Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 5 episode 7 “Secrets of the Soul”** See this for a plot summary.
There is one small political issue and one pretty large one.
First, Dr. Franklin says, for the third time, that he will not be involved in biogenetic warfare and this time promises representatives of an alien race who are giving him their people’s medical information (probably the biology, chemistry, etc. and epidemiology) that he would rather die than be involved in that sort of thing.
While reviewing that information he learns that there were two races (the Hyach who are known to Earth and the Hyach-Doh who are buried in history) on their home planet in a case of “parallel evolution.” He is accosted by one of the Hyach intent on maintaining a cover-up of what happened to the other race. He learns that at one point centuries ago they briefly co-existed and there was inter-marriage. Then Hyach religious forces had that designated as immoral, which changed to illegal, and then became punishable by death. After that the Hyach spent centuries successfully pursuing a policy of extermination. This included bounties on the heads of the Hyach-Doh and a severe ban on anyone helping them leave the planet. The former reminds me of what happened to American Indians, and the latter goes further than what the Nazis initially did (for some period of time in the 30s German Jews could leave).
Dr. Franklin then learns that the race that continued (the Hyach) is numerically declining and that it’s doing so because they needed the inter-breeding with the other race (the Hyach-Doh) for biological or genetic reasons.
There is a powerful exchange between the Dr. and a Hyach who seems RELATIVELY willing to deal with the truth:
Hyach: We are a dying people unless you help us.
Dr. Franklin: No.
Hyach: You hold us responsible for those who were killed.
Dr. Franklin: Yes.
Hyach: Even though we ourselves were not yet born?
Dr. Franklin: You helped hide the truth about what happened by revising your history, cutting out the parts you didn’t like. Now as far as I‘m concerned that makes you an accomplice after the fact.
The one quoted above asks for forgiveness and Dr. Franklin says only the Hyach-Doh can do that, but they’re all dead.
**Season 5 Episode 8 “Day of the Dead”** For a plot summary see this.
There’s one tiny comment I need to make about this. This episode was made about 20 years ago and I think that back then this mistake I need to highlight was fairly common and today probably everyone against bigotry already knows what I’m going to say. But when discussing diversity and inclusion using the word “tolerance” is very inappropriate. It suggests something is wrong with, for example, the religion being discussed. So it was disappointing that the Captain of B5 used that word in connection with religion.
**Season 5 Episode 9 “In the Kingdom of the Blind”** See this for a plot summary.
There is one brief bit of politics. The Interstellar Alliance gets one of it’s member races to agree to not block the independence of a planet near them (although it’s not stated explicitly, the seperatists were probably governed by the IA member). That was in exchange for the IA agreeing to intercede in all border disputes there for the next 20 years. I imagine something like that might be helpful somewhere on Earth in reality- possibly with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, possibly with other international conflicts.
**Season 5 Episode 10 “A Tragedy of Telepaths”** See this for a plot summary.
There's only one political issue in this episode. Evidence is discovered indicating that recent attacks on shipping by Interstellar Alliance races may be carried out by OTHER members of the IA. There is some degree of escalation of threats and military deployments between three different IA races. Then Sheridan deploys Ranger White Star military vessels and threatens to attack anyone seen attacking the military of fellow IA races. Apparently it’s allowed by the constitution of the IA and it’s not a horrible idea but I’m not sure it’s a good idea.
**Season 5 Episode 20 “Objects in Motion”** See this for a plot summary.
There are two brief things about Mars that are worth mentioning. First, looking at the time when Mars was controlled by Earth, accusations are made about what Earth was doing with it’s colony: a vague reference to “exploitation” and a more specific reference to strip mining. Those accusations are the sort of things I had been hoping to hear about Earth's rule of Mars.
The other political thing is that Earth is using bureaucracy, especially about finance, to control Mars as it tries to realize independence- it’s basically neo-colonialism. Th Interstellar Alliance offers to help Mars get financial independence from Earth.
Monday, April 9, 2018
Thursday, March 22, 2018
Babylon 5 Reviews L
Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 5, Episode 1 “No Compromises”** See this for a plot summary.
This is partly about the inauguration of the President of the Interstellar Alliance. G’Kar reads the Declaration of Principles (which he wrote). He talks about freedom and inclusiveness and the right to pursue reforms within the IA (and probably member worlds as well).
When he has Sheridan place his hand on what in America would usually be the Bible, he uses a book that is a compilation of the first page of every holy book of every race that has joined the Alliance. Although in the Declaration of Principles he DOES mention the inclusion of atheists, I’m still not totally in favor of using ONLY holy books in the swearing-in ceremony. But if I ignore that, what he did with that compilation is pretty cool.
**Season 5 Episode 3 “The Paragon of Animals”** See this for a plot summary.
A big part of this episode is about how to build the Interstellar Alliance (it’s pretty obvious the writers were inspired by Star Trek). Sheridan and most of the other main characters want members to sign a Declaration of Principles but for various reasons that have nothing to do with the substance of it, they refuse. Garibaldi, who sort of comes out as more right-wing than left-wing, says that some use of force is needed first to demonstrate what the IA can do. Sheridan is reluctant but soon finds himself needing to do it as a situation develops with a race that want membership in the IA. It turns out that the victimizers of the planet are aligned with a de facto member of the IA and Sheridan uses this (as well as successful martial and political maneuvering in the crisis) to convince the others that signing the Declaration of Principles is necessary. Setting aside for a moment how things worked out, I largely disagree with Garibaldi. Sheridan shouldn’t have been pressured to find a fight in order to get the Declaration signed. If an opportunity to fight in that situation doesn’t present itself, you shouldn’t go looking for one (at the very least because you can be accused of CREATING a crisis for your benefit politically) and starting out with principles by itself isn’t that bad.
**Season 5, Episode 4 “A View From the Gallery”** See this for a plot summary.
In general this is supposed to be from the viewpoint of B5’s working-class, but it doesn’t say much about life for workers in a capitalist system- for example, although B5 is a pro-union show, it doesn’t say anything about unions. That part of the episode is not a waste of time, it just could have been a little more political.
The main political thing is a brief discussion of how, in war, captured enemy wounded should be treated. Dr. Franklin strongly advocates for treating them as well as possible- that is, as well as friendly wounded should be treated. Although I can imagine supporting a war against an enemy state or organization I hate, their captured wounded should be treated well. It’s the right thing to do, and might affect how the enemy treats captured wounded soldiers. (on a related point, I DO accept that in some cases prisoners can't be taken and they have to be killed (i.e. units that are behind enemy lines, or the IRA in N. Ireland), but it really should be the norm).
** Season 5 Episode 5 “Learning Curve”** For a plot summary see this.
There are 2-3 political items in this episode.
First, some stuff about diversity. The Interstellar Alliance’s military component, the Rangers, were traditionally just minbari and humans but are now allowing members of other races to join. The lone representative of the Pak’ma'ra seems to be without potential because of certain characteristics of that race. But Delenn realizes those characteristics can be useful in certain jobs that Rangers do. She says something about how they can learn from humans and how we benefit from diversity (I'm not sure what she means exactly, but I think it might be at worst a flawed statement in favor of diversity).
