Remake the Prime Directive(RAR)

[Lord Revan]

What I propose is simple. Show up with your fancy tech and offer it up at a reasonable rate to whom ever is willing to make reciprocal steps toward us in terms of reshaping their culture....

Basically, take the time to slowly over a period of decades or longer reshape their culture through a voluntary transformation in exchange for gift.

Yeah, just bribe them to reshape their culture. Because that will totally always work. Teach them over decades that if they do the "right" thing they get a nice shiny reward...with no built-in moral impetus to be "good," just the greed for more fancy sky-tech.

also what happens if said culture gets a reason to disbelive the "devine edict" to be good once they've reached warp-capability and relative parity with UFP, now you got a civilization with no moral code what so ever since what they had was destroyed and what was put in it's place gives no foundation to build a new one as it's essentially "do what I say" without any sort of justification as to why they should beyond "if you want my help, do as I say" and now they have reasons to not belive UFP is some devine arbiter of right and wrong.

this is why I called your ideas naive Purple, you assume your method is never put to the test, cause if it would be, it would crumble like a house of cards, you rely totally on having absolutly unquestionble authority over the natives and at the same time relies on your agents being paragons of virtue that won't abuse that authority and if either of those aren't present your method breaks apart in an instant.

[Panashe]

I think the best time for the Federation to establish contact with a rising civilization would be when they detect artificial radio signals from the planet.

The contact would solely be with the portion of the planet's cultures who possess radio technology? Or would radio on one continent open the door to the entire planet?

... eventually leading to in-person contact if the civilization desires to continue the connection.

This is interesting and very respectful. Contact the civilization remotely and inquire if they even want a meeting. Basically make an appointment.

Imagine if space aliens had come to earth in 1940, seen the concentration camps and went "It's an internal affair. Let them sort it out."

Short of a massive invasion by Starfleet personnel, I'm having trouble figuring out how you would stop the Holocaust on a remote planet with a few dozen people. .

Jewish groups petitioned Allied politicians to actually bombing the camps, even though prisoners would be killed. Knock out the facilities.

Problem is the Nazis didn't need the camps to kill people, they went with the camps because they saw them as efficient. But they also would have mass graves dug, herded people into them, shot them and buried them (whether they were dead or just injuried). Other methods were employed too.

The Allies stopped the Holocaust by dismantling the government that engaged in it. The Federation/Starfleet could "side" with the Allies and accelerated their victory, ending the Holocaust in that fashion.

like for example the idea that consentration camps are inherently evil, while during WW2 USA had it's own consentration camps (well interment camps if you want to anal about it) for american citizens of japanese decent

Death camp are inherently evil, extermination camps.

Concentration camps that serve as prison camps, internment camps, refugee camps, quarantine camps don't come close the being the same.

the problem with this is that how do you prevent your operative from becoming corrupt and abusing his/her "divine" authority?

A possible problem, especially if they are in place for multiple years. There is also the chance that they will come to identify with the native culture and give them inappropriate technology and knowledge for their current development.

Having there be periodic outside supervision would be sensible.

you might end up with planetary equilevant of the "preacher's daugther" problem

Does the term "preacher's daugther problem" refer to something specific?

.

[Lord Revan]

you might end up with planetary equilevant of the "preacher's daugther" problem

Does the term "preacher's daugther problem" refer to something specific?

.

it refers to where you have morality system where a person of authority (the preacher in question) is the sole arbiter of what is right and wrong without any Foundation given as to why something is right or wrong aka "it's right cause I say so", so when there comes reason to dout the person of authority the whole system goes down cause there was never any foundations to build your personal system on, basically once you can't trust that person of authority knows what's right and wrong, you have no way of knowing what's right or wrong period.

[amigocabal]

My Prime Directive would be simple:

• Do not initiate hostilities with pre-warp aliens.

• Do not provide weapons technology to aliens without Council approval.

I would permit trade and diplomatic relations with pre-warp civilizations (aside from weapons).

[WATCH-MAN]

My Prime Directive would be simple:

• Do not initiate hostilities with pre-warp aliens.

