• ColonelRevolution@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, people sometimes look at the past from the perspective of privileged classes. Ancient Rome or Middle Ages were anything but glorious for poor folks. We should stop romanticizing them.

        • Shrike502@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well it’s the ruling class that writes history. It’s not just ancient past, very recent past as well - just think of all the nostalgia cropping up for 1950’s or 1980’s!

          • ColonelRevolution@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is no nostalgia for 50s and 80s in public discourse in my country, which basically confirms your point - it were socialist times, which the current rulling class hates. Media screetch thay we “defeated communism and won our freedom”, many young people think that whatever happens is million times better than horrible 50s and 80s. But I can imagine what you mean.

            • Shrike502@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Apologies, I should have specified yankee media - since that is what dominates the world media. But also on the topic of flinging crap at the socialist times - we get that as well in Russia. Not just in media, as you mentioned - the term “Sovok” is used as a derogatory for things people dislike and (usually erroneously) associate with USSR. Ya know, such obviously socialist concepts as bureaucracy, employers monitoring every move a worker makes and punishing them for time off, unpaid overtime, etc

              • ColonelRevolution@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                No need to apologize.

                I only get salty when Americans do it 😆 When I still lurked on reddit, I wrote a post about how educational system takes part in anti-communist propaganda and historical misinformation with my personal experiences attached and I got many responses from Americans who related to this and assumed I wrote specifically about the US schools. One of them even wrote ironically: “You see, we Americans are the best at everything!” No, my dear American comrade, I didn’t even say a word about US schools specifically - that’s the situation in many other places of the world, too.

                But we have to give it to them - their system spreads everywhere, so there is a grain of truth in their assumptions. Poland wants to be “American” as much as possible and it breaks my heart. It seems to be tied to the anti-Russian propaganda that is spread by the government and I’m horrified how quickly liberals swallow it. Even if we put things that way, I would guess that we have more in common culturally than with yankees. I dream that some day we will put end to this insanity and unite under the red banner against the US imperialism.

                Thanks for sharing some new information with me, I’m always happy to learn about your country and I know these Sovok things from my own experience, but it’s strange - I never lived in a socialist country 🤔

    • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Looks cool? Can you imagine how dry their skin is? How chaffed their skin is under that leather gear with no baby power or moisturizer? How dehydrated they all are?

      (This post was made by the skincare gang)

  • sicaniv@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Being a liberal accustomed to sucking up to capitalist imperial war lords, it’s in my nature to choose the below one.

    But after lurking this long on grad, being called out every now and then, I think I should be considerate about the first one too.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      We all start somewhere, and considering a broader range of ideas is key to having a better understanding of how things work. Glad to hear that people helped you get a new perspective here. :)

  • JucheBot1988@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I dunno, Star Trek always struck me as a bit of a liberal fantasy, Next Generation especially. (Though I will say that giving the Klingons a flag deliberately reminiscent of Nazi Germany and then making them allies of the Federation was actually pretty prescient, given current events).

    • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Isn’t the federation quite literally a true to form end goal communist organization?

      They have no currency, no poverty, no coercion to work, they have no dedicated navy or army (just auxiliary units repurposed from science vessels in case of emergency), there is a true democratic consensus derived from the will of the people, diplomacy comes before conflict, almost all effort is devoted into art and science, and so on.

      This seems like a lot further then a utopian liberal democracy.

      • JucheBot1988@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        That was actually my first impression when I started watching TOS and TNG. But the more episodes I saw, something about the show started to rub me the wrong way, almost like under the utopianism, something more sinister was being smuggled in. Maybe I’m just a hypersensitive Zhdanovite, but here was how I ended up formulating my unease with the Star Trek universe:

        1. Most explicit philosophy in the show tended to have an individualist slant. Picard, in one of the very first episodes, wonders if humanity has a right to hunt the crystalline entity, because humanity’s imperative to survive does not neccesarily outweigh the entity’s need to find food; I can see Kim Il-Sung wanting to beat Picard over the head for this. In another episode, Picard tells Data that “you are a culture of one, no less valued than a culture of a billion.” In context, this makes sense, because Data is an android and the only one of his kind; but you do wonder how something like this is going to be interpreted, and why it was put on American TV. But worst is the episode where a couple of Americans from the 20th century are brought back to life after being found in cryogenic stasis. For a long time, everything is entertaining enough, contrasting their selfish ways with the more utopian life aboard the Enterprise, but then there’s this deeply uncomfortable scene (or at least I found it so). One of the group, a former billionaire, learns that money has been abolished, and that nobody strives after wealth anymore. “Where’s the challenge?” he asks. “What do you live for?” Then Picard drops the bombshell: “The challenge,” he says “is to improve yourself – be the best you can be.” Had there been something about “serving the people” “expending yourself in their service,” etc., the scene might have embodied the spirit of Lei Feng. Instead, the federation seems to be more about the Jeffersonian “pursuit of happiness.”