Second is the legacy of the Earth Civil War. The new captain (largely) in charge of B5 was on the government’s side and clashes with Garibaldi. She says that, unlike the anti-government side, she didn’t believe in firing on her own ships- as if it was just those led by Sheridan who did that. It’s not clear to me who started the shooting but I watched some of two earlier episodes and it seems like it was the government (there were also two episodes where anti-government ships were reluctant to attack government ships until they had to). Captain Lochely also talks about how the military doesn’t create policy and how she believes in the chain of command, and how her opponents tore up the constitution. But, even if there was some reasonable doubt concerning the allegation that the President had his predecessor killed so he could replace him, there is no doubt that he dissolved the Senate and earlier was eroding democracy through the McCarthyist Night Watch organization.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 5, Episode 1 “No Compromises”** See this for a plot summary.
This is partly about the inauguration of the President of the Interstellar Alliance. G’Kar reads the Declaration of Principles (which he wrote). He talks about freedom and inclusiveness and the right to pursue reforms within the IA (and probably member worlds as well).
When he has Sheridan place his hand on what in America would usually be the Bible, he uses a book that is a compilation of the first page of every holy book of every race that has joined the Alliance. Although in the Declaration of Principles he DOES mention the inclusion of atheists, I’m still not totally in favor of using ONLY holy books in the swearing-in ceremony. But if I ignore that, what he did with that compilation is pretty cool.
**Season 5 Episode 3 “The Paragon of Animals”** See this for a plot summary.
A big part of this episode is about how to build the Interstellar Alliance (it’s pretty obvious the writers were inspired by Star Trek). Sheridan and most of the other main characters want members to sign a Declaration of Principles but for various reasons that have nothing to do with the substance of it, they refuse. Garibaldi, who sort of comes out as more right-wing than left-wing, says that some use of force is needed first to demonstrate what the IA can do. Sheridan is reluctant but soon finds himself needing to do it as a situation develops with a race that want membership in the IA. It turns out that the victimizers of the planet are aligned with a de facto member of the IA and Sheridan uses this (as well as successful martial and political maneuvering in the crisis) to convince the others that signing the Declaration of Principles is necessary. Setting aside for a moment how things worked out, I largely disagree with Garibaldi. Sheridan shouldn’t have been pressured to find a fight in order to get the Declaration signed. If an opportunity to fight in that situation doesn’t present itself, you shouldn’t go looking for one (at the very least because you can be accused of CREATING a crisis for your benefit politically) and starting out with principles by itself isn’t that bad.
**Season 5, Episode 4 “A View From the Gallery”** See this for a plot summary.
In general this is supposed to be from the viewpoint of B5’s working-class, but it doesn’t say much about life for workers in a capitalist system- for example, although B5 is a pro-union show, it doesn’t say anything about unions. That part of the episode is not a waste of time, it just could have been a little more political.
The main political thing is a brief discussion of how, in war, captured enemy wounded should be treated. Dr. Franklin strongly advocates for treating them as well as possible- that is, as well as friendly wounded should be treated. Although I can imagine supporting a war against an enemy state or organization I hate, their captured wounded should be treated well. It’s the right thing to do, and might affect how the enemy treats captured wounded soldiers. (on a related point, I DO accept that in some cases prisoners can't be taken and they have to be killed (i.e. units that are behind enemy lines, or the IRA in N. Ireland), but it really should be the norm).
** Season 5 Episode 5 “Learning Curve”** For a plot summary see this.
There are 2-3 political items in this episode.
First, some stuff about diversity. The Interstellar Alliance’s military component, the Rangers, were traditionally just minbari and humans but are now allowing members of other races to join. The lone representative of the Pak’ma'ra seems to be without potential because of certain characteristics of that race. But Delenn realizes those characteristics can be useful in certain jobs that Rangers do. She says something about how they can learn from humans and how we benefit from diversity (I'm not sure what she means exactly, but I think it might be at worst a flawed statement in favor of diversity).
Second is the legacy of the Earth Civil War. The new captain (largely) in charge of B5 was on the government’s side and clashes with Garibaldi. She says that, unlike the anti-government side, she didn’t believe in firing on her own ships- as if it was just those led by Sheridan who did that. It’s not clear to me who started the shooting but I watched some of two earlier episodes and it seems like it was the government (there were also two episodes where anti-government ships were reluctant to attack government ships until they had to). Captain Lochely also talks about how the military doesn’t create policy and how she believes in the chain of command, and how her opponents tore up the constitution. But, even if there was some reasonable doubt concerning the allegation that the President had his predecessor killed so he could replace him, there is no doubt that he dissolved the Senate and earlier was eroding democracy through the McCarthyist Night Watch organization.
Monday, March 19, 2018
Babylon 5 Reviews K
Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 4, Episode 18 “Intersections in Real Time”** See this for a plot summary.
At the end of the last episode, Sheridan is captured by Earth forces. This episode is entirely about him being questioned. They aren’t looking for information, but for a false confession that crucially includes him admitting to being led by aliens. Most of what the interrogator does is not torture (very little physical torture and none of the sort of non-violent torture that was also used at Abu Ghraib in Iraq). A good example of what his interrogator does is ask him first if he’s "controlled" by “outsiders” and then, before Sheridan answers, asks if he’s "influenced" by “others.” Sheridan says no, clearly (in my opinion) not noticing the difference between the two questions and/or thinking of the first question. But the interrogator then says that EVERYONE is influenced by others and Sheridan must be lying. Of course if Sherdian had said yes either at first or after being called a liar, the Earth gov’t would have taken that (recorded answer) as an answer to the first question.
**Season 4, Episode 19 “Between the Darkness and the Light”** see this for a plot summary.
There’s about five minutes that continue with an attempt to get Sheridan to say that the rebellion he led was really an alien conspiracy. About half-way through the episode he’s freed by Garibaldi, Franklin, and Lyta.
One other thing worth mentioning is that the Narn, the Centauri, and the League of Non-Aligned Worlds agree to militarily support Sheridan (more, apparently, than they already were). G’Kar says that since the Shadow war they “have begun working together as never before. In the past we had nothing in common but now the humans have become the glue that holds us together.”
On one hand it seems like the beginning of what we see very shortly at the end of the 4th season, which is the creation of something sort of comparable to Star Trek’s "the Federation." On the other hand, I don’t like the Earth-centric nature of these developments.
**Season 4, Episode 21 “Rising Star”** See this for a plot summary.
There are at least two political things in this episode.
First, the acting President of Earth says that Sheridan did the right thing the “wrong way.” That doesn’t make much sense. In his position, I’m not sure what else he could have done. I’m not saying that armed rebellion is the only way to deal with a dictatorship. There is always the option of mass struggle- getting people in the street, or sitting down in protest, etc. But, according to the acting President of Earth, dissidents on that planet felt like they couldn’t do anything. How could Sheridan have contributed to a non-violent resistance on Earth while in command of B5? He could have used non-violent methods ON B5 without breaking from Earth, but it seems to me that breaking away was more effective. It must have been more visible and inspirational to the rest of the Earth Alliance population than marches or non-violent civil disobedience on B5 (without breaking from Earth as they did (and which could have been more easily covered up in the media than what they actually did)).
