Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews S

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).

“Daedalus” See this for a plot summary.

A non-political episode. I give it two stars out of five.

“Observer Effect” See this for a plot summary.

A non-political episode. I give it three stars out of five.

“Babel One,” “United,” “The Aenar” See the links for a plot summary.

There are a small number of political aspects to this episode:

1) Shran again expresses a willingness to torture people, which is fairly disturbing because he is generally seen as an ally of Archer’s.

2) One thing I like is the unity created between the different alien races, which will lead eventually to the formation of the Federation. I generally support such moves (i.e. (after making some changes) increasing (in small steps over a number of decades) the power of the United Nations).

3) So far I don’t have a complete picture of the Romulan political system and how democratic or undemocratic it is. In this episode we learn that dissident members of the Senate can be expelled.


I give this three-parter two stars out of five.

“Affliction” and “Divergence” See this and this for a plot summary

There are two sort of political things in this episode.

First, we hear (probably not for the first time) that Klingon society is a caste-based society.

Secondly, there is the appearance of Section 31. I discuss Section 31 here while discussing the episode "Inquisition."

For the most part a non-political episode. I like how it explains the appearance of Klingons in The Original Series. I give it two stars out of five.

Irish-Americans, N. Ireland, and YDS

I’m going to do one post here that’s a new sort of post for me, there might be some more on the same theme in the next weeks and/or months. To a small degree it’ll involve me getting a little personal (something I have overwhelmingly avoided while doing this blog), but will be mostly political and in-line with the themes of this blog. And for now I will provide only the most relevant information, I will give basically zero background and won’t mention other things related to the topic. I am doing this because I believe there are a lot of people out there who really don’t like me, mostly because of a failure on my part to explain things.

In June of 2001, I was a very active member of the Young Democratic Socialists, youth wing of the Democratic Socialists of America. I had been a member of DSA since 1994-1995 and was often active. During those first seven years I was involved to some degree with about 25 events. Not counting about five events (i.e. events in Denver, or in the dorms) there was an average of 65 people at each event I organized. (I resigned my membership in DSA in May of 2002) I think that is basically all the background you need.

In June 2001, Sinn Fein overtook the Social Democratic and Labour Party as the largest party of the nationalist community. This was in two elections on the same day- local elections using Single Transferable Vote and Proportional Representation and British parliamentary elections that are First Past the Post. I sent something about the results to the YDS-Discussion list. Someone responded and asked if YDS had a position on N. Ireland.

I’m going to skip some details at this point. I said I would type something up (I was a member of the leadership at that point). After a month, with a fair amount of discussion and a fairly (possibly very) good job done by me, I withdrew it. There were too many problems with it.

The main point of me typing this up is to explain one of the arguments I offered in support of YDS taking a position on N. Ireland (of course that position would have to be more or less (possibly very less) in support of Irish Republicanism for this to work). I felt like the good that could be done with such a resolution (encouraging people to work on that issue to one degree or another (from one person signing a petition that’s going around to a YDS chapter doing an event on this issue)) was obvious, so I unfortunately didn’t say much if anything at all about that (I said a lot about the background to the conflict, but not, “this will help...”). One of the reasons that I DID offer was that it would help us attract a certain part of the population- Irish-Americans (depending on what the resolution said, we’d probably be talking about people who are more or less Sinn Fein supporters). Without further explanation by me, this must have sounded questionable, and that’s probably what a lot of YDSers thought; or thought it was even worse than questionable. Here are some things I should have mentioned:

*I was thinking overwhelmingly about I-As who are already liberal (liberals who are in transition towards the left), progressive or left-wing. (UPDATE 11/8/20 My thoughts about the word "liberal" are here; my brief definition of a liberal is someone to the left of the Clintons and to the right of Sen. Elizabeth Warren)

*There’s a good minority of those Americans who work on this from the right perspective who are not Irish-American, and about 1/2 of such people are people of color. I was also thinking it would attract some of them. For more of my thoughts on that, see this, this, and this one is also relevant.