• Do not provide weapons technology to aliens without Council approval.

I would permit trade and diplomatic relations with pre-warp civilizations (aside from weapons).

Please define the term »weapons« and explain how you can ensure that pre-warp civilizations aren't abusing the traded technology to build weapons.

[bilateralrope]

I would permit trade and diplomatic relations with pre-warp civilizations (aside from weapons).

What about technologies that make it easier for them to wage war ?

For example, better medical care will let one of their soldier recover from injuries that would kill the other countries soldiers. Giving the country you're trading the medical knowledge to the ability to defeat more of their enemies than they could before.
Better agriculture means more productive farms. Meaning less people needed to feed everyone. Meaning more people to produce or use weaponry.

You will be limiting your trade to the countries that have whatever it is you want. Because if the countries that have what you want find out that you're giving the same goods/knowledge to their enemies, enemies that aren't giving you anything in return because they don't have anything you want, why would the country with the stuff you want be willing to give you anything ?

Then there is the question of what you want from a pre-warp civilization and how the lack of that resource would affect that civilizations development.

[amigocabal]

I would permit trade and diplomatic relations with pre-warp civilizations (aside from weapons).

What about technologies that make it easier for them to wage war ?

For example, better medical care will let one of their soldier recover from injuries that would kill the other countries soldiers. Giving the country you're trading the medical knowledge to the ability to defeat more of their enemies than they could before.
Better agriculture means more productive farms. Meaning less people needed to feed everyone. Meaning more people to produce or use weaponry.

That is pretty indirect.

As an aside, able to provide medical knowledge to aliens would be limited by inherent biological differences. A stethoscope and microscope would probably be useful. But penicillin may very well be a deadly neurotoxin or a food sweetener to them.

similarly with agriculture. Canals and crop rotation and better plows might work; but fertilizers uysed on Earth may not be too useful to them.

You will be limiting your trade to the countries that have whatever it is you want. Because if the countries that have what you want find out that you're giving the same goods/knowledge to their enemies, enemies that aren't giving you anything in return because they don't have anything you want, why would the country with the stuff you want be willing to give you anything ?

I see no problem with that.

Then there is the question of what you want from a pre-warp civilization and how the lack of that resource would affect that civilizations development.

The same thing I want from civs with warp- peaceful trade relations.

[Elheru Aran]

While the same chemicals or medical procedures or whatever may not work for an alien world as they do for you, the techniques you use to create those things can still be shared and applied towards their own individual properties. So pencillin doesn't work; okay, figure out why it doesn't work, see if there are any similar organisms that can be cultured and extrapolated into medication with similar antibiotic effects. Basic principles of science.

[bilateralrope]

That is pretty indirect.

Indirect or not, it's still a factor you need to consider. You are still making it easier for the countries you trade with to wage war.

You will be limiting your trade to the countries that have whatever it is you want. Because if the countries that have what you want find out that you're giving the same goods/knowledge to their enemies, enemies that aren't giving you anything in return because they don't have anything you want, why would the country with the stuff you want be willing to give you anything ?

I see no problem with that.

The problem is that if you only give it to some countries, they will be better equipped to wage war. Once you leave there will be nothing stopping them from going and conquering their neighbors. Neighbors who you didn't give those advantages to.

Then there is the question of what you want from a pre-warp civilization and how the lack of that resource would affect that civilizations development.

The same thing I want from civs with warp- peaceful trade relations.

How can you have trade relations when they have nothing you want ?

If they don't have anything you want, any claim of trade relations is a blatant lie.

Without anything you want, you are deciding which culture(s) on the planet get to flourish and which get conquered by your favoured culture(s).

[amigocabal]

That is pretty indirect.

Indirect or not, it's still a factor you need to consider. You are still making it easier for the countries you trade with to wage war.

and why should I consider that factor? It is one thing to sell phasers (let alone provide the schematics for building phasers).
But to refuse to provide knowledge of agricultural techniques for their crops, because they might be better able to have a larger army, is too attenuated.

