The Prime Directive: Why It Should Be Abolished

[Whitestar]

In the excellent book entitled, "The Meaning of Star Trek" by Thomas Richards, the author discusses about the inherent flaws of the Federation's most cherished principle, the Prime Directive. Here is a direct quote:

"The prime Directive has a further problem. Not only is it easy to violate the Prime Directive; in fact, it is hard not to violate it. Almost any action taken by Starfleet, ranging from tentative exploration to outright colonization, is by definition a violation of the Prime Directive. this is through no fault of any starship captain. It is because the Prime Directive is not only an unattainable ideal but also a scientific impossibility. Behind the Prime Directive is the idea that it is possible to observe a society without actually affecting it. Seen this way, the Prime Directive constitutes a violation of one of Star Trek's favorite scientific principles: the Heisenberg Uncertanty Principle. The Heisenberg Uncertanty Principle states that observers always interfere with the things that they are observing. Even a hidden observer creates a disturbance. The interferance may be small or it may be great, but it is everpresent and it can be measured. If we believe Heisenberg (as the series does), we must admit that the Prime Directive is founded on a scientific impossibility. Maintaining a perfect distance is simply not possible in a universe where all actions, however remote, have consequences. No observation is or can be neutral. Observers are necessarily participants. Wherever Starfleet goes in the galaxy, it must act to limit the damage inevitably caused by its own powers of observation. Violating the Prime Directive is thus not a matter of principal but of degree."

I recalled a TNG episode entitled, "Homeward" where the crew encounters Worf's foster brother, Nikolai Rozhenko (played by Paul Sorvino), who is under Federation authority to observe Boraal II, an M class planet currently in the process of an atmospheric catastrophe. When Nikolai transports aboard the Enterprise, he meets with Picard and the senior staff in hopes of convincing Picard to help these people by transporting them to another habitable planet. However, Picard does not agree and states that it would be a direct violation of the Prime Directive. Before long, they all observe the planet from the bridge and watch as Borall II's atmosphere darkens, devoid of any life. Suddenly, the Enterprise experiences a power drain, originating from the Holodeck. Worf goes to investigate the cause when he attempts to open the doors to the Holodeck, but discovers that not even his security password can bypass the lock. The lock is opened from inside to reveal Nikolai. He had taken the initiative to transport the Boraalans on an identical camping site on the ship while they were sleeping. He designs the program in the Holodeck to make it appear that the Boraalans are traveling to a habitable place on the planet that they are no longer on. The surface of the new planet will be their stopping point. Seeing that he has no choice in the matter, Picard takes the Boraalans to another habitable planet.

Although the story has a happy ending (which is soooo typical in Star Trek), it made me feel very differently about the Federation and their damn precious Prime Directive policy. The Prime Directive states that Starfleet does not have the right to impose their views, philosophies, and technology (especially medical technology) on other alien civilizations, specifically pre-warp societies, because it could possibly lead to disasterous conquences, no matter how well-intended. However, this principle also has some merit such as not providing weapons to one of two opposing factions, unless the other has a more tactical advantage. And we have seen in Kirk and Picard's era, both captains violated the Prime Directive on many occasions, but they did so when it only suited the Federation's best interests. Not only that, when the Federation would greatly benefit from something such as advance technology or other assortments, they even went so far as to give their Starfleet Captains their blessings to deliberately violate the Prime Directive! So, basically violating the prime directive is not a matter of principle, but one of degree. Therefore, the Federation will have one of two choices to make: one, either remodify it, or two, abolish it. The fact that Picard and crew were willing to let an entire species die due to this stupid principle, I lost my respect for them and the Federation as a whole. The Prime Directive is a moral act of cowardice and stupidity, so I say abolish it.

Thoughts anyone?

Whitestar

 

[Winters_Sorrow]

The Prime Directive was just a way of discussing the polarised viewpoints of the 'isolationist/imperialist' foreign policies of the USA during the pre & post second world war.
When does your presence/interference in a culture become negative. Is it always negative? Can it be hard to stop? Does the power you wield as a greater technological force foster a disdain of those you are there to help?

I think it does it's job of social commentary very well.

I remember an original series episode where a Starfleet observer discovered a run down and crime ridden society on the verge of social revolution & collapse and introduced an ideology of order to preserve it. Sadly the ideology was that of the Nazi party, but the road to hell, as they say...

 

[j d worthington]

The Prime Directive is totally unworkable as a theory, let alone practice. Agreed. And in all logic it should be abolished. Agreed. But when the dickens has either of those things led any regime in making decisions on whether or not to hold onto a principle? And I think it would be totally unrealistic to not have Starfleet riddled with that very human capacity to hold two diametrically opposed ideas as infallible simultaneously. (Not that ST has ever been strong on realism, even given its basic premise; but it's got to have some touchstone with the concept....)

 

[Brian G Turner]

I'm curious - when did the Prime Directive become a part of Star Trek?

