When I was so young that my feet barely cleared the couch cushions, I saw the first run of A Taste of Armageddon. Amazingly, it was in color, since it was on my uncle’s brand new color tv. We only had a black and white at home.

But STAR TREK, (TOS) was very much a creature of its day. The characters could have been lifted from a Western (indeed, they hired a writer from Wild Wild West). The Captain and his men were manly men, to be watched and acknowledged as such of an audience of men who’d been to war, be it WWII or the Korean War, perhaps even Vietnam.

The manner in which the men carried themselves, and even the women, could have been found in Wagon Train or Gunsmoke. No limp wrists or lisping allowed, save for an occasional comic foil.

The females were all female, and the opposites were opposites and attracted.

There was no political correctness, although Roddenberry considered himself to be pushing the envelope with things like the first TV interracial kiss. He stated that the show was basically an allegory of the Cold War that America was dealing with at the time.

I noticed that Kirk would *negotiate* and/or bluff, such as in the Corbomite Maneuver, or By Any Other Name, and would express the philosophy that, sure, we could make war, but not today. The spinoffs would have more space battles than I ever recall happening in TOS, perhaps thinking that the special effects would make up for the paff that passes for dialog or a soggy story line.

So the men were men in TOS, aside from some of the villains, like the Squire of Gothos, and others who were squishy and conniving, like Harry Mudd.

Kirk was square jawed and manly. Mostly serious, as were his best friends, with humor reserved for the closing ten seconds of the show.

But ALL subsequent spinoffs repelled me. All had the stink of the new political correctness on them. Like Mr. Atos, the Librarian, I found comfort in relieving the past in the form of reruns, rather than face the disappointing or nauseating present.

After Kirk, Star Trek has been dead to me.

And there I have left it.

The study found that 97.4% of men identified as heterosexual, 1.6% as homosexual and 0.9% as bisexual. For women 97.7% identified as heterosexual, 0.8% as lesbian and 1.4% as bisexual.

https://factsandtrends.net/2019/04/15/how-many-americans-actually-identify-as-lgbt-less-than-you-think/

TNG got much better in its later seasons, after Roddenberry was no longer involved. Similarly, the best Trek movie, Star Trek II, was hated by Roddenberry, who tried to sabotage it by leaking Spock’s death (Kirk’s line after Spock “dies” during the Kobayashi Maru simulation, “I thought you were dead”, was an allusion to this.).

Anti-Semitism had a long history in progressive WASP circles, which the Star Trek writing reflects.

Then there are the goblins in the Gringotts Wizarding Bank – Harry Potter books.

I think it’s still clear the ferengi are meant to be Jewish. Perhaps it’s a play on the fact that many negative characteristics foreigners attribute to westerners actually stem from jews. For instance there is a Greek term still in use “ferengios” which basically means genuine trustworthiness. Which is what you would expect of genuine western races.

Star Trek lived and died with Gene Roddenberry. Its that simple.
As long as he was the Executive Producer of TNG you could watch that show. Once Rick Berman took over, everything was screwed.

As I said, you know not the difference between price and value. Then you use de Beers’ diamonds as an example. Oy, boy, de Beers sure have the monopoly on a scarce resource. That’s why half the armies in Africa are dying and killing for control of the diamond fields. Fields, the moment de Beers lose their military protection, diamonds will sell per kilo. Diamonds is the most idiotic, protected contraband mafia example you could possibly choose in my presence, I actually know first-hand about the “scarcity” of diamonds. From behind the barrel of a frigging gun!
Just to be sure, de Beers has so much clout, they stopped the Russians from flooding the market about a decade ago…”Blood diamond” is any stone not sold via de Beers. Any.
Then, of course, beyond making good drill points and abrasive tools, what is the value of a diamond? The price varies with many parameters, the value remains that of a drill bit.
Price, my good man, is not value.
You could. of course, use diamonds to attract a mate, and the higher price you pay, the fancier that mate may be. The value of someone that runs after diamonds, on the other hand…

I really don’t know where to begin on this idiotic comment.

You do agree, the scarcity of a “collectable� does not influence its value, only the price.

Ermm…price is a measurement of value to someone? Is maybe that’s just crazy talk.

Marginal utility, if I read right, treats the change in value from UTILISATION, not scarcity?

“Marginal utility quantifies the added satisfaction a consumer garners from consuming additional units of goods or services.”

If an items is scarce then by definition you can’t consume a lot of it and thus its marginal consumption value remains high. Diamonds and de Beers come to mind.

Have you read Pirsig’s “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance�? Difficult read, but it discusses the subject of Quality, from which all value flows. Internally consistent, of course.

Yes I read it. It sucked balls. Most overrated, worst written, most pretentious book I’ve read in my life.

Got a problem with it?

Sulu

Check this insightful review out, Guillaume. These fcuking Hollyweird soyboy “producers” just don’t know when to leave well alone. They’re ruined Star Trek!

Why Star Trek Picard FAILED

Video Link
So, I won’t even bother to watch any of these new Star Trek series while I’m over here on the dark continent. I’ll just get my East African girlfriend into TNG since I have all the episodes. This will be my test to see if she’s wife material.

If she likes it, we’re kool. If she doesn’t “get it”, then I’m fcuking showing her the door. Well, after a few more years of dating cuz she’s pretty hot. 😉

” . . . minority of any population, biologically 3% or so.”

This is a behavioral construct and no evidence it has a biological determinant.

The Ferengi were caricatures of capitalism. … I saw them as the first step toward destroying Gene Roddenberry’s humanist idealism.

Anti-Semitism had a long history in progressive WASP circles, which the Star Trek writing reflects. The history stopped when progessive Jews and progressive WASPs merged in their mores, culture and philosophy, in the mid-century time period.

Whether you think that WASPs converted to Holocaustianity or that Jews converted to Quakerism, depends on how you read your Moldbug/Yarvin.

But male homosexuality is, historically, also militaristic & brutal.

Don’t conflate that with being queer. Greek homosexuality was pretty weird by our lights, but it was practiced by the elite, i.e. biologically straight men. Queers are a small minority of any population, biologically 3% or so.

because it is what we let them believe (why would anyone be envious of them anyway?).

The Ferengi were caricatures of capitalism. Their hundreds of “Rules of Acquisition” had some ethical elements along with pragmatic devices for getting the better of a deal. I saw them as the first step toward destroying Gene Roddenberry’s humanist idealism. I am shocked to see that Patrick Stewart would agree to play the Picard character in this last disgraceful rendition. Sickening. I don’t watch these shows.

“Look forward to more of your incisive posts in the Christian Spirit.”

How very generous . . .

Your comments were very well stated.

Should probably have addressed mine directly to dfordoom, but couldn’t resist responding to the classic, “Rainbow flags — Oy veh.â€�

Look forward to more of your incisive posts in the Christian Spirit.

while I am ever careful regarding my fellows in Christ . . .

your comments elicit no rebuttal from me.

