How would you fix Star Trek?

[CmdrKing]

I think the issue Trek is struggling with is: it doesn't stand out.
It's far from the only sci-fi game in town. Plenty of shows have gritty backstabbing and swearing and break representational barriers. Discovery might be good, I haven't had a chance to watch it (based on Chuck's reviews it seems... fine?), but it's just going to suffer from so many other, established shows doing a lot of what it does even without the paywall issues.

Similarly, we have honest to god Star Wars movies now. The Star Trek film series isn't going to outdo them in terms of space action and explosions, they don't have the cash and it makes less sense in the universe.

Star Trek has to press its advantages, and it has two options: its continuity, or it's philosophy. So you either want to take advantage of the extensive timeline the series already has, which rules out reboots, or you want to go back to the series roots and be optimistically political. Not gritty realpolitik, not dreary allegories for 9/11, but a future you want to live in that gets better over time.
Heck, Beyond is easily the best of the Kelvin timeline movies, and it's precisely because it shows how goddamned awesome the future is and does it by showing how far humanity has come. I mean, why else would the villain be what they were.

So in that spirit, y'know what I want? I want the Enterprise C story. We might know how it ends, but before that. A galaxy trying to find its way after... how many years of cold war? 20 was it? 30? I can't even remember. Of trying to figure out how to untangle years of mistrust and make good on an armistice signed in... unfavorable circumstances shall we say (as uplifting as the end of Undiscovered Country is, think about it: how many aging warriors or young teens with everything to prove will look at that treaty and reject it? We were desperate, it was a federation plot, we're STRONGER now, end it! A lot.)
Heck, you want your 90s nostalgia? Make a show that's set in an allegorical 90s, and has that same spirit of hesitant optimism. Where the end of history seems possible, and a future without wars seems in reach. A version of the 90s where the Federation tries to make good on the sorts of promises our real politicians did not, where the Klingon's didn't fall a decade later to some strongman remnant of the old guard.

Maybe I'm the only person on earth that wants that, but I think not. It'd be something we don't have now, something undeniably and specifically trek, and something I think the world is hungry for: the idea that things can go right.

[Deledrius]

Star Trek has to press its advantages, and it has two options: its continuity, or it's philosophy. So you either want to take advantage of the extensive timeline the series already has, which rules out reboots, or you want to go back to the series roots and be optimistically political. Not gritty realpolitik, not dreary allegories for 9/11, but a future you want to live in that gets better over time.
Heck, Beyond is easily the best of the Kelvin timeline movies, and it's precisely because it shows how goddamned awesome the future is and does it by showing how far humanity has come. I mean, why else would the villain be what they were.

Exactly!

Maybe I'm the only person on earth that wants that, but I think not. It'd be something we don't have now, something undeniably and specifically trek, and something I think the world is hungry for: the idea that things can go right.

Well, you and me both, at least. Everything you said in this post is right on point.

[Beastro]

No, they pussy footed more around doing the realpolitik thing and it butting heads with their ideals, especially around the Cardassians in later TNG. It's been awhile since I watched those episodes, but the whole matter reeked of not only the Feds leadership being weak willed, but Fed culture being so as well as being naive when tit comes to matters of national interest.

What is so wrong with having one major mainstream franchise that does not spread politcal misery, preemptive wars, and bad but necessary shadowy black ops?

Political misery? Rather political verisimilitude, like DS9.

Preemptive wars? It's not either/or with political realism.

You know, Beastro strikes me as a nationalist. I find this attitude of putting my nation before yours as really, stupidly petty. Cuz we're all human beings.

It's the acknowledgement of the beasts that are nations that we make up. They inevitably exert their will beyond ours and it's why nations, tribes and all other social groups continually do things beyond the will of their constituent parts.

In the end my view comes down to "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar, render unto God that which is God." We continually have tried to subordinate such beasts to the will of as few as possible, resulting in monarchy with the result of the conflation of the beasts being made with the monarchs trying to rule in their place.

I do not make a virtue out of necessity, however. I do not think of nationalism as a good in an of itself, rather living it room in the same way emotional repression isn't a sensible thing to do.

I find the so-called white nationalists and others hilarious as they continue the same old cycle. Like Pan-Slavism, such a wonderful idea so many Slavs were for, until it came down to exactly how the hierarchy of people's would be ordered within the Pan-Slavic nation, and suddenly it broken down into each group thinking they'd run things as they sneered and looked down upon the other, as almost all feared the hegemony of Russia.

You see that sort of thing now on boards as people cry out that whites need to save their world and such, then when the unifying rhetoric dies down, they turn on each other arguing over who isn't truly white and which of their little groups is superior, ultimately turning an axe to their own supposed solidarity.

As a Christian I cannot align with that given Christ's universalist message and simply reeks of paganism's basal "recognize your blood and only your blood" roots that literally came from tribes. It is no surprise to me that those on the right most for that mentality outright reject Christianity and hold it in such contempt for being so "cuckism" and not incestuous as they think everyone should be.

And sticking to tribal mindsets is just one more thing that holds us back as a species.

