Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Reviews N

This is one of my posts where I “review” Star Trek episodes. I will be giving each one a star rating. I sometimes will make some comments about non-political parts of them that I like or don’t like. I’ll sometimes use the issues raised in the episode to discuss similar issues in real life. And I will sometimes simply high-light the progressive politics of ST. ST is in-line with the three original themes of this blog, as I explain in the first ST post where I offer some general thoughts about ST.


I’m not very familiar with The Original Series and there might be some small amount of material there that would affect what I say about Star Trek (i.e. how often religion is mentioned)

Lastly. multi-culturalism is such a pervasive theme in ST that I only comment on it when it goes beyond the norm (i.e. inter-species partners).

“Life Support” See this for a plot summary.

A fairly non-political episode. We see more of how repulsive a character Kai Winn is, which is both good and nauseating. We also see more of how sexist Ferengi culture and society are.

One thing I could Northern Ireland-ize is the idea of a peace treaty between Bajor and Cardassia. I’m going to skip, for now, the details of the treaty between the Irish and the British that resulted in the South of Ireland getting it’s independence and talk about how the Dublin state got along with the British.

It’s pretty widely accepted that if Michael Collins had not been killed during the Civil War he would have continued the fight for all of Ireland to be independent and united. With his death that didn’t happen. Unlike with the situation between Cardassia and Bajor where the Occupation is completely over, the Irish state in Dublin has generally gotten along with London EVEN THOUGH the British continue to occupy an area that the vast majority of Irish consider to be Irish and want to be united with the area governed by Dublin. The State in Dublin could have been more supportive of the IRA by coming to some kind of arrangement with them and more politically supportive of the nationalist community by consistently making a big deal internationally about how they were treated. At the very least that would make things very awkward between London and Dublin, although it’s unlikely the British would have gone to war over it. If they did, that would have almost certainly increased support for the IRA in the South and re-occupying the South would not have been sustainable for the British considering the resistance they would have met in Ireland and the embarrassment it would have caused internationally. At the very least they should have taken that attitude after the events of Aug. 1969 when there were major pogroms (one successful, one unsuccessful) against the Catholic community in the North. At that point there was a lot of international attention on the North, a lot of sympathy for the Nationalist community, and it seems like at that point the British would not have reacted by directly attacking or occupying the South. Letting loyalist paramilitaries attack the South would have been relatively minor and but would have had a similar effect if the Dublin state had responded the right way, by pointing to likely collusion or the way that the British were turning a relatively blind eye to the loyalists and highlighting what was happening to the nationalist community and all the other arguments in favor of unification as justification for the State’s behavior that brought on the loyalist attacks. Also, such an aggressively republican strategy would have been appropriate at that point as the republican movement and the nationalist community were putting lots of pressure on the British and there was a higher than usual amount of international pressure on the British, which could have been increased if the Dublin state had been more republican. A leading Irish-American politician once responded to critics in the Irish-American community who were pushing him to be more (Irish) republican by saying "What do you want me to do, be more Irish than the Irish government?" Of course, it’s not an issue of being Irish, it’s an issue of being against oppression and injustice and in favor of human right and against imperialism, but it still would have been easier to generate support for uniting Ireland if the Irish state had been more republican.

Why weren’t they more republican? Historically and in recent decades, most of the politicians who have had a relatively or very moderate attitude towards the British represented business interests who didn’t want their business disrupted by confrontation with the British. in general the population in the South had their freedom and civil rights, etc. which affected how strongly they felt about the situation facing the nationalist community- they were and are concerned about them, but are not interested in confrontation with Britain since they can live their lives just fine anyway. Much of the left also were anti-republican, something which I’ve heard attributed to something called “post-colonial self-loathing.” It’s also possible that to some degree, opinions on this in the South would have improved if the rest of the world had shown the appropriate amount of interest, and as I’ve explained here and here, almost the entire reason why the world didn’t show more interest has nothing to do with Irish public opinion. It has to do with the Left and and with Sinn Fein making mistakes and the IRA making mistakes.

Going back to the episode, I don’t like it very much. I give it one star out of five.

“Heart of Stone” See this for a plot summary.

A very non-political episode, although there is one thing that’s worth commenting on. Nog starts his efforts to be the first Ferengi in Starfleet. Nog is one of my two favorite secondary characters and him being the first Ferengi in Starfleet is a very interesting story. Although as a Ferengi he’s fairly sexist, he clearly isn’t wedded to the way Ferengi society treats women and he has shown, even before expressing a desire to join Starfleet, some dissent from Ferengi values. I also like his friendship with Jake. So I like the idea of him being the first Ferengi in Starfleet.

Overall a good episode, I give it two stars out of five.

“Destiny” See this for a plot summary.

Overall a very non-political episode, two sort of political bits:

1. It’s made clear that the Federation do not allow animal fights for entertainment and gambling.

2. It’s made very clear that religious texts should not be taken too seriously, although they can be used for inspiration.

(Although I am mildly religious and fairly spiritual and the Bible laid the seeds of me becoming a socialist, I’m not a religious socialist. The seeds of socialism that the Bible planted in me when I was very young were further developed by the music I listened to in High School (as I describe in the 2nd 1/3 of an earlier post) and some information I learned about US history in 11th grade and two fiction books I read in High School. So I don’t identify as a religious socialist and don’t quote the bible in favor of my positions, but I respect people who do identify as religious socialists. They use religious documents as a small part of the basis for their arguments and believe strongly in seperation of church and state)


It’s a good episode, I give it three stars out of five.


“Prophet Motive” See this for a plot summary.

A very interesting episode, very political. We learn that the Ferengi were not always greedy and in fact at one time long ago were basically the opposite of what they are on DS9. There’s lots of anti-capitalist talk from the prophets/worm hole aliens.

Overall a good episode, I give it three stars out of five.