SFDebris: Insurrection

[Captain Seafort]

Aka, Chuck: 1, Rochey: 0.

Part 1

A good start, and I'm looking forward to him really starting to rip into the Luddites.

[Mikey]

Chuck: 1, Rochey: 0.

There is no Rochey, there is only Zuul Sionnach Glic.

[Captain Seafort]

There's neither, actually, and hasn't been for over a month. I wonder where he's got to this time.

[Mikey]

There's neither, actually, and hasn't been for over a month. I wonder where he's got to this time.

Maybe he sequestered himself to work on his INS script.

[Griffin]

Maybe he sequestered himself to work on his INS script.

So, we're never going to see him again?

[Captain Seafort]

So, we're never going to see him again?

Guess not. Now it's a race between him and the heat death of the universe.

We also have the rest of Chuck's version:

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

[Lighthawk]

I have to admit, I don't remember much of Insurrection. But looking back on it and on this review, it does rather seem like the movie had to bend over backwards and shove its head up its own ass in order to make the Son'a the bad guys and the Ba'ku the good.

I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?

[GrahamKennedy]

Here's the book he mentioned about the writing of the movie, in PDF format : Link

[Mikey]

I have to admit, I don't remember much of Insurrection. But looking back on it and on this review, it does rather seem like the movie had to bend over backwards and shove its head up its own ass in order to make the Son'a the bad guys and the Ba'ku the good.

I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?

That was left rather fuzzy - intentionally, probably, so as not to let any inconvenient facts get in the way of the intended visceral pull of the poor abused Space Amish.

Now it's a race between him and the heat death of the universe.

Well, heat entropy has a lot further to go... but it does tend to work more quickly than Rochey...

[Sonic Glitch]

I have to admit, I don't remember much of Insurrection. But looking back on it and on this review, it does rather seem like the movie had to bend over backwards and shove its head up its own ass in order to make the Son'a the bad guys and the Ba'ku the good.

I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?

That was left rather fuzzy - intentionally, probably, so as not to let any inconvenient facts get in the way of the intended visceral pull of the poor abused Space Amish.

I always figured that it was in their space but unclaimed by the Federation. While the Feds may claim the sector and space surrounding it, the planet was ostensibly pre-warp so the Feds couldn't actually do anything with it. I would think they would leave the pre-warp civilizations go a bit, at least until they develop the technology to detect the presence of the Federation/warp drive. Make sense?

[Mikey]

It would make sense, except the planet (meaning the inhabitants) weren't pre-warp. The non-interference principle applies to societies that haven't achieved warp, not to societies which have renounced it.

[Sonic Glitch]

It would make sense, except the planet (meaning the inhabitants) weren't pre-warp. The non-interference principle applies to societies that haven't achieved warp, not to societies which have renounced it.

I was under the impression that Starfleet/the Feds were unaware of their technological past. I suppose it should be rephrase to an apparent pre-warp society. What's his face references their migration from their homeworld as 309 years ago, which would put it sometime in the 21st century. I doubt anyone was out there at the time to spot them (it has been established the Briar Patch seems to pose some sort of hazard to handling/navigation/magic technobabble).

[Mikey]

Hmm, good point.

[GrahamKennedy]

I don't recall, but was it ever even mentioned in the movie if the Ba'ku actually owned the planet? I know it was in Federation space, but does that make it legally the Federation and the Ba'ku are basically squatters, or is it legally the Ba'ku's and the Federation decided to just oust them without even giving a notice of eviction?

This, to me, was actually the most important aspect of the film.

All the arguments for moving the Ba'ku focus on ideas like the fact that a government can have eminent domain and force purchase land to build a road, or a military base or whatever because the benefit to society outweighs the rights of a few. But that's really only true when dealing with your own citizens. We're part of a society, we have a voice in how that society is run, and that gives the society a moral right to exert authority over us.

That's the argument employed with the Maquis. Yes, the Federation basically screwed over some of its people to protect the greater number. That's fair enough, some Federation citizens got screwed so the rest didn't have to go to war. You can still argue whether this was a good thing to do, and even whether it's legal to essentially deny some of your citizens their citizenship, but at least the principle of harming some to help most does apply.

But the Ba'ku really do not seem to be Federation citizens. It's never baldly stated that they are or are not but for Pete's sake, they've never even heard of the Federation until Data shows up, they can't possibly be Federation members. They're apparently within Federation space, but we don't even know what that means - just how much territory does the Federation control, and how is it legally defined? We haven't a clue. But I find it very difficult to believe that they simply draw a big volume of space on a map and declare that they own everything and everyone within it. Which really makes the idea that they have any right to screw them over nonsensical.

[Mikey]

Excellent point, GK. The idea of citizenship being based on the government owning a planet when the inhabitants aren't denizens of that government's sphere is ludicrous.