Star Trek: Imperialist

[khaosworks]

Let's State The Really Obvious For A Change By Mr. Terence Chua, who really should be reading about the Hatfield-McCoy feud right now

I'm sure it's nothing you've never heard before, and I'm probably going to look like a total goof for not thinking about this in detail earlier.

It goes back to Frederick Jackson Turner, whose 1893 treatise, "The Significance of the Frontier in American History" formed the basic historical myth of the populating of the American West. Turner's frontier thesis - that the driving force behind the expansion to the West was this free land that was constantly beckoning as the settlers moved ever westward, and that the frontier mentality gave the purest context to such "American" virtues as individualism, democracy, self-reliance, the belief in progress, that "can-do" attitude. Turner is largely responsible for the romantic image of the Old West in the popular consciousness and its association with the values mentioned earlier. So what we have is this largely empty space and Americans moving into it and shaping it to their will, and for the better. Cowboys with their codes of honor, hardy settlers working the land and bringing life to it, wagon trains seeking a new life beyond the next hill.

Let's look at wagon trains.

Fans of Star Trek will know that Gene Roddenberry's initial pitch was a "Wagon Train To The Stars". Most kids today, even if they know this, probably don't remember that Wagon Train was actually a TV show, set in the Old West. So when we look at Star Trek, and all the liberal baggage that has built up around the show, how it was so progressive in showing an integrated crew, in dealing with social issues of prejudice and racism head on, and of course that infamous "not-a-kiss" between Kirk and Uhura, we've got to remember that, at its core, Star Trek is simply a transplanted Western.

In that light, several things become apparent, especially the Turnerian view of the universe. The galaxy is the new frontier, beckoning the brave explorers on. We have colonists on far flung worlds, facing new dangers, and new life forms to deal with. We have Kirk and crew as the new marshalls, bringing law to the lawless, and imparting lessons of tolerance, and peace and goodwill to the natives, and welcoming them into the brotherhood of a galactic Federation of Planets.

But let's look closer at what the Federation really is all about. It's not about diversity, it's not about tolerance, it's not a celebration of the things that make us unique or individual. It's about assimilation, about homogeneity, about forcing everyone to a particular political or social culture - even if it is, in their view, a "good" one. The comparison is so much clearer when it comes to The Original Series, of course.

Sulu, Uhura, Spock, the three examples touted as being part of Trek's multicultural nature. We don't get many hints of their individual cultures affecting who and what they are. Sulu is culturally indistinguishable from any other crewman. Aside from a couple of words of Swahili in "The Man Trap" (and aside from a couple of "Nubian princess" references), Uhura's ethnic identity is never mentioned.

The silence about their identity is deafening. Obviously, there is a defense - what kind of stories can you tell with Sulu's Japanese heritage, or Uhura's African one, say. But you don't really have to make it all apparent. If they really wanted to celebrate multicultralism, there are all sorts of subtle ways to do it. Make Sulu's passion one for samurai culture, not fencing, for example. Or have Uhura dress in traditional African dress off-duty.

The counter argument to this is, well, why should Sulu and Uhura be identified by their ethno-racial ancestry? Aren't they free to form their own identities outside of what their ancestors did? That's a fair question, and my examples are a little simplistic in what the show could have shown. But the disturbing vision of this 23rd century future is one where everybody's the same - and while there may be nothing wrong with that vision from some points of view, that is not the same as being multicultural, or pluralistic. Don't get me started on Scotty, who's a racial stereotype.

Spock is a more subtle example of this kind of assimilation. Yes, he's a character with a very strong cultural identity - he's Vulcan. But at the same time, he's also half-human. In a way, Spock is a perfect example of the second or third generation immigrant or the mixed-race individual trying desperately to bridge both worlds he feels he belongs in. And his popularity, and his prominence in the series would make lots of things possible with the character that aren't with supporting characters like Sulu and Uhura.

Showing a synthesis of Human and Vulcan would be great, but that's not what the show does. Vulcan values of logic and control of emotion are constantly being ridiculed and shown to be wrong in TOS. McCoy and Kirk keep exhorting Spock to be more human, and we cheer when he does so, not quite getting that at the same time Spock is being asked to give up a vital part of his own makeup and identity.

What is celebrated about Spock? Mainly, his physical abilities and his loyalty to Kirk. It's so similar to early colonial ideas of the Native Americans, who were seen as physically stronger (at first) but intellectually weak. Spock isn't shown as dumb, but his intellectual values are shown to be "inferior" to human ones. This smacks of the ethnic sidekick in media portrayals - Tonto to Kirk's Lone Ranger, say. Tonto provides the native savvy while the Lone Ranger the brain power and the mastery to direct this native savvy.

It's the big strong negro manservant and the white master. After all, as Edith Keeler observed in "City On The Edge of Forever", "You (Spock) belong at his side - as if you were always have been there, and as if you always will." Sure, Kirk treats Spock as a brother, an equal, and will do anything for him. But in the end, Spock is still a subordinate in the show, Kirk in his attitude towards Spock's judgment is always promoting the human over the Vulcan, and we still can't run away from the fact that Vulcans are, like many of the other aliens, shown up as being flawed from the human point of view, and held up as examples of how much better we humans are.

