Sunshine

2007.07.29 - Sunday

Wow, where to begin. Chris and I walked down to Tinseltown to catch an afternoon showing of director Danny Boyle's "Sunshine", a supposedly "real" science fiction film, at least compared to what passes for sci-fi in film today. Well, the visual effects were really nice, and the actors were pretty damn good. There, now that the good stuff is out of the way, I can get started.

"Sunshine" could be, and should be, a poster boy for everything that's wrong with science fiction films and television today. It's an endless string of space cliches, many of which I'll add to my list shortly, strung together with ridiculous situations and stupid people. The sun is dying, providing less and less energy to the Earth, so a mission is dispatched with a "bomb" which will repair the damage. Don't ask, it doesn't matter. Needless to say, the mission fails, the ship and crew are presumed lost, and a second is sent. The new crew is eight presumably highly trained, professional, and mentally stable astronauts and scientists from around the world. The ship is, for the most part, logically designed: a crew section hidden from the Sun by a huge, reflective solar shield. The flight time to the Sun is about 16 months, with a loss of contact with Earth with a few months to go. Seems pretty straight forward, so of course there's a hitch.

The first ship is found by the second, and with the weight of all of Human civilization resting on their mission, the crew decides to investigate. The logic is somewhat sound, since having two bombs gives them two chances to succeed instead of one. The pilot plots a course correction and executes a burn, seemingly alone, because the rest of the crew awakes to alarms set off by the pilot's forgetful failure to adjust their solar shield angle to compensate for the new course. What, no checklists in the future? No computer safeguards? No verbal confirmation procedure with other crew members? Naturally, damage to the shield requires a ludicrous EVA to repair. When all is said and done the captain is killed by solar exposure and the communications array, seemingly spinning on a centrifuge around the ship for no reason, is destroyed.

Upon reaching the derelict missing ship, members of the new crew board her and find nothing but a few dead crew members who deliberately exposed themselves to the Sun, seemingly out of insanity. Naturally, a crew member from the first ship survived and stows away aboard the second one as it leaves to continue the mission. When this is finally discovered by someone, they don't let anyone else know, they just go off and search the ship themselves, getting attacked in the process. Turns out the survivor is the first ship's captain, insane from, I don't know, something, and spouting religious non-sense about not fixing the Sun because it's challenging "God's will". How did this person get to be the commanding officer of a Humanity saving space mission? Regardless, he begins to sabotage and roam the ship killing and attacking the remaining crew members. You practically expect someone to shout "look out, he's got space dementia!" Yadda, yadda, yadda, he gets stopped for a bit, comes back, the bomb launches, all the crew are killed except one, who survives all the way to the surface of the Sun to complete the mission in the nick of time and sacrifice himself to save the world. What a big surprise!

At any point in this insipid story, had any one of these eight civilization saving astronauts bothered to take the immediately obvious, insultingly logical course of action available to them, the whole mission would have been saved with no trouble at all. When your drama depends on supposedly professional and smart space travelers being complete and utter morons, you should know you've got a problem. The entire script is based around stupid decisions which would never occur in a real space mission in a million years, and a ship with just enough obvious design flaws to allow for just enough "dramatic" hardware failures. Couple that with some preposterous and fictional laws of space physics, and you've got a sure winner. When people go to see movies like this, it's what makes them hate science fiction. It insults the audience's intelligence to ask them to believe in these characters' actions, or in this story. Chris described it best as "a sci-fi B movie you'd expect to see on the Space channel, 'arted' up enough to pass as a real film".

Absolutely.