*Going back to attracting people interested in N. Ireland, which would at least often if not mostly mean Irish-Americans, I should explain that even with the latter group, I don’t see the harm, although I can sort of understand people thinking I’m an idiot or an ass-hole. But YDS and DSA wanted to attract more members (**which would include attracting people to an anti-racist agenda**) and I saw that as the icing on the cake of making an important statement on an important issue.

*On a related note, the issue of N. Ireland can be used to drag Irish-Americans towards the Left (talk with them about how N. Ireland is not the only place with bigotry, national oppression, etc.). That would be most successful if it involved a left-wing group that appreciated the importance of the N. Ireland issue ( I explain why it’s important for American political activists in this post (starting about 1/3 down with the paragraph starting "Was S. Africa much worse?").

I think that should clarify what I meant.

Tom

UPDATE 2/6/13 About a month after my proposed statement was discussed among YDSers online, I spoke briefly with two senior members of DSA about this. I didn't say much, certainly not everything i've typed above, but I said something that made my idea sound better than when I first mentioned it in that online YDS discussion. One of these senior members agreed with me, and maybe the other one too, at least to a small degree. 

UPDATE 11/6/20 A related and much higher-quality post about my interest in Irish-American activism is here.

Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews R

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).

“Borderland,” “Cold Station 12,” “The Augments” See the links for a plot summary.

This three-parter contains one very large political theme and a couple smaller ones. The big one is the question of genetic engineering. My thoughts on this are here while discussing the episode “Doctor Bashir, I Presume?”

At one point one of the augments and Archer have the following exchange:

Malik: We were defending our right to exist.

Archer: You’ve already killed over 25 people. Your existence has a pretty high price.

Malik: It could get higher.


Obviously they are pretty much unable to co-exist with normal people, and StarFleet was right to prevent any more augments from being born.

The other issues:

1. We learn that at one point Earth space ships were nuclear-powered, something which I have negative feelings about (even in the context of ST, I believe they should have postponed further space travel until they found something better than nuclear power). Could cause serious environmental problems on Earth.

2. There’s also an element of slavery. First, when the slaves can no longer be controlled by the neurolytic restraints, they rebel, which is pretty cool.

It raises the question for me, shouldn’t StarFleet do something about the Orion slave trade? It doesn’t count as an internal issue for the Orions because they enslave outside of their race most of the time. And even if it were internal, I’m very open-minded about StarFleet intervening anyway. I have difficulty imaging that happening in the past with black slaves in America, since I don’t think there was a world power comparable to the Federation of ST. I mean, the British ended slavery in almost all of the Empire in 1833 but I’m not sure if they would have been an ideal candidate for this. Would black slaves in America have welcomed liberation in that way? I imagine they would have. And of course they did welcome liberation during and at the end of the Civil War, and of course many former slaves fought for the Union in that war.

On a non-political note, it was brilliant of them to have Brent Spiner play Soong, an ancestor of the man who created Data (The Next Generation).

I give this three-parter five stars out of five.

“The Forge,” “Awakening,” and “Kir’Shara” See the links for a plot summary.

This three-parter has one main theme- religious persecution, and there are several minor things that come up here and there:

I’m against religious persecution, although there would of course be some exceptions- for example if children are being abused in some way. My thoughts on religion can be found here, here (while discussing the episode "Who Watches The Watchers?"), here (while discussing the episode "Destiny"), here (while discussing the episode "In The Hands Of The Prophets").

1. At one point Archer seems to compare the different interpretations of Surock’s writing with what has happened with the Bible. The basic message I believe was that the Bible (and similar books) shouldn’t be taken too seriously.

2. The leader of the Syrrannites says that the High Command defiled the monastery of P’Jem by placing an intelligence operation there. It really is very inappropriate to use religious places for what might be called intelligence or military efforts.

3. We’re reminded that Vulcans who can do mind melds are treated poorly, and this is undoubtedly a statement against homophobia. See this when I discuss the episode “Stigma.”

