A Look into the world of the Left February 7, 2007
Posted by ymarsakar in Science Fiction.trackback
*Post about the borg, Iraq, Star Trek, and fake liberal philosophy. Inspired by this post by Bookworm*
One of the things I’ve gone over with Startrek Voyager, was their thinking and use of holograms. You know about holographic technology, Book. They can use photons to actually create matter, that they could even eat. Sort of like replicators, although the differences are perhaps academic at the moment.
But the application is that holograms can be used outside the ship, and setup in advance, like the doctor. One of the various episodes they had, was the ship being boarded and what not. And I was thinking, if you can have holograms actually outside the ship, with relay projector emitters and what not, then why don’t you setup holograms that are auto-turret defense cannons on every bulkhead and what not. All you need would be power, there would be no need to expend “human lives”.
But what they do. They cry about “don’t weaponize technology” or whatever. This is reflected in both the episodes themselves, as well as perhaps by the writers’ personal philosophies. They just don’t need much about technology.
But in the terms of Voyager itself, the universe world, what were the consequences? The consequences were that the crew of the Voyager died, needlessly, fighting off invasion incursions that could be dealt more effectively through advance use of weapons technologies.
I think it shows some of the flaws of fake liberal thinking. This is not the fighting liberals that were represented by Teddy “The war Monger” Roosevelt. Who won a Nobel Peace Prize at the end of the Russo-Sino war of the early 20th century (or was that the late 19th).
This kind of the Left, as shown by Star Trek, is not a group that believes in “Peace Through Superior Firepower”, Book. They never did. They cared far more for pure science and exploration, than the actual defense of colonial worlds and of individual human beings. Classical and true liberal philosophies focus so much effort and value on individual human lives, Book, that it would be a pretty large sacrilege to let something like distaste for weapons technology end up in a human life wasted. Surely such is the difference between true liberals and fake liberals.
But if you didn’t value individual human lives above certain ideologies (Prime Directive, Golden Rule, moral high ground), then you might be at liberty to sacrifice a few lives to the Greater Good.
But what exactly is the Greater Good, Bookworm? Who decides what is the greater good. I mean, if the rationale behind the Prime Directive is of “not harming the indigenous population through interference” then isn’t the Greater Good supposed to be about protecting people? And how is that accomplished by letting people slough through war, death, disease, and despair all by themselves. Wouldn’t that be a belief in Darwinism and might and right through war, rather than the classical liberal belief in the salvation of individual people?
The point I’m getting at isn’t that Star Trek should have setup holographic auto-turrents on Voyager and upgraded Voyager with kick arse weapons that could blow up a planet (although there was one episode that came close). The point is that these people on the Left don’t look at their own beliefs and philosophies, to check whether it is true. Whether it does what it says it does. They just look at it and say “that is the good” and that is it.
Would an engineer look at a blue print and then say it is feasible just because it came from a grand old company? Of course not, he would have to run a few calculations in his head himself, to check if it really computes in reality. And when actually creating it in reality, he might run into problems that he has to solve, and that requires understanding how the blueprints may be modified without harm.
Would a lawyer just glance over a contract and say it is workable?
The Prime Directive (anti-Colonial anti-Imperial) folks just say “don’t mess with it”, ignore them and their people will figure things out for themselves. Figure what out, figure out the things that you people already know, but aren’t willing to shoulder the responsibility (and the blame) for teaching it to the “people” if things go bad?
One of the things I never quite understood about the Left’s reaction to Iraq, was perhaps what they thought should have happened. You know, what their idealized version would have been. But it was Star Trek that helped me see, that the Left may not have wanted the attempt to be made at all. At All I say. To a true liberal, leaving people in despair and pain when you have the power to help them is…. not human, not compassionate. Not an act that gives you worth in the eyes of god or of justice.
But it was exactly what the Left wanted us, me, to do. Leave the Iraqis alone, to fall or getup on their own, never to help, never to guide, never to aid. It is what they said when they said “let the Iraqis have a revolution like we in the US did”. Afghanistan was justified in their eyes cause “Osama was there and he hit us”, but Iraq wasn’t cause… well I guess cause people had more important things to take care of than the suffering of strangers. I recognized and supported the national security angle, of course, but that was not where I started. When the war first began being debated, I did not support it because of national security interests. I supported it because a friend told me what Saddam had done, and I believed that a war could not be evil if it was against such a person. I disliked preemption because I feared it, feared the slippery slop. But fears are not what people should take counsel of when making decisions or supporting causes.
