That’s Right Nate

Thoughts from a right thinker.

Liberal Propaganda Destroys Star Trek Franchise

with 42 comments

I have to admit that I had big hopes for the new Star Trek movie.   I had never cared much for the original with its message that the United Nations…I mean Federation would save us all.  However, the new movie promised to replace all that lovey dovey garbage with a healthy dose of explosions.  I couldn’t have been more turned off if the screen play had been written by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

In this case The Romulans are used to represent the United States.   The big weapon they use is a drill.   Hmm, just like the United States drilling for oil in the Middle East.   After they have attacked with their drill, the Romulans unleash their ultimate weapon which they refer to as red matter which is so powerful that even a small drop creates a black hole that then consumes everything.   I literally groaned when I saw this thinly veiled reference to American capitalism.

The Enterprise is made up of the original motley collection of ethnics with the only American being a screw up from Iowa who gets it right in the end.   It was funny that the creators decided to base James Kirk on their opinion of Tom Harken, but it was more funny sad than funny ha ha.  If Kirk was Harken, then Spock was meant to be a Middle-Easterner with a culture that we Westerners would never understand.  In the ultimate bit of disrespect for survivors of terrorism, Spock actually destroyed the Romulans by crashing his ship into theirs in a nod to 9/11.

The producers even felt the need to comment on waterboarding by showing Pike strapped to a board in a pool of water.   Though the aliens never waterboarded him on screen, it was clearly intended.   In the  end the movie depicts America’s final collapse as being the result of our own capitalistic society which we have unleashed on the rest of the world.

Excuse me for not wanting to be preached at during the movies, but this is not your father’s Star Trek…its worse.   Even Dr. McCoy was turned into an advertisement for socialized medicine.   I’m not going to call for a boycott of this movie, but if you see it you’re either a liberal or have $10 to waste being preached at.  To rate Star Trek I set my phaser to crappy.

Advertisements

Written by thatsrightnate

May 8, 2009 at 10:24 pm

42 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. We went to see it tonight too. Loved it! It’s so cool that Star Trek looks like it’ll go on long after we’re gone.

    zenyenta

    May 8, 2009 at 10:55 pm

  2. Sorry Zen, your liberal bias is showing.

    thatsrightnate

    May 8, 2009 at 11:03 pm

  3. Did you see any illegal aliens from south of the border on the Enterprise? Soaking up tax dollars like a sponge.

    wrecksracer

    May 8, 2009 at 11:19 pm

  4. I liked the movie, thought it was cute, although I’m in no way a fan of the old franchise. But it’s great to know that women will still wear mini-skirts while men walk around fully clothed in 2233. Kirk must think the female population of the universe is his own buffet.

    Lola

    May 9, 2009 at 9:39 am

  5. Excuse me Lola, but your insecurities are showing. Some of us have worked very hard in the gym for our bodies and we are proud of the fact that we can wear mini-skirts and that men like Nate and Captain Kirk appreciate our efforts. You feminists should spend more time worrying about yourselves and less time worrying about my legs. As a former Miss Ohio, I’d also like to say that I love you Carrie and support you 100%. Don’t let the oppression of the haters get you down.

    cecily

    May 9, 2009 at 10:22 am

  6. I don’t think there were illegal aliens. I’m pretty sure that in the world of Star Trek everybody has open borders. Yuck. As for the mini-skirts—to be honest I was so outraged that I dind’t even notice.

    thatsrightnate

    May 10, 2009 at 6:32 am

  7. See, Cecily? Nate didn’t even notice the mini-skirts. Thus, you can’t put him and Captain Kirk in the same sentence.

    Lola

    May 10, 2009 at 7:06 am

  8. Did you notice that the majority of roles that depicted positions of authority and expertise were filled by blacks…another hat tip to the Obama generation.

    Hammer

    May 11, 2009 at 5:58 pm

  9. Excellent point Hammer. I hadn’t noticed that

    thatsrightnate

    May 11, 2009 at 6:58 pm

  10. Good analysis. I wouldn’t have thought of that… Have you ever watched Star Trek Enterprise? I swear it’s full of liberal BS. I can NOT watch it, but my husband loves it. I like Star Trek Voyager. Is it just me? Or is there a real difference between these 2 series…

    Sissy

    May 15, 2009 at 9:56 am

  11. I thought Voyager was also heavy liberal indoctrination with the whole female captain and the Indian in the crew.

    thatsrightnate

    May 15, 2009 at 6:48 pm

  12. I would just like to point out: it’s groaned NOT growned.

    And while I’m on this planet:-

    What has happened to simply enjoying entertainment? If you are so wrapped up in politics that you cannot relax, suspend you’re disbelief, and enjoy what’s in front of you for even the duration of a film, then what on earth (or any other planet in this universe) is the point in any of us ever trying to entertain this world again?

