Talk:Section 31

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Star Trek Portal

Version rolled back because of unexplained removal of many wikilinks to other articles. -- Infrogmation 03:28, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My intention was not to remove links to other articles; it was to improve the quality, accuracy, and completeness of the text. Wikilinks that got left out were mere overlooks. I will revert to my improved version and add the wikilinks. Next time, feel free to add them yourself rather than choosing an inferior and innacurate article. EDGE 04:05, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 Enterprise? 2 Books 3 "Unaccountability": National Security, and S31's dramatic realism 3.1 Moved to talk page 4 Episodes dealing with Section 31

[edit] Enterprise?

The information regarding Section 31's inclusion in ENT, specifically:

"Reportedly Section 31 will be involved in an upcoming two-part story involving the Klingons and detailing why their visual appearance changes. The NX-01's security officer, Malcolm Reed, is also somehow involved (though the details have not yet been revealed)."

What is the source of this information, and how has it been affected by the cancellation?

| THOR 19:45, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Books

There is also a series of four books about Section 31, one for each major Star Trek show (excluding Enterprise, which it predates). Should this be mentioned? — JIP | Talk 20:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely. There is very little about S31 in canon sources (TV), so I think that adding the books would be very useful and legitimate.

It should be noted, though, when parts are from books, if only because canon does not include books and Trek purists usually do not either.

VigilancePrime 02:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Unaccountability": National Security, and S31's dramatic realism

To make this succinct, author Richard M. Dolan wrote written a book, UFOs and the National Security State, which has little to do with the Star Trek universe...but has much to do with a study such as this. In the work, Dolan makes a very serious and (if I may be so bold) contentious claim, that, namely, even though it may appear that organizations such as the NSA or CIA have accountability to the people of the United States, they, in actual practice, have virtually unlimited power to do whatever their members and directors deem necessary to "safeguard the welfare of the United"...States of America, here, though the words of Mr. Sloane almost roll off the tongue. Granted, Dolan's work is about UFOs, and the ramifications of policies down through the years that many who write about Star Trek may either scoff at, or merely not care about...but his quite-lucid statements regarding the nature of "real power" in the United States are certainly fascinating reading, as well as illuminative on such a topic as S31. To sum it up, the idea that Section 31 would remain in the shadows, and not even be named as legitimate, is more real, not less, than the idea that the NSA and CIA answer to America. To state that the two real organizations likely see themselves much more in the fictional S31 roll of "quietly dealing with" anything that the Federation (American?) public would be unwilling to openly state need to neutralize and/or eliminate...is a very real suggestion. As such, in the paragraph where it is claimed they are 'legitimate' in a way S31 is not, I question that; perhaps they are known and S31 is not, but their power seems to be equal. "Self-appointed guardians of the universe" as Janeway once accused the Q of being. --Chr.K. 11:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the paragraph on this in the article, to make it more NPOV. I think though, that it could do with a whole rewrite. There are some basic points to be made, the naritive desire to make parallels between current 'democratic governments' and 'intelligence services' and the Star Trek conception of the Federation, the role of realism in introducing more moral greyness and complexity (are black ops orginisations inevitable, and thus in pursuit of realism ST should have an S31), and as an aside perhaps, its narrative usefulness as a plot device (S31 did it, in the same way secret societies and orginisations are often blamed (fairly and not) for the woes of the world).

I think that the role of S31 is more or less to develop the complexity of the Star Trek universe, especially in the political sense, which started with DS9. If you want to talk about real world events, especially the post cold war events that DS9 deals with, then you need something like S31 to show that the 'powers that be' are not neccessarily morally perfect. Its role is especially poignant in the post 9-11 world: what is the role of government, and how much should the rule sbe 'bent' (or broken) to protect 'the innocent'.

I am a little concerned by this. It seems to be pushing politics in a star trek article. Further, whilst the recent edit seems to be NPOV, in fact it may not be. Adding arguments such as "Others counter that the idealised form of governance in Star Trek precludes the existance of official black-ops organisations, and thus any true black-ops must neccessarily be carried out by a non-official organistion." is all well and good, but you must cite your sources ( who are these "others"?). I dislike the term, but you may be using Weasel words (according to Wikipedia's definition). The best thing to do is to find sources (such as the book given at the top of this section - with more information like year, publisher etc).

Actually I don't think that paragraph was that reasonable before your edits, so I am reluctant to merely revert it. For now, I will tag it as unsourced, but if no references can be found I think we should discuss whether the whole paragraph might have to be moved to the talk page. Captainj 17:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moved to talk page

I have moved the following from the article, per notes above. Please don't put it back in without some references:

Roddenbery's vision of the Federation is likely to have been inspired by American democracy. The addition of Section 31 adds a touch of realism to the Star Trek Universe, especially to the concept of the "Federation". In American politics, the existence of intelligence organizations, such as the NSA or CIA, exist alongside a democratic form of government, and carry out much work unknown to the average citizen behind a veil of secrecy. While many fans like to compare Section 31 to groups such as the NSA or the CIA, this comparison has been critised on the grounds that both the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency are officially acknowledged organizations that are subject to the authority of the American government, while Section 31 is unacknowledged and operates without any accountability towards the Federation government. Others counter that the idealised form of governance in Star Trek precludes the existence of official black-ops organisations, and thus any true black-ops must necessarily be carried out by a non-official organistion.

[edit] Episodes dealing with Section 31

I personally would find it very handy if there was a list of episodes dealing with Section 31, similar to how many frequent recurring characters (such as Dukat, Nog, and Liquidator Brunt) have lists of episodes in which they appeared. Althai 10:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! Althai 18:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)