4. I think this is my first exposure to the political system on Vulcan. It’s not made clear, but I got the idea that the High Command was the government; I used to think it was the leadership of the military; and what kind of civilian government leadership is known as the High Command? It also turns out that the head of the High Command (HC) organized a large-scale invasion force without the other members knowing. All members of the HC were men. Vulcan still uses the death penalty for some crimes. And lastly, there is apparently a loyalty oath that at least some Vulcans must take. Unless I’m missing something from The Original Series, I would have to say that the Vulcan government isn’t very democratic and considering most of what I wrote in this paragraph, I wonder what they're doing in the Federation? (on the other hand, it IS suggested at one point that the head of the HC was elected).

5. The leader of the HC seems to have gone after the Syrrannites because, as pacifists, they might stir up opposition to his invasion of Andoria.

6. There is one part where a Vulcan is tortured mentally instead of physically, which Vulcans can usually resist. After that the interrogator who used torture suggests that very often people being tortured will say whatever they think their interrogator wants to hear, even if it’s not true (which makes torture ineffective in addition to being immoral).

I’m not a big fan of Vulcan episodes, so I can only give this one two stars out of five.

Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews Q

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).

“Storm Front” parts 1 and 2 See this, and this for a plot summary.


In some ways it’s completely political, as it’s largely about World War II. There are a few elements I’d like to comment on:

A: There’s a bit of Nazi propaganda at one point. Part of it talks about the Nazis taking down the capitalists that were responsible for The Great Depression. This raises the question of whether the Nazis were left-wing or right or a combination of the two. It makes much more sense to put them solidly on the right. The Nazis economic policies were mixed in terms of their treatment of capital. But their policy on labor was not mixed- they got rid of the unions at the very beginning of their reign. Also, they emphasized nation and race much more than class. Lastly, it was conservative politicians that let the Nazis into government in 1933 (and for some years after that, conservatives were still involved in the Nazi state). (I go into more detail here)

B: A Suliban from the 22nd Century says that he didn’t know humans could be as war-like as they were during WWII, based on his knowledge of humans in the 22nd Century. Referring to humans on Earth who have not been at war with each other for many decades is a good idea. He also says that while searching for the Xindi and their weapon, Archer behaved in a way comparable to the humans during WWII (if he was referring to the Allies, that sort of makes sense, but if he was including the Axis, it makes no sense at all). I’m going to say more about this in the next review (below) (“Home”).

C: I realize there weren’t very many white, American characters in the Brooklyn parts of the two-parter, but I think it would have been more appropriate if there had been something that would briefly touch on the racism that people of color faced back then (one of the members of the resistance is a black woman). Also something about Jews being rounded up by the Nazis would have been nice.

Overall, I have mixed feelings about this two-parter. I am very interested in WWII, but so far I generally don’t like Star Trek stuff about WWII. I give it three stars out of five.


“Home” See this for a plot summary.


This episode was surprisingly full of political stuff. There are two subjects: How exploring the galaxy requires an ability to fight; and bigotry.

First the bigotry. There are basically three scenes for this. On Vulcan, T’pol’s mother gets upset about the idea of Trip and T’pol getting married and having children: “Do you really believe that a human and a vulcan can have a future together. Imagine the shame your children would endure.” This is probably a reference to their kids being part human and part Vulcan and being rejected by both Vulcans and humans.

As a result of the Xindi attack, many people on Earth became xenophobic about aliens, and Phlox encounters this. Travis and Malcolm stand up to the bigots, which results in a fight. Later, Hoshi is talking with Phlox about going down to Earth:

Hoshi: So you’re going to stay on the ship because of some loud mouth in a bar?

Phlox: My presence could provoke another incident- someone could get hurt....

Hoshi: This isn’t the way to deal with prejudice. The best thing is to show your face and remind people that there are aliens who don’t want to blow up the planet.

Phlox: I can’t blame those men for the way they reacted. Earth has survived a horrific attack. It’ll take time for the trauma to heal.