The first battle with forces loyal to the President was kind of defensive in nature. I think that, considering there were other parts of the Earth Force that broke with the Earth gov’t, Sheridan, would have been doing the wrong thing if he had abandoned them. Then, the most immediate cause of him going on the offensive was the slaughter of civilians by Earth Force ships under orders from the President.
This reminds me of N. Ireland and the Provisional IRA’s campaign. I defend it in many places on this blog, but perhaps the two main things you should read are here and here. It would be kind of reasonable of people who disagree with me about this to point to the years where the PIRA’s campaign overlapped with the last 2-3 years of the Civil Rights Movement (1970-72) and say that the PIRA should have been on cease-fire during that time. First, as far as I can tell there was probably a majority and maybe a LARGE majority of members and supporters of the Provisional Republican Movement (what we call in recent decades, Sinn Fein and the IRA) that DID participate in the CRM. And during those years, even the Official IRA (the other side of the split that produced the Provisionals and the side which was fully in support of the CRM) was waging an armed campaign of some significance.
The Officials went on cease-fire in 1972 (not long after the CRM was kind of displaced by the PIRA’s campaign as the dominant answer to unionism and British imperialism) and have remained there since (well, until some time in the 1980s their cease-fire wasn't totally solid in different ways but it was close). I haven’t heard of the Officials organizing any large-scale protests and/or marches as a replacement for armed struggle, and they had the support of about 4% of the nationalist community in the 1970s and that went down further in the 80s and 90s. They were pretty irrelevant as an example of a better form of resistance.
The SDLP was getting a large chunk of the Nationalist vote. When looking at the 70s (when PSF wasn’t running candidates) and thinking about how much support they had in the Nationalist community, it seems unavoidable and reasonable to assume that they had the same level of support that they had in the 80s and 90s, which would have been about 60% (this is based partly on voting figures and population figures in the 1970s). But after the decline of the CRM, it looked like the SDLP were not organizing marches and rallies, etc. In fact John Hume, who was a very senior member in the 70s and was the SDLP’s leader in the 80s and 90s, was not a major advocate of marches during the time of the Civil Right Movement. He opposed three key marches during that time. And about 15 years ago, I read an article where a senior SDLP member poured cold water on the idea of organizing marches.
There are two more ways in which the SDLP didn’t represent a more populist, people-based and non-violently subversive response to what was being done to the Nationalist population. In general it wouldn’t hurt if you read this post about the SDLP. Items #4, #5, and #8 are especially relevant. #3 might also be relevant. As I wrote elsewhere on this blog:
(Mark Langhammer is or was for a while a senior N. Ireland member of the Irish Labour Party)
I don’t know what SDLP members in the trade-union movement did or didn’t do along those lines, but the fact is they didn’t succeed in orientating that movement the way McCann and Langhammer suggested, and that might indicate that either A) they had almost no one in that movement and/or B) they didn’t try. As far as SDLP MEMBERS (not voters) go, they have been consistently described as being middle-class.
I don’t mean to totally acquit the Provisionals when it comes to this. Speaking of republicans in general, Bernadette Devlin-McAliskey called for them to do more work organizing people and less work organizing armies. What I said about the SDLP and the trade-unions might apply, to a lesser degree, to PSF. As a more working-class party they probably had more members in the trade-unions, (but maybe not since they may have had more trouble getting jobs- because they were more likely to have a criminal record). I also won’t deny that Protestant and unionist TRADE-Unionists were probably less interested in what SF members had to say than what SDLP trade-unionists had to say. And lastly, although I’m certain PSF made more efforts to get people in the streets than the SDLP did, they weren’t ridiculously successful with it (that is, outside the context of the prisoners' struggle around 1980 when they were massively successful).
For more info about mass struggle in the Troubles, see this.
The other issue is something that was said about the creation of the Interstellar Alliance. As far as I can tell it’s similar to the Federation of Star Trek, but less centralized. While announcing the creation of the IA and inviting Earth to join, Delenn talks about free-trade (probably not anything comparable to NAFTA), a code of conduct for interstellar relations, a reserved but possibly very useful armed component, and more. At one point she says: “this new alliance will help less-advanced worlds improve their conditions.” It’s at moments like this when I wish I was about 20 times more familiar with the EU than I am, but it reminds me of the sometimes-met potential of the EU. The EU has, as far as I can tell, done a lot about civil rights and human rights and civil liberties. At the very least they have some potential to redistribute wealth around the EU. The Earth joins the IA, which requires them to recognize an independent Mars.
**Season 4, Episode 22 “The Deconstruction of Falling Stars”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is more creative than most, and kind of special. We are shown a current affairs TV show discussion about 2-3 weeks after Sheridan defeats the forces loyal to the President. Then a similar show about 100 years after that event, and then a recording made 500 years after Sheridan’s victory and lastly, a hidden recording about 1,000 years after that event.
The first discussion involves an obnoxious supporter of the deceased President whose grip on power was broken by Sheridan. There’s a lot of talk from him about Sheridan being unsuitable as a leader of the Interstellar Alliance (IA). First, Sheridan is criticized for firing on "his own ships." What’s intentionally ignored is that there was a civil war raging, a war that Sheridan hadn’t started, and a war that involved the late President’s ships firing on their former colleagues in the Earth military. Second, he says that Sheridan arranged for independence for Mars “at gunpoint.” This ignores the fact that Earth was keeping Mars under Earth control, “at gunpoint.”
In the third part of this episode, we learn that one of two factions on Earth is preparing to launch a propaganda campaign aimed at weakening support for the IA by creating fake recordings of the top four Babylon 5 figures doing horrible things like summary executions, following speeches about how there will be no mercy. I am wondering how much of that is aimed at supporters of that faction, or undecideds, or the other faction. If it’s the latter, I guess it’s because they want to sow doubt and confusion about what the founders of the IA were really like.
Their motivation for this is that they feel the need and/or desire to colonize and conquer new worlds and the IA and it’s military (the Rangers) are obstacles. Which is exactly what they should be. The imperialist faction is also planning on launching a first strike, probably with nuclear weapons and aimed at civilian targets in areas their opponents govern. The virtual reality version of Garibaldi engages in some cleverness and warns the IA-aligned areas who strike at the military targets in areas governed by the imperialists.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 4, Episode 18 “Intersections in Real Time”** See this for a plot summary.
At the end of the last episode, Sheridan is captured by Earth forces. This episode is entirely about him being questioned. They aren’t looking for information, but for a false confession that crucially includes him admitting to being led by aliens. Most of what the interrogator does is not torture (very little physical torture and none of the sort of non-violent torture that was also used at Abu Ghraib in Iraq). A good example of what his interrogator does is ask him first if he’s "controlled" by “outsiders” and then, before Sheridan answers, asks if he’s "influenced" by “others.” Sheridan says no, clearly (in my opinion) not noticing the difference between the two questions and/or thinking of the first question. But the interrogator then says that EVERYONE is influenced by others and Sheridan must be lying. Of course if Sherdian had said yes either at first or after being called a liar, the Earth gov’t would have taken that (recorded answer) as an answer to the first question.