You will be limiting your trade to the countries that have whatever it is you want. Because if the countries that have what you want find out that you're giving the same goods/knowledge to their enemies, enemies that aren't giving you anything in return because they don't have anything you want, why would the country with the stuff you want be willing to give you anything ?

Why would I give their enemies what thety want if they have nothing to trade?

The problem is that if you only give it to some countries, they will be better equipped to wage war. Once you leave there will be nothing stopping them from going and conquering their neighbors. Neighbors who you didn't give those advantages to.

There is a degree between actively supplying them with phasers and whatnot, and providing them with gardening hints from Better Homes and Gardens.

How can you have trade relations when they have nothing you want ?

If they don't have anything you want, any claim of trade relations is a blatant lie.

Without anything you want, you are deciding which culture(s) on the planet get to flourish and which get conquered by your favoured culture(s).

That is not a problem in itself. Historically, cultures with stuff that others wanted (and who had enough military power to deter others from taking it by force) were always better able to fluorish than cultures that had jack shit to offer.

[FaxModem1]

Hypothetical, you decide to give advanced farming techniques to one of these new cultures, along with all sorts of other neat gadgets. Culture starts to revere you like the Cargo cult did the airplanes during World War II. What are you going to do with these new worshipers proclaiming Starfleet as gods for helping them with these new tools? What if they practice ritual human(or their equivalent) sacrifice? Do you tell them to stop that? How much do you babysit them until they meet your standards?

[bilateralrope]

That is pretty indirect.

Indirect or not, it's still a factor you need to consider. You are still making it easier for the countries you trade with to wage war.

and why should I consider that factor? It is one thing to sell phasers (let alone provide the schematics for building phasers).
But to refuse to provide knowledge of agricultural techniques for their crops, because they might be better able to have a larger army, is too attenuated.

Because the Prime Directive is supposed to be a moral rule. Sure, it doesn't hold up well in the canon. But it holds up better than you wanting to ignore the consequences of your actions because they are "too attenuated".

Remember, this is in the context of Federation ships. Ships that will be leaving the planet to explore the next system very soon leaving the planet to suffer the effects of your meddling without the ship captain being in a position to do anything about it.

Even if they decide that you must be a god, they must be gods chosen*, and go start a crusade in your name.

*As the 'trade' involves you taking stuff they consider worthless in exchange for stuff they find really useful. Or worse, maybe you're taking away something they find dangerous. For example, radioactive materials. Useful if you have the technology to use it, dangerous, and the war I suggested is "too attenuated" of a problem, then any stunting of their scientific development centuries later on can't count either because it's even more attenuated.

As bad as the canon Prime Directive is, at least it prevents Federation ships from making things worse because the captain didn't think things through or ran into problems he couldn't predict with the information available. While you, you aren't saying that my predictions are wrong. Just that they don't matter. Just that anyone who dies because of your interference doesn't matter.

How the fuck is that better than the canon Prime Directive ?

You will be limiting your trade to the countries that have whatever it is you want. Because if the countries that have what you want find out that you're giving the same goods/knowledge to their enemies, enemies that aren't giving you anything in return because they don't have anything you want, why would the country with the stuff you want be willing to give you anything ?

Why would I give their enemies what thety want if they have nothing to trade?

Your trade has two options:
- Give stuff to all factions. Which isn't what I'd call trade.
- Give stuff to one faction. Making them stronger against their enemies. Likely to lead to wars of conquest.

The problem is that if you only give it to some countries, they will be better equipped to wage war. Once you leave there will be nothing stopping them from going and conquering their neighbors. Neighbors who you didn't give those advantages to.

There is a degree between actively supplying them with phasers and whatnot, and providing them with gardening hints from Better Homes and Gardens.

Yes, there is a difference. But both still stregthen their military. Both are still likely to cause more deaths than you simply staying away.

How can you have trade relations when they have nothing you want ?

If they don't have anything you want, any claim of trade relations is a blatant lie.

Without anything you want, you are deciding which culture(s) on the planet get to flourish and which get conquered by your favoured culture(s).