As far as how to respond to bigotry, I lean towards agreeing with Hoshi. But I’m open-minded about this and would respect the feelings of those who are the targets of bigotry.

On a related issue, I can’t agree with Phlox’s last words. I don’t believe that it was okay for people to express hostility towards Arabs and Muslims after 9/11.

Archer has a lot to say about the need for firepower while exploring. In general I would sort of agree with him, but some of what he says doesn’t make much sense to me. First, when the Captain of the second ship like Enterprise asks him for advice on which StarFleet officer would be best for Tactical (which covers both the weapons systems and the security force), Archer suggests filling that position with a member of the military (apparently StarFleet is not considered part of the military). He then also suggests having a team of military riflemen on board, as he did when he went after the Xindi. It seems like StarFleet can produce people like Archer’s tactical officer- it’s totally unnecessary to fill that position with a rifleman. On the other hand, having a squad of riflemen in addition to the tactical officers and crew is probably a good idea- it seemed to work well for Enterprise. It would probably make sense to have the Tactical officers and crew handle security on-board, and the military would help in the event of being boarded but would normally be available for away missions.

More generally Archer at one point advocates for a more isolationist policy, where StarFleet would stay close to Earth as a defensive force. He doesn’t seem to really mean it.

In the last post (while discussing the episode “Zero Hour”) I talked about how Archer did some things that were immoral during the mission to find the Xindi weapon. I basically said that although he shouldn’t be tossed in jail or even tossed out of StarFleet, he should get some punishment, to make other officers understand that there are consequences for breaking or bending the rules, even for hero Captains, and they should only do so when very necessary. There is nothing about him getting in any trouble in this episode, nor the three after it (I sometimes do reviews at a slower pace than I watch the episodes at). At the end of his de-briefing, the Vulcan ambassador says that he (Archer) did some immoral things, but says they were necessary for his mission to succeed.

It turns out that in some ways, Archer is doing what needed to be done about his immoral tactics. Mountain climbing with a fellow Captain (Erika Hernandez), Archer explains why he wanted to go climbing.

Archer: I figured this was the last place I’d run into anyone who’d want to shake my hand or take my picture or tell me I’m an inspiration to their children. If they knew what I’d done...

Hernandez: You did what any Captain would have done.

Archer: Does that include torture or marooning a ship full of innocent people- Cause I don’t remember reading those chapters in the handbook.


I’m still disappointed that he didn’t receive some kind of punishment, but that exchange is better than nothing.

Overall I give this episode three stars out of five.

Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews P

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).

These episodes are more or less part of the Xindi story line that lasts the entire 3rd season of Enterprise. For some introductory comments from me and a link to a plot summary of the first episode of this story line, see this where I discuss the episode “The Expanse” (which is the last episode of the 2nd season).

“e2” See this for a plot summary.

A non-political episode. But it’s a very interesting episode. I like the part where some of the crews of the two Enterprises meet each other. I also like the “generational ship” aspect. Reminds me of Star Trek: Voyager.

I give it five stars out of five.

“The Council” See this for a plot summary.

At this point there’s almost nothing new that’s political- aside from the alliance Archer has made with some of the Xindi.

There is one thing I wanted to high-light. Trip’s sister was killed by the probe that attacked Earth at the end of the 2nd season (seven million were killed). A Xindi named Degra designed that weapon and is also the first senior Xindi to accept what Archer is telling him- about how humanity is not the enemy of the Xindi. He interacts with Trip about 2 times when Trip is very hostile towards him. At one point, they have the following exchange:

Trip: Do me a favor- don’t try to get on my good side.

Degra: I understand you and I will always be enemies.

Trip: You got that right

Degra: I can’t change what happened to your sister, or any of the 7 million. But I am risking my life, I am risking the lives of my family. I’ve killed members of my own species. All because I’m trying to save both ours worlds.


Later on they build on that improvement with Trip acknowledging that Degra has taken some serious risks for peace between the Xindi and humanity.

