• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      I maintain everyone on Battlestar Galactica was a Cylon.

      That or Cylonism can spread as an STD.

      This solves all plotholes, no further questions.

  • Smuuthbrane
    link
    fedilink
    English
    611 year ago

    StAr tReK is TOO DIVERSE, tHatS wHy I lIkE Babylon 5!

    [insert heavy breathing and unchecked drooling]

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        141 year ago

        Farscape is cool. Star Trek is cool. Star Wars is okay too I guess; not hating, I just don’t like them as much as the rest of the world seems to.

        • Seraph
          link
          fedilink
          211 year ago

          Obviously. Because Firefly is the superior show, right?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          81 year ago

          Disney did accidentally turn the two part story arc of space liberals restoring the status quo after it fell to space fascism into a three part warning that liberalism will always fall to fascism by allowing it to thrive in the first place by refusing to address wealth inequality and outright complacency in spite of all the warnings in the galaxy so that’s fun.

    • katy ✨OP
      link
      fedilink
      371 year ago

      she probably cheered for the bajor occupation or the government during the bell riots

      • Smuuthbrane
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        Haven’t watched it in years myself, but unless you can define “woke” I’m not going to make any assumptions.

            • Captain Aggravated
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              Just making sure here, you want me to rigorously define the political position and identity of platformless reactionaries?

              • Smuuthbrane
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Not at all, in fact I’d rather “woke” be defined by what they really mean - feminism, inclusivity, equality, etc. Let’s make them say what they actually mean without hiding behind a nebulous term like “woke”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        151 year ago

        It has an alien species where the religious group has quotes that are directly from Carl Sagan (and they’re have more of a philosophy than a religion, at least in most ways). It generally treats religion with more respect than Roddenberry did, in a “all religion has some good parts to it, but extremism is a problem” kind of way.

        One of its major plot arcs is all about how democracies fall into fascism. I thought it was a bit heavy handed at the time, but now it feels too real.

        Skirts around a pair of characters in a lesbian relationship, but like most shows at the time, it doesn’t come right out and say it. They 100% banged one night, though.

        It’s also military science fiction. That always seems to invite right wingers who love the asthetic but ignore the themes. Same problem with Star Trek and Star Wars.

      • Captain Aggravated
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Well let’s see, there’s an episode with a dockworker’s strike, in which a “negotiator” is sent in who’s position is basically “I’ll pretend to ask nicely but the only tactic I have is this in-universe law that says I can use the military to force you back to work.” The letter of that in-universe law (the “Rush Act”) is “The local military commander can break strikes by any means he deems necessary.” And Commander Sinclair decides to pay the dockworkers what they demand out of the military budget of the station. So the union ultimately wins.

        There’s several times when some character, often a human but sometimes an alien, walks up to some other kind of alien and says “We don’t want you FREAKS coming in and stealing our JOBS!” and they’re always depicted as obviously in the wrong. Basically in the script it says “A Republican happens, and gets dealt with.”

        There’s a whole episode with a religious exchange, all the various aliens are invited to demonstrate their planet’s “dominant religion.” When it’s the human’s turn, Sinclair takes the alien crew down a hallway with a long line of various different kinds of priests, ministers, monks, etc. The first guy in line is an atheist. The point being “Earth is diverse as fuck, yo.”

        The show just barely glances off a lesbian relationship, and the show’s attitude says “What? You didn’t have a problem with the five other romantic couples we’ve seen so far, what’s your problem with this one?”

        Oh, then there’s the whole major plot of a socially conservative president sliding Earth’s entire government into totalitarianism with the backing of a hostile alien race thing.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      311 year ago

      Money exists in Star Trek, the Federation just doesn’t use it. the Ferengi love the stuff though

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        101 year ago

        They occasionally reference “Federation Credits”, but I think it’s mainly for use outside the Federation.

        • SharkAttak
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          That’s the greatest accomplishment of the Federation, tricking the Ferengi! Internally money isn’t used anymore, but to trade with the Ferengi they use these Non Federation Tokens, which have no real value.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          61 year ago

          This is just a world building issue that comes with hundreds of writers over the decades. Who knows how money works. Someone will say something, then ten years later, another writer wont get the note and write something that conflicts.

  • Rodneyck
    link
    fedilink
    81 year ago

    The oligarchs and billionaires who own the corporate mainstream media and both political parties are the ones stirring up WOKE issues. Why? So you all hate each other and take your eye off the billionaire thieves stealing everything. This is why we can’t have nice things.

  • IWantToFuckSpez
    link
    fedilink
    65
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I would have thought they’d be more of a Starship Troopers fan, since the satire would fly over the fash’s head.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    93
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    “ Star Wars is bad now”

    I mean yah, the vertical integration, means tested everything, nostalgia bating and assembly line techniques that Disney does sure do ruin otherwise fine properties.

