I was impressed with this presentation. But, alas, I have to give the author a fail. He presents a strong (mostly) case for seeing Star Trek Discovery a certain way. We are supposed to imagine that it’s an unseen, dark background aspect of Star Trek dealing with intelligence and agents who bend and break the rules in order to keep the universe safe for… something. The CIA’s analogue in Star Trek is Section 31, which pops up from time to time, but not often. Listen to SFS’s presentation to get the full, entertaining story.
I commented. It was lengthy. I had no problem posting it, which I find interesting. I have far more difficulty posting comments on any number of sites, and those are supposedly progressive sites whereas Google is, without a doubt, the enemy. Maybe I’m just too small and unthreatening for the mighty Borg-like Google to swat away. Unless that’s coming.
My online comment follows:
=== === =
SFS thinks the darkness here is wonderful. It’s light! He’s wrong. And he’s free to be wrong.
I have a barista friend who I chat with about movies all the time. The other day he told me about a friend of his who observed that everything that comes out of Hollywood is so dark. He agreed with him. And I agree with them.
You can’t get light from those who have embraced darkness, which includes things like the Pheonix program (not confined to Vietnam), drone tech that is used for assassinations, surveillance tech that is used in the global pacification program (Jeff Halper). You can get innovations from unprincipled people. So what? Who will save them from their own innovations? Who do you think will save unbelievers when nukes finally get used? Their creators?
Hollywood/CIA/Pentagon does its thing. Because I’m human, and not a machine, they kind of got me. CIA torturers know this about people. Something that works every time is cutting victims off from stimulus. And so, While I enjoy my political blogging, and the reading that I have to do in order to make that work, I simply have to set it aside sometimes and be entertained. Star Trek, so far, is one thing I will do for entertainment. It has positives and negatives. I don’t enjoy all the foul, anti-God language you get in most entertainment in order to make it cool, which it will be to a population that has been mentally and spiritually ruined. Does Star Trek reflect the kind of dark elements that our friend SKS suggests? (I thought that the third episode might be touching on the origins of the gel packs that Voyager used in its proplusion system, but I have no idea.) If he get’s it wrong in this particular case – which he manages to do a good job of presenting, I must say – he’s not wrong about some things. He may see them as harmless, but I certainly don’t. Then again, I haven’t self-modified into being a believer in violence, deceit and inquality.
The psychos in the CIA – and I’ve read enough history to know that they are and how do any people not know that they are? – make too much money (in a sick, ungodly system in which money means life) doing the Devil’s work. As the saying goes, Idle hands are the Devil’s workshop. In other words, If you aren’t busy being part of the solution (to violence, deceit and inquality), then you’re going to be found being busy being part of the problem. From the Devil’s standpoint, Our being a part of the problem is a good thing (but not for any of us). He is pro fun and pro happy and pro life – when it comes to his tools, some whom play around in Hollywood/CIA/Pentagon, fashioning ideas and situations that reflect their own dark paths, that in turn enable them to sit back and gaze, lovingly, at themselves as in a mirror. Their entertainment products may not have exactly the effects that they want, although there is no doubt a subtle perverting of our senses over time, but that doesn’t stop them from enjoying themselves, which is guaranteed when you stop to think that they are getting paid for their perversity.
Just the other day, I read an article by Tom Secker and Matthew Alford on Medium. They are authors of yet another book about the CIA et al in Hollywood. (I’ve read Tricia Jenkins eye-opener “The CIA In Hollywood”) By coincidence, I had only re-watched “Little Fockers” a few days earlier. The authors note that the CIA, which apparently had some say in how it was portrayed in the movie, had a scene deleted in which Greg breaks into Jack’s spy cave or whatever and finds a CIA manual about torture on his desk. The movie is lighter for not showing that. But reality needs to be lighter and we need to care and know and make choices that will change that reality, in which torture and terrorism (global pacification of abused people) are regular, daily occurrences.
= === ===
“Then the disciples came and said to him: “Do you know that the Pharisees were stumbled at hearing what you said?” In reply he said: “Every plant that my heavenly Father did not plant will be uprooted. Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”” – Matthew 15:12-14