I give this episode four stars out of five.

“Countdown” See this for a plot summary.

Aside from being a part of the Xindi story line, there’s basically nothing political here. Even Archer’s efforts at convincing Xindi that humanity isn’t their enemy are basically over.

I give it four stars out of five.

“Zero Hour” See this for a plot summary.

Aside from being a part of the Xindi story line, there’s not much political here. Even Archer’s efforts at convincing Xindi that humanity isn’t their enemy are over.

There is some discussion of the future formation of the Federation which is political and very inspiring. In general, with some exceptions, I think political mergers are a good thing. On a similar note, I like the involvement of Shran and the Andorians in attacking the Xindi weapon.

In general season three was sort of what I had remembered from watching it about 13 months ago. It’s inspired by a non-progressive response to 9/11. But there was also more progressive elements than I remembered, and as I said earlier, the darker side of Archer’s efforts is probably more or less realistic (that that sort of thing would come up in his mission). It’d be nice if StarFleet had, after the mission found some way to give Archer a slap on the wrist for the immoral things he did. I’ll learn for sure soon as I start watching the 4th season, but I don’t remember that happening (a slap on the wrist of some sort would be good- overall Archer has been a great StarFleet officer and he shouldn’t be tossed away in jail or something; but some punishment would remind other officers that they need to try and come up with alternatives before doing something immoral)

I don’t like the ending where they’re all sent back in time- although I might change my opinion of that after I watch the first two episodes of season four, it just seems like a bad end to the Xindi story line, when they’re supposed to return to Earth as heroes.

I give it four stars out of five.

Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews O

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).

These episodes are more or less part of the Xindi story line that lasts the entire 3rd season of Enterprise. For some introductory comments from me and a link to a plot summary of the first episode of this story line, see this where I discuss the episode “The Expanse” (which is the last episode of the 2nd season).

“Hatchery” See this for a plot summary.

If it wasn’t for one thing, there would be a fair amount of political stuff to comment on. But pretty much everything Archer said was when he was affected by some chemical. He does say two things that I want to comment on.

First, he says “I don’t know much about Vulcan ethics, but humans don’t throw morality out the window when things start getting a little rough.” First, during the 3rd season Xindi story line Archer frequently does exactly that, especially in the episode “Damage.” I know that even with some good causes, this happens, but every effort should be made to avoid such actions. At another point he says: “There are rules, Trip, even in war” about the need to avoid civilian casualties. I’d basically say the same thing. With both of these, many people will say that morals should be abandoned if necessary to avoid casualties among American soldiers. What many just don’t seem to get is that killing civilians pisses off a lot of people- they’re friends and families, some of whom are going to become insurgents. I found something among supporters of the US military that illustrates this problem pretty well. It’s the text of a shirt here. The 10th slogan is the main thing I want to highlight, but the 3rd slogan is also similar. They just don’t get it.

I give it three stars out of five.

“Azati Prime” See this for a plot summary

Although it is part of the Xindi story line, there’s not much that is especially political. At one point Daniels tries to convince Archer to try some more diplomacy instead of destroying the Xindi weapon, pointing out that if the weapon is destroyed without getting some of the Xindi to understand humanity is not a threat, they'll simply build another weapon. Archer disagrees- since he has engaged in some sort of diplomatic efforts, I assume he favors destroying the weapon since they have finally found it.

Also, about the destruction of the monitoring station. It’s not clear but it sounds like a military installation, in which case it was a legitimate target.

That’s about it for political stuff. In some ways the damage that Enterprise suffers is kind of neat.

I give this episode four stars out of five.

“Damage” See this for a plot summary.

This is a political episode. First we are reminded that at some point Archer said “we can’t save humanity without holding on to what makes us human.” T’pol quotes him on that after Archer decided to take an important piece of equipment (a warp coil) for the warp drive from another, friendly ship, by force. After losing the warp coil, the other ship faces a very log voyage home that they’re not ready for. T’pol at first strongly opposes Archer, but she is going through withdrawal from drugs and shortly afterwards retracts what she said.