Since a lot of fake liberals can’t seem to explain the axioms they take for granted via debates, I had to learn of it via different sources. Star Trek gave a very good (and entertaining) look into what the Left sees as the ideal. The situation of the Judgement with Q and Picard, was very interesting. They brought up good questions, important questions even, about humanity’s fate, duties, responsibilities, and what not. As well as our capacity for war and hate and everything else as well. Of course, Picard’s answers were not my answers ; )
While Star Trek did not really have a debate concerning whether the Prime Directive was shall we say moral or not, they did question its efficacy, and how to actually go about it. And what I could not help noticing was that the most interesting episodes to me, were episodes in which the crew of a starship (even during NC1701 Cpt Kirk) interacted directly with the local population. Whether disguised or not. I got a sense, perhaps reflected in my own soul, that encountering different cultures was entertaining as well as educational. That the people of the Enterprise wanted to learn. But they did not want to interfere, yet the possibility of interference they took for granted…. so long as the “local government” approved or so long as their knowledge is advanced (perhaps selfishly). The local government being anything from pirates, thugs, to fascist oppressors that is. So long as the local government “approved”, then everything was honky dorry. Some of this schism and contradictions were covered in many episodes, concerning say extradition of a Starfleet officer.
But they never resolved whether the Prime D was truely moral or not. They just perhaps left it at “good” but “flawed’. I wasn’t satisfied with that.
I was always curious, I always would not leave things as they were. I would not be satisfied in simply accepting things as they are because they told me how it was, I had to get at the why, at the roots.
Btw, Book, this is what happens when you bring up Star Trek (borgs) to someone (me) who has written several complete blog posts on individual episodes of Star Trek (Voyager).
Two of the most funny and great episodes were one ST Voyager and one Picard episode. Picard when Enterprise-C came through a time vortex just before it was destroyed, pitting SF against the Kinglons. The New militant Picard had a CIC in the background “like military background chatter”. Combat Information Center. His uniform changed to a darker hue. Obviously they wanted the effect of a more warlike and militant atmosphere, so as to send the Enterprise C back and get the peaceful Star Fleet back. Still, very refreshing.
The other one was where the episode of Voyager where the holographic doctor was re-activated amongst a people that told the story of a warlike Voyager. Obviously an unjust caricature of the real voyager, to us audience members. They gave a view of the Voyager battleship (snickers) with armor planes showing 3 Vs ontop of the saucer section, giving it a racing and menacing look. I snicker because I knew what the authors wanted me to feel. They wanted me to feel outraged, scared, and intimidated. But all I thought “Oh ya, now that looks kick arse”. It was a parody on many levels. The level they intended, and the level that I saw through.
What does this all have to do with the Islamic Jihad? Hrm, well in one way they find us just as funny and weak as I find Picard and Janeway in Star Trek. There are certain things I can respect of Picard and Janeway as leaders and personalities, but I do not admire them. And neither does the Islamic JIhad admire us, regardless of our technological, economic, and military status of forces.
Interesting. I liked Star Trek yet never fully bought into the idea completely. But then I was a fan of original and not the later versions as much. Fact is you can’t promote peace from a point of weakness.
Loved your analogy, Ymarsakar.
Glad it was of use. I am going to dig up that post I did on those Voyager episodes. Makes for good background reading, and also psychological warfare interests as well.
I might as well look to fantasy and fiction for insights on the Left. Certainly, what they produce in the real world is even harder to distinguish from reality than Star Trek.
Found it.
A couple of posts I did Wayyy back on science fiction shows and themes
Obviously the holographic one if you scroll down, was the thing being referenced here.
Still trying to find the psychological warfare post.
Here it is.
[...] I did using just my own resources and reasoning ability to decipher Star Trek’s the “Prime Directive”. Not the first series of course. I think the Left back in the original Star Trek [...]