Goal Clinic

2007.07.24 - Tuesday

On Sunday I drove out to the "Great Pacific Forum" in Delta to take part in the first of what will hopefully be many goal clinics put on by Paul Fricker of The Goalie Store. I haven't had any kind of hockey instruction since playing minor hockey years and years ago. Ever since I came upon the The Goalie Store bulletin board, or the GSBB, I've tried to read as much as possible about the changes to the position and how to perform certain techniques or play certain situations. Every once and a while someone will post a video or some pictures, providing mostly useful information to the board members. Practicing this stuff in five or ten minute spurts before pick up games or in warm-ups is all I've been doing for the past few years, and that will only get you so far. I definitely credit martial arts with developing my interest in actually getting better at goaltending, analyzing game situations, and not only working on technical skills, but getting better at working on them.

There were no shooters at this first session. The only pucks on the ice were used to practice shooting the puck ourselves. It was nice to finally see the proper technique demonstrated. I'll need a bit of practice with that for sure. Most of the hour and forty five minute ice time was spent on skating drills, basic stance stuff, and a couple of fundamental butterfly techniques. That stance above is a bit wide, except for facing straight shots, but a prepared stance and what happens in a game are quite different, so I'd be curious to see myself actually playing. It was a good chance to review some basics and allow Paul to get an idea of where everyone ranks skill-wise.

Paul's plan is to continue these sessions roughly once a month through the coming season, provided there's enough interest. I certainly plan on being there. Playing games is great, but it was also a lot of fun to get out on the ice and just practice. It's nice to come away with a few things to work on, and be motivated to do so. Check out some more pictures from the clinic here.

Emmys

2007.07.20 - Friday

The Emmy nominations were announced yesterday and our team from the "Battlestar Galactica" episode "Exodus, Part 2" was lucky enough to get in. I haven't been able to find an easy link to the visual effects category without linking to the whole Emmy list, but we're under "Outstanding Special Visual Effects For A Series" in the "59th Creative Arts Emmy Awards". You'll find my name on there as "Lead CGI Artist / Animator" along with Brenda Campbell, Andrew Karr, Tom Archer, and Jeremy Hoey from Atmosphere. Of course, there were a bunch of other people who worked on the show as well, so thanks also to Paul Hegg, Chandra Juhasz, Daniel Osaki, Trevor Adams, Eric Bates, Scott Paquin, Nik Slotiuk, Louie Hinayo, and Andy Aspirin for all the hard work and long hours. That's just in 3D, so you get an idea of how many people it takes to pull off these kinds of projects, even for the small screen.

We're up against some pretty popular and critically acclaimed shows, especially "Heroes" and "Rome", so to be honest I think the chances of a win are slim. I suppose you never know, so we'll see what happens on September 8th down in LA.

The United Federation of Planets: The Economy

2007.07.15 - Sunday

This could be a tough one. We know almost nothing about the economy of the Federation, although much has been made of the fact that there's no money as we understand it. This alone has caused many to wrongly brand the Federation as an uber-communist or socialist state, where there is only no money because everything is provided by the state, to all citizens, on an equal basis. I've always found this to be extremely narrow thinking, usually attributed to an attempt to imagine a Federation society existing in the world as it is today. This kind of approach takes the Federation system entirely out of context. It would simply not be possible to implement a fully Federation inspired society into a world like ours that has neither the technology nor the culture to implement it. The economy of the Federation exists on Federation planets, and is not necessarily transferable outside of that environment. So, we know there's no money, no poverty, no disease, and no material want, at least in the traditional sense. Let's get started.

It's important to realize the kind of technologies that make the Federation economy possible. All members of the Federation have access to nearly limitless sources of energy. On Earth, we could expect to find wind, solar, hydro, tidal, and geothermal power stations. There would also be space-based solar arrays, collecting energy from the Sun and sending it to receiving stations on the surface. Fusion power plants would provide an added boost, helping to ensure a global supply of clean electrical power. Indeed, it's entirely possible that most homes and buildings on Earth would have their own micro fusion reactors; standard household appliances as common as a boiler or furnace is today. As for more tangible resources, such as food, materials, and other goods, the replicator makes the majority of those items trivial. Standard material wealth quickly loses its luster once every standard home replicator can produce meat and bread, fruits and vegetables, water, diamonds, gold, toys, electronics, and light bulbs. Industrial sized versions produce entire pieces of houses, starship hull plating, metal or composite structures, vehicle frames or almost anything else you might be able to think of.