**Season 4, Episode 19 “Between the Darkness and the Light”** see this for a plot summary.
There’s about five minutes that continue with an attempt to get Sheridan to say that the rebellion he led was really an alien conspiracy. About half-way through the episode he’s freed by Garibaldi, Franklin, and Lyta.
One other thing worth mentioning is that the Narn, the Centauri, and the League of Non-Aligned Worlds agree to militarily support Sheridan (more, apparently, than they already were). G’Kar says that since the Shadow war they “have begun working together as never before. In the past we had nothing in common but now the humans have become the glue that holds us together.”
On one hand it seems like the beginning of what we see very shortly at the end of the 4th season, which is the creation of something sort of comparable to Star Trek’s "the Federation." On the other hand, I don’t like the Earth-centric nature of these developments.
**Season 4, Episode 21 “Rising Star”** See this for a plot summary.
There are at least two political things in this episode.
First, the acting President of Earth says that Sheridan did the right thing the “wrong way.” That doesn’t make much sense. In his position, I’m not sure what else he could have done. I’m not saying that armed rebellion is the only way to deal with a dictatorship. There is always the option of mass struggle- getting people in the street, or sitting down in protest, etc. But, according to the acting President of Earth, dissidents on that planet felt like they couldn’t do anything. How could Sheridan have contributed to a non-violent resistance on Earth while in command of B5? He could have used non-violent methods ON B5 without breaking from Earth, but it seems to me that breaking away was more effective. It must have been more visible and inspirational to the rest of the Earth Alliance population than marches or non-violent civil disobedience on B5 (without breaking from Earth as they did (and which could have been more easily covered up in the media than what they actually did)).
The first battle with forces loyal to the President was kind of defensive in nature. I think that, considering there were other parts of the Earth Force that broke with the Earth gov’t, Sheridan, would have been doing the wrong thing if he had abandoned them. Then, the most immediate cause of him going on the offensive was the slaughter of civilians by Earth Force ships under orders from the President.
This reminds me of N. Ireland and the Provisional IRA’s campaign. I defend it in many places on this blog, but perhaps the two main things you should read are here and here. It would be kind of reasonable of people who disagree with me about this to point to the years where the PIRA’s campaign overlapped with the last 2-3 years of the Civil Rights Movement (1970-72) and say that the PIRA should have been on cease-fire during that time. First, as far as I can tell there was probably a majority and maybe a LARGE majority of members and supporters of the Provisional Republican Movement (what we call in recent decades, Sinn Fein and the IRA) that DID participate in the CRM. And during those years, even the Official IRA (the other side of the split that produced the Provisionals and the side which was fully in support of the CRM) was waging an armed campaign of some significance.
The Officials went on cease-fire in 1972 (not long after the CRM was kind of displaced by the PIRA’s campaign as the dominant answer to unionism and British imperialism) and have remained there since (well, until some time in the 1980s their cease-fire wasn't totally solid in different ways but it was close). I haven’t heard of the Officials organizing any large-scale protests and/or marches as a replacement for armed struggle, and they had the support of about 4% of the nationalist community in the 1970s and that went down further in the 80s and 90s. They were pretty irrelevant as an example of a better form of resistance.
The SDLP was getting a large chunk of the Nationalist vote. When looking at the 70s (when PSF wasn’t running candidates) and thinking about how much support they had in the Nationalist community, it seems unavoidable and reasonable to assume that they had the same level of support that they had in the 80s and 90s, which would have been about 60% (this is based partly on voting figures and population figures in the 1970s). But after the decline of the CRM, it looked like the SDLP were not organizing marches and rallies, etc. In fact John Hume, who was a very senior member in the 70s and was the SDLP’s leader in the 80s and 90s, was not a major advocate of marches during the time of the Civil Right Movement. He opposed three key marches during that time. And about 15 years ago, I read an article where a senior SDLP member poured cold water on the idea of organizing marches.
There are two more ways in which the SDLP didn’t represent a more populist, people-based and non-violently subversive response to what was being done to the Nationalist population. In general it wouldn’t hurt if you read this post about the SDLP. Items #4, #5, and #8 are especially relevant. #3 might also be relevant. As I wrote elsewhere on this blog:
In his 1998 book "McCann: War and Peace in Northern Ireland," NI socialist and trade-unionist Eamonn McCann writes, "the trade union movement is better placed than any other to purge the politics of this island of sectarianism. No other institution brings Catholic and Protestant workers together on a regular basis in pursuit of a common purpose which is antipathetic to sectarianism." McCann makes it clear that he doesn't think this potential has been tapped more than occasionally, and [Mark] Langhammer agrees with his analysis.
(Mark Langhammer is or was for a while a senior N. Ireland member of the Irish Labour Party)
I don’t know what SDLP members in the trade-union movement did or didn’t do along those lines, but the fact is they didn’t succeed in orientating that movement the way McCann and Langhammer suggested, and that might indicate that either A) they had almost no one in that movement and/or B) they didn’t try. As far as SDLP MEMBERS (not voters) go, they have been consistently described as being middle-class.
I don’t mean to totally acquit the Provisionals when it comes to this. Speaking of republicans in general, Bernadette Devlin-McAliskey called for them to do more work organizing people and less work organizing armies. What I said about the SDLP and the trade-unions might apply, to a lesser degree, to PSF. As a more working-class party they probably had more members in the trade-unions, (but maybe not since they may have had more trouble getting jobs- because they were more likely to have a criminal record). I also won’t deny that Protestant and unionist TRADE-Unionists were probably less interested in what SF members had to say than what SDLP trade-unionists had to say. And lastly, although I’m certain PSF made more efforts to get people in the streets than the SDLP did, they weren’t ridiculously successful with it (that is, outside the context of the prisoners' struggle around 1980 when they were massively successful).
For more info about mass struggle in the Troubles, see this.
The other issue is something that was said about the creation of the Interstellar Alliance. As far as I can tell it’s similar to the Federation of Star Trek, but less centralized. While announcing the creation of the IA and inviting Earth to join, Delenn talks about free-trade (probably not anything comparable to NAFTA), a code of conduct for interstellar relations, a reserved but possibly very useful armed component, and more. At one point she says: “this new alliance will help less-advanced worlds improve their conditions.” It’s at moments like this when I wish I was about 20 times more familiar with the EU than I am, but it reminds me of the sometimes-met potential of the EU. The EU has, as far as I can tell, done a lot about civil rights and human rights and civil liberties. At the very least they have some potential to redistribute wealth around the EU. The Earth joins the IA, which requires them to recognize an independent Mars.
**Season 4, Episode 22 “The Deconstruction of Falling Stars”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is more creative than most, and kind of special. We are shown a current affairs TV show discussion about 2-3 weeks after Sheridan defeats the forces loyal to the President. Then a similar show about 100 years after that event, and then a recording made 500 years after Sheridan’s victory and lastly, a hidden recording about 1,000 years after that event.