A little off topic but I learned an astounding fact a few months back- James Doohan “Scotty” was shot six times on D-Day.

Great observation.

���🌈

This is a meme promulgated by fake SJW churches and fake woke media.

It has nothing to do with the Gospel of Christ or the Church created on Pentecost Sunday.

Also, born-again Christians do not obscess over sin and guilt. They are freed from them through Christ’s victory on the cross. “Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.â€� Matt. 11:28-30 NKJV

��

Excuse me some clean up here.

Get a grip what you see is that most blacks are not pimps, gangsters or anything you so desire be but negative stereotypes.

Which is why the rhetoric regarding how to deal with black liberals or blacks in general simply falls flat. But by all means keep importing Mexicans, Asians, Indians and everyone else who will siphon US value.

———————————-

Clearly a small percentage of blacks are: pimps, prostitutes, thieves, murderers and knaves of various varieties, as are whites, browns, yellows, reds, etc.

“It’s not any better for black characters in movies. Progressive Hollywood writers are afraid to write real Black characters, with goals, flaws, emotions.”

Utterly and incompetently unaware of films as portrayed by and about blacks for the last 120 years. just nonsense.

Get a grip what you see is that most blacks are not pimps, gangsters or anything you so desire be but negative stereotypes.

Which is why the rhetoric regarding how to deal black liberals or blacks in general simply falls flat. But by all means keep importing Mexicans, Asians, Indians and everyone else will to siphon US value.

It’s not any better for black characters in movies. Progressive Hollywood writers are afraid to write real Black characters, with goals, flaws, emotions. It’s probably because they don’t know any. You don’t see the pimps and gangsters so much but now they are all magic negroes, living to help the white lead character navigate the choppy waters of life. We like characters that are complicated, have flaws, overcome failings, etc and portraying a black character that way could be taken a raaay-cist. A great recent example was The Invisible Man starring Elizabeth Moss. After running away from her abusive boyfriend she stays at the home of a black cop. He somehow is a close friend of hers, although we never learn why. We don’t learn much at all about him except he is a single dad with a smart teenage daughter, and he speaks just enough ghetto slang to show he’s authentic. Both of them seem to exist only to be there for Moss during her times of trouble. You would think he would be busy with his job as a cop and father, but somehow he is always there, immediately, whenever Moss is in trouble. It’s almost magical in a way.

Dick Hackborn was/is a long term HP engineer who knew the company inside out and backwards. His real contribution was to take HP into the computer business in the first place. He understood how the corporation worked. He then seemed to sit back and let the board make appointments based on political correctness rather than competence. Fiorina for example did not sem to understand that HP product divisions were profit centres rather than as AT&T, sales groups were profit centres. Fiorina also went for large acquisitions which were a total No No under Bill & Dave. HP became a rag bag of failing IT hardware companies with incompatible and multifarious products, operating systems and internal cultures supported by the printer division. The obvious choice to take over HP, Rick Belluzo, rightly left and was slightly later appointed COO of Microsoft. He delivered the X-Box. Belluzo was a keen soccer fan, hence HP sponsored soccer for a generation.

That’s because Picard is a fictional character, the path is also fictional. His words come through him, emanating from the writers, not from the depth of character of a real person.

God damn it! You’ve pricked my bubble about Picard being a fictional character.

All joking aside, I will say this…
The writer who intimately created the persona of Captain Jean-Luc Picard on Star Trek TNG is obviously a remarkable person who has a great innate sense of humanity with a firm grounding in honesty, justice & integrity. You definitely don’t find such a rare combination in “real life” because, as I’ve said a zillion times, humans are easily (dangerously) corruptible.

Heck, just look at the entire “Western” exceptional & allegedly “superior” AngloSaxon leadership Swamp. All treasonous, all supremely corruptible which has now put our planet in a destructive game of brinkmanship that is definitely leading us on a war path. That’s my point.

IMHO, the closest person who exudes Captain Jean-Luc Picard’s remarkable leadership skills here on Earth is none other than Vladimir Putin. Fact! How ironic that he’s not an AngloSaxon but an Orthodox Christian Indo-European slav from Eurasia. I know a lot of brainwashed Western sheep will disagree with me on this, but I’m sticking to my assertion because actions speak louder than words.

Therefore compare President Putin’s talk & actions vs. same for Obama, Bush Jr., Bill Clinton, Bush Sr., yes even Ronald Reagan. No comparison! In fact, you’d have to go all the way back to the original Founding Fathers who were incorruptible.

I always saw Star Wars as dark – always about evil & war, war, war. That’s probably why most of the confused sheeple prefer it to the always positive & enlightening Star Trek TNG series.

In Captain Picard, I see a man who exudes a high level of integrity in a leadership role – unlike any persona I have ever seen or will ever see in my lifetime. His “Frenchness” is authentic, traditional & passionate – unlike what you see in the current crop of treasonous French leaders who are destroying France & French culture with suicidal dieversity. I’m looking at you Sarkozy, Hollande & Macron! You are all a disgrace to DeGaulle’s secular French society.

Picard always upholds the Prime Directive (PD) – unlike today’s crop of warmongering exceptional “Western” leaders selected into power due to their innate corruptibility. Oh how I would love to borrow a Romulan Warbird for a few hours to sort out all of their treachery if u know what I mean. But that’s another story.

As for Picard, he has no fear of going head to head against Star Fleet Admirals who disregard the PD. Do we see this in our “Western” Military leadership today with their resource meddling in Africa & the Middle East? Nope, I have a better chance spotting a pink unicorn!

No doubt Patrick Stewart’s stage experience at the Royal Shakespeare Company in Stratford-upon-Avon gave him an unfair advantage when graduating to the big screen. He is the most polished quick-thinking & versatile Starfleet Captain you will ever meet. Even his most fearless adversaries respect him.

Personally, I think Gene Roddenberry & the other producers were waaay ahead of their time in creating the Star Trek TNG series. You get a sense there’s a higher creative consciousness at play when watching TNG episodes. I wonder if this creativity was enhanced through the use of psychedelics like psilocybin (magic mushrooms).

So you’ve got great character development combined with excellent screenplays which blends in perfectly with a remarkable mix of SciFi technologies that are plausible if humanity can stay alive for another 600 to 1200 years or so. Fat chance of that happening. We’re all going to die either via bioweapons, nuclear war or vaccinations.

One of my favourite TNG episodes, by far, is The Nth Degree (season 4, episode 19) where Barclay temporarily becomes a super-genius due to an accident, attaches himself to the ship’s computer & is guided 30,000 light years by a distant alien explorer race (The Cytherians) who want to exchange knowledge with Starfleet. The imagination in this episode is out of this world – literally. See if u can watch the entire episode & scroll to the point where Barclay creates a subspace inversion catapulting the Enterprise across great distances faster than warp travel. Really kool stuff.
Captain Picard, as usual, is fantastic in this episode. Arguably one of the greatest actors of our time in a leadership role.