There were some other ways Archer could have gotten the warp coil. He could have asked to BORROW it until the mission was over in return for the supplies he DID send them to pay for the warp coil. If that failed, I am honestly unable to choose what he should have done, they’re both unattractive choices. For now I have to leave it at that.

I’d say there are almost zero/zero progressive values on display in this episode. But as much as I don’t like the choice Archer makes, that does make it a bit more realistic. It’d be better if Archer received some kind of punishment for what he did, but as far as I can remember, that doesn’t happen.

I give this episode four stars out of five.

“The Forgotten” See this for a plot summary.

The only thing worth mentioning is the developing alliance of Degra and Archer. Convincing as many Xindi as possible that humanity is not a threat to them is very important- if they they destroy the weapon without that, the Xindi will just build another weapon. It also lays some ground-work for good relations in the future.

I give it four stars out of five.

Star Trek: Enterprise 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).

These episodes are more or less part of the Xindi story line that lasts the entire 3rd season of Enterprise. For some introductory comments from me and a link to a plot summary of the first episode of this story line, see this where I discuss the episode. “The Expanse” (which is the last episode of the 2nd season).

“Proving Ground” See this for a plot summary.

There is one bit of politics in this. It’s a conversation about responding to the Xindi attack on Earth, in which Trip’s sister was killed.

Shran: I can understand why you seek vengeance on these Xindi.

Trip: I’d love to get my hands on whoever ordered that attack. But that’s not why we’re here.

Shran: You have no desire to make these people pay for the death of your sister?

Trip: I just want to make sure they don’t get the chance to finish what they started.

I won’t say revenge is always bad, but in general it really isn’t helpful. I value what Trip says when I also remember what Archer has said about trying to use a relatively diplomatic approach, trying to convince at least some of the Xindi that humanity is not a threat to them. That’s a good approach for that sort of thing.

I also like the involvement of the Andorians.

I give it four stars out of five.

“Stratagem” See this for a plot summary.

There is one large political aspect to this episode. Archer tries a new method of getting information which seems more acceptable than threatening people in ways that are torture. The wiping of Degra’s memory is far from ideal, but it only involved a small period of time, about 2-3 days while Degra was a prisoner on Enterprise.

I give it three stars out of five.

“Harbinger” See this for a plot summary.

A non-political episode. I give it two stars.

“Doctor’s Orders” See this for a plot summary.

A non-political episode. I give it three stars.

Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews M

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).

These episodes are more or less part of the Xindi story line that lasts the entire 3rd season of Enterprise. For some introductory comments from me and a link to a plot summary of the first episode of this story line, see this where I discuss the episode “The Expanse” (which is the last episode of the 2nd season).

“North Star” See this for a plot summary.

A fairly political episode. It’s a good illustration of racial oppression. It’s illegal to educate the Skagarans, there’s one set of laws for humans, another for Skagarans etc.

I also like the idea of finding the descendants of people taken from Earth by aliens centuries before they are discovered by Enterprise.

One thing I was kind of disappointed with was that there could have been more about dismantling the anti-Skagaran laws and/or about encouraging humans to change their attitudes towards Skagarans. More generally it ties social progress with TECHNOLOGICAL progress, a connection I doubt exists.

I give it five stars out of five.

“Similitude” See this for a plot summary.

A non-political episode. It’s very interesting. I give it four stars out of five.

“Carpenter Street” See this for a plot summary.

There is some commentary about Earth having a problem back in those days (the early years of this century) with “greed, violence, and moral corruption.” At one point Archer starts to say something about Earth and fossil fuels being exhausted in 2061, but doesn’t finish- I imagine it would have something to do with things like the electric car.

There’s also another incident of Archer crossing the line while interrogating someone (overall, the message from Star Trek is that torture is wrong).

I give it three stars out of five.

“Chosen Realm” See this for a plot summary.