The first discussion involves an obnoxious supporter of the deceased President whose grip on power was broken by Sheridan. There’s a lot of talk from him about Sheridan being unsuitable as a leader of the Interstellar Alliance (IA). First, Sheridan is criticized for firing on "his own ships." What’s intentionally ignored is that there was a civil war raging, a war that Sheridan hadn’t started, and a war that involved the late President’s ships firing on their former colleagues in the Earth military. Second, he says that Sheridan arranged for independence for Mars “at gunpoint.” This ignores the fact that Earth was keeping Mars under Earth control, “at gunpoint.”
* * * *
In the third part of this episode, we learn that one of two factions on Earth is preparing to launch a propaganda campaign aimed at weakening support for the IA by creating fake recordings of the top four Babylon 5 figures doing horrible things like summary executions, following speeches about how there will be no mercy. I am wondering how much of that is aimed at supporters of that faction, or undecideds, or the other faction. If it’s the latter, I guess it’s because they want to sow doubt and confusion about what the founders of the IA were really like.
Their motivation for this is that they feel the need and/or desire to colonize and conquer new worlds and the IA and it’s military (the Rangers) are obstacles. Which is exactly what they should be. The imperialist faction is also planning on launching a first strike, probably with nuclear weapons and aimed at civilian targets in areas their opponents govern. The virtual reality version of Garibaldi engages in some cleverness and warns the IA-aligned areas who strike at the military targets in areas governed by the imperialists.
Friday, February 23, 2018
Babylon 5 Reviews J
Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 4, Episode 12 “Conflicts of Interest”** See this for a plot summary.
We learn a little bit more about Mars and it indicates something that I had kind of missed earlier. I still believe that the Earth-Mars conflict (before the Civil War) is comparable to the conflict between London and the original 13 American colonies. I am suddenly unsure if there was bigotry towards the colonists and if I should have known (from an earlier episode) there was hostility towards people born on Mars that might be considered racial. We learn in this episode that judges on Mars are appointed from Earth and are biased against those born on Mars. There was a weaker indication of this kind of stuff earlier, but I decided that it was a mistake by the writers, or that it was POLITICAL (not racial (or "planetary?")) bias and I ignored it.
**Season 4, Episode 13 “Rumors, Bargains, and Lies”** See this for a plot summary.
About 25 episodes earlier, the Minbari government, the Grey Council (GC), was dissolved. Without it, conflicts have arisen between the religious and warrior castes (there is also the workers caste but they weren’t mentioned in this episode). Delenn’s aide says that the GC suppressed the conflicts between the three castes but couldn’t erase them.
Delenn heads for Minbar and meets a leader of the warrior caste. She appeals to him for a solution where neither caste is the victor, believing that if one of them won it would break the delicate balance of Minbari society. But it turns out that the warrior caste isn’t as interested in dialogue and compromise as they pretended to be.
**Season 4, Episode 14 “Moments of Transition”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is the conclusion of the conflict over power on Minbar. There is one issue that comes up and has little to do with the how the conflict is resolved.
That is the question of when is it acceptable to go to war. Although I am generally against war and assume it is horrible for everyone involved, I believe that sometimes it is justified and/or helpful and/or necessary. The leader of the Warrior Caste (Shakiri) says that wars should only be fought for practical gains, not for religious reasons or other principles.
I am sticking with my earlier impression that the Religious Caste is not as religious or (anywhere near) as right-wing as, for example, the Taliban, so I’m open-minded about what they might call a holy war. I might assume it would be less offensive to me than campaigns in reality that might be called holy wars- in general the Crusades would be examples, and so would Cromwell’s war in Ireland, etc.).
As far as wars for practical gains, I wouldn’t be surprised if the vast majority of such wars would be offensive to me- they would probably be clearly imperialist wars (i.e. Indian Wars here, or the Indonesian occupation of East Timor).
I am open-minded about supporting wars that are for progressive principles. Of course one obstacle is the fact that people who might be called neo-imperialists can and will spin what they’re doing as principled. A recent example of that I believe was the Persian Gulf War (the 1991 conflict). Ones that I would have supported would be WWII (it was far from totally invulnerable to criticism, but I believe it was overall a pretty good cause and 99% of the time the Allies fought honorably), and perhaps the two conflicts the US was involved with in the former Yugoslavia.
Going back to the episode, it turns out that the junior leader of the Warrior Caste who seemed to double-cross Delenn at the end of the last episode actually WAS cooperating with her to some degree. Shortly after that, with Minbari cities being destroyed because of the war, Delenn (who has become possibly THE leader of the Religious Caste) surrenders.
As the Warrior Caste are formalizing the surrender, Delenn says something about how their surrender doesn’t mean they are giving up the right to participate in Minbari politics. Although I like her very next move, I’m not sure what to think about that statement by her. The Religious Caste was in a very weakened position. I don’t know if the anti-fascist side in the Spanish Civil War demanded such a right after they were defeated. And the ANC seemed to RELUCTANTLY agree to a limited and very brief period of sharing power with what I think would be called a post-Apartheid, overwhelmingly white party.
In any case, she basically challenges Shakiri to settle the conflict the way inter-caste conflicts were settled before the Grey Council by standing in some kind of heat beam. The first leader to leave the beam and live loses (this was developed partly because Minbari felt that leaders should risk death in conflict just as much as their soldiers did). Delenn enters the beam but Shakiri is hesitant until a junior leader calls him a hypocrite for refusing to risk his own life. Shakiri enters, then leaves. Delenn is then carried out by the junior leader.
The very best part of this episode is at the end. Traditionally the Grey Council has nine members- three from each of the three castes- worker, religious, and warrior. Forming a new GC Delenn gives two seats to the religious caste and two to the warrior caste, and FIVE to the workers caste. Although I think it’s a little flawed, for the most part her little speech justifying that is worth quoting. She seems to be speaking mostly to the other two castes:
“You had forgotten the Worker caste, hadn’t you? When our two sides fight, they are the ones caught in the middle, forgotten until it is their time to serve, to build and to die. They build the temples we pray in, the ships you fight it. They look to us to guide their hands. But prayers are fleeting and wars forgotten. What is built endures. They do not wish to conquer or convert, only to build the future. And now they will have that chance. The Religious caste and the Warrior caste will advise and counsel. We will serve, as is proper. Religion and war must act in the service of the people- not the other way around.”
My favorite parts are underlined.
**Season 4, Episode 15 “No Surrender, No Retreat”** See this for a plot sumamry.
At the end of the previous episode it was learned that Earth Alliance forces massacred civilian passengers of a space ship, killing thousands. Sheridan decides that enough is enough.
First, though, he needs to secure defensive forces for B5. He talks about the mutual support treaties that members of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds have with Earth and says that in exchange for the security Sheridan’s forces have been providing for those worlds, the treaties must be torn up and those planets must each provide one large military vessel for the defense of B5. He also, on a more ethical note, reminds them that the President of Earth is a xenophobe promoting mistrust of aliens.