There are upper limits to which Mankind can function together as groups. That isn't to say more complex ones beyond nations couldn't exist, but they'd require all of Mankind to be very homogeneous, which will never happen. My position is to seek a happy medium with to each his own accepting that conflict in an inherent part of such a position, especially given that the field of these beasts is like the wild than that of our minds and outlook, as is their mentality.

You build too high and you create another Tower of Babel, as we're seeing in the EU as Eurocrats try to corral too many nations together too quickly out of trauma over what they'll do if they're free to live on their own again thanks to the World Wars.

I'd destroy American culture if it meant we could come together as a happy race in peace and love and cooperation. PERIOD.

You'd destroy one of the best societies on earth for a fabled utopia and reap a whirlwind as a result, like all utopians have accomplished.

This mentality is ultimately why I'm so against Internationalism and Political Liberalism (no, not the same thing as the L-word is commonly used as, just as Political Realism is different from Realism).

If I were a member of the Federation Council and had to decide between accepting that those worlds would continue to be harshly-treated possessions of the Klingon Empire in exchange for helping to safeguard the lives of trillions of citizens I was responsible for, I'd make that bargain. I wouldn't feel great about it, but I'd do it.

And that's what I liked about DS9, in that that is how things happened, but Sisko and Co. didn't act like their shit didn't stink as opposed to Picard in later TNG who was acting like Yuke in this thread that idealism was being sacrificed out of regard for lack of omnipotence on the part of the Fed. At least the weakness and appeasement of folks like Nechayev is at least a bit more understandable than Picard's sanctimonious crap.

Here's another way I'd fix Trek - LEAVE THE MILKY WAY. Adopt the Voyager mindset, but do it right this time. Have the crew be marooned in not the Milky Way, but the Andromeda Galaxy.

Yes, yes, let's following Mass Effect's and Stargate's preceent. That'll work out SO well.

Hell, today's entertainment model is very cynical and dark, so it's like DS9, and you don't even really have to change anything.

DS9 dark, but it wasn't cynical. If it was Sisko wouldn't have ended In The Pale Moonlight the way he did. He refused to allow himself the luxury of cynicism for what he did - he accepted it full on - he played a part in a terrible act and its necessity makes no difference that it was terrible or that he should abandon everything he swore to uphold and defend even if he had to betray those principles to win a war.

THAT is what I appreciate about DS9. That despite what I may think of Roddenberry's ideals and the way he built the Federation, it did not throw the baby out with the bathwater by challenging the Trek status quo and stayed true to the spirit of Roddenberry's ideals even if it disagreed with how they'd actually play out in a world where they had weaker plot armour.

That goes to the heart of what I'd like to see in what I described with a secessionist state from the Federation, that like America and Britain, as much as they may play up hating one another and their history of animosity and mutual cultural disgust, deep down they agree on what matters and they're natural allies and friends given their values and national interests, of which they allow more room for the former to be a part of the latter than many other countries allow.

In ths century invidual interests > national.

And we're going from one extreme to the other. For God knows how long it was "Doesn't fucking matter what you think, individual, keep in step or the mob will remove you with prejudice", now it's "Why should I do anything to make the world a better place beyond making things nice and pleasurable for myself? Why should I care for the future beyond my life? I'd rather warm my feet by the fire of the world burning than dare defend something greater than myself".

Collectivism and Individualism I hate them both, it's rather prefer a society of individuals that understand their place within the various communities they inhabitant.

or you want to go back to the series roots and be optimistically political. Not gritty realpolitik, not dreary allegories for 9/11, but a future you want to live in that gets better over time.

One must balance things, as DS9 showed, but I agree with you, just as TOS did so with the Cold War. For me, elements of realpolitik are an acknowledgement of humbleness and frailty, in the same way Sisko wasn't a self-righteous prick and refused to do what he did to bring the Romulans into the war - his principles and those of his nations weren't so sacred as to risk losing that war and all that would have come from it, but like I said, he also refused to hide behind things like thought terminating cliches and didn't flinch taking the moral bullet in the heart.

In that vein, I'd rather stick with the post-Dominion War world where the AQ fears and acknowledges the might and paranoia of the Founders, but led by Federation and it's secessionists challenge their judgement that solids should be treated only in the way they've come to see that can build a path with the Dominion that doesn't end with either the AQ falling to them or the Founders exterminated due to their inveterate paranoia.

[Karha of Honor]

And we're going from one extreme to the other. For God knows how long it was "Doesn't fucking matter what you think, individual, keep in step or the mob will remove you with prejudice", now it's "Why should I do anything to make the world a better place beyond making things nice and pleasurable for myself? Why should I care for the future beyond my life? I'd rather warm my feet by the fire of the world burning than dare defend something greater than myself".

Collectivism and Individualism I hate them both, it's rather prefer a society of individuals that understand their place within the various communities they inhabitant.

Can you blame people when their leaders turn out to be crooks and liars?

Also are you sure people are that individualistic?