That is not a problem in itself. Historically, cultures with stuff that others wanted (and who had enough military power to deter others from taking it by force) were always better able to fluorish than cultures that had jack shit to offer.

Your entire idea of trade relations assumes that the pre-warp culture has something the Federation wants. If that assumption doesn't hold, your entire idea fails. So please at least attempt to prove it.

Hypothetical, you decide to give advanced farming techniques to one of these new cultures, along with all sorts of other neat gadgets. Culture starts to revere you like the Cargo cult did the airplanes during World War II. What are you going to do with these new worshipers proclaiming Starfleet as gods for helping them with these new tools? What if they practice ritual human(or their equivalent) sacrifice? Do you tell them to stop that? How much do you babysit them until they meet your standards?

There is nothing he can do because the Federation ship is likely an exploration ship. Meaning that it has left to continue with its mission of exploration*. Making them unlikely to even hear of the cult for a few years when the next ship passes through. Possibly longer if it's a pre-radio civilisation, as the Federation would need a reason to investigate the locals.

*As the only ship in the area, captains are likely given a lot of authority to make decisions without having to ask higher up the chain of command. Maybe the propaganda about the Prime Directive being the highest morality serves to keep the captains on the missions assigned to them, instead of wasting resources on a badly thought out attempts to help.

[amigocabal]

But to refuse to provide knowledge of agricultural techniques for their crops, because they might be better able to have a larger army, is too attenuated.

Because the Prime Directive is supposed to be a moral rule. Sure, it doesn't hold up well in the canon. But it holds up better than you wanting to ignore the consequences of your actions because they are "too attenuated".

Attenuation is quite relevant.

Remember, this is in the context of Federation ships. Ships that will be leaving the planet to explore the next system very soon leaving the planet to suffer the effects of your meddling without the ship captain being in a position to do anything about it.

that is why the captain would leave behind something that would allow them to contact the Federation.

As an aside, most trade would be conducted by interstellar merchant ships, not by Starfleet ships. Only the the pre-warp civilization were providing something strategically important to Starfleet (say, a plant from which certain chemicals can be more easily synthesized) would Starfleet ships engage in trade.

*As the 'trade' involves you taking stuff they consider worthless in exchange for stuff they find really useful. Or worse, maybe you're taking away something they find dangerous. For example, radioactive materials. Useful if you have the technology to use it, dangerous, and the war I suggested is "too attenuated" of a problem, then any stunting of their scientific development centuries later on can't count either because it's even more attenuated.

Yes, attenuation is the key word here.

As bad as the canon Prime Directive is, at least it prevents Federation ships from making things worse because the captain didn't think things through or ran into problems he couldn't predict with the information available. While you, you aren't saying that my predictions are wrong. Just that they don't matter. Just that anyone who dies because of your interference doesn't matter.
How the fuck is that better than the canon Prime Directive ?

what you seem to be arguing is moral responsibility based upon ForWantOfANail effects. Essentially, it would be wrong to eradicate malaria on Eartgh because without malaria, some countries may be able to raise larger armies with which to conquer others- certainly a far cry from donating nuclear weapons to foreign countries.

Why would I give their enemies what they want if they have nothing to trade?

Your trade has two options:
- Give stuff to all factions. Which isn't what I'd call trade.
- Give stuff to one faction. Making them stronger against their enemies. Likely to lead to wars of conquest.

Which is why we would not be rtrading in weapons technology.

Yes, there is a difference. But both still stregthen their military. Both are still likely to cause more deaths than you simply staying away.

It is like saying we should not try to treat malaria in other countries because it might strengthen their military.

That is not a problem in itself. Historically, cultures with stuff that others wanted (and who had enough military power to deter others from taking it by force) were always better able to fluorish than cultures that had jack shit to offer.

Your entire idea of trade relations assumes that the pre-warp culture has something the Federation wants. If that assumption doesn't hold, your entire idea fails. So please at least attempt to prove it.

that would depend on what the culture actually has.