Many of the most menial tasks for which we need workers may be performed automatically in the Federation. Street sweepers and garbage collectors, that is, what garbage there is which can't be dissolved in the nearest replicator as easily as it was created, would almost certainly be autonomous robotic units functioning behind the scenes. With their advanced battery technology, small robot devices would unplug from central stations and move out to perform their tasks, or they may be sent power wirelessly and never have to return unless in need of repair. Power cable checking robots, structure assembly robots, entire assembly lines for vehicles or small ships, house cleaners, and everything in between. All will be sufficiently advanced so they can operate with a minimal amount of Human oversight. The Federation to date has not developed actual sentient machines, apart from Data, and even if it had, there would be no reason to give your automated vacuum cleaner a personality. There's no need to invent wild and ridiculous stories about Federation "robot slave labour" or any such insanity. These devices are machines, and no more sentient than your local ATM. Replicator technology and robotics, along with the unlimited power to fuel them, certainly do a lot of the work for us in terms of imagining a Federation economy. Many of the basic needs of a Federation citizen are already taken care of, and the age old questions of "who cleans the sewers" is easily answered. However, not everything can be "beamed" into existence and simply plugged into a wall, and not all jobs can, or will even be allowed, to be done by robots. The Human being remains the driving force of Federation society.

For some reason people always assume that the population of the Earth is going to increase in perpetuity. Considering almost all developed nations are, without immigration, in population decline today, I don't know why that myth persists. On Earth, and most other worlds, in the Federation, the entire planet is developed. There are no third world countries, no starving masses, no families who need twelve kids to make their dirt farm work. The population on Earth in the Federation is at most half of our current six billion people, and possibly less. Once we're down to that number, suddenly everyone has a lot more breathing room, don't they? Now, are there two to three billion jobs on our Federation capital? Probably not. That's not really a problem, since it's not as if anyone is going to starve or be without a home, but it does mean competition for the existing jobs is intense. Now I know what some people would say: that no one would want to work in a world like that. I think you'll find most of those people are office clerks or retail sales people. Personally, I do my job because I like doing it, not simply because I get paid. If I didn't need money, I'd do it as a hobby anyway. Why do I want to work on bigger shows with more complicated effects? Because it might earn me more cash? No. It's because they're a challenge, an opportunity to learn new things and improve my skills. Despite the stress, the long hours, the politics of film and television, those projects are fun. There's nothing like the feeling of accomplishment you get when you see your completed work, and when you see how it pleases others. The feeling of facing a challenge and overcoming it, that is why most of the people with impressive jobs in this world got those jobs and continue to do them. Why does a world famous architect design a bigger, more impressive building? Why do military pilots or scientists join the space program? Why do engineers build more advanced airplanes or rocket engines? Simply for the money? Ridiculous. These people do these things because they like being on the cutting edge of technology, of art, and of Human progression. Now, not everyone is like them, and in the Federation, not everyone has to be. If only ten percent of the Federation population wants to actively work, that's probably enough. Still, even without money, there are less tangible rewards for those who actively contribute to society.

