#the prime directive

[mrmagusjester]

More MTG x Star Trek nitpicks

The Borg Queen isn't a literal queen. She shouldn't have the "Noble" creature type anymore than a literal queen bee should.

Why does Consider the Prime Directive depict Captain Archer when, famously, the Prime Directive hadn't been written yet when he was a captain? I get that it could be referencing the times when he wished there was something like the Prime Directive, but it just feels weird that he is the character chosen for this card.

Also, stunning something doesn't feel much like "observing" to me. That mode should have been scry or surveil or something.

[neurodiversitysci]

It just occurred to me, the Prime Directive was actually extremely relevant when the original Star Trek series was coming out. Urban-living, high tech societies like America and Western Europe were making contact with isolated groups of hunter gatherers, who had only ever met other hunter-gatherers before. To them, we *were* the powerful aliens with unheard of technology from unimaginably far away. And anthropologists did, rightly, worry about how to interact with them without upending their way of life.

[anghraine]

It's genuinely kind of fascinating to me that the Prime Directive was, as far as I recall, never once mentioned or alluded to for over 20 episodes of TOS and is rarely that big of a deal. Sure, the world-building developed gradually over time and it takes a bit to find their footing, but you really wouldn't guess from TNG and general Star Trek discourse that the Prime Directive is so completely irrelevant for so long.

But also, the very episode in which it's introduced—"Return of the Archons"—parallels the Prime Directive of Starfleet with the Prime Directive of the evil computer in the episode. The familiar Prime Directive is only mentioned once in vague terms; Spock brings it up as a concern and Kirk immediately rule-lawyers his way out of obeying it. Meanwhile, Landru the evil computer (named after an actual, long-dead guy who programmed it) says:

Your statement is irrelevant. You will be obliterated. The good of the Body is the Prime Directive.

Landru has basically instituted a terrifying control state in which people are kept submissive, docile, harmonious, and physically healthy, interpreting this as "the good of the Body" (the body being the physical welfare of the people). It's able to override the wills of those subsumed into "the Body," including Sulu and McCoy.

Kirk, aided by Spock, beats Landru by focusing the analysis on "the good" and thus redefining the Prime Directive (of Landru) as creating the good for the people and destroying the evil. He then convinces Landru that Landru's oppressive rule itself qualifies as "the evil" and thus it must destroy itself under the Prime Directive.

KIRK: You are the evil. The evil must be destroyed. Fulfill the Prime Directive. You— LANDRU: Landru, help me! KIRK: —are the evil. Fulfill the Prime Directive.

So, the very episode that introduces the Prime Directive as a concept:

Is over 20 episodes into the series;

Barely mentions the Starfleet version, and the Starfleet characters easily come up with a justification for ignoring theirs in favor of helping people;

Provides an obvious dramatic foil in the evil AI counterpart version, also called the Prime Directive, and what often is the thing being referring to by the term in that episode;

Has Kirk et al free people by redefining the evil Prime Directive as requiring the promotion of the common good but for real, and destroying the true evil of oppression, resulting in the liberation of the people Landru was dominating.

The takeaway about Starfleet's Prime Directive in the context of all this is ambiguous at best. So the Prime Directive becoming this very concrete, pivotal, absolutist aspect of the world-building is not really how it's introduced. And I do feel like TOS most often treats "fight oppressive evildoers and help people" as a far higher priority than non-interference, though Kirk et al do prefer to accommodate regulations and orders when they can.

It reminds me a little of Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, which were an intriguing concept to begin with and became this whole ... thing over time.

[janedoodlee]

watching tng. Ok so we're just throwing the prime directive out the window huh

[farsight-the-char]

You just know Cass would break the "Prime Directive" to save someone.

She might also break it to troll, but that is another topic.

[majuuorthrus]

What is the "statute of limitations" on the Prime Directive?

Like, the Federation does seem to do space colonisation fairly ethically - choosing M-class planets not inhabited by sapient life to set up colonies for the most part, so no one gets displaced or anything

But

For millions of years, Earth was an M-class planet not inhabited by sapient life. And this might include time when animals we consider "early humans" were wandering around - the line between "sentient" and "sapient" can be a bit fuzzy

Now, there's a good chance that the original Federation colony is in ruins and uninhabited by the time native sapient life evolves millions of years later - maybe it's not a good planet for pizza-loving salamanders - but they'd leave evidence of their existence and that would have an impact on these new species' developing societies

So does this technically count as a violation of the Prime Directive, section 1-B: "No interference with the social, cultural, or technological development of said planet"?

(I'm going to say "probably not", because like, you cannot predict evolution in this way, but if Star Trek has taught me anything, it's to have a good hard probe into moral questions from every angle)

[lichqueenlibrarian]

“…we are in such violation of the Prime Directive as not even the Enterprise has managed before.”- Spock

Fuckin around and finding out, the novelization.

[im-perialism]

American Imperialism in Star Trek: The Prime Directive and Cultural Imperialism

Another important layer to Star Trek’s depiction of American imperialism is the presence of a guiding fictional principle known as the “Prime Directive.” This directive states that no humans or other Federation members may make contact with other planets deemed “less developed” than the Federation. This directive exists because of a fear that contact with “primitive” aliens would immediately and irrevocably alter the course of that world’s development. Going back to my first post, this is more evidence of how frontier mythology has affected Star Trek; there is a “tradition” within American stories of exploration where any indigenous people are depicted as ‘primitive’ and innocent in contrast to the fictional counterpart for the United States (Newell and Lamont 61). Thus, Star Trek’s Prime Directive carries the idea of the Federation’s own superiority, since a belief that they can “civilize” or “advance” a culture upon contact suggests the view of that culture as inferior and uncivilized – and empire, after all, depends on a belief in the imperial power’s own superiority (Howe 83).

[A meme about the Prime Directive, which is often joked about by Star Trek fans. Image from The Eclectic.]

The idea of cultural imperialism is essentially one of cultural dominance stemming from the imperial power’s belief in the supremacy of its own values. In the modern day, cultural imperialism also involves dominance of the media – and is a type of imperialism that the U.S. has mastered. Today, American empire does not manifest in colonies and conquest, but rather in the scale of its cultural influence and the power it holds on the global stage in trade and wealth (Howe 57). Ultimately, the way the Federation’s idea of cultural superiority is so strong that it’s tied into everything that they do reflects how the United States’ own cultural superiority is so often reflected in American produced media. This is why it’s important to be aware of how American fiction can perpetuate and justify American colonial activity – whether that fiction is a space western or not.

Project Bibliography