Beawulf Posted October 11, 2005 Author Share Posted October 11, 2005 But the prime directive really does protect both parties! For example today' date=' in Australia, alot of the aboriginals are living in distress mainly because of intervention by the european settlers/immigrants, who tried to give them a better life. This ended up with the aboriginals being quite dependent on the help provided by them up till today. For a majority of them anyway.[/quote'] good example, that's certainly a dark part of our recent history (stolen generations). If only there a concept of non-interference back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostShadow Posted October 19, 2005 Share Posted October 19, 2005 Mabe the prime directive is to protect the federation from blam too. They are always useing it as a shield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ifilmco Posted October 19, 2005 Share Posted October 19, 2005 It's also just ridiculously expensive and taxing to try and maintain a high level of involvement with EVERYbody you come across - it seems that the implication is that the prime directive harkens back more to classical/enlightenment philosophe thinking than it does reflect a progressive futuristic kind of philosophy. An interesting conundrum, to be sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now