    And by the way, so bloody what? Although I love the dramatic arts as a form of escape, it is also there to hold a mirror to life and hopefully get us thinking. I don’t see much evidence of anything but you moaning. (NOTE: not mowning) Sadly, with you, the film seems to have failed on all levels it may possibly have hoped to make a connection.

    I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and I hope that this article does not take the joy out of it for anyone yet to see it.

    shooting_star

    May 17, 2009 at 8:47 pm

  13. I’m not surprised somebody like yourself would enjoy the movie. I’m just trying to warn off those who don’t belong to any socialist organizations.

    thatsrightnate

    May 17, 2009 at 9:13 pm

  14. So, at the risk of coming under some serious Team America back lash about my hippie communist ways, I thought this movie was great. Thanks, shooting star, not only for your good spelling, but your healthy dose of calm and reason. Yes, there are some movies and media that are used as a platform to preach and comment on society, but sometimes you just need to relax and enjoy the ride. One would hope that your cultural, political and societal values (whatever those may be) are able to withstand a couple of hours in a theatre. While many of you were busy pulling this movie to shreds, the rest of us had a fun night out. And you know what I did with my hippie money? I went and saw it twice 🙂

    clearly a liberal hippie who lives in Canada

    May 18, 2009 at 11:29 pm

  15. Movies like Star Trek, Dark Knight, and Night at the Museum with their liberal preaching are what’s wrong with Hollywood.

    thatsrightnate

    May 19, 2009 at 5:36 am

  16. wow, man. couple notes:

    I’m a crazy conspiracy nut, paranoid, and some would even go so far as to say anti-liberal, but this just takes the cake.

    9/11? if that scene was a nod to 9/11, I missed it. as well, the RSE (Romulan Star Empire) as an analogy to the U.S. is kinda laughable. usually, Trek uses the ever expansionist and barbarically warlike Klingon Empire for jabs at the U.S.

    and Vulcans as a representation of Arabs? no liberal hippie with ANY sense (almost seems a contradiction, no?) is going to even TRY to insinuate that a culture that chops off heads of “sinners,” hands of thieves, and beats women for showing the skin on their wrists or ankles is based solely on cold, hard logic. (and I’m not saying much sense, mind. I mean the kinda sense that tells you “stove hot” when you burn yourself and “doors are solid, therefore I have to open them before I can walk through them”)

    honestly, the whole “red matter” plot device seemed odd to me. I couldn’t exactly place WHAT they were getting at with that. but I think your definition is the strangest one to date.

    and Bones advertising socialized medicine? you gotta remember, Starfleet isn’t your average run-of-the-mill job. it’s the Federation Navy. I was unaware that navy medics billed for services performed shipboard in combat. “damn the torpedos, here’s my bill?”

    and no mention of the fact that no non-military officer has EVER been shown with a phaser unless they were using it to shoot at the good guys? truthfully, THAT’S what’s always rankled me most about trek. military guys with guns being the good guys, civillians with guns invariably being criminals.

    I’ve always seen Trek as sort of a “Utopian ideal” rather than a plausible future. keep in mind, the whole idea behind their system of communism (and that’s exactly what it is. don’t let anyone else tell you different) is that they have developed a world where there’s plenty to go around. how did they do that? food replicators. and I’ve always thought it particularly telling that in their world, their communist economy was only made possible by the technology to create everything from essentially nothing. honestly, communism MIGHT just work if all it took to manufacture anything was a single device and a couple of words, be they “tea, Earl Grey, hot” to get a cup of tea, or “gold, one-pound bricks, 50” to get you 50 pounds of gold. but until that day, Communism will always fail, no chance for any other outcome. Maybe even then, but who knows?

    as for the feminist complaining about Uhura’s miniskirt, I think that was more a nod to the 60’s era uniforms than anything. blame the 60’s.

    also, it’s been noted that in Star Trek cannon that the miniskirt is an acceptable alternative duty uniform for ANY Starfleet officer. there was a couple male extras all through the first season of Next Generation running around in ’em.