The Federation is not communist, or even socialist. There is no redistribution of wealth because everyone is "wealthy" as we understand it today. In the Federation, however, there are people who live in their apartments, go jogging every day, spend a few hours in a holo-program, then meet up with friends before going to bed. Maybe the next day they'll go swimming instead. These people are not considered "wealthy". They contribute very little to their society. As a result, these people will not be the ones living in the oceanfront home three blocks from Starfleet Academy. They might not be able to get tickets to the Canucks' game. The Federation is the ultimate meritocracy. Your personal accomplishments and reputation are your bank account, and can be spent wisely or squandered just as easily. Achieving more than just the very high, but baseline, standard of living in the Federation requires that you not only work and distinguish yourself, but be known as an upstanding citizen as well. A building manager on Earth would most likely assign his suites to people that he or she felt comfortable with, instead of just to those who happen to have the cash. Indeed, in certain cities or neighbourhoods today where vacancy rates are extremely low, apartment managers or home sellers do this already. Take money out of the equation, and what are you left with? If you're a total jerk in the Federation, you had better be an absolutely brilliant doctor or lawyer, or you'll find yourself constantly getting the short end of the stick. Make no mistake, not everyone in the Federation is nice, and even nice people will play favourites. You can't legislate against Human nature, so people are still going to get jobs because they "know a guy" in the company, or because their girlfriend's Dad is the head engineer on the Golden Gate maintenance team. Or maybe that's why they won't get the job. In any case, the Federation economy and market isn't automatically "fair" just because there's no money. The spirit of money is still around, it's just a lot less tangible, and some would say a lot harder to come by.

Now, as far as specific jobs go, it's really not that hard to deal with. Not everyone is going to be the project lead on the Gibraltar hydro dam project. Only the best of the best, people with proven track records, years of experience, and exceptional skill will get the high-profile, high reward jobs. That aspect of the Federation is no different than today. That doesn't automatically mean that no one else will do their jobs, and in fact, like doing their jobs. Just because Dennis Murren is a legendary visual effects supervisor and artist doesn't mean I automatically sulk in my apartment all day complaining about how unfair the world is. People will do jobs they like doing. Why does an engineer become an engineer? Probably because they like to solve problems and design technology. People in the future will still want to do that. Why do people spend thousands of dollars on fancy gardens in their yard? Because they like working with the soil and growing exotic plants, and so there will still be gardens in the Federation. Why do people sink hundreds of dollars into expensive aquariums? Because they like having the fish, taking care of them and creating artificial ecosystems for them to thrive in, and so there will still be aquariums in the Federation. People will do jobs because they find them interesting, because they find them challenging, or just because they would be bored out of their minds otherwise. People will do jobs in order to compete with other people, to be acknowledged as the "best in their field" will be a reward worth pursuing for millions of citizens. The spirit of competition and accomplishment is alive and thriving in the Federation. It is only the method of compensation which has changed.

Payment isn't something that the Federation has completely done away with. There is no money, but there's still an economy. At the moment, I imagine it mostly as a complicated web of favours exchanged between people doing jobs for each other. A lot of people will work simply because they like working, as I have already mentioned. As much as always wanting something in return might give some people a bad reputation that could hurt them, almost everyone might ask for some form of payment once and a while. An architect might design a house and have it built for a famous musician, in exchange for a private performance at her Son or Daughter's wedding. Alternatively, the musician might just want a standard house design, built by the architect's apprentice and a few robots as he begins to cut his teeth in the industry, no payment required. Who built Kirk's cabin in the woods? He might have simply chosen a design from a catalogue and had it constructed by machines, with the finishing touches put on by hand himself with the help of a few friends. They wouldn't need anything in return, but they'd probably all have a barbeque and enjoy each other's company afterwards. Or perhaps Kirk enlisted the help of an old friend from his Academy days, who's son now operates a construction firm, and who's grandson is looking for a sponsor to take the Academy entrance exam. One could go on and on describing a million possible ways this system would function, but you get the idea. While not always required, the age old system of barter and trade makes a lot of sense, except that the only currency is that of favours, good will, and proper thanks. Remember that no one is trying to get anything they need out of these deals. None of this is ever a matter of life or death, home or street. This is the way people get the things they want in the Federation, through a lifetime of hard work and personal integrity, traded with others of similar standing who happen to have a symbiotic request.