Video Link

The show’s lead is a black woman who’s the best at everything, acts bizarrely hostile towards the crew and later berates the male commanding officer, captain Pike,,,

Wow, Star Trek has definitely gone downhill. I prefer my good ol’ TNG series. I’m shocked Patrick Stewart would ruin his amazing Captain Jean-Luc Picard persona with this crap. Must be Dementia.

Note how the SJW/ZioPress media has done a remarkable job at fracturing the black male/black female bond by deliberately elevating the always feisty bossy independent black woman on a greater scale while encouraging an “I don’t need a man!” ethos which creates friction & disunity in the troubled black community. So what happens next?

Well, today’s educated career black woman – feeling empowered – believes she can raise black male kids all by her lonesome self cuz she’s been brainwashed to think that “I’m strong, I don’t need a man!” Fast forward 14 years later & a majority of these fatherless teen black males are growing up in dysfunctional conditions with momma going through many unstable relationships while “baby boy” is being influenced by the most destructive form of ghetto Hip Hop/Rap culture in existence.

I’d wager that this new pro-SJW Star Trek Discovery series has a bigger black female audience compared to TNG thanks to the perfect sista, Michael Burnham. End result is that black males will most likely find black women more intolerable which will probably lead them right into the arms of white or Aisan women who, well, are not as bossy as the stereotypical black woman. So society is definitely getting “programmed” whether one wants to believe it or not.

white males in any prominent role must follow the 3-C rule. The must be either Crippled (emotionally or physically), a Coward, or a Criminal.

Well, now you know how typical law abiding Main Street blacks feel about always being portrayed (for so long!) as pimps, slaves, janitors, drug dealers, gangster thugs, baby producing womanizers, wife beaters & physically strong ballers but intellectually challenged?

Relax, it’s just “make believe”. No harm done…just “acting”.
Right? 👀🤔

Ferengi were supposed to represent ‘capitalism.’

Roddenberry was no stranger to Chosenism.

https://trekmovie.com/2008/06/02/shatner-roddenberry-was-a-chiseler/

“Maybe I know too much about what it’s about. I know it isn’t always about sitting around the campfire singing Kumbaya. It isn’t always about putting up Refugees Welcome signs and flying Rainbow Flag . . . et al.”

Allow me to amend my earlier comment. It’s very clear that you have no idea what Christianity is about.

Rainbow flags — Oy veh.

Yep, the Israeli army sure is a manly bunch…
It is also a fact that every army is well populated by erm… people unsure about their gender projection? Shiny buttons on tailored uniforms, and they give you a big gun! Imagine living amongst hundreds, thousands of glistening young physiques, for pay, and you get to kill lesser shits, too. The little boys polishing armour and sweeping the campaign tent is also a standard feature of military bases.
I think it’s on this thread that someone mentioned the abhorrent levels of domestic violence amongst lesbians? It is no different between queers, let me tell you, the poor things. That may explain the barbaric brutality of the average IDF gunmonkey. The need to prove your manhood can overwhelm your human-hood, it seems.

Internal consistency of argument is a valued habit every keyboard philosopher should aspire to. You do agree, the scarcity of a “collectable” does not influence its value, only the price. I bet after a turkey dinner that leaves you bloated and pie-eyed, that very same chocolatey goodness will have severely diminished value. Maybe we are confusing ‘value’ with ‘pleasure’?
Going by the wiki on ‘marginal utility’, either you are being funny, or irrelevant to the issue at hand, namely your assertion that “scarcity brings value”. Marginal utility, if I read right, treats the change in value from UTILISATION, not scarcity? Different issue altogether.
Have you read Pirsig’s “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”? Difficult read, but it discusses the subject of Quality, from which all value flows. Internally consistent, of course.

DS9 is my favorite Star Trek series. It really is extremely well done. Gul Dukat is one of, if not the best, villain of all time. Watching him is just sublime. Wait til you get to the later seasons, with the Dominion War and other stuff (hopefully won’t spoiler anything by mentioning that!).

I think it’s the perfect mix of action, traditional Star Trek values, and interesting, but not overly emotional or agenda pushing, character development. And I say this as a person that isn’t a big media consumer, but I do love Star Trek. Haven’t watched any of the new shows since Enterprise, which was terrible. It’s sad how much worse it’s gotten. Not that I’d watch it, but Andrew Anglin does some interesting reviews on “Picard�, so I know more than I need to know. It’s a real shame but not surprising, that they ruined it. Anyways, hope you enjoy DS9!

Just in case because your comments suggests that you don’t really know why Christianity or what christianity is about.

Maybe I know too much about what it’s about. I know it isn’t always about sitting around the campfire singing Kumbaya. It isn’t always about putting up Refugees Welcome signs and flying Rainbow Flags. It has an excessively nice caring and sharing side (which can be disastrous) and an excessively nasty side (which can be disastrous). It’s an emotion-driven religion. And emotions can drive people to be Mother Theresas or Torquemadas. Emotions can drive people to be too forgiving, or rigidly unforgiving.

A highly developed sense of sin can make one person humble, and it can make another person a merciless persecutor. It can make one person want to clasp sinners to his bosom and make another want to kindle a fire to burn those sinners.

And we certainly don’t need a morality based on Christianity, constantly obsessing about sin and guilt.

Glad to know that you know “what we need� better than ~2,000 years of European history…

It’s easy to have romantic notions about the past. It’s also easy, living today in a world of degeneracy and excess and self-indulgence, to have romantic notions about how wonderful it must have been to live in a Christian society.

The fact is that none of us today have any actual experience of living in a society based rigidly on Christian moral values. We haven’t lived in a society in which Christians have actually had the power to impose their values by force. But history does teach us that Christians have been pretty keen on imposing their moral values by force. I’m suggesting that the reality of such societies was probably not all that pleasant. And at times very unpleasant indeed.

And since Christians have not had that kind of power for a long time it’s easy to make the mistake of assuming that Christianity would never go back to being a persecuting religion. I’m not convinced. History also teaches us that if you give any group of people the power to persecute others they’ll grab that chance with both hands.

Modern Christianity seems warm and friendly and cuddly because it’s powerless. Christians are no trouble as long as they don’t have any real power. But I’ve seen Christians right here on UR express enthusiasm for social policies that the 17th century Puritans would have considered extreme. Christianity has a very dark side to it.

If Christians want to live by Christian moral values that’s fine by me. But I don’t want them to impose those values on everyone else. Which they have a long track record of doing.

Like most people, Moses over there is unsure about the difference between price and value?