This is largely about fundamentalist religion taken even further than usual in a negative direction (one sect believes that the “Chosen Realm” was made by the Makers in nine days; the other sect says ten days, and they’ve been at war for 100 years). It illustrates that well, and I liked the episode. I’m concerned that ST overall gives people the idea that religion is incompatible with the values of the Federation and/or StarFleet. More of my thoughts on religion can be found here, here (while discussing the episode "Who Watches The Watchers?"), here (while discussing the episode "Destiny"), here (while discussing the episode "In The Hands Of The Prophets").

This episode also has what I believe is the very first time that ST has said something about abortion. It’s more or less a pro-choice statement, although not very explicit.

I give this episode three stars.

Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews L

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).

These episodes are more or less part of the Xindi storyline that lasts the entire 3rd season of Enterprise. For some introductory comments from me and a link to a plot summary of the first episode of this storyline, see this where I discuss the episode. “The Expanse” (which is the last episode of the 2nd season).

“Impulse” See this for a plot summary.

Although it’s part of the Xindi story line which is fairly political, this episode is relatively non-political. I give it three stars out of five.

“Exile” See this for a plot summary.

Although it’s part of the Xindi story line which is fairly political, this episode is relatively non-political. I give it three stars out of five.

“The Shipment” See this for a plot summary.

This episode includes some efforts by Archer to be sort of diplomatic in his mission to find the Xindi weapon. But he kind of goes back and forth between trying to co-opt an important Xindi he captured and, on the other hand, threatening to kill him.

At one point Archer has the following exchange with Malcolm.

Archer: I thought we were here to stop a war, not start one.

Malcolm: They struck first.

Archer: Because they were told we were going to attack them. They think they’re acting in self-defense. By destroying this complex, we’ll be confirming their worst fears about humanity.

Malcolm: Let’s not forget the 7 million people who were killed.


Disappointingly, this desire for revenge seems to affect Archer, as he indicates that he now favors destroying the complex. He does, however, order something that will protect the community nearby.

I give it three stars out of five.

“Twilight” See this for a plot summary.

The political aspect of this is the genocide of humanity. Besides that, it’s very non-political, but I love the story. I give it five stars out of five.

Star Trek: Enterprise Reviews K

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).

These episodes are more or less part of the Xindi storyline that lasts the entire 3rd season of Enterprise. For some introductory comments from me and a link to a plot summary of the first episode of this storyline, see this where I discuss the episode. “The Expanse” (which is the last episode of the 2nd season).

“The Xindi” See this for a plot summary.

Although it’s part of the Xindi storyline which is fairly political, this episode is relatively non-political.

I give it four stars out of five.

“Anomaly” See this for a plot summary.

This has one aspect that needs to be discussed, although it doesn’t “highlight the progressive politics of ST.”

While interrogating a prisoner taken during a devestating raid on Enterprise’s supplies, Archer first threatens torture and then actually engages in it.

The prisoner says, “I don’t think you’d be very comfortable torturing another man. You and your crew-mates are far too civilized for that, too moral.”

Archer replies, “I need what was stolen from me. There’s too much at stake to let my morality get in the way.” Then some hours later, needing another piece of information, he puts the prisoner in an air-lock and has it slowly de-compress until the very last second when he lets the prisoner out.

This sort of thing happened one other time in Star Trek. See this, where I discuss the two-parter “Equinox.” In that episode it was made fairly clear that Starfleet opposes torture- that doesn’t happen with this Enterprise episode.

I give this episode three stars.

“Extinction” See this for a plot summary.

Although it’s part of the Xindi storyline which is fairly political, this episode is relatively non-political. I give it two stars out of five.

“Rajiin” See this for a plot summary.

Two political bits:

1) There’s opposition to the trafficking in people (slaves, and in this case, specifically female slaves).

2) Archer once again indicates his willingness to violate someone’s human rights (this is not an example of progressive politics in ST; but it is the exception to the rule).

Rajiin: If I say anything else, they’ll kill me.

Archer: .... how do you know I won’t do the same?


I give this episode three stars out of five.