Now, what about interplanetary commerce? Obviously, given the technology available, individual Federation planets don't need to trade a great deal with each other, apart from personnel. Most resources can be produced or replicated where they're needed, but people can not. Ships might ferry highly desired workers from one planet to another, increasing their experience and personal profile, and giving them new challenges. These ships might be flown and operated by people who didn't quite have what it took to make Starfleet, but still wanted a career in space, or perhaps they're right on the bubble of Academy acceptance and are building up their hours of practical experience to supplement their application. Others may have no wish to go to the Academy, instead preferring to serve as non-commissioned personnel, but still wanting the experience and challenge of starship operations. The Federation would indeed be able to produce a great deal of resources that other civilizations may wish to use, and for this reason the Federation or Federation citizens might want to keep some alien currencies handy if they ever have to deal with alien groups. Still, citizens or the Federation itself may prefer exchanging favours for their services in any case.

I think you get the idea. So there's no money, big deal. Most of the things we spend money on in this world are easily and abundantly produced in the Federation without the need for very much work from anyone. What's left is largely the intangibles. With a smaller planetary population there is an opportunity for most people to have a nice home in a pleasant location. Maybe they get bored after a while and switch with someone else. Maybe they get bored of the whole planet and decide to join a colony expedition. The choices and possibilities are nearly limitless for a Federation citizen. Hard work and civil behaviour still rules the day, but even if you're a lazy freeloader, you've got a pretty nice life.

Free Speech

2007.07.11 - Wednesday

Lawyer doggedly pursues neo-Nazis using the Internet

It scares me to be living in a country where not being offended is apparently a "basic Human right". I wonder, does he go after Islamic fundamentalist websites too? Jewish orthodox hate groups?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

Mars Direct

2007.07.11 - Wednesday

I just finished reading Robert Zubrin's book "The Case for Mars". In case you haven't heard of Zubrin, he's the "live off the land" guy who's been advocating a simple, effective Mars mission plan ever since Bush's (I) "Space Exploration Initiative". Before reading the book, I'd never even heard of the SEI, so you can take a guess on how effective it was. Never the less, Zubrin's plan, well, the plan he helped to develop, makes a whole lot of sense and doesn't cost a whole lot of money. About half way through the book, when you really start to get a clear picture of just how easy a Human Mars mission could be, you'll start to get pissed off. There's no good reason, none at all, for not having Human beings living on Mars at least part time right now.

One of my favourite lines in the book is the observation that the Earth was colonized by "iron men in wooden ships, not wooden men in iron ones." That statement was true in '96 when the book was published, and it's even more true today. The only aspect of Zubrin's book I disagreed with, partially, was his insistence that technological progress should be progressing at the same rate today as it was 100 or 50 years ago. I won't dispute that we've slowed down and aren't reaching our potential right now, but technological progress of that kind is unlikely to come again regardless of funding or even sheer will. A lot of the discoveries that have been made to date were the easier ones, the low handing fruit of a technologically advanced civilization. As they say, the last 10% of the work takes 90% of the time. Major breakthroughs in materials, astronomy, and physics are slowing down because it's getting harder and harder to make them. Eventually we're going to reach a point where such breakthroughs are hundreds, if not thousands of years apart. We're not even close to that yet, and yes, we should be doing a lot more, especially in space, but I'm wary of advertising a Human Mars program as some kind of "guarantee" of the future we were all promised in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. Jet packs and flying cars might one day be aerodynamically possible and technologically practical, but you'll never convince me that they're a good idea.

That being said, Zubrin does go on to make some convincing arguments blaming our current civilizational laziness on the lack of the technological and societal challenge of "the frontier". It was a sorry state of affairs back in '96, but today, I'm not even sure you can get back to motivating a large majority of the population with those kinds of inspiring goals. If so, I'm willing to bet some of those people will be older than 30, while most of them will be older than 40. Kids today can't even wait for more than two weeks for the story payoff in "Lost" before scrambling to the internet to scream about how "nothing happened" in the last episode. How will that generation be motivated to take part in a 10 year project? How would they even comprehend something like Mars terraforming, a process that could ultimately take a few thousand years? I can't imagine a building taking more than 5 years to construct, but ancient structures like the pyramids or European cathedrals took much longer. In a free society with access to almost limitless amounts of near instantaneous entertainment, could any leader ever hope to maintain their focus long enough to actually get anything like that done?

