DS9 - Tribunal

[PerrySimm]

Just like with Picard in "Chain of Command" - when the Cardassians capture a Starfleet officer, war is not typically the result. The result is high-stakes poker match.

This is a very strong second on the list of top Keiko episodes, right after "In the Hands of the Prophets".

[Hero_Of_Shadows]

This is the closest we can come to an objective truth about politics.

On the other hand when I think about what is more important Law/Chaos or Good/Evil I always chose the option that gives me the best class in DnD.

[Jonathan101]

Since the Enterprise was mobilised over this, I like to think that Picard was lecturing a different Cardassian official over video at the same time Sisko was over this whole thing.

And this whole incident was just a setup by Dukat after he made a bet with some colleague over who gives the better speech.

[Thebestoftherest]

Just like with Picard in "Chain of Command" - when the Cardassians capture a Starfleet officer, war is not typically the result. The result is high-stakes poker match.

This is a very strong second on the list of top Keiko episodes, right after "In the Hands of the Prophets".

Except Piccard was illegally in Cardassian terority meanwhile O'Brien was minding his own business in Federation space.

[FlynnTaggart]

The going to extreme sides and lacking nuance I've felt in politics. Shockingly as a moderately proud WVian who wears camo regularly I lean more conservative however as a person raised to treat everyone equally and to not judge someone by what they are but who they are I do have some liberal tendencies. I support gun rights but also support gay rights, support religious rights but the right to be free of religion, believe in a strong military but don't believe in a militarized police force, think we should have a strong Euro style social(ist) safety net but also think we should have strong border protection. Some people seem to take almost offense that I'm not throwing all my eggs into one political basket, that I'm a "centrist" or "moderate" like thats a bad thing, a fence sitter.

That unless you support everything in a position you cannot support any of it, the opposing viewpoint is not just opposing and opposite but straight up evil and if you hold that viewpoint you are evil too, if you support gun rights you support child murder in mass shootings, if you support gay rights you support children being forced to be gay/trans, if you support religious rights you support religious wackjobs brainwashing their kids, if you support non-religious rights you support atheist wackjobs brainwashing their kids, if you support a strong social safety net they you support death panels, and if you support a strong border then you support kids in cages. If you support something then you support all the evil that goes with it people seem to think.

Like First Amendment rights, I got in some internet fight about my support of it it even to Neo-Nazis. Not supporting them, no just supporting their right to sounds like pieces of human garbage, that even Neo-Nutzis deserve equal protection under the law as everyone else not for their benefit but for the benefit of everyone, in my opinion if you cannot protect the worst of us you cannot protect any as any tomorrow can be the worst. Of course some accuse me of supporting them, of being them for defending their rights. It wasn't even really about their rights, its mine, I don't want a foot in the door from a future (or current) President to label what I'm mindlessly spewing as hate speech, to declare saying something like "I'm an atheist and support gay marriage" as offensive from a conservative President or "I like guns and don't like illegal immigration" as offensive from a liberal President.

But no, you support a Neo-Nutzi's right to free speech then you are one of them, eff context and nuance, if you lean a way you are falling in that way all the way.

But stupid nonsensical political crap out of the way, the Cardassian legal system is interesting, seems like alot of things in Cardassian society is designed to prop up the system. A system that only punishes the guilty (because everyone is guilty) and more time in trial is spent getting the guilty to admit they are guilty while their sobbing family watches. Makes the state look like its always right while making people not want to commit any crimes or get into any trouble. I wouldn't be surprised if Cardassia was a very paranoid place, with police state shenanigans like neighbors informing on neighbors.

[clearspira]

Since the Enterprise was mobilised over this, I like to think that Picard was lecturing a different Cardassian official over video at the same time Sisko was over this whole thing.

Honestly, that's a great point. We know season 2 of DS9 must be season 6 of TNG as Generations takes place just before DS9 season 4 given how that's when Worf joins the station.
And season 6 of TNG contains within it the infamous ''There Are Four Lights!'' I am going to imagine that Picard was very unlikely at this point in time to take the potential execution of a former crewmember lying down.

Makes you wonder how close he was to breaking the peace treaty to rescue him. Although saying that, TNG Picard as opposed to Movie Picard or Old Man Picard is not likely to have done a ''Spock in The Undiscovered Country'' and charged into Cardassian space to save a friend. He just isn't that sort of man.
Kirk? Definitely. Sisko? Maybe. Janeway? Depends on the writer. Archer? Depends on the writer. But Picard? I don't see it.

[Freeverse]

Antifa isn't a group, it's a tactic. Also, you may want to refresh your memory on what fascism is.