Oh brother. You guys sound like spergy libertarians.

Of course you must value a thing for it to have any value, fer cryin’ out loud.

Scarcity of a thing increases the value you place on each marginal unit. Abundance decreases it.

Marginal utility. Look it up.

I don’t value scarce toy collectibles because I don’t give a crap about toy collectibles in the first place. I do value a fine day more than when I lived in CA because there are far fewer of them where I live now.

Problem is you cant send an endless row of remakes without boring the fans. So you must take what modern times will give you. FemoNazis and ecologyfacists.

Next the Enterprise is driven with wind, biogas and solar energy.

And with Cpt. Greta Kørk.

It’s astounding
Time is fleeting
Madness takes it’s toll

But listen closely
Not for very much longer
I’ve got to keep control
…
Let’s do the time-warp again

Rocky Horror

She was as they said back in the day a knockout.She also was the only one that wasn’t a officer.

“And we certainly don’t need a morality based on Christianity, constantly obsessing about sin and guilt.”

Laugh.

just a word:

Christianity obsesses about sin, guilt, accountability, forgiveness, multiple chances and grace, avoiding sin and

always, always about redemption, hope and love in this and the next

Justin case because your comments suggests that you don’t really know why Christianity or what christianity is about.

you’re not alone . . . in your misconceptions

And we certainly don’t need a morality based on Christianity, constantly obsessing about sin and guilt.

Glad to know that you know “what we need” better than ~2,000 years of European history…

“Guilt and sin”, like the poor, will always be with us and predate Christianity.

I think we just forgot what we knew before, and we are very slowly relearning it.

What you need is a return to a more traditional morality

Sort of, although traditional morality could be pretty unpleasant. People have a lot of romantic notions about how great traditional societies were. They were actually in most cases pretty miserable.

I think something halfway between the morality of the Victorian era and the post-Sexual Revolution morality is what is needed. Not a free-for-all of indulgence and excess, but not pious moralising and rigidity either.

And we certainly don’t need a morality based on Christianity, constantly obsessing about sin and guilt.

Maybe the 1920s weren’t too bad. And the early 60s. Most people got married and had kids but those who wanted casual sex or open marriages or wanted to cohabit without marriage could do so as long as they were fairly discreet about it and didn’t rub other people’s noses in it. One-size-fits-all moral systems don’t work because one size doesn’t fit all.

Also, it seems that the sexual revolution today morphed into digital/virtual sex, and we will eventually get into robot sex, etc. So the tendency is that we will have more simulations of sex, and less real sex.

Social media and internet addiction, and smartphones, have probably been more harmful than the Sexual Revolution. Social media needs to die.

Hollywood has degenerated into garbage. There isn’t a single TV show I can watch anymore; they all look and sound the same. Lots of worthless dialogue that has nothing to do with the plot. Every hour-long show has a half-hour of such gibberish. They should go back to half-hour dramas. But no, they keep churning out 60-minute doctor, cop and lawyer shows (now firemen, too) despite the fact that they have been done a thousand times in the past, and (some) were far better than today’s crop of crap. Movies suck, too. There are perhaps five worth watching in a given year (and action trash like anything Marvel are not worth a nickel). Millennial morons are the target audience, so they have become the chuckleheads in charge.

Israel has to fight wars? Didn’t get the news they finally deployed to Iraq.

It’s also possible that too many incels is as socially harmful as too many promiscuous people.

Incels and promiscuity are really just two sides of the same coin. With the destruction of general monogamy, you get more promiscuity for some, and inceldom for others.

What you need is a return to a more traditional morality, only within which “liberation” makes any sense anyway (what’s the point of “sexual liberation” if nothing is frowned upon, what’s the point of a “bacchanalia” if you don’t have a rigid moral structure on the other days).

Also, it seems that the sexual revolution today morphed into digital/virtual sex, and we will eventually get into robot sex, etc. So the tendency is that we will have more simulations of sex, and less real sex.

The world post-corona is going to have even less sex and romance than ever.

One should at least have the wherewithal to long for Brits — they are after all, they are our natural cultural cousins as to nationhood.

God save the Queen . . .

“By the way, Asians (Eastern Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese, among others) have higher IQ than the –now-lowered– mean in the U.S., and what I have seen in high-tech, is that they usually deserve the promotions; Their temperament is another matter. As always, there are exceptions.”

Laugh. There have always been exceptions. Those exceptions are the rule. And a look at history regarding technical expertise will clear this matter, because thousands of skilled blacks could not even apply for positions in which they had skills qualifying them for posts. In fact, the country had no small number of riots when skilled blacks were hired and promoted. I hate to bring up those issues, but even I was unaware until some years ago, just how warped the system is —-

My mother is older than my father. She had me when she was 33.

My father has never been part of my life. I can count the number of times I’ve been in the same room with him on two hands. The last such meeting was well over twenty years ago.

I don’t see your point. Are you complaining about your favourite show being changed, or because the show is such a faithful reflection of real life outside the TV room?

Like most people, Moses over there is unsure about the difference between price and value? Scarcity may move the price, but the value of that thing remains the exact (subjective) same. A 4-pound hammer will crush your skull no matter what price you paid for it, see? Very important distinction that, value versus price.

WRT sex, all the evidence indicates that the fewer people you screw, the better off you are psychologically .

But is there hard evidence? Also bear in mind that people vary.

It was disastrous medically, socially, psychologically, etc.

Again, actual objective evidence is required.

Look, you’re probably right. But the problem for social conservatives is that they lack the hard objective evidence to back their case. Proving psychological harm is difficult. Proving social harm is incredibly difficult.

I’m inclined to think that it’s a matter of balance. The Sexual Revolution may have been a positive thing, up to a point. Some loosening of sexual morals may have been healthy. It just went too far. I’m also inclined to think that being an incel is probably just as psychologically unhealthy as being promiscuous. It’s also possible that too many incels is as socially harmful as too many promiscuous people.

The waters have been muddied by the current trend towards irrational generational hatred. As far as some Millennials are concerned everything the Boomers did was wrong and bad (even though it was the Silent Generation that was responsible for the Sexual Revolution). So sex is bad because it’s a Boomer thing. And some Boomers are inclined to simply despise Millennials as whiny snowflakes.

I personally think Millennials just need to drop their smartphones in the trash can and go outside and get some sunshine. I think social media may have done a lot more harm than the 1960s/1970s Sexual Revolution.

But hard evidence on any of these points is in short supply.

I watched the first episode of STD just to see how bad it could be. Of course, it was terrible, but the look of it was as awful as the plot. Basically everything, from the alien make-up, to the ships, to the bridge. Good visual design was utterly lacking, and a lot of shots were too busy. To top it off, there was constant movement. The camera was moving, when people weren’t. It made me want to throw up.