Simply because I was watching an episode from the original series at the weekend, where the Enterprise is on a diplomatic to a world that - unknown to them - is at war with another close planet. The different being, instead of actual warfare by weapons, computers simply designate that a target has been hit, and for people in the area to report to a disintegration chamber.

Kirk has no problem at all interfering with this, in order to try and create peace between the warring planets.

No sign of the Prime Directive.

 

[Hawkshaw_245]

The theory of 'non-interference' in dealing with new civilizations is a warm, fuzzy, pleasant idea. But how could you practice it? And why?

The realities are life are often harsh. Even in a space-faring futuristic society, there is still the need for new technologies and resources to support it, and to improve it.

No matter what your intent may be, your societies needs must fit into your thinking. And to some extent, they must take precedence.

I say this, because I've always had problems with the seemingly endless resources available to Starfleet, and the Federation. Never did they mention a shortage of ANYTHING, no matter how many resources they consumed...personnel, material, fuel, medicine.

Only in those far-flung, remote backwater outposts was there ever any threat of discomfort for anybody.

And the Federation technology reached a level that I felt was unbelievable, and 'too perfect'. I mean, an engineer could repair any damage or fix any problem on a ship, virtually by punching a few buttons!!!

Though the Prime Directive, and the 'peaceful coexistence' theme of Trek is a good one, I don't think it's especially realistic.

 

[littlemissattitude]

Kirk never had any problem violating the Prime Directive. I think it probably happened in one way or another in nearly every episode.

Actually, academic anthropology lives by principles very much similar to the Prime Directive, and there are always all kinds of controversies going on because it is so nearly impossible for an anthropologist studying a culture (especially small-scale cultures) to avoid influencing it; just by being there, he or she has some impact.

 

[Roboripper]

I'm curious - when did the Prime Directive become a part of Star Trek?

Simply because I was watching an episode from the original series at the weekend, where the Enterprise is on a diplomatic to a world that - unknown to them - is at war with another close planet. The different being, instead of actual warfare by weapons, computers simply designate that a target has been hit, and for people in the area to report to a disintegration chamber.

Kirk has no problem at all interfering with this, in order to try and create peace between the warring planets.

No sign of the Prime Directive.

they had it in TOS but it was refered to by it's older name of General Order One. it's been a while since I've seen any TOS, let alone the episode mentioned, but if I recall correctly, the civilisation/s (wasn't a case of both races started off on the one planet and were in an almost perpetual civil war, so one side upped and left for the other planet but the war continued anyway?) in this instance already had space travel and maybe GO1/PD didn't affect it?

 

[j d worthington]

If I'm remembering correctly, the episode Brian refers to is from the original Star Trek, yes? And I think, if memory serves, it was titled "Balance of Power" -- and, yes, the Prime Directive (General Order One) was in effect in the series at that point, as it was introduced in the early broadcast episodes. However, Kirk had no trouble putting it (or any other rule) aside whenever the situation (in his mind) demanded it. It's a wonder he wasn't courts-martialed more often.... Maybe the middle name (Tiberius) threw them off, thinking he might just revert to type.....

 

[Whitestar]

I'm curious - when did the Prime Directive become a part of Star Trek?

Simply because I was watching an episode from the original series at the weekend, where the Enterprise is on a diplomatic to a world that - unknown to them - is at war with another close planet. The different being, instead of actual warfare by weapons, computers simply designate that a target has been hit, and for people in the area to report to a disintegration chamber.

Kirk has no problem at all interfering with this, in order to try and create peace between the warring planets.

No sign of the Prime Directive.

I just found out that the name of the episode where they first introduced the Prime Directive was "The Return of the Archons".

Whitestar

 

[Whitestar]

I just found out that the name of the episode where they first introduced the Prime Directive was "The Return of the Archons".

Whitestar

Correction, it was "Tomorrow Is Yesterday".

Whitestar

 

[Joel007]

The Prime Directive exists to create tension between the captain's responsibilities and his emotions. Its a plot device.

 

[isoneri]

The prime directive exists in order to maintain one thing humanity has a nasty habit of doing - forgetting it's reponsibilty to not only themselves but to those they come into contact with....look at "modern civilisation" history and go from there...

 

[Winters_Sorrow]

Hmm, that's not quite fair.
There was a lot of negative impacts, especially in the wholesale colonisation by 'modern civilisations' against weaker or less developed neighbours but I was always surprised in Star Trek (except in Voyager where it seemed to happen a lot! eg the Kazon) that you never really had the other situation of less developed civilisations taking from more civilised ones. Sadly they usually want their weapons technology rather than their legal systems...

 

[Highlander II]

Didn't the Prime Directive initially come from the Vulcans?

Based on the fact that the Vulcans wouldn't visit a planet that didn't already have warp capability? This is why it was so important for the TNG crew to make sure things happened like history said it would, to ensure that the Vulcans stopped by to visit Earth or the Federation and everything that *we* know about what Star Trek is would never happen.

Of course, the writers could have thought this up specifically for the movie and I just don't remember it being mentioned before that.