You are talking about a meritocracy. Political animals absolutely hate that. I'm with you on this. I don't care about your politics. I want to know if you can do the job well or not.
Bravo. Would be great if we all got back to collaborating on making cool things instead of reading into every single word, thought or action someone takes and wondering what their politics are.
Well, *one* note: I'm often reminded of Saving Private Ryan, when they had a running pool to try to guess Tom Hanks's character's profession. Business used to be like that; I remember election day 2000 when a CEO I worked down the hall from told one of his VPs "I'm about to cancel out your vote." And she responded: "Are you sure about that?" That was as far as the political discussions went between those two; and any other discussions in meetings that year (it was a WEIRD election) were always civil and about the ramifications for clients.
This political equivalent of porn brain is totalitarian and has gotten really tiresome. But thankfully, at least my experience, it tends to be more a function of people who are Extremely Online and doesnt always seem to tear its head as readily in the outside world.
darling, there is a difference between talking about politics and living in a political world. if you are queer, immigrant, palestinian or from a group who is everyday feeling in their skin who they are for just... breathing... everything becomes political. i wish i could have the privilege you are writing about. enjoy it because for you it will be always easy like this :)
In the 90s when no one really cared if you were these things and people didn't focus on tiering everyone based on identity everything was better. We should go back to that
Spoken with the privilege of somebody who has never had to hide an aspect of their identity out of fear of their employment, social standing, safety, or mortality. You forget how big of a deal and controversial it was for Ellen DeGeneres's character to come out on her hit show. It was a brave move because of all of the potential consequences that could come from being out of the closet. No, it always was a big deal, but you were just ignorant to that fact. And what it sounds like you're wishing for is to go back to that type of ignorance so you can blissfully live your life without having to consider the experiences of others.
But that's not entirely true Monica, I've received an incredible amount of antisemitism over the last few years as a Jew online - hate, death threats, you name it.
I honestly just want everyone to treat me the same as everyone else and not think anything specific of me based on my religion. Pretty much all the research on this via Gallop etc shows things like race relations were better when very few people focused on it obsessively. I agree with you that's horrible someone was treated poorly bc of sexual preference in the past. I don't want that. Somehow it's gotten even worse in the world of identity politics.
I think you're making the wrong argument, then. What you're looking for is moving beyond human categorization and just accept people as people. I'd love to see that too. But first we all have to agree that all people are worthy of being treated with dignity and respect. And we don't achieve that by going backwards to the '90s... Or any other era because that time has yet to exist. And it's not going to be achieved by burying our heads in the sand and ignoring differences like we did in the past, but in the celebration, embracing, and normalizing of those differences, just as they did on Star Trek.
I think where we both agree a lot of what's happening now isn't super great - I'm fine with trying something new, as long as it actually does get us to a more egalitarian society.
Perhaps we achieve it by coming from a place of curiosity, rather that judgment. And that comes from celebrating differences and recognizing the uniqueness of the journeys of others. Instead of complaining about identity politics, learn more about the populations and people whose identities are political. And then use your privilege to help those folks have equal rights so their very existence is no political. Remember, my rights as a woman vary from state to state... So my very existence has been made political whether I wanted it to or not. 😉
There are plenty of immigrants and people from other groups you mention who don’t make their entire lives political? They are busy working normal jobs, spending time with their families and pursuing hobbies…being 100% obsessed with electoral politics is also a kind of “privilege.” Most people don’t have time for that.
Uh... Dude, Tell me that you don't understand Star Trek without actually telling me you don't understand Star Trek.
In addition to the obvious social and political commentaries contained in many TOS episodes, it was absolutely revolutionary for a show in 1966 to have a multicultural cast. Famously meeting at an NAACP fundraiser, Martin Luther King, Jr. told Nichelle Nichols "This is not a black role, this is not a female role... You are marching," urging her to stay because her portrayal of Lieutenant Uhura was a vital, dignified, and unprecedented representation of equality on television. Oh, and this was during the Cold war when Russia was our enemy... Why do you think they had a character named Chekov, if not to show a possible future in which we were no longer enemies.
Your entire premise is flawed. Star Trek has been political since day one. ;)
I've been a trekkie since I was a kid. Please read the section again carefully, I said they actually could write well, which matters most. The new Star Treks lack this. Kurtzman-era trek is complete and total slop. If you can't write nothing else matters.
Okay. The writing on TOS was different and perhaps less heavy-handed, but no less political. And in an era where facts and opinion are conflated and those who think critically and engage empathically are an endangered species, the writers feel like they need to be heavy-handed because subtle points are lost in the spectacle. As our political leadership is pandering to the lowest common denominator and lowering the bar daily, the Star Trek writers are desperately trying to appeal to our best selves.
Yes the subtlety is why it's so good, show don't tell is cinema 101. Also I probably should have mentioned DS9 which probably tackled the most political topics of any of the series. The writers did this really, really well and you can tell they were well versed in philosophy, history etc. I just think they lost all this and we haven't had a good Trek since Voyager really (which was fantastic, loved Janeway)
"Show, don't tell" works with audiences who weren't second-screening and have attention spans longer than a goldfish. That's not the era in which we live anymore. And while I yearn for the better, more subtle writing style of DS9, one has to remember that the shift in the tone towards full political intrigue with Dominion war was at the end of the 5th season in a syndicated show with a full compliment of 26 episodes per season. They had the luxury of time to develop characters, plots, and subplots that the modern Trek writers lack. So, you gotta cut them some slack.
You are talking about a meritocracy. Political animals absolutely hate that. I'm with you on this. I don't care about your politics. I want to know if you can do the job well or not.
