Directive & its bylaws as the story dictated, but it was done - as you mentioned in the TOS argument - to promote good morals, and also to provide good storytelling. Gene Roddenberry’s intent was to show how the future was good because of technology and humanity working together; we got rid of pollution (mostly), war, famine, poverty, illness, all because we decided to get off our butts and commit ourselves to getting better. That isn’t to say everything is perfect, of course, but the focus was on the positives.
With Discovery & Picard, the focus is more on the corruption and negative aspects. Suddenly the future’s just as bad as the present, and that positive flavor is replaced with a more cynical and almost depressed one.
Of course, this is more a point reflecting how our society outside of trek has changed; the 70’s were a comparatively bright and optimistic time compared to the scared and uncertain present days of 2020. But anyways, that’s my thoughts; feel free to rip and tear my opinions apart, I just thought I’d voice mine and see what happens.
Very well put things to think about. I mean yes the ideal Federation I think is something to aspire to but governments have to do really shady, even, let's say, distasteful acts to ensure the well-being and protection of it's citizens as sad as it is to admit. What the people see on the surface would be smiling faces and political stuff but behind everyone is some form of a metaphorical knife as each try to keep control but also to one up another. Really cool to get these topics going as they should be talked about.
Thank you very much :) I try :)
Great video/series, personally it's the realpolitik aspects of Star Trek that I've always liked best as it shows the cold reality of the universe that doesn't actually care about idealism, something Q frequently tried to explain to Picard in TNG. Even if your agenda is a noble one you must have power to achieve it and gaining and keeping that power often requires one to get dirty and occasionally violate their own ideals in order to maintain an order built on those very ideals.
If you desire universal peace you may have to go to war to eliminate forces who desire conflict for their own power and will prevent peace from ever being achieved. Sometimes the ends do justify the means, even if we'd rather not admit it in polite company.
Just like in the real world the realpolitik in Star Fleet/U.F.P. is hidden behind the smoke and mirrors of ideological politics that is merely designed to convince people to support the agenda(s) while those at the top rarely actually believe that fluff and are merely doing what they believe needs to be done to maintain power(personal or communal).
To me new trek is just a more real version of Star Fleet where the smoke and mirrors are removed and we actually get to see more of the "shady" realpolitik underbelly that IS reality. I think that's the real reason many hate it - it shatters their "utopian" illusions to reveal the uncomfortable reality that was always there but they were able to ignore before.