Of course, Humans living on Mars, unable to waste time on such frivolous pursuits because they're too busy trying to survive, is exactly the kind of kick in the pants we need. These days however, where it seems like most young people don't even believe the Moon landings happened, will we even be able to get there at all? Unless the United States' return to the Moon in 10 years sparks some kind of change, I don't see the political climate for a Human Mars mission getting any better than it is now, and it's already a lot worse than when Zubrin wrote his book.

The United Federation of Planets: The Prime Directive

2007.07.01 - Sunday

One of the faults, one might say, of Star Trek is that no one who ever wrote or produced the show ever seemed to want to explore the Federation itself in depth. Oh sure, we know there's no poverty, no hunger, almost no disease, no money as we understand it, and no significant internal conflict, let alone war. All of this has been stated in one throw away line or another, in one television series, film or another. However, it has never been explained. How does the Federation work? How is it governed? What do people who aren't in Starfleet do? What do people who are in Starfleet, but not assigned to starships do? There are a million questions to be answered about the Federation, and while I certainly have no intention of trying to answer all of them, some broad brush strokes would at least be helpful. I'm sure this has been done by others before, but until I see something definitive, I think I'll give it a shot.

Almost every time someone who's new to Star Trek sees one of these episodes, they think it's stupid. Many articles and essays have been composed lambasting the immorality of it. Even a few years ago I wasn't a believer in it. You know what I'm talking about. The Prime Directive. It's practically the staple of "The Next Generation", the Federation's highest law, regarded with the same absolute truth that we give basic Human rights today. Sounds like a good place to start.

First, I highly recommend reading this piece over at Sentient Developments. I feel I must point out that I agree with almost nothing on that entire site, and the same applies here. However, the "prime directive is stupid" post does make some points that are certainly legitimate, even if the main crux of his argument is an awful episode of "Enterprise", Prime Directive aside. In any case, it's certainly worth reading if only to maintain perspective.

At the heart of the Prime Directive is the absolute adherence to a policy of non-interference. This policy has multiple levels, from non-interference in the internal affairs of fellow space faring civilizations, to non-interference in pre-warp cultures who have no knowledge of alien life, space ships, or even technology at all. Now I'm not for one second going to suggest that all of the episodes of Star Trek are absolutely consistent in their application of general order number one. Even within TNG, there are episodes which cause you to raise an eyebrow. Still, the basic premise of the Prime Directive is sound, for two main reasons.

The first is the most obvious. The Prime Directive serves to protect less advanced civilizations from exposure to ideas and technology that are either beyond their comprehension, or worse, within their comprehension but beyond their wisdom. When at all possible, the Federation will not be responsible, either directly or indirectly, for the destruction of entire cultures, belief systems, or species. Indeed, while questionable, the Prime Directive may even prevent action in a case where allowing an alien society to survive could ultimately lead to the destruction of the Federation itself. At the core of this law is the belief that no one has the right to decide which species should live or die, which should advance and which should not, and that no one can simply absolve themselves of the immorality of making that choice by spreading it around until it becomes the choice of your society and not the individual. Arguing against the use of medical intervention is the toughest aspect of the Prime Directive, and I'm not even sure if I can fully support that kind of position. As in the piece at Sentient Developments, the crew refuses treatment to a dying species, on the grounds that their extinction would pave the way for a fellow humanoid race to develop unimpeded. "Unbelievable" is the word used to describe this, but in truth, what right do they have to make that choice? Yes, they could save these Valakians, but wouldn't doing so condemn their fellow humanoids, the Menks, to an eternity of established animalistic slavery? The Prime Directive isn't making a value judgment here so much as it's saying that no single Human being should ever have to make a decision like that. Indeed, in Picard's time, they never would have beamed down to the planet in the first place.