Edit: I didn't mean to be so dismissive, it's just that there's a lot of misinformation being spread about antifa and the left in general and I just wanted to clear things up if I could.

Openly fascist groups, such as the Proud Boys and the English Defense League are intentionally sparking violence with counter-protests to manipulate the way that people see their opponents. Because such a premium is placed on civility, they are trying to provoke antifa reactions so they can claim they didn't throw the first punch.

Antifa action is limited to the direct opposition of fascist organizing. This can include violent action, and if you have a problem with that, your concerns are legitimate, but what we are talking about is not a coup against the current government, or a plan to eliminate anyone who shares different views. What we are talking about, is being willing to punch Nazis. And again, there is a debate to be had about the validity or effectiveness of such a tactic, but that is what it is; nothing else.

And if you're hearing that antifa organizing is happening for any reason other than the direct opposition of currently active and open fascist groups, you are being lied to.

Antifa has websites and social media presences. Tactics don't have websites.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've seen Antifa tactics including property damage. According to Wikipedia, there are about 400 Nazis in the U.S. And I'm pretty sure most of the people I've seen Antifa oppose have not been advocating for anything authoritarian.

Antifa has also suppressed the freedom of speech for people, haven't they? People who were not advocating anything authoritarian, AFAIK.

I have also not heard the Proud Boys advocating for authoritarianism. Or white supremacy, or racism of any sort.

What definition of "fascist" are you using?

People can label themselves or their actions as "antifa", or have that label applied to them by others, but there's no one with a trademark on the term, no organization deciding who is or is not a member. There are groups that are antifa, but there is no Antifa group; the same way that there are liberal groups and conservative groups, but there's not a Liberal Group and Conservative Group

That's also something to keep in mind when you ask how many Nazis there are in America. If you look just at the American Nazi Party, then yeah, that's a pretty small number. But they're hardly the only Nazi organization in America; even if you only look at groups that openly identify themselves as Nazis, they're far from the largest. And there are plenty of other groups and individuals who, while they reject the Nazi label, still argue for many of the same beliefs.

As for the Proud Boys . . . well, its founder/leader has openly identified himself as a "western chauvinist".

That was well put, thank you.

The only thing I would add is that there have been plenty of times when someone is deplatformed due to protests being held against them speaking at a certain venue... but, this isn't the same thing as free speech being suppressed. It's actually just one group using their freedom of speech to convince the platform holder not to have these people speak on their platform. Essentially "HEY! don't give your microphone to that racist! They're probably going to use it to say some racist shit!"

[TGLS]

Imagine if North Koreans sent the army across the 38th parallel to abduct a South Korean citizen or a member of the South Korean military.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abduction_of_Shin_Sang-ok_and_Choi_Eun-hee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_abductions_of_Japanese_citizens#List_of_victims
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_abductions_of_South_Koreans#Major_abduction_cases

Admittedly, this was rarely the North Korean army, just their intelligence service.

[JL_Stinger]

That's also something to keep in mind when you ask how many Nazis there are in America. If you look just at the American Nazi Party, then yeah, that's a pretty small number. But they're hardly the only Nazi organization in America; even if you only look at groups that openly identify themselves as Nazis, they're far from the largest. And there are plenty of other groups and individuals who, while they reject the Nazi label, still argue for many of the same beliefs.

Every person who was at the Charlottesville protest with a Nazi flag was a Nazi whether they hold membership in the party or not. Chanting "blood and soil" or anything else that is effectively a Nazi slogan would also count. I'd go so far as to say anyone who willingly participates in a protest that includes any Nazi flags or slogans is at best a Nazi sympathizer.

[Genth]

A lot of people here talk about 'context', especially in terms of issues like the 'free speech rights' of Nazis. It's important to understand that there is a difference between personal context and social context. One can have a positive personal context - you believe in the right of freedom of speech, even for those you disagree with, as a principle that must be upheld for the good of everyone. But equally so, there is a social context which (I would argue) shows that you cannot debate fascists, their operational tactic is so anathema to free speech that you have to vigorously oppose them with protests and yes, calling for deplatforming. You can have nuance in that in terms of how much you want to rely on authorities to flex their power in this case, sure, but that then gets into a tactical argument. But my appraisal of the social context means that despite your personal context, calling for them to be given platforms and calmly 'debated' means that, unintentionally, you are supporting them. That does not mean I am saying you are lying when you give your beliefs and reasons, but just that despite what you believe, there is an outcome of your beliefs which I oppose.

Similarly, it does not matter that Kovat firmly, deeply believes in the state's infallibility, it does not matter that he honestly deeply believes that the Cardassian system is the best thing for society and that it does good. His actions and beliefs, though principled, are just fodder for the Cardassian state to get away with whatever it wants.