Yes that's right
Bravo. Would be great if we all got back to collaborating on making cool things instead of reading into every single word, thought or action someone takes and wondering what their politics are.
This is great. 10/10, no notes.
Well, *one* note: I'm often reminded of Saving Private Ryan, when they had a running pool to try to guess Tom Hanks's character's profession. Business used to be like that; I remember election day 2000 when a CEO I worked down the hall from told one of his VPs "I'm about to cancel out your vote." And she responded: "Are you sure about that?" That was as far as the political discussions went between those two; and any other discussions in meetings that year (it was a WEIRD election) were always civil and about the ramifications for clients.
I miss those days.
This political equivalent of porn brain is totalitarian and has gotten really tiresome. But thankfully, at least my experience, it tends to be more a function of people who are Extremely Online and doesnt always seem to tear its head as readily in the outside world.
agree!
What a political thing to say! 😏
darling, there is a difference between talking about politics and living in a political world. if you are queer, immigrant, palestinian or from a group who is everyday feeling in their skin who they are for just... breathing... everything becomes political. i wish i could have the privilege you are writing about. enjoy it because for you it will be always easy like this :)
In the 90s when no one really cared if you were these things and people didn't focus on tiering everyone based on identity everything was better. We should go back to that
Spoken with the privilege of somebody who has never had to hide an aspect of their identity out of fear of their employment, social standing, safety, or mortality. You forget how big of a deal and controversial it was for Ellen DeGeneres's character to come out on her hit show. It was a brave move because of all of the potential consequences that could come from being out of the closet. No, it always was a big deal, but you were just ignorant to that fact. And what it sounds like you're wishing for is to go back to that type of ignorance so you can blissfully live your life without having to consider the experiences of others.
But that's not entirely true Monica, I've received an incredible amount of antisemitism over the last few years as a Jew online - hate, death threats, you name it.
I honestly just want everyone to treat me the same as everyone else and not think anything specific of me based on my religion. Pretty much all the research on this via Gallop etc shows things like race relations were better when very few people focused on it obsessively. I agree with you that's horrible someone was treated poorly bc of sexual preference in the past. I don't want that. Somehow it's gotten even worse in the world of identity politics.
I think you're making the wrong argument, then. What you're looking for is moving beyond human categorization and just accept people as people. I'd love to see that too. But first we all have to agree that all people are worthy of being treated with dignity and respect. And we don't achieve that by going backwards to the '90s... Or any other era because that time has yet to exist. And it's not going to be achieved by burying our heads in the sand and ignoring differences like we did in the past, but in the celebration, embracing, and normalizing of those differences, just as they did on Star Trek.
I think where we both agree a lot of what's happening now isn't super great - I'm fine with trying something new, as long as it actually does get us to a more egalitarian society.
Perhaps we achieve it by coming from a place of curiosity, rather that judgment. And that comes from celebrating differences and recognizing the uniqueness of the journeys of others. Instead of complaining about identity politics, learn more about the populations and people whose identities are political. And then use your privilege to help those folks have equal rights so their very existence is no political. Remember, my rights as a woman vary from state to state... So my very existence has been made political whether I wanted it to or not. 😉
There are plenty of immigrants and people from other groups you mention who don’t make their entire lives political? They are busy working normal jobs, spending time with their families and pursuing hobbies…being 100% obsessed with electoral politics is also a kind of “privilege.” Most people don’t have time for that.
great point
Uh... Dude, Tell me that you don't understand Star Trek without actually telling me you don't understand Star Trek.
In addition to the obvious social and political commentaries contained in many TOS episodes, it was absolutely revolutionary for a show in 1966 to have a multicultural cast. Famously meeting at an NAACP fundraiser, Martin Luther King, Jr. told Nichelle Nichols "This is not a black role, this is not a female role... You are marching," urging her to stay because her portrayal of Lieutenant Uhura was a vital, dignified, and unprecedented representation of equality on television. Oh, and this was during the Cold war when Russia was our enemy... Why do you think they had a character named Chekov, if not to show a possible future in which we were no longer enemies.
Your entire premise is flawed. Star Trek has been political since day one. ;)
I've been a trekkie since I was a kid. Please read the section again carefully, I said they actually could write well, which matters most. The new Star Treks lack this. Kurtzman-era trek is complete and total slop. If you can't write nothing else matters.
Okay. The writing on TOS was different and perhaps less heavy-handed, but no less political. And in an era where facts and opinion are conflated and those who think critically and engage empathically are an endangered species, the writers feel like they need to be heavy-handed because subtle points are lost in the spectacle. As our political leadership is pandering to the lowest common denominator and lowering the bar daily, the Star Trek writers are desperately trying to appeal to our best selves.
Yes the subtlety is why it's so good, show don't tell is cinema 101. Also I probably should have mentioned DS9 which probably tackled the most political topics of any of the series. The writers did this really, really well and you can tell they were well versed in philosophy, history etc. I just think they lost all this and we haven't had a good Trek since Voyager really (which was fantastic, loved Janeway)
"Show, don't tell" works with audiences who weren't second-screening and have attention spans longer than a goldfish. That's not the era in which we live anymore. And while I yearn for the better, more subtle writing style of DS9, one has to remember that the shift in the tone towards full political intrigue with Dominion war was at the end of the 5th season in a syndicated show with a full compliment of 26 episodes per season. They had the luxury of time to develop characters, plots, and subplots that the modern Trek writers lack. So, you gotta cut them some slack.
Back in the day Ohora and Kirk kissing would have been political and the Bajoran occupation arc was dripping with politics.
"Civilization thrives on peaceful disagreement and people seeing things differently coming together amicably."
I couldn't agree more with this.
Thanks for this excellent comment - wrote about this myself the other week and couldn't agree more!