This policy can even be extended to lifeless celestial bodies. For example, should the Federation mine a comet that, in 500 years, is projected to impact a potential life-supporting planet? Should they colonize an M-class world with primate-like animals living on a Northern continent, preempting any chance that species may have had at evolution and ultimate intelligent civilization? It's one thing to commit these acts in ignorance, but to look wide eyed at the data, at the potential, and still decide to turf them? Does anyone have the right to do that?

The second reason for the Prime Directive is less obvious. In fact, I don't recall it ever being mentioned on any Trek show, but it makes sense to me. I'd almost say it's an even more important reason for having the law than the first one I gave. The Prime Directive also serves an important function in terms of culturally protecting the Federation from potential internal threats. The Federation functions because it is a coalition of like-minded planets and cultures, each of which has achieved a certain level of advancement of their own accord. From the Sentient Developments piece:

"It's survival of the fittest as decreed by the Federation, and those who cannot progress to an advanced developmental stage or who destroy themselves first simply didn't deserve to be in the Federation in the first place."

Well, yes, that's it exactly. The Federation is not the United Nations, which is why it works. It doesn't have time for welfare cases, primitive minded war cultures, religious zealots, or drug addicted nutjobs. It is precisely through practicing this kind of artificial selection that the Federation maintains its cultural and economic strength, and its longevity. The Federation doesn't go around snuffing out "unfit" civilizations, but it also doesn't let just anyone join. There are strict socioeconomic, never mind technological, milestones any potential member must meet before their application is even considered by the Federation Council. Making sure potential member planets have achieved a certain level of planetary peace, especially, ensures that only those civilizations which have demonstrated an ability to behave responsibly, logically, and reasonably will ever join the Federation. This isn't some grand moral stance on anything so much as it is a practical way of protecting the internal workings of the alliance and the Federation's cultural identity.

As we can see today on Earth, propping up failing or failed states and cultures only serves to ensure that their self-destructive, or outwardly destructive behaviour continues. When the price paid for war and intolerance is reduced to a kind of "half-consequence" by support from outside sources, rarely are lessons learned. Indeed, the only culture to come close to eliminating internal conflict on Earth has been the Western one, and only after nearly unspeakable destruction was heaped upon it. With no one to prop them up again, people were driven to desperation and were forced to give up the hateful rhetoric of the past. Just look at the situation today, as the West continues to both care for other cultures, as well as "uplift" them. However, the care and aid can never satisfy the ever increasing demand, and attempts at "uplift" are regarded, correctly, as trying to control foreign culture, breeding mistrust and resentment. It is fundamental truths like these that the Federation is exploiting in order to ensure that only the correct pieces of the puzzle end up being a part of their larger picture. As with the United States and Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, a close alliance with the Klingons is useful for the Federation in that they aren't at war, but they would never be offered Federation membership, and in fact, wouldn't want it.

Just as the Federation's pickiness regarding membership protects them internally, their policy of non-interference protects them externally. Apart from colonial expansion onto uninhabited planets, rarely do other space faring civilizations who aren't Federation members have cause to complain about them. The Federation does not operate secret prisons on foreign planets, does not assassinate alien government officials, and does not covertly support or not support factions fighting in alien conflicts. All of this serves to reduce the Federation's footprint inside its neighbour's borders, thereby reducing the likelihood that they'll become a focus of alien hostility or frustration. In fact, on most occasions that foreign planets see a Federation starship, it would most likely be delivering medical supplies, disaster relief workers, conducting search and rescue operations, or delivering diplomats or scientists or artists to various conventions or symposiums.

I feel like I could go on forever. The Prime Directive, it seems to me, only rarely applies in the kind of tricky ethical situations that the series' always focused on. In the broader scope, it's simply a defensive and isolationist policy designed to protect Federation ideals and civilization from potential internal and external conflict; a way to preempt future conflict through inaction, instead of through blowing stuff up. It seems like a sound, practical system to me.