Why did they do this? Because TVs have high definition now and because it is easier to do effects like holograms.

I bet anything you could feed films into some algorithm. Something that just worked on the level of images – simple, not complex AI. Something that could count quick cuts, or shaky cam. and you would see some curve that would correspond to the downturn of civilization, as it analyzed popular films from each year.

Is that necessarily a good thing? Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t but I think the question has to be asked. Has lesbianism* and porn made people happier than all that illicit sex that the Boomers supposedly had? Has it made society healthier?

People are not happy right now, but that’s mostly because they don’t have good leadership, are alienated, etc. WRT sex, all the evidence indicates that the fewer people you screw, the better off you are psychologically . The Abrahamic religions have been right all along. But the neo-lib Right and the subversive Left are both delusional; the former has never recognized that rising inequality makes it impossible to sustain a family (or even have one at all), the latter still says that the destruction of the trad. family is an achievement.

We may disapprove of the Sexual Revolution of the 60s and 70s (and remember that the Sexual Revolution was a creation of the Silent Generation not the Boomers**) but disapproval is not enough. It’s necessary to show actual evidence that it was harmful.

It was disastrous medically, socially, psychologically, etc. The Silent and Boomer generations had to constantly make up complete bull-shit about how “unhappy” everyone was when Lost and GI elders (who were born during the Gilded Age and came to reject Gilded Age libertine norms as older adults) were telling people to not do drugs, not sleep around, not get divorced, not give into passions, etc. Not surprisingly, later Gen X-ers and further generations are trying, to the opposition of today’s older adults, to re-build the behavioral boundaries that were shattered in the late 60’s and 70’s.

*chicks can always get laid, but since the late 80’s they’ve been socialized to be afraid of “loser” or “dangerous” males. So their lustful urges are being directed at other girls to a much greater degree these days. And with ever rising inequality the situation isn’t going to improve.

**These two generations were born during a time of rapid progress and wholesome culture, so of course they took it all for granted and presided over a transition toward chaos, decadence, etc. It’s been noted by many that our current problems began in earnest in the 1970’s and 80’s when the Silent Gen began to usurp the GI Gen (and the Silent Gen is still hanging on, BTW) while Boomers did virtually nothing to stop most of these bad trends.

Dear EliteCommInc: Another thing to keep in mind, is that before the so-called “Diversity� drives were introduced into high-tech, the mantra was always for competence and merit to be the bases for advancement, without discrimination. Albeit with some escapes, as you refer to.

Today, however, so-called “Diversity� requires quotas for promotions, and even more heavy ones for hiring. Please check with any friends you might have in those fields, perhaps even someone in HR. So we went from a case where merit was the main stated and understood requirement, to one where merit is secondary, and quotas are unstated, but understood bases.

Dear EliteCommInc: You are right when it comes to your run of the mill corporation, and Academia which we know is highly political. What I was referring to are the highly technical ranks in high-tech. In those ranks, a person’s history of achievement is well known to colleagues, and promotions based on gender or race (not merit) are easily recognizable.

By the way, Asians (Eastern Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese, among others) have higher IQ than the –now-lowered– mean in the U.S., and what I have seen in high-tech, is that they usually deserve the promotions; Their temperament is another matter. As always, there are exceptions.

FWIW-I probably saw all episodes of STOS as a youngster; maybe a dozen or so of STNG. Nothing of the other spin-offs. My interest in sci-fi pretty much waned by my late teens.

William Shatner ought to beat out the late soul singer James Brown’s claim to be the hardest work man in show business. Shatner’s resume dates to the 1950s. He’s done all sorts of work with a lot of people, including that Esperanto language movie from the 1960s. He did a summer stock Arsenic and Old Lace in 1973 in my area. He’d yet to make serious Hollywood money, although he was just on the verge. If my memory’s okay, he was going through a divorce, and traveling in one of those campers that fit into pick-up truck beds. He presents that confident, cosmopolitan manner, but he’s earned it, too.

Dear Mr. Owen,
I am not familiar with the case of Mr. Hackborn. Would you please elaborate.
Regards

Your honour, I present in evidence the case of Hewlett Packard, as early as 1985 when the founders were still in control.

There were people on the HP board who should have known better. Hackborn comes to mind.

Meanwhile, in the UK, there is Dr Who … Not only female but overturning the class structure too.

I’m an old Star Trek fan, old enough to have watched the original series live on TV when I was a schoolboy. I’ve not watched more than a few episodes of the latest iterations, and find them almost unbearable. I could fill a long rant with specific complaints, but I’ll mention just one that I think is critical; Discovery and Picard lack the Promethean spirit so evident in the original Star Trek and in TNG. I guess it’s just another sad symptom of our declining civilization.

BTW thanks for the spoiler about Picard’s ending. Now that I know it ends with Jean-Luc professing gay love for Data, I know the damn series is not worth wasting another minute on.

Besides the bossy women / bumbling men, one thing that turns me off immediately from these new series, and unfortunately I see it all the time mostly in Netflix series, is the pairing of a white woman with a black man. It seems that Netflix does this in ALL series.

I just now chose a random series, British, but produced by Netflix, and bang, just from the start, a blonde teenager with a crush on black dude. This can’t be a coincidence. And also, I suppose these series are targeted at women (even if they are sci-fi), because no white guy worth his salt wants to watch a anything with a blonde ni***r-fu***r . Unless it’s Othello, or a horror story about rape. (And even Othello was not a subsaharan African, but likely a northern African).

The stuff produced since the late 2000’s will always look like crap because digital cameras will never come close to duplicating the pleasing image that the film cameras and film stock of the late 80’s and 90’s produced.

I’m glad that someone else noticed this. The newer shows … look bad, despite the production values. There are chroma issues, color saturation issues, color casts everywhere, bizarre and uncomfortable lighting choices, lens flaring, etc. I find that’s an issue with a lot of movies these days.

I really think the non-white audience is the key to explaining the newer movies.

That has certainly had an impact. I recall Steve Sailer once mentioning the demographics of the Lucas Star Wars prequels. Hispanics were only about 12% of the population then but 25% of the movie going audience. Changing demographics in the United States and globalization have led to an industry subsisting on the lowest common denominator. There’s not much room for sophistication in that environment.

I don’t see the writer’s point. Is he complaining about his favourite show being changed, or because the show is such a faithful reflection of real life outside the TV room?

The first line of text: “My take on modern Star Trek compared to the old”

” . . . but you are partially right this time. Whereas “atta boy – atta girl, loyalty, quotas, verbal agreements, trade-offsâ€� may have been practiced; They are not part of the accepted system in public corporations, and were always frowned upon. Most importantly, they could be criticized and scrutinized publicly, with impunity.”

I am simply going to state — you are wrong. Hence the myth meritocracy. They are more tan a part of system they are long standing traditions of human behavior. I not partially correct, — it’s correct.