Hypothetical, you decide to give advanced farming techniques to one of these new cultures, along with all sorts of other neat gadgets. Culture starts to revere you like the Cargo cult did the airplanes during World War II. What are you going to do with these new worshipers proclaiming Starfleet as gods for helping them with these new tools? What if they practice ritual human(or their equivalent) sacrifice? Do you tell them to stop that? How much do you babysit them until they meet your standards?

If they do that, we inform that that there will be a trade embargo until they stop that.

[WATCH-MAN]

My Prime Directive would be simple:

• Do not initiate hostilities with pre-warp aliens.

• Do not provide weapons technology to aliens without Council approval.

I would permit trade and diplomatic relations with pre-warp civilizations (aside from weapons).

Which is why we would not be rtrading in weapons technology.

Again:

Please define the term »weapons« and explain how you can ensure that pre-warp civilizations aren't abusing the traded technology to build weapons.

Is ...

• transporter-technology,
• replicator-technlogy,
• anti-gravity-technology,
• shield-technology,
• commuication-technology,
• FTL-technology

• technology based on advancements in materials science and engineering,
• technology based on advancements in computer science,
• technology based on advancements in physics, chemistry or biology,

• explosives (intended for mining)
• nanites (intended for medical purposes)
• energy-beam (intended for cutting in industrial manufacturing applications)

... weapons technology?

[Panashe]

to wage war.

This would seem to be a obsession with you.

At a certain point the "don't help that hungry baby, he might grow up to be Hitler" excuse becomes quite ridiculous. Yes, a simply hammer can be used as a bludgeon, but it can be used to build homes, and work metal, and create roads, and fashion boats.

The same drug you fear might be used on a battlefield, can be used in clinics and hospitals, improving the lives of millions.

Would a steam engine powers some "steam-punk" war machine? A steam engine can provide electricity, pumps, transportation, industry.

.

[bilateralrope]

Attenuation is quite relevant.

Only if you want to ignore the consequences of your actions.

*As the 'trade' involves you taking stuff they consider worthless in exchange for stuff they find really useful. Or worse, maybe you're taking away something they find dangerous. For example, radioactive materials. Useful if you have the technology to use it, dangerous, and the war I suggested is "too attenuated" of a problem, then any stunting of their scientific development centuries later on can't count either because it's even more attenuated.

Yes, attenuation is the key word here.

I picked radioactives because nuclear power has a lot of potential as a significant part of a solution to climate change. Deprive a planet of their radioactives and you have deprived them of one of the solutions to climate change. While doing nothing to prevent it happening as the interstellar merchant ships* have no reason to help.

Or, if you're not thinking long term, what about the native workers in the uranium mines ?
Mines that only exist because your traders are buying the uranium. Maybe the mining equipment is used in the mines. Maybe the rulers you're trading with decided that the lives of their subjects are cheap enough that the mining equipment is being used for warfare and the subjects are forced into the mines. Maybe your traders didn't sell any mining equipment.

Or maybe the trade is for the hides of specific animals. Leading to overhunting and the species in question being wiped out.

It's quite clear that your rules don't have anything to do with protecting the less technologically advanced planet.

*Your rules don't include anything to ensure the traders are more moral than stereotypical Ferengi.

to wage war.

This would seem to be a obsession with you.

Because amigocabal's 'no weapons' rule looks like wars are the only thing he's trying to prevent.

At a certain point the "don't help that hungry baby, he might grow up to be Hitler" excuse becomes quite ridiculous. Yes, a simply hammer can be used as a bludgeon, but it can be used to build homes, and work metal, and create roads, and fashion boats.

My position is that interfering in a less technologically developed species is something that needs to be done carefully. With plenty of observation and planning before any interference begins so that it goes well, then a long term commitment to keep things going as planned. Something Starfleet captains don't have the time to even collect enough information to start planning before their mission takes them out of system, let alone assist when the plan starts coming apart a few years down the line due to previously unknown variables. Leaving Starfleet captains only two choices:
- Do nothing.
- Do something without having had the time to plan it out, knowing that they will not be around to fix things if their first interference makes things worse.

My position is that doing nothing is better than rushing to do something. Making a non-interference a good general rule, though one that needs exceptions for things like planet killing asteroids.