The Final Frontier 9/Final Frontier 9 (Disk 2 of 3).adf/LCARS/TextFile/Articles/Prime_Pain.pp/Prime_Pain

Text File | 1995-11-09 | 3.4 KB | 63 lines

TF01
3,Prime Pain
4,by Marcus Priddey

Starfleet's General Order number one,  the  Prime Directive. Have you
ever stopped to consider what a major pain it is and how, by visiting
foreign cultures it is virtually impossible not to break it.

Put  simply,  if  there  is  a  civil  war  (such  as  there  was  in
"Redemption") no action must be  taken.  You  have to withdraw to the
sidelines and watch  and  let  it  follow  its  course.  If populated
planets are facing global devastation  ("Pen Pals" and "Homeward" for
example) again you must withdraw  and  let  events take their course,
even if you  have  the  power  to  either  save  the  planet  or it's
population. Or even if an entire  race  are forced into slavery for a
brutal oppressor (as suggested in "Ensign Ro"), and so on.

Of course that's one side of it.  The  other side is that you can not
interfere in the course of the  natural development of a civilisation
which means no contact is allowed  until the civilisation had reached
a certain stage.

You can now see what I mean when I say the Prime Directive is nothing
but a hinderance and  a  barrier  for  Starfleet  to hide behind. The
reasoning behind the non-interference rule is purely selfish. What do
you do when you see someone in trouble, whether it be a single person
getting beaten up  or  an  entire  country  torn  apart  by  war with
millions of innocents killed, or  a  person  dying  of a disease? You
help. It's only natural. Look at  the  state of former Yugoslavia and
what happened when civil war  erupted.  The United Nations sent their
troops in to try and quell  the  turmoil. They sent in negotiators to
try and  restore  peace  and  when  casualties  were  found,  medical
assistance was offered straight  away.  Another  example - Kuwait was
invaded by Iran. What happened? The whole world turned against Saddam
Hussein by putting embargo's on anything going into and coming out of
Iran. Again the United Nations made  it's full resources available to
Kuwait whether it be military or medical.

Suppose you lived by the  Prime  Directive,  where would you draw the
line? Suppose you knew of a planet that was ravaged by a disease but,
oh dear, they haven't  reached  the  required technological stage, so
sorry, we can't do anything.  What's  the difference between that and
say, your neighbour dying of  Ebola.  Are  you going to be prejudiced
because your neighbour hasn't  got  the  required whatever? Of course
you're not. You might need something off  him in the future so you're
going to aid him in  any  way  you  can.  Okay,  that may sound a bit
selfish but it's also true  (it  usually  comes  out in arguements as
"after everything I've done for you!").

So full marks to Kathryn Janeway  for  sticking two fingers up at the
Prime  Directive  and  helping  the  Ocampa  (in  the  Voyager  pilot
"Caretaker"). Of course, some may argue  that it is necessary because
suppose  we  didn't  have  the   Prime  Directive  and  someone  gave
transporter technology to a medieval  society.  I've got an answer to
that one. The only way you'll  know  whether you've interferred is if
you travel  into  the  future  and  see  what  happens  when  to this
hypothetical society if they weren't  given  this technology and then
see what happens if they  were.  But,  when  you travel back into the
past with knowledge of the future you  can't say anything in case you
alter future history and start  causing  paradoxes which the Universe
will not allow to exist.