I provided several references you should check if you haven’t ad have another go —-

Here’s another avenue, take look at the revolving door of elite academic an corporate playgrounds. And compare that to performance. People who have gotten matters completely wrong in every way –remain in positions of power.

Now on this matter of partial rightness this time.

I take it you think I got something wrong previously — if so I usually note it — however, I am unfamiliar with what you thin I got wrong — you are welcome to enlighten me.

maybe you too think anyone has the skill, knowledge and the money to paint their homes, and only lazy, shiftless blacks living on the dole are grifting . . .

laugh. or that the solution to the black citizens role in the US is to import mexicans and asians — speaking of “wrong”.

laugh good grief

In British army, nurses are NCOs starting at the rank of corporal. In Royal Navy, nurses start as sub-lieutenants. Star Fleet would likely follow navy practice. I note that the US Army has them as commissioned officers from the beginning.

Lesbian relationships exhibit the highest rates of domestic violence.

Indeed. I’ve known a lot of lesbians over the years. Amazing levels of domestic violence. Frightening.

This is something I’ve thought about a lot in the past few years (Gen X’er here). What gives things value is scarcity.

I’m not sure I agree. What gives things value is that they are things that we want. If you like a particular kind of chocolate bar it doesn’t matter if they’re in every store and they only cost 95 cents. If they have the exact kind of chocolatey goodness that you crave then they still have very high value.

I found that when the movies and TV shows that I particularly liked suddenly became available on DVD and I could watch them whenever the hell I wanted to I grew to appreciate them a lot more.

In past 2 or more decades, filmmakers’ visual arsenal is something old guys could only dream of.

Which is one of the reasons they make worse movies.

Has lesbianism and porn made people happier?

Well lesbianism doesn’t. Lesbian relationships exhibit the highest rates of domestic violence.

Isn’t it funny how, as you get older, you end up longing for the days when you had nothing, when you pined after all the things that you have now?

Great line.

Right now, without getting up, I can watch any and every episode of any and every Star Trek episode ever made… But I’d give anything to be back in a time when I couldn’t watch any of them. I’d give anything to be back in a time when the highlight of my weekend was staying up late on Saturday night just to watch a tedious Voyager crapfest (in horrible over-the-air reception, to boot) that I’d already seen. I’d give anything not to have all the things I spent so many years hustling to get.

This is something I’ve thought about a lot in the past few years (Gen X’er here). What gives things value is scarcity.

As a teen I remember listening to the radio for hours just to catch a favorite hit song. It was always an exciting event. Same for the once-a-year Christmas specials or Wizard of Oz broadcasts.

When everything is available, all the time, it loses its special value.

Californians don’t value a beautiful, sunny summer day the way New Englanders do.

Bardon Kaldion said: “Older sci fi had better ideas and, perhaps, more freedom. Yet, most of it is now visually anachronistic.”

Hey Bardon!

Re; your respectable opinion, above. A question. Ever see this sci-fi movie, “The Magician’s Nephew?” Trailer is linked below.

Video Link

It is difficult to rate sci-fi films & series because they, more than other genres, are dependent on the cinema technology, so to speak.

Even dramas from, say, 1950s, 60s, 70s…now seem, most of them, rather odd (dialogs, acting, …). Sci fi – even more. Older sci fi had better ideas and, perhaps, more freedom. Yet, most of it is now visually anachronistic.

In past 2 or more decades, filmmakers’ visual arsenal is something old guys could only dream of. But- they lack guts, balls. And, they’re mostly illiterate, uncultured & dumb.

What they have in abundance is almost compulsive urge to preach idiotic ultra-liberal gospel, something which has nothing to do with our reality or even projected “reality”.

Shallow, false, fake, lying, cowardly, corrupt, sleazy… that’s how I would characterize modern movie sci fi.

Like most stuff on TV, Star Trek is best enjoyed with the sound muted as pleasant background ambience something like a tank of tropical fish.

To its credit, Star Trek has an excellent color palette, so it works well that way.

Come to think of it, doesn’t William Shatner somewhat resemble or make you think of a goldfish? Hmm… Patrick Stewart resembles a Moray eel in that light, but at least he aged well. Shatner’s appearance seems to have taken a plunge as he’s aged, although Beaver and Wally are the hands down winners in that category, but I thought they were both rather weird looking as child stars of the popular series to begin with. Now I enjoy the series mostly for regular looks at Barbara Billingsly.

Getting into the spirit of taking Star Trek far too seriously, I decided to cast some familiar public celebrities to play the former stars in the series.

First, notice that Chekov in the photo here appears to be something of a stuffed suit, so to say, where my choice for the part — former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev — is quite muscular, and certainly wouldn’t need any padding in his suit, but I think he makes an excellent Chekov.

For Nyota Uruha, Hota Kotb. Try saying — or even typing — that several times quickly to get in the mood for this kind of adventure.

I stuck with NBC’s Today show to pick Carson Daly for DeForrest Kelly, Bones.

Jared Kushner as Spock, of course.

I don’t know anyone with a good fake Scottish accent, so I’m stumped on a stand in for James Doohan as Scotty.

And NBC’s “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd as Shatner.

To go boldly where no fake news has gone before.

Dear EliteCommInc: Yes, but you are partially right this time. Whereas “atta boy – atta girl, loyalty, quotas, verbal agreements, trade-offsâ€� may have been practiced; They are not part of the accepted system in public corporations, and were always frowned upon. Most importantly, they could be criticized and scrutinized publicly, with impunity. In privately held concerns, this could be legitimately practiced, since that is part of the intent behind holding something privately –you can have your brother or wife sit on the board of directors.

As to groups which keep complaining about racism, and white privileged, I have one question: What is stopping you from creating your own ecosystem of wealth and prosperity? Why don’t you do that, and keep it for yourselves. Do not even let any whites into it. We are waiting……….

Laugh

last one

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Danny+Crane+Moments&ru=%2fvideos%2fsearch%3fq%3dDanny%2bCrane%2bMoments%26FORM%3dVDMHRS&view=detail&mid=229A40458DD294B88495229A40458DD294B88495&rvsmid=5DE385119AE27DA70ACC5DE385119AE27DA70ACC&FORM=VDQVAP

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Danny+Crane+Moments&ru=%2fvideos%2fsearch%3fq%3dDanny%2bCrane%2bMoments%26FORM%3dVDMHRS&view=detail&mid=649F99D58366D69C6188649F99D58366D69C6188&rvsmid=5DE385119AE27DA70ACC5DE385119AE27DA70ACC&FORM=VDQVAP

And those roles in Twilight Zone and Star Trek will were essential in making Denny Crane.

If the blacklist can avoid becoming smarmy — Mr James Spader . . . may know the same.