While trying to get the Narn leader G’Kar to sign a joint statement about both races supporting Sherdian, the Centauri ambassador Mollari describes them both as patriots. Although he played a role in ENDING his race’s near genocidal occupation of Narn worlds, he also played a role in BEGINNING and SUSTAINING it for about a year. G’Kar was a leader, in exile, of the resistance on Narn. They might both be patriots, but there is a huge difference between them when you look just a little deeper.
The vast majority of the episode is about Sheridan going on the offensive in what would probably be seen as an important and medium-sized space battle between Sheridan’s fleet and six Earth Force ships that might be compared to battleships. One enemy ship is destroyed, one leaves the battle rather than fight for a corrupt government, one leaves without plans to take orders from Earth anymore, another stays to defend the planet they were earlier laying siege to, and two fully defect to Sheridan’s command. I find this sort of thing inspiring. Even if we look throughout human history and all over the world, I’m MUCH more an opponent of the military than a fan, but some times they do good, and the idea of senior officers defecting to support the re-instatement of freedom and/or democracy in their nation is great. I am not real familiar with this, but I know that in the mid-1970s elements of the Portuguese military overthrew a fascist dictatorship and, within a small number of years a democracy was created.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 4, Episode 12 “Conflicts of Interest”** See this for a plot summary.
We learn a little bit more about Mars and it indicates something that I had kind of missed earlier. I still believe that the Earth-Mars conflict (before the Civil War) is comparable to the conflict between London and the original 13 American colonies. I am suddenly unsure if there was bigotry towards the colonists and if I should have known (from an earlier episode) there was hostility towards people born on Mars that might be considered racial. We learn in this episode that judges on Mars are appointed from Earth and are biased against those born on Mars. There was a weaker indication of this kind of stuff earlier, but I decided that it was a mistake by the writers, or that it was POLITICAL (not racial (or "planetary?")) bias and I ignored it.
**Season 4, Episode 13 “Rumors, Bargains, and Lies”** See this for a plot summary.
About 25 episodes earlier, the Minbari government, the Grey Council (GC), was dissolved. Without it, conflicts have arisen between the religious and warrior castes (there is also the workers caste but they weren’t mentioned in this episode). Delenn’s aide says that the GC suppressed the conflicts between the three castes but couldn’t erase them.
Delenn heads for Minbar and meets a leader of the warrior caste. She appeals to him for a solution where neither caste is the victor, believing that if one of them won it would break the delicate balance of Minbari society. But it turns out that the warrior caste isn’t as interested in dialogue and compromise as they pretended to be.
**Season 4, Episode 14 “Moments of Transition”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is the conclusion of the conflict over power on Minbar. There is one issue that comes up and has little to do with the how the conflict is resolved.
That is the question of when is it acceptable to go to war. Although I am generally against war and assume it is horrible for everyone involved, I believe that sometimes it is justified and/or helpful and/or necessary. The leader of the Warrior Caste (Shakiri) says that wars should only be fought for practical gains, not for religious reasons or other principles.
I am sticking with my earlier impression that the Religious Caste is not as religious or (anywhere near) as right-wing as, for example, the Taliban, so I’m open-minded about what they might call a holy war. I might assume it would be less offensive to me than campaigns in reality that might be called holy wars- in general the Crusades would be examples, and so would Cromwell’s war in Ireland, etc.).
As far as wars for practical gains, I wouldn’t be surprised if the vast majority of such wars would be offensive to me- they would probably be clearly imperialist wars (i.e. Indian Wars here, or the Indonesian occupation of East Timor).
I am open-minded about supporting wars that are for progressive principles. Of course one obstacle is the fact that people who might be called neo-imperialists can and will spin what they’re doing as principled. A recent example of that I believe was the Persian Gulf War (the 1991 conflict). Ones that I would have supported would be WWII (it was far from totally invulnerable to criticism, but I believe it was overall a pretty good cause and 99% of the time the Allies fought honorably), and perhaps the two conflicts the US was involved with in the former Yugoslavia.
Going back to the episode, it turns out that the junior leader of the Warrior Caste who seemed to double-cross Delenn at the end of the last episode actually WAS cooperating with her to some degree. Shortly after that, with Minbari cities being destroyed because of the war, Delenn (who has become possibly THE leader of the Religious Caste) surrenders.
As the Warrior Caste are formalizing the surrender, Delenn says something about how their surrender doesn’t mean they are giving up the right to participate in Minbari politics. Although I like her very next move, I’m not sure what to think about that statement by her. The Religious Caste was in a very weakened position. I don’t know if the anti-fascist side in the Spanish Civil War demanded such a right after they were defeated. And the ANC seemed to RELUCTANTLY agree to a limited and very brief period of sharing power with what I think would be called a post-Apartheid, overwhelmingly white party.
In any case, she basically challenges Shakiri to settle the conflict the way inter-caste conflicts were settled before the Grey Council by standing in some kind of heat beam. The first leader to leave the beam and live loses (this was developed partly because Minbari felt that leaders should risk death in conflict just as much as their soldiers did). Delenn enters the beam but Shakiri is hesitant until a junior leader calls him a hypocrite for refusing to risk his own life. Shakiri enters, then leaves. Delenn is then carried out by the junior leader.
The very best part of this episode is at the end. Traditionally the Grey Council has nine members- three from each of the three castes- worker, religious, and warrior. Forming a new GC Delenn gives two seats to the religious caste and two to the warrior caste, and FIVE to the workers caste. Although I think it’s a little flawed, for the most part her little speech justifying that is worth quoting. She seems to be speaking mostly to the other two castes:
“You had forgotten the Worker caste, hadn’t you? When our two sides fight, they are the ones caught in the middle, forgotten until it is their time to serve, to build and to die. They build the temples we pray in, the ships you fight it. They look to us to guide their hands. But prayers are fleeting and wars forgotten. What is built endures. They do not wish to conquer or convert, only to build the future. And now they will have that chance. The Religious caste and the Warrior caste will advise and counsel. We will serve, as is proper. Religion and war must act in the service of the people- not the other way around.”
My favorite parts are underlined.
**Season 4, Episode 15 “No Surrender, No Retreat”** See this for a plot sumamry.
At the end of the previous episode it was learned that Earth Alliance forces massacred civilian passengers of a space ship, killing thousands. Sheridan decides that enough is enough.
First, though, he needs to secure defensive forces for B5. He talks about the mutual support treaties that members of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds have with Earth and says that in exchange for the security Sheridan’s forces have been providing for those worlds, the treaties must be torn up and those planets must each provide one large military vessel for the defense of B5. He also, on a more ethical note, reminds them that the President of Earth is a xenophobe promoting mistrust of aliens.
While trying to get the Narn leader G’Kar to sign a joint statement about both races supporting Sherdian, the Centauri ambassador Mollari describes them both as patriots. Although he played a role in ENDING his race’s near genocidal occupation of Narn worlds, he also played a role in BEGINNING and SUSTAINING it for about a year. G’Kar was a leader, in exile, of the resistance on Narn. They might both be patriots, but there is a huge difference between them when you look just a little deeper.