    “No, I don’t mind that, that’s just good business. I just hate the gay people who kissed in the background”

    Oh, OH ok, you’re just an idiot…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      I was gonna say, “what kind of fucked up Shekhinah is that???” That hands gesture symbolizes the Hebrew letter “shin,” which is the first letter of the feminine name of God in Judaism. The female form of God is believed by Orthodox Jews to be so powerful that seeing her can blind a human, therefore they cover their eyes when the rabbi does this symbol while they invoke the dwelling of God, or something like that. I’m quite fuzzy on this part.

      So, this moron is calling Star Wars, the bra strangulation movie, too woke and is trying to troll Star Wars fans with a Star Trek symbol that she got wrong? The incredible irony of her being a bigot unfit for Leonard Nimoy’s Shekhina project while she’s blasting her own face with some Jewish mysticism girl power is beyond hilarious.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    1221 year ago

    There is a weird right-wing contingent of Trekkies who think it’s all about pew pew fights with the Borg and they confuse the rest of us who love the idea of a socialist utopia where indigenous cultures are respected and people try to talk things out before shooting in hostile situations.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      151 year ago

      That’s why I prefer Picard over the others. He represented the best of those ideals while respecting the history that led humanity to the Federation. They even took the time to reveal his humility when he went too far, by his choice or no.

    • Trek has no money in the Federation; no barter. Nobody who’s watched a season of any Trek show can avoid noticing that. It might be a bit murky with characters like Harry Mudd, or the Ferengi, but those operate outside the Federation; you’d have to be daft to miss that. TNG was more careful with their “capitalist” characters like Kivas Fajo, who was clearly a collector and trader rather than a travelling salesman.

      Right-wing free-market Trekkies are self-deluding.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        9
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s a special case of the more general rule: right-wing free-market anyone is self-deluding.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    They don’t have money but they do have the classic authoritarian hierarchy of SciFi.

    Want to travel the galaxy? You need a starship. How do you get a starship? Join the federation.

    Picard retired to a grape farm in France. How did he get that perk? Can anyone have a grape farm in France?

    SciFi has an inherent power imbalance between the fleet and grounders. This comes from the ability to move around and drop bombs on people. As much as they try to stay in a socialist paradise, they still have tons of incidents that end up being solved the starfleet way.

    It’s a quote from starship troopers, but the idea of “Service guarantees citizenship” is what draws fascists to SciFi. It’s a tough problem to fix in fiction and most of the time it’s overlooked because spaceships are cool on paper. They make great entertainment.

    The reality is that serving in the federation usually would mean you’ve never been on a starship bridge. You’re 20 levels down in a maintenance hold with no outside view. Nobody tells you shit and all you know is the ship is being fired at and you’re fucking terrified.

    Even if you can pull up an external view on your tablet (which is a massive security problem), you still don’t have any control over the fight. Now you can watch torpedoes coming straight at you and realize the captain can’t stop it, and you can’t either…

    Morale would be constantly in the toilet, and without a bigger reward than to explore strange new worlds you can’t see from the hold, people would be constantly quitting.

    In conclusion, I’m not saying that star trek is fascist. I’m just saying it hand waves away 90% of the problems with their alleged utopia and people like watching action packed SciFi adventures.

    I have a whole separate rant about weapons like lasers that travel at the speed of light. In the real world most fights would happen across distances, with ships being undetectable against the blackness of space, until a beam comes out of nowhere and instantly destroys your ship. But because it’s fiction you can ignore this.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      141 year ago

      FRIENDLY NOTE: I don’t mean this to sound combative, I just want to offer a different (more optimistic) perspective.

      What’s missing here is the central conceit of Trek: that humanity grew up. We could have a utopia now if people would just stop being greedy little shits, and decided to embrace empathy and forgiveness. There’s nothing stopping every single person in a modern conflict from dropping their weapons, but we still want vengeance and punishment. and I’m not saying I’m above that: someone kills someone I love, and I’m going to want blood. On paper I’m against capital punishment, but I know if I was faced with a war on my doorstep, bombs being dropped, my morals may not hold.

      In Star Trek, they had WW3/the Eugenics Wars, and after that…humanity finally had enough. Never again, but for all the ills of humanity, in a way.

      So very few people in the Trek world would actually complain about working a shit detail, because they’re in it for the greater good. We saw in TNG episodes that randos from the 20th century could just waltz around the ship at their leisure, and how lax security is…because people just generally behaved well. Humanity really did bind themselves to a stronger social contract, if that’s the right term.