“Best thing about William Shatner is that he was very skilled at playing his favorite character…..William Shatner.”

“I’m Denny Crane.”

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=i%27m+danny+Crane&docid=608010233137138095&mid=42027942652C0F92ABF042027942652C0F92ABF0&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Danny+Crane+Moments&ru=%2fvideos%2fsearch%3fq%3dDanny%2bCrane%2bMoments%26FORM%3dVDMHRS&view=detail&mid=1A4907F6D4042A8993F81A4907F6D4042A8993F8&rvsmid=5DE385119AE27DA70ACC5DE385119AE27DA70ACC&FORM=VDQVAP

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Danny+Crane+Moments&ru=%2fvideos%2fsearch%3fq%3dDanny%2bCrane%2bMoments%26FORM%3dVDMHRS&view=detail&mid=CD4CD152AE35A7C7852BCD4CD152AE35A7C7852B&rvsmid=5DE385119AE27DA70ACC5DE385119AE27DA70ACC&FORM=VDQVAP

Perhaps the best duo to hit television: James Spader and William Shatner

“But these were rarer, and not as systemic as the race-based and gender-based promotions of today.’

You might want to re-read

‘The Myth of Meritocracy” and other similar writings; patronage, atta boy – atta girl, loyalty, quotas, verbal agreements, trade offs . . . these have always been pat of the system and consider this, the entire of whites have lived primarily with a complete bar of access to most of black society —

I had some other thoughts, but understanding what I do about meriticracy (assuming I am correct)

laugh, I am going to tread lightly . . . there’s enough; scapegoating fear and panic as the result of leadership — nearly all white in these spaces as it is —-

Dear EliteCommInc: Yes you are right. But in the case of white women, I have seen increasing promotions based on gender. There was always the odd promotion of a white male, based on the fact that he is well-connected, and well-liked. But these were rarer, and not as systemic as the race-based and gender-based promotions of today.

I left out Hispanics: In many cases, these are essentially white (Spaniards), but with the politically-correct surname. I have perceived such males be promoted, in order to score a check mark in the “Hispanic� column of the quota ledger. All of this is an inevitable consequence of a society of groups with disparate capabilities, where the standards eventually decline to meet the mean.

Actually, its probably more easy to catch AIDS from an HIV positive woman through anal sex than an HIV positive male because a woman’s anus is smaller and more likely to tear.

I recall back in 2004 an HIV positive porn actress infected two males during a “double anal” scene. She was aware that she had AIDS, in fact.

So indeed, if you’re heterosexual and that far down into the rabbit hole of extreme sexual practices like “double anal” then indeed you’re much more likely to acquire AIDS.

But most heterosexuals don’t have anal sex with strangers. Except prostitutes, of course. And many heterosexual men have contracted AIDS from them.

What can you say, being a sexual degenerate will open you up to tremendous risks.

Best thing about William Shatner is that he was very skilled at playing his favorite character…..William Shatner.

AIDS is a gay disease. It is possible to catch it from a woman, but less so.

It would be more accurate to say that AIDS is a disease spread by sodomy. It is possible to catch it from vaginal sex, but it’s very very very unlikely. Degenerate heterosexuals who practise sodomy can however spread it.

Stanislaw Lem, who leaves all others in the dust.

I agree with you about Lem. Great writer.

I think you’re a bit hard on science fiction. There’s science fiction and science fiction. Some of it is intelligent and cerebral, some of it is fun adventure stuff, some of it is trash. Since the 70s most TV and movie science fiction has been pretty awful. There were some extremely good science fiction movies in the 70s and even into the 80s – Colossus: The Forbin Project, Solaris (the original Russian one not the godawful Hollywood remake), The Andromeda Strain, the John Carpenter version of The Thing, Blade Runner, A Clockwork Orange. Even some of the lesser 70s sci-fi movies had their moments (Westworld, even Demon Seed).

Star Trek TOS was mostly fun and occasionally clever and even quite thoughtful. There were some cringe-inducing episodes but mostly it was pretty good entertainment.

TNG was dull and preachy and took itself too seriously. I really hated the TNG crew. Picard was a pompous ass. And having an empath aboard – dear God.

“I am sad to say that Mr. Durocher’s description of Silicon Valley is outdated. I am at a prominent high-tech company, with decades in that business. Today, there is a quota for promoting women and Africans, at all technical grade levels, especially the upper ones. ”

This might have some value i not were one little observation. That you believe that whites engaged in ,meritocracy even among themselves. I have no doubt that if not a sing;e black were a group of promotions — whites male and female would still be standing around looking at each other dumbfounded about the choices.

Boomers and early-mid Gen X were responsible for massive levels of both consensual and non-consensual sex in the late 1960’s-1990’s. But late Gen X and the Millennials have been responsible for a sexual counter-revolution, increased lesbianism and porn consumption, sure, but far less sexual activity over-all compared to older generations.

Is that necessarily a good thing? Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t but I think the question has to be asked. Has lesbianism and porn made people happier than all that illicit sex that the Boomers supposedly had? Has it made society healthier?

We may disapprove of the Sexual Revolution of the 60s and 70s (and remember that the Sexual Revolution was a creation of the Silent Generation not the Boomers) but disapproval is not enough. It’s necessary to show actual evidence that it was harmful.

I’m not arguing that the Sexual Revolution was harmless or that it was a good thing, merely pointing out that an argument that it was harmful has to be backed by evidence.

The same applies to the Sexual Counter-Revolution (assuming that it’s real and not a media artifact) – an argument in its favour needs the backing of actual evidence. Does such evidence exist?

It doesn’t seem to be all that derogatory. Googling the term brings up an Indian movie with that title, and a television series, as well, that uses the word in its title.

The problem is not that women abandoned children altogether, but that they had children out-of-wedlock as unwed teen mothers.

Marriage disappeared, but kids on welfare increased.

The original drugs like weak strains of marijuana were not really the problem. And heroin had been around for decades before the sixties. The problem was that the drug culture opened the door to crack cocaine and meth, which destroyed millions of lives.

Its hard to believe how naive Americans are, Each invasion is estimated to last 10 days. Then it drags on for 10 years.

The collateral damage is to allies who accept refugees. Australian is overrun by Vietnamese, for example.

Crime has actually decreased. Not because minorities are better socialized, but because of prison sentences. Nowadays, criminals are caught and imprisoned sooner rather than later.

AIDS is a gay disease. It is possible to catch it from a woman, but less so.

@Anon242

BTW did you see the 2015 movie Trumbo? Opinion?

I saw Trumbo. Terrific performance by Brian Cranston, but I can’t get invested in a movie where the “heroâ€� is a red.

> Times of Israel
> Israeli press
Nice job, linking a left-wing English-language CIA rag as “Israeli press”. Did you read the actual article, or only the title? The article opens with “let’s turn to Mahatma Gandhi, one of the greatest and wisest leaders in human history”! Pfui.