[Madner Kami]

As a Christian I cannot align with that given Christ's universalist message and simply reeks of paganism's basal "recognize your blood and only your blood" roots that literally came from tribes. It is no surprise to me that those on the right most for that mentality outright reject Christianity and hold it in such contempt for being so "cuckism" and not incestuous as they think everyone should be.

Um, what the fuck?

[Yukaphile]

Is this guy living in the same universe? He defends other cultures with severe flaws under the guise of "cultural relativism," and then he claims most people on the right don't like Christ? The hell? "The religious right" and "the alt right" is mainstream terminology for a reason, and it is that they are fueled by religious fanaticism and paranoia. Most of America identifies as religious conservative, though at least with some on the right you got people who classify themselves as "fiscally conservative, socially liberal." It's just... wow, could you get any more wrong? Hell, Christ's message is honestly that he was too forgiving. He said if you wanted sincere forgiveness, and asked for it, you would be given it from God. That... just ignores all the horrible things you might have done, huh? I recall what Leia said regarding Vader. "Yes, perhaps Vader had died heroically, but ten minutes contrition did not make up for a lifetime of atrocities." And I can't disagree given the dude had literally burned worlds just because it was efficient. That's why I prefer the more Oriental faith systems, like how even the Buddhists believe in hell, an icy hell and a fiery hell (and living in Minnesota right now, trust me, there is no worse punishment for some guy fucking around with kids at the corner bus stop than being sentenced to walk a million years in weather like this, brrrrrrr), which is amazing to me given how they're about enlightenment and peace and cosmic awareness and forgiveness, and even they understand you can't just walk away from all your negative karma sometimes. Christ, though? I do believe excessive kindness can be a cruelty, in its own way.

[clearspira]

You know, Beastro strikes me as a nationalist. I find this attitude of putting my nation before yours as really, stupidly petty. Cuz we're all human beings. And sticking to tribal mindsets is just one more thing that holds us back as a species. I'd destroy American culture if it meant we could come together as a happy race in peace and love and cooperation. PERIOD.

I'll say one thing for Trek: wiping out all major governments and countries thanks to World War Three and then finding a common ground for us to unite around i.e. aliens and trying to stop World War Four is the most likely way we will ever come together as a race. Too much history, too much bad blood, too much nationalism for that to ever happen on our current course.

It funny, whilst I hate season 1 TNG just as much as anyone else, I can legitimately see why they would look at the Stars and Stripes and 20th century military uniforms in ''Encounter At Farpoint'' and mock because to them these things mean nothing. They have no symbolic or emotional attachment to any of these things. It would be like you or I feeling pride over a flag from some African republic that no one has barely ever heard of. Its just a pity that they then ruined it by making Picard masturbate over the French flag and culture in ''Code of Honor'' thereby making the whole point redundant.

[clearspira]

Is this guy living in the same universe? He defends other cultures with severe flaws under the guise of "cultural relativism," and then he claims most people on the right don't like Christ? The hell? "The religious right" and "the alt right" is mainstream terminology for a reason, and it is that they are fueled by religious fanaticism and paranoia. Most of America identifies as religious conservative, though at least with some on the right you got people who classify themselves as "fiscally conservative, socially liberal." It's just... wow, could you get any more wrong? Hell, Christ's message is honestly that he was too forgiving. He said if you wanted sincere forgiveness, and asked for it, you would be given it from God. That... just ignores all the horrible things you might have done, huh? I recall what Leia said regarding Vader. "Yes, perhaps Vader had died heroically, but ten minutes contrition did not make up for a lifetime of atrocities." And I can't disagree given the dude had literally burned worlds just because it was efficient. That's why I prefer the more Oriental faith systems, like how even the Buddhists believe in hell, an icy hell and a fiery hell (and living in Minnesota right now, trust me, there is no worse punishment for some guy fucking around with kids at the corner bus stop than being sentenced to walk a million years in weather like this, brrrrrrr), which is amazing to me given how they're about enlightenment and peace and cosmic awareness and forgiveness, and even they understand you can't just walk away from all your negative karma sometimes. Christ, though? I do believe excessive kindness can be a cruelty, in its own way.

On your point regarding Vader, it really annoys me when people say that he ended up a good person just because he did the right thing in the end. ''Eventually'' throwing the guy over a railing that you helped put into power in the first place does not absolve you of hacking small children to bits whilst they scream your name and choking your pregnant wife half to death.

[Yukaphile]

Yeah, as I said, I'd destroy the US if it meant world peace - on a cultural level, however. If it took even one innocent life, my conscience would get in the way. I think our current-day nation-states are stupid. Holdovers from our tribal days. And just ripe for the abuse of human excess. Bleh.

IKR? Coming back to the light is one thing. You need some serious hard work to make up for that. Like... devoting a billion years to making sure huge populations of people are happy and not suffering or something. The reverse of what you did.

[Karha of Honor]

Yeah, as I said, I'd destroy the US if it meant world peace - on a cultural level, however. If it took even one innocent life, my conscience would get in the way. I think our current-day nation-states are stupid. Holdovers from our tribal days. And just ripe for the abuse of human excess. Bleh.

Cosmopolitans are just another small minded cultural tribe. non nation states would be just as ripe for abuse and human excess.