Take what I have to say with a grain of salt, as I've seen TOS and most of TNG, but only bits of DS9, Voyager, and almost nothing of Enterprise - zlich for Discovery. But...
It seems to me like a very progressive agenda was always baked in, as we've both said, but I do know something of what you mean since the substance of that agenda has changed. Assuming Star Trek is championing liberal values, that's great. I can disagree with it on socialism, but I still respect a lot of people (intellectually) who happen to be socialists. That's cool; I can disagree with them. Maybe I'm wrong.
But if Star Trek is championing left wing values, that's different. That's different because the left have gone gonzo in the last six or seven years - really out to Froot Loop land - and there's a big difference between imagining a socialist utopia, championing freedom, creativity, peace, the value of life, and exploration; and championing a lot of the kool-aid being peddled these days.
So, I do know what you're driving at. And, yeah, Kirk would be centre-right at *least*. That guy liked kissing women and sometimes used force in negotiation and diplomacy. He's probably a Nazi, these days (depending on who you ask).
Now, where we do disagree is that I don't think TNG did that as much, as hard, or in such an obnoxious way as you do. I think there are plenty of episodes where they present a "no easy win". There's "The Measure of a Man" where Data is tried to see if he's a person or a machine. There's the Bajoran/Cardassian stuff (usually associated with DS9, but introduced here, I think...). There's the way they handle interactions with the Klingons. "Pen Pals" gives us a "non-interference" policy which is supposed to be used to protect civilizations from colonial influence, but is now risking the life of a girl. It never gives us an easy answer, and though the characters discuss the ethics of it (leading to a certain amount of moralizing - impossible to avoid), nobody's preaching.
Others, yes, are preachy. But I maintain that it depended on the writer. I think the show was pushing ideas of xeno-acceptance, cross-cultural exchange, peace, and compassion. It championed science over ignorance. These are great ideas, universal, and timeless. These days, a lot of people have a problem, saying free speech is "right wing". Well, okay. Then I'm right wing.
I don't disagree that the show has a moral stance, but I don't think it's soapboxing all the time, and it does cover nuance and a lot of dissenting opinion - never dismissively. Even when it comes to a conclusion like, "This is right, that is wrong," it's rarely dismissive or condescending to the other side (more or less).
Capitalism is attacked in Star Trek, yes, and racism. But I don't think that Star Trek ever blamed white people for it. It seemed, in fact, to have the values that the wokists *claim* to have: acknowledging the problems of history (the Prime Directive seems to be put in place to avoid slave trades, exploitation of resources, and genocides) while valuing the good done, too (Star Trek references the US Constitution in a positive way a lot). They go after backwards values like slavery and laud advancements like Magna Carta. Star Trek TOS, TNG - early Trek - would never condemn Western Civilization as evil white people doing harm. They would acknowledge the harm, keep/hold up the good, and keep on Trekkin'.
That's how I see it, anyway.
reply
share