“Inquisition” and tomorrow’s episode, “In the Pale Moonlight,” are two episodes which, more than ay other, exemplify the philosophical differences between DS9 and the rest of Trek. The two episodes explore the question that has more or less been ignored up util now--are you willing to sacrifice your principles in order to survive?One of the reasons DS9 is my favorite of the Trek series is because the answer to that question as far as the series is concerned is, “Yes.” The characters will not admit it, of course, but when faced with the choice, they are willingly to sacrifice their moral codes for the greater good. A further discussion of that will be more relevant in tomorrow’s review.
It is pretty clear that I do not advocate the general idealistic philosophy of Trek. I do not believe utopia can be achieved period, much less with a combination of socialism, pacifism, and secularism. I blame it on man’s sinful nature, but if the thought of Christian theology makes your eyes burn, call it man’s moral flaws which make utopia impossible. Natural man can never been perfect.
But for the sake of argument, let us concede that Gene Roddenberry’s vision is true. Man has achieve perfection by the 24th century and lives in a nice, comfy utopia. There is no possible way it can be anything other than an illusion because such comforts have to be defended by dirty means that most everyone would rather not think about.
It does not have to be anything big, either. Have you ever really conceived of what a life sentence without parole is like? It is completely taking away someone’s life, perhaps deservedly so, but done in yours and my name. My conscience is clear over it and I will bet yours is, too.
But what about shadier things, such as actions in war? We were dragged into a national debate on the morning of September 11, 2001 into how far we will go to protect ourselves. The question still has not been resolved. Our country has overthrown governments, killed individual terrorists around the globe, imprisoned more, arguably tortured some, and inarguably handed others over to countries for definite torture. All this in the name of preserving our way of life.
I am a realist. I think I can only be as moral as someone else allows me to be. Would I lie to save someone’s life? Yes. Would I steal/ Yes. Would I kill? Maybe. I would rather not think about it. Would any of these actions make me less moral for taking them? Considering the consequences that would occur if I did not, I doubt I would necessarily forfeit my claim to moral superiority. Again, it is circumstantial.
Let us pull back and apply the standard to governments. Would the world be better off I the Nazis and Imperial Japan had not been defeated? Of course not. Would the US have been better off leaving the Taliban in power to give aid and comfort to Al Qaeda? No. So war is sometimes the only right choice. Perhaps one thinks fighting such wars sacrifices too many core principles, but I do not want to be wiped off the face of the Earth just so future generations will speak well of me. But in order to survive, a lot of immoral things have to be done.
That is the concept that has been introduced to the Trek universe here with the introduction of Section 31. They area clandestine organization that does anything necessary to neutralize threats to the Federation. In subsequent episodes they will be a party to sacrificing double agents and genocide.
In the expanded novel universe, Section 31 has been part of stealing the Romulan cloaking device in “The Enterprise Incident,” the Khyomir conspiracy, the creation of the Omega particle, Adm. Pressman’s recovery of the Pegasus, and a number of other incidents told only I the novels.
Most are exaggerated for the sake of drama, but not all of it sounds morally unjustifiable to me.
The DS9 characters are going to have to work through their own feelings about the morality of what they are going to be called upon to do in order to win the war against the Dominion. Bashir will specifically grapple with Section 31 because of ‘Inquisition,’ where he is sized up as a potential agent by accusations of being a Dominion spy. Bashir remains an idealist appalled by their actions. But it is arguable he and the Federation would never have survived without them. Much of the Federation’s top people agree.
Interesting times ahead, folks.
“Inquisition” introduces William Sadler as Luther Sloan, the key Section 31 operative. Sadler is one of my favorite character actors. I have enjoyed him in everything from Die Hard 2 To The Shawshank Redemption and the first Tales from the Crypt episode, “The Man Who Was Death.” He is perfectly cast as Sloan--dark, hardened, and cold, yet with asense of moral purpose. It isa great character.
Rating: **** (out of 5)