The vast majority of the episode is about Sheridan going on the offensive in what would probably be seen as an important and medium-sized space battle between Sheridan’s fleet and six Earth Force ships that might be compared to battleships. One enemy ship is destroyed, one leaves the battle rather than fight for a corrupt government, one leaves without plans to take orders from Earth anymore, another stays to defend the planet they were earlier laying siege to, and two fully defect to Sheridan’s command. I find this sort of thing inspiring. Even if we look throughout human history and all over the world, I’m MUCH more an opponent of the military than a fan, but some times they do good, and the idea of senior officers defecting to support the re-instatement of freedom and/or democracy in their nation is great. I am not real familiar with this, but I know that in the mid-1970s elements of the Portuguese military overthrew a fascist dictatorship and, within a small number of years a democracy was created.
Thursday, January 18, 2018
Babylon 5 Reviews I
Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 4 Episode 8 “The Illusion of Truth”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is about the presidential propaganda TV station doing a story about Babylon 5, promising to be relatively objective and expose viewers to B5’s point of view. What is broadcast though is a dishonest attack on B5.
Some things worth noting as they stand out more than the general lies and propaganda of the story about B5:
1. A report that gov’t forces on Mars are making progress against the resistance there.
2. In a newly reconstituted senate, there is a McCarthyist “Committee on Anti-Earth Activities." Apparently some or many or most caught up in the witch-hunt are “hospitalized” so that they can “one day return to society [as] active and productive citizen[s].”
The story about B5 is so full of nonsense that I’m not going to cover all of the details or explain what was done by referring to the scenes being filmed in the first half of the episode. The main theme is that in general the B5 rebels are self-hating humans who believe they are inferior to aliens in every way and that is why they are (the show alleges) subservient to aliens.
A last few notes on economic justice on B5. Lennier is showing the journalists “Down Below” and they have a conversation about it, most of which is new information:
Lennier:“ Babylon 5 has always had an under-class. People who come here in search of a better life and find themselves stranded when they run out of money. They become a cheap workforce for some of the less reputable businessmen.
Journalist: So, they’re exploited.
Lennier:Sometimes, yes. The captain stops it when he hears of it. He’s instituted work programs so that they can earn money while helping to repair the station.
…..
Lennier: This is Doctor Stephen Franklin. He operates a free clinic for these people.
**Season 4 Episode 9 “Atonement”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is overwhelmingly about the Minbari.
In an earlier review I defended Delenn against allegations she was something comparable to (you might say) a leader of Al-Qaeda and I said some nice things about the Minbari. Although my defense of Delenn stands (she DID transform herself into a hybrid of human and Minbari and she IS in a serious relationship with a human), apparently Minbar officially bans inter-species marriages. Her clan (part of the religious caste) didn’t approve of her transformation and seem inclined to oppose her taking a human as a mate. For that reason she must do a ritual called the “dreaming” where she is confronted with elements of her past.
The leader of the Minbari (in her memories that are explored), Dukhat, says that humans are reportedly primitive and dangerous. Considering that Earth is not comparable to the Federation of Star Trek, this is a fairly progressive statement. The Grey Council (the leadership of the Minbari) all argue that they should not make contact with Earth for different reasons:
1) The workers caste worried about competition with another source of food. The specific reference to food is a little weird but in general it's far from unheard of- a massive chunk of the American working-class, even large chunks of the labor movement, do see foreign workers as competition. In reality (and maybe in the world of Babylon 5) that’s a very unhelpful stance to take. I’m not saying it’s totally unreasonable for workers to feel that way, but it can often fuel racism which is even less helpful and there are better ways to create and protect jobs here.
2) The religious caste is “worried about the impact of strange, primitive ideas.” This erodes my opinion that they are not conservative, but also could be relatively harmless (relative to clear-cut xenophobia).
3) The warrior caste believe they should not associate with “inferior” cultures. Again, more or less xenophobic, but the warrior caste has never been illustrated as a positive part of Minbari society.
A big part of this episode revolves around the opening shots of the Earth-Minbar War. In addition to not speaking the other’s language, part of the explanation is that the humans didn’t recognize the traditional warrior caste approach with gun ports open (i.e. ready to fire). They mean it as a non-threatening “gesture of strength and respect”- the approach is “open-handed.” In general it might not be totally ridiculous for the warrior caste to see that as something unlikely to start a war. But when they describe it as “open-handed” it’s just not true. Open gun ports is like showing a fist.
Earlier in the episode Delenn supports a course of action in relation to humans that is fairly constructive and diplomatic. But after Dukhat is killed, she wants blood and casts the tie-breaking vote in favor of war. Later after that first battle was over she reverts back to her earlier stance and tried to pull a blood-thirsty nation and military back from the abyss of war. Another member of the planetary leadership, demanding blood minutes earlier, now seems to have followed Delann and says that they should have made contact with the humans BEFORE a war started.
At the end we learn that a historical political/religious/military leader of Minbar (who was not Minbari but human) fathered children with a Minbari woman. 1,000 years later his descendants can’t be counted they are so numerous. Delenn uses the fact that before her transformation she already had human DNA inside her (so it doesn’t matter if she has children with a human (they wouldn’t be completely Minbari anyway)) to defend her plans with Capt. Sheridan.
One other detail about the episode. Sheridan sends two of his men to Mars to establish contact with the resistance there. I remember the first time I watched this show I wasn’t very interested in that part of the Earth Civil War, but I have changed my mind.
**Season 4 Episode 10 “Racing Mars”** See this for a plot summary.
There are two small progressive political items.
1. First the two men meeting with the Mars resistance are given cover stories that involve them being married to each other. To be honest I wouldn’t be surprised if the writers put that in there partly for some laughs, but considering the episode they did about HIV/AIDS I think it’s safe to also see it as a serious statement against homophobia.
2. At one point the Pope is referred to as a woman!
**Season 4, Episode 11 “Lines of Communication”** See this for a plot summary.
There are three political aspects to this episode.
1. We learn that the caste system on Minbar is breaking down. At it’s extreme, the warrior caste in one city left the religious caste to die by expelling them from the city, thus forcing them to walk through the elements to the nearest city. The warrior caste are also creating their own leadership to replace the Grey Council.
2. Captain Sheridan’s emissary to the Mars resistance tells them that after the Earth Civil War is over, Mars will be independent.
He also criticizes them for bombing civilian targets. It’s unclear exactly what he means. That comment seems inspired by a bombing at a hotel that was aimed at members of the security forces but which was carried out in a way that unsurprisingly killed 10 civilians as well (it’s not known how many members of the security forces were killed). I go into more detail about whether or not IRA attacks were terrorism here, but briefly, even if the targets of a bomb are combatants in very close proximity to civilians, if no effort is made to avoid civilian death it sounds more or less sort of like terrorism to me.
Sheridan’s representative says that civilian casualties turn off people, including those who should be supporting a struggle for liberation. I think that’s very true. But it seems like many western progressive supporters of Hamas (the party in the Palestinian territories) don’t get that. Hamas’s military wing, in their offensive activities (their operations) largely targeted civilians (and seem to have allowed other factions in Gaza to target civilians). As far as I can tell, their rival, the PLO, seems to have failed miserably to achieve victory for their people in the Peace Process, and I get the impression a lot of progressives criticize them for that and some other stuff. To those who focus on that failure and who then turn to Hamas, I say that whatever mistakes the PLO have made that weakened the Palestinian struggle, at least they didn’t damage it as much as Hamas' military wing has because of attacks on civilians they carried out or permitted.
Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.
**Season 4 Episode 8 “The Illusion of Truth”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is about the presidential propaganda TV station doing a story about Babylon 5, promising to be relatively objective and expose viewers to B5’s point of view. What is broadcast though is a dishonest attack on B5.
Some things worth noting as they stand out more than the general lies and propaganda of the story about B5:
1. A report that gov’t forces on Mars are making progress against the resistance there.
2. In a newly reconstituted senate, there is a McCarthyist “Committee on Anti-Earth Activities." Apparently some or many or most caught up in the witch-hunt are “hospitalized” so that they can “one day return to society [as] active and productive citizen[s].”
The story about B5 is so full of nonsense that I’m not going to cover all of the details or explain what was done by referring to the scenes being filmed in the first half of the episode. The main theme is that in general the B5 rebels are self-hating humans who believe they are inferior to aliens in every way and that is why they are (the show alleges) subservient to aliens.
A last few notes on economic justice on B5. Lennier is showing the journalists “Down Below” and they have a conversation about it, most of which is new information:
Lennier:“ Babylon 5 has always had an under-class. People who come here in search of a better life and find themselves stranded when they run out of money. They become a cheap workforce for some of the less reputable businessmen.
Journalist: So, they’re exploited.
Lennier:Sometimes, yes. The captain stops it when he hears of it. He’s instituted work programs so that they can earn money while helping to repair the station.
…..
Lennier: This is Doctor Stephen Franklin. He operates a free clinic for these people.
**Season 4 Episode 9 “Atonement”** See this for a plot summary.
This episode is overwhelmingly about the Minbari.
In an earlier review I defended Delenn against allegations she was something comparable to (you might say) a leader of Al-Qaeda and I said some nice things about the Minbari. Although my defense of Delenn stands (she DID transform herself into a hybrid of human and Minbari and she IS in a serious relationship with a human), apparently Minbar officially bans inter-species marriages. Her clan (part of the religious caste) didn’t approve of her transformation and seem inclined to oppose her taking a human as a mate. For that reason she must do a ritual called the “dreaming” where she is confronted with elements of her past.
The leader of the Minbari (in her memories that are explored), Dukhat, says that humans are reportedly primitive and dangerous. Considering that Earth is not comparable to the Federation of Star Trek, this is a fairly progressive statement. The Grey Council (the leadership of the Minbari) all argue that they should not make contact with Earth for different reasons:
1) The workers caste worried about competition with another source of food. The specific reference to food is a little weird but in general it's far from unheard of- a massive chunk of the American working-class, even large chunks of the labor movement, do see foreign workers as competition. In reality (and maybe in the world of Babylon 5) that’s a very unhelpful stance to take. I’m not saying it’s totally unreasonable for workers to feel that way, but it can often fuel racism which is even less helpful and there are better ways to create and protect jobs here.
2) The religious caste is “worried about the impact of strange, primitive ideas.” This erodes my opinion that they are not conservative, but also could be relatively harmless (relative to clear-cut xenophobia).
3) The warrior caste believe they should not associate with “inferior” cultures. Again, more or less xenophobic, but the warrior caste has never been illustrated as a positive part of Minbari society.
A big part of this episode revolves around the opening shots of the Earth-Minbar War. In addition to not speaking the other’s language, part of the explanation is that the humans didn’t recognize the traditional warrior caste approach with gun ports open (i.e. ready to fire). They mean it as a non-threatening “gesture of strength and respect”- the approach is “open-handed.” In general it might not be totally ridiculous for the warrior caste to see that as something unlikely to start a war. But when they describe it as “open-handed” it’s just not true. Open gun ports is like showing a fist.
Earlier in the episode Delenn supports a course of action in relation to humans that is fairly constructive and diplomatic. But after Dukhat is killed, she wants blood and casts the tie-breaking vote in favor of war. Later after that first battle was over she reverts back to her earlier stance and tried to pull a blood-thirsty nation and military back from the abyss of war. Another member of the planetary leadership, demanding blood minutes earlier, now seems to have followed Delann and says that they should have made contact with the humans BEFORE a war started.
At the end we learn that a historical political/religious/military leader of Minbar (who was not Minbari but human) fathered children with a Minbari woman. 1,000 years later his descendants can’t be counted they are so numerous. Delenn uses the fact that before her transformation she already had human DNA inside her (so it doesn’t matter if she has children with a human (they wouldn’t be completely Minbari anyway)) to defend her plans with Capt. Sheridan.
One other detail about the episode. Sheridan sends two of his men to Mars to establish contact with the resistance there. I remember the first time I watched this show I wasn’t very interested in that part of the Earth Civil War, but I have changed my mind.
**Season 4 Episode 10 “Racing Mars”** See this for a plot summary.
There are two small progressive political items.
1. First the two men meeting with the Mars resistance are given cover stories that involve them being married to each other. To be honest I wouldn’t be surprised if the writers put that in there partly for some laughs, but considering the episode they did about HIV/AIDS I think it’s safe to also see it as a serious statement against homophobia.
2. At one point the Pope is referred to as a woman!
**Season 4, Episode 11 “Lines of Communication”** See this for a plot summary.
There are three political aspects to this episode.
1. We learn that the caste system on Minbar is breaking down. At it’s extreme, the warrior caste in one city left the religious caste to die by expelling them from the city, thus forcing them to walk through the elements to the nearest city. The warrior caste are also creating their own leadership to replace the Grey Council.
2. Captain Sheridan’s emissary to the Mars resistance tells them that after the Earth Civil War is over, Mars will be independent.
He also criticizes them for bombing civilian targets. It’s unclear exactly what he means. That comment seems inspired by a bombing at a hotel that was aimed at members of the security forces but which was carried out in a way that unsurprisingly killed 10 civilians as well (it’s not known how many members of the security forces were killed). I go into more detail about whether or not IRA attacks were terrorism here, but briefly, even if the targets of a bomb are combatants in very close proximity to civilians, if no effort is made to avoid civilian death it sounds more or less sort of like terrorism to me.
Sheridan’s representative says that civilian casualties turn off people, including those who should be supporting a struggle for liberation. I think that’s very true. But it seems like many western progressive supporters of Hamas (the party in the Palestinian territories) don’t get that. Hamas’s military wing, in their offensive activities (their operations) largely targeted civilians (and seem to have allowed other factions in Gaza to target civilians). As far as I can tell, their rival, the PLO, seems to have failed miserably to achieve victory for their people in the Peace Process, and I get the impression a lot of progressives criticize them for that and some other stuff. To those who focus on that failure and who then turn to Hamas, I say that whatever mistakes the PLO have made that weakened the Palestinian struggle, at least they didn’t damage it as much as Hamas' military wing has because of attacks on civilians they carried out or permitted.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)