I never watched much of any of the several iterations of Star Trek. Maybe I just wasn’t that much of an sci-fi nerd, or I was born in the wrong time. But I can see the appeal of the older series, while the new ones… I don’t know who would watch that crap.

Actually, films and series (and commercials!) with annoying bossy females and bumbling males are very common these days, not only in Star Trek. I doubt there is anything that people hate more. Men obviously hate that, but women don’t seem to like it either (what they really love is womanly women stories like Little Women or Sense and Sensibility).

So who is the target public? Bitter lesbians?

Seriously, NO ONE likes to watch bossy women and dumb men. It’s cringy. It’s anti-natural.

Logarithmic?

I enjoyed the article but there was one omission on the original series I’d like to correct. There were four main characters not three as Divine Right said. Those four represented the four parts of the human psyche according to Jung. I’m convinced this was intentional on Roddenberry’s part.

Spock was obviously the intellect. Bones, the doctor always reacted emotionally – so represents the emotions. Scotty ran the ship so he is the physical or body. Captain Kirk represents the spirit. In that light the Enterprise becomes the human psyche encountering life. Each episode represents a particular human experience.

I learned this when I was watching the first season, and it gave a depth of meaning beyond just the adventure and technology. That’s almost unique in a TV series.
Captain Kirk always consulted with at least one of the other three before making any important decision. They disagreed, often intensely – especially Bones and Spock – but ultimately acted as a unit.

The characters were consistent throughout the original series. I recommend watching a few episodes to see if you agree. To me that subtle meaning behind the adventure is the quality that got lost along the way.

>>�Michael is a unisex name, like Leslie or Evelyn or Taylor.�

Raise your hand if you’ve ever heard of a female named Michael prior to ST:D…. anyone?

Michael Steele, bass player for The Bangles. There was also actress Michael Learned.

It’s not a common girl’s name but it’s not that wildly uncommon either. Since girls named Michael are probably mostly going to refer to themselves as Miki or something similar it’s possibly more common than you think.

This rang true:

[…] the past, in many ways, was better than the present and probably will end up being better than the near future. That’s intolerable to a lot of political extremists, the very people who put us in this position in the first place. So, the past has to be destroyed; it serves as a foil to the current reigning madness. “Let the past die, kill it if you have to.â€� That’s why pop culture had to be denigrated. That’s why Star Trek is trash nowadays.

I am reminded of the words of Roger Scruton:

“One of the saddest things about the modern world, partly a result of television, is that people live in a tiny time slice of the present moment, which they carry forward with them, but nothing remains. And there’s nothing in their experience which reverberates down the centuries, because the centuries to them are completely dark, just un-illumined corridors from which they stagger into the single little sliver of light”.

Related: in the last ten years of television there has been an obvious increase in the depiction of tribalism among whites. This started with Breaking Bad, Sons of Anarchy, Peaky Blinders, and recently the show Ozark uses the same formula. Often there are narratives of class re-union in these shows; the wealthy chemist or businessman befriends the local salt of the earth drug dealer, and they develop a synergy and prosper. Would any of these shows have been thinkable thirty years ago?

It’s clear big money is aware of where the instincts of Netflix watching whites are headed; they want tribal unity, they are sick of being gutless pansies, they want to believe they are capable of violence and wresting destiny from the ether. These narratives are provided, but at the price of being poisoned: the show Peaky Blinders, for instance, after hooking whites with three seasons of heroic family struggle, and some genuine loving relationships, injects an explicit anti-fascist narrative, where the hero is made the foil of none other than Oswald Moseley. There are several scenes in the latest season where Moseley quotes the philosophy of Nietzsche, and the hero quotes back at him the psychology of Freud. I find it another instructive example of how white-positive messaging is used by media as a carrier for a neutralizing memetic enzyme.

You have to remember that when Star Trek was conceived in the mid-60s its liberal technological utopian vision of the future seemed not only plausible but probable. At that time the evidence suggested that the liberal model was working and would go on working.

It seemed likely that race relations would continue to improve gradually. Feminism was around but sounded pretty reasonable – if a girl wanted to be an engineer why shouldn’t she be able to do it? Why shouldn’t women have careers? The Sexual Revolution was already underway but it seemed like it was going to be generally a good thing. Censorship was loosening but in 1966 porn meant girlie magazines like Playboy which appeared to be (and in fact were) pretty innocuous. Social liberalism really did seem like a very good idea.

In 1966 it seemed certain that prosperity would go on increasing. The idea that in a couple of centuries there would be so much prosperity that everyone could easily be given a fair share seemed almost certain. Technological progress seemed unstoppable.

In 1966 nobody could have predicted the disasters that would wreck this scheme – the poisoning of race relations, increasing crime rates, the explosion of the drug culture, the trauma of the Vietnam War, the oil crisis. Nobody could have foreseen that so many women would abandon the idea of marriage and children altogether. Nobody could have foreseen that relations between men and women would become poisonous. Nobody could have foreseen the scale of the excesses that lead to the AIDS disaster.

In retrospect we might think it was naïve but all the evidence at the time suggested that the optimism of Star Trek was justified.

The problem was that when TNG hit the airwaves in 1987 liberals were still clinging to their optimism. But to be fair, in 1987 it still seemed possible that it might work despite the setbacks of the preceding 20 years..

Only saw Shatner in ST and the Twilight Zone episode. Very underrated actor. If you mean Shatner in the roles he played, sure he’s man’s man. I never saw him that way because he’s playing a role specifically for boys. Too much mischief and dancing of eyes. I think it was one from his bag of actor’s tricks to draw the audience in. Nothing wrong with that, he made a fortune for himself and the franchise. And he’s still a spry 89, which is remarkable in itself. Good for him, and nice to have a star from my childhood still around.

– Bolshevik Bernie supporter ChuckOrlowski still clueless after all these years.

“For all the liberal activist messaging, the characters were indeed gripping and familiar and likable and honorable. The sets and stages were entertaining. The tech talk led to places in the script. It was an enjoyable ride, even if it included irritating leftist doctrine. Heck, I kept tuning each week, no matter how outrageous it became.”

You could make a good argument that ST: the Next Gen was, and still is, some of the best produced TV ever done. The costumes, props, and visual effects still look pretty good (and recent re-masters upgraded some of the effects to be even better), and the sets were well above par for genre TV. The color film stock still looks great, esp. after HD re-mastering, whereas the 60’s show will always be plagued by the awful color film stock and camera equipment that was used for 60’s TV. The stuff produced since the late 2000’s will always look like crap because digital cameras will never come close to duplicating the pleasing image that the film cameras and film stock of the late 80’s and 90’s produced.

Below, Leonard Nimoy, and the Jewish story behind Spock.

Video Link