How does this factor into American Imperialist attitudes? Americans went out into the world, and still do, to civilize it, to bring democracy to the poor, unenlightened masses, a peculiar mix of the zealotry of Manifest Destiny and the desire to make a quick buck by providing new markets. A sidebar I won't go into here: Iraq.

Assimilation doesn't stop at expansion. It stays at home in the schizophrenic attitude that arises from, on one hand, presenting a face to the world that says, "We welcome all! We want diversity! We want your huddled masses!" and at the same time once these masses get here the only way to truly belong is to buy American cars, eat American food, speak American English, swear allegiance to American democracy. And by American, I mean white, Anglo-Saxon and male. So it's - sure, we want you, but on our own terms.

Back to the Federation, it's that alien cultures - i.e., other races - are okay, but you have to conform to certain things before we let you into the Federation. It's that, yeah, we have a Prime Directive of non-interference, but the moment you screw with us or we decide that your values are warped, we will interfere ("A Taste of Armageddon", "The Apple", "Return of the Archons", et al.). This air of smug superiority permeates TOS.

Put another way, we will recognize your cultures and your right to be individuals, but we don't want to give up our own values (which we feel are superior), and we want you to give up the values of your culture we find threatening. The Klingons aren't part of the Federation - they are merely allies. That's because they still aren't "Federation" enough. The Bajorans will eventually be part of the Federation, but that's because what makes them unique - their religion, mainly - is non threatening to the rest of the Federation because they don't proselytize or launch jihads, and anyway, the Federation (including Sisko) knows that their religion really has a scientific explanation anyway snicker snicker.

There's an article by Gary Gerstle ("Liberty, Coercion, and the Making of Americans", The Journal of American History, Vol. 84, No. 2, Sep. 1997, 524-588.) which suggests that the Progressive movement of the 1930s which touted multiculturalism and liberal values was only made possible because of the repressive immigration policies and the whacking down of non-conformity during the 1910s-1920s. In other words, liberal nationalism is only possible after an illiberal crackdown to make sure there's a common base to start from.

So it's not that once you enter America/The Federation that you are free to do what you want, but it's that you're free within certain delineated constraints, and those parts that don't fit, well, the cultural structure that you're importing into will subtly coerce you to fit (Spock! Remember you're also half human!) else you won't truly "belong."

The writers of The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine are actually better at the diversity angle than TOS, but the idea of the Federation still remains, and the fact that the Federation is still touted as infallible - at least in its ideals, even if you or I might agree with those ideals - is just as disturbing as it was in TOS. It's all about the hegemon, folks. He's invisible, and he's everywhere.

I won't go into an analysis of how TNG and DS9 are a bit different, except to point out two telling points which make me believe that what I have here isn't really anything new and that the next generation of writers dealing with Trek are at least aware of the imperialistic problems.

First, the line in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country where Azetbur sneers, to Chekov's remark that the Federation is interested in promoting human rights: "Human rights - even the very name is racist." The other one, as pointed out by djfanboy is Eddington's speech to Sisko from "For the Cause". It's a good one, and I'll close this little ramble by quoting it here:

"Why is the Federation so obsessed with the Maquis? We've never harmed you and yet we're constantly arrested and charged with terrorism. Starships chase us through the Badlands and our supporters are harassed and ridiculed. Why? Because we've left the Federation and that's the one thing you can't accept. Nobody leaves paradise. Everyone should want to be in the Federation. Hell, you even want the Cardassians to join! You're only sending them replicators because one day they can take their rightful place on the Federation Council. You know, in some ways, you're even worse than the Borg. At least they tell you about their plans for assimilation. You're more insidious. You assimilate people and they don't even know it."

I knew I always liked the Maquis more. Thank you and good night.

Comments

Re:

[khaosworks.livejournal.com]

As an added note, B5 was a more realistic political and cultural portrayal of the future. The alien races were shown to be flawed, but the flaw was not in their inherent natures, but the flaw in all of the races was the fact that they were monolithic. Humanity's greatest strength, as JMS pointed out, was the ability to build communities, and the ultimate lesson of the Interstellar Alliance is that in diversity there is strength - and the Alliance was no namby pamby single galactic government Federation but a real confederation of allies. My favorite moment in the first season had to be the end of "Parliament of Dreams" when Sinclair introduces the ambassadors to Earth's "dominant belief system". A wonderful, wonderful moment.

I also loved the fact that Ivanova was a Jew, and that later on there were meetings of various religious leaders, including a Muslim and a Baptist in addition to Brother Theo's Catholic monks.

The other show I like because it was so rich was Farscape. The aliens were so alien and so individualistic, that it felt real, and the universe in consequence felt so much bigger and expansive.

Re:

[amezri.livejournal.com]

Ah, see, Farscape is what we could be like if we went to space and met aliens now. We'd shoot at the ones who looked "weird" and didn't seem to be valuable to us. And then, the PKs would come and blow us up.