        2. This might just be the constraints of a 40 minute episode, but all the major problems facing humanity seeemed to be solved, not by collective action, but by the brilliance of a few technocrats (Geordie LaForge – actually my single favorite character – comes up with a new way to configure the phasers, or Counsellor Troy has prophetic dreams). Wesley Crusher, I think, made the theme too obvious, which was one reason he was so roundly hated.

        3. Women on the show: in TOS, the female members of the crew were uneccesarily sexualized, with that goofy miniskirt uniform which seemed explicitly designed to not be practical on any kind of planetary environment. There was also a whole lot of “leering” from Kirk, Bones, and the other male members of the crew, and attitudes like this were never really challenged. TNG fixed this somewhat, but there was still “bone every female in the galaxy” Riker, and he seemed conceived as the character a male audience would most indentify with. Then we have the movies, with things like an alien supercomputer indentifying a female member of the crew as a “mass of conflicting impulses,” etc.

        4. Most seriously, the whole thing seemed set during and after a kind of Space Cold War, with the “Soviets” (Klingons) as the definite Bad Guys. In TOS, they were portrayed as “Asiatic barbarians:” quarellsome, uncivilized, and generally inferior to the federation technologically (though able to make up for this with superior numbers). Rather obnoxiously, they are equated with both the USSR and the Nazis, but this is a trick US liberals love to pull. In TNG, the Klingons have transitioned to being heroes, but only after the events in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, where the Klingons experience a Chernobyl-like disaster that wrecks their entire economic system, causing them to seek help from the federation. The mighty Klingon Empire, in short, becomes Yeltsin’s Russia, complete with Yanks to the Rescue. I seem also to remember an episode in TOS where the federation and the Klingons are both arming different sides in a planetary civil war; Kirk concludes that matching whatever armaments the Klingons supply is not violating the prime directive, which in the context of 1960s American can only be a metaphor for increased US presence in Vietnam.

        Maybe I’m seeing this all through an American lens (though it is an American show), and in any case it’s been years since I watched any Star Trek. But there you have it.

        • StalinIsMaiWaifu@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Point 2 I feel is more of an issue with writing in general and specific tv shows; the fewer speaking roles the cheaper you can make the show therefore in a capitalist system shows are incentives to reduce problem solvers to the minimum number.

          1. I feel is a product of the time unfortunately, while racism was a theme Gene (and American society as a whole) felt could be addressed I think our society is only just now capable of broaching to topic of the male gaze

          1 & 4 though are very solid points, I’ll have to give TOS and TNG a rewatch and think about it.

        • RedSquid@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve seen all 10 films many times (no Abrams, your trash doesn’t count) and I really don’t remember an alien supercomputer saying any such thing. Or even being in any of those films. The closest thing would be V’Ger in TMP, which ‘scans’ (and thus kills) the Deltan navigator, Lt. Ilia and recreates her in the form of a computer probe with her memories to interact with the crew. While the crew do hit on the idea of using the probe’s memories of the dead Ilia’s romantic feelings for Captain Decker against her (it?) and that is really horrible in hindsight knowing what we now know about Decker’s actor…

          As for the cold war thing, yeah the Klingons were explicitly meant to be a standin for the USSR, and of course, an American tv show of that era is gonna present a biased perspective, tbh I feel they did a better job than many others would have at presenting even the possibility of peace between the two. Worth mentioning one can extend the cold war metaphor to include others - the Romulans being the PRC (sneaky, authoritarian, collective-minded aliens with yellow skin even! Plus baseless accusations from one character in Balance of Terror that they ‘stole’ Federation technology to make their ships even though they clearly have advanced technology the Federation doesn’t have like the cloaking device and the plasma torpedo). If we accept the Romulans as being the Chinese to the Klingon USSR and Federation as NATO, one could posit the Vulcans as kinda like Taiwan/ROC/KMT? I’m not so sure on that one but the argument could be made.

          I think one has to consider the material circumstances in which the shows were made. TOS was made in the 60s at the height of the cold war, TNG was made in the 80s/90s and reflects prejudices of that era (the showrunner once Gene died, Rick Berman, infamously vetoing ANY LGBT representation at all - going so far as to interfere with DS9’s plans for Garak/Bashir, a show he wasn’t running). I think it’s about as good as one can expect given the environment in which it was made. Especially compared to modern Trek having people living in poverty and drug addiction on Earth of all places, and even having an “Elon Musk high school” or something mentioned in one episode.