      As for needing ships: there seem to be plenty of civilian ships out there, from trading and light exploration to proper science vessels. Not all Starfleet, though the shows have focused on them. So I can only imagine there’s plenty of opportunity for non-Starfleet folks to get out there.

      Granted, DS9 pushed back on all this a little, as the Maquis are comprised of a lot of Federation members that went feral/colonial and don’t hold themselves to the Federation ideals that seem to keep the rest of humanity and others acting in good faith at almost all times. Likewise still plenty of BadMirals out there, and they do show the Tom Paris-es of the world in some kind of prison, so it’s not all roses, and could definitely be spun as drops of dystopia in a utopia, but we’re also told (and have no reason to doubt) that it’s all well-above board, humane, and focused on rehabilitation instead of punishment.

      Also, all that said, I do wish it wasn’t so hierarchical, but that’s my anarchist streak flaring up.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        To reply to myself, because it merits its own giant text box: for anarchist-minded folks like myself, I’d highly recommend reading Homage to Catalonia, because it gives some glimpse of how things might work in a less-hierarchical military (in the cases like in Trek’s Starfleet that weapons are sometimes unfortunately needed).

        https://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0201111.txt

        The main sections I want to quote are:

        The essential point of the system was social equality between officers and men. Everyone from general to private drew the same pay, ate the same food, wore the same clothes, and mingled on terms of complete equality. If you wanted to slap the general commanding the division on the back and ask him for a cigarette, you could do so, and no one thought it curious. In theory at any rate each militia was a democracy and not a hierarchy. It was understood that orders had to be obeyed, but it was also understood that when you gave an order you gave it as comrade to comrade and not as superior to inferior. There were officers and N.C.O.s but there was no military rank in the ordinary sense; no titles, no badges, no heel-clicking and saluting. They had attempted to produce within the militias a sort of temporary working model of the classless society. Of course there was no perfect equality, but there was a nearer approach to it than I had ever seen or than I would have thought conceivable in time of war.

        But I admit that at first sight the state of affairs at the front horrified me. How on earth could the war be won by an army of this type? It was what everyone was saying at the time, and though it was true it was also unreasonable. For in the circumstances the militias could not have been much better than they were. A modern mechanized army does not spring up out of the ground, and if the Government had waited until it had trained troops at its disposal, Franco would never have been resisted. Later it became the fashion to decry the militias, and therefore to pretend that the faults which were due to lack of training and weapons were the result of the equalitarian system. Actually, a newly raised draft of militia was an undisciplined mob not because the officers called the private ‘Comrade’ but because raw troops are always an undisciplined mob. In practice the democratic ‘revolutionary’ type of discipline is more reliable than might be expected. In a workers’ army discipline is theoretically voluntary. It is based on class-loyalty, whereas the discipline of a bourgeois conscript army is based ultimately on fear. (The Popular Army that replaced the militias was midway between the two types.) In the militias the bullying and abuse that go on in an ordinary army would never have been tolerated for a moment. The normal military punishments existed, but they were only invoked for very serious offences. When a man refused to obey an order you did not immediately get him punished; you first appealed to him in the name of comradeship. Cynical people with no experience of handling men will say instantly that this would never ‘work’, but as a matter of fact it does ‘work’ in the long run. The discipline of even the worst drafts of militia visibly improved as time went on. In January the job of keeping a dozen raw recruits up to the mark almost turned my hair grey. In May for a short while I was acting-lieutenant in command of about thirty men, English and Spanish. We had all been under fire for months, and I never had the slightest difficulty in getting an order obeyed or in getting men to volunteer for a dangerous job. ‘Revolutionary’ discipline depends on political consciousness–on an understanding of why orders must be obeyed; it takes time to diffuse this, but it also takes time to drill a man into an automaton on the barrack-square. The journalists who sneered at the militia-system seldom remembered that the militias had to hold the line while the Popular Army was training in the rear. And it is a tribute to the strength of ‘revolutionary’ discipline that the militias stayed in the field at all. For until about June 1937 there was nothing to keep them there, except class loyalty. Individual deserters could be shot–were shot, occasionally–but if a thousand men had decided to walk out of the line together there was no force to stop them. A conscript army in the same circumstances–with its battle-police removed–would have melted away. Yet the militias held the line, though God knows they won very few victories, and even individual desertions were not common. In four or five months in the P.O.U.M. militia I only heard of four men deserting, and two of those were fairly certainly spies who had enlisted to obtain information. At the beginning the apparent chaos, the general lack of training, the fact that you often had to argue for five minutes before you could get an order obeyed, appalled and infuriated me. I had British Army ideas, and certainly the Spanish militias were very unlike the British Army. But considering the circumstances they were better troops than one had any right to expect.