    Grizzly

    May 19, 2009 at 7:57 am

  17. Grizzly, I’ll definitely agree that Star Trek’s future has always been one of extreme optimism, but I do disagree with your point of there mysteriously being enough to go around. There is enough to go around in today’s world, in fact there is plenty to go around. The only reason there are people in such dire straights, left without food, shelter and basic medical facilities is that we in the West (not just America) consume far more than our fair share.
    Now if we were all willing to go without our super-size ‘freedom’ fries, SUV’s, and pretty much every ‘disposable’ consumer good, we would probably be able to feed a very large amount of the world’s population that is currently going without food and other basic needs. Maybe in Star Trek’s future people just stopped being so greedy as they are today.
    As far as the movie goes, I loved it, I didn’t see any message so nearly as complicated as Nate puts out there. J.J Abrams is not known for deep and thoughtful plot lines, he’s more of a popcorn action kind of guy. He appeals to the masses rather than trying to win the Palm d’Or. If anything, he has made Star Trek less preachy than the 60’s original, which was all about putting people of oppressed and marginalized people into positions of power and responsibility, as well as putting forth anti-war and anti-God messages. That is now pretty much gone.

    Comrade Canuck

    May 19, 2009 at 9:43 am

  18. Grizzly–thanks for the tip on the pro gun control message. I hadn’t thought of that. Boycott liberalism is currently boycotting the movie because JJ Abrams went to a fundraiser at Barbara Streisand’s. I’m not calling for a boycott, but I want viewers forewarned.

    thatsrightnate

    May 19, 2009 at 11:25 am

  19. you know what, if all people other than liberals are so idiotically caught up in politics, i’m now even more happy that obama won the election.

    peter

    June 30, 2009 at 1:26 am

  20. holly s*** don’t you obviously exceptionally smart people have something better to do than compare a MOVIE to government issues. i mean come on how many lead roles where actually played by ” African Americans ” these terribly racist comments disgust me along with 90% things said on this page. i am a die hard Trekkie and i loved this movie as Im sure to love more to come so in closing nate suck it!!!!!!!!!!!!

    superpizzed

    August 23, 2009 at 6:28 pm

  21. horrible review, too many assumptions.

    oknarst

    September 24, 2009 at 5:46 am

  22. You obviously do not know anything about the Star Trek franchise. JTK has always been from Iowa in the lexicon, and everything you mentioned in your review shows a lack of real understanding of the entire franchise as envisioned by G.R.

    There’s a reason most righties are in business and sales versus sciences and literature–they just lack intelligence.

    Trekfan

    September 24, 2009 at 6:12 pm

  23. Ouch, that’s strong words coming from people whose computers are probably in their mother’s basement.

    thatsrightnate

    September 24, 2009 at 6:34 pm

  24. How would you know, Nate? You speaking from first hand experience?

    DJ Chew

    October 4, 2009 at 10:35 pm

  25. My mother was a saint

    thatsrightnate

    October 5, 2009 at 5:59 am

  26. Oh boy, why not right on some real world issues? Instead of resorting to picking apart a fantasy universe to give your political viewpoints more validity. Sad, sad little man.

    seaoftears

    November 26, 2009 at 3:44 pm

  27. I do write about real world issues my friend. This was just one article about Star Trek. I am not a little man though.

    thatsrightnate

    November 26, 2009 at 10:09 pm

  28. How do you know the Romulan’s weren’t Chinese … or Russian … or maybe they were just Romulan’s …

    Joe American

    November 27, 2009 at 12:54 pm

  29. you are an idiot

    Anti-Christ

    November 27, 2009 at 12:55 pm

  30. “How do you know the Romulan’s weren’t Chinese … or Russian … or maybe they were just Romulan’s …”

    Any Star Trek fan would know this.

    thatsrightnate

    November 27, 2009 at 3:13 pm

  31. Just stumbled on this blog looking for info on the next installment of the new Star Trek franchise and wow do you people have too much time on your hands. I’ll leave you to your debating, but not without taking an bite out of Nate. So Nate, from reading only a couple of your posts, am I to understand that you can find a liberal bias in just about anything and that any situation that doesn’t have an old, white, fat male in charge is automatically “liberal?” The world’s changing buddy. Learn to live with it or crawl back under that rock from whence you came.

    zenaloha

    December 18, 2009 at 3:26 pm

  32. If you read my posting you would see that I found the original Star Trek liberal too and that had an old fat white guy in charge.

    thatsrightnate

    December 18, 2009 at 7:14 pm

  33. Actually, we’re never told who’s the head of Starfleet in the original series. The first time anyone in high command is revealed is in Star Trek: The Motion Picture when Admiral Nogura gives command of the Enterprise back to Kirk. So really the first time we see an authority figure, he’s Japanese.

    Trek Liberal

    December 26, 2009 at 1:36 pm

  34. That would make sense as there is a lot of technology in the future.

    thatsrightnate

    December 26, 2009 at 1:39 pm

  35. Ignoring the blatantly racist comment referring to technology and cultures of Asian descent, could you please explain exactly what is wrong with different cultures of the world (or galaxy in the case of Star Trek) coming together to find common ground, a common purpose, and make peace? Maybe I’m just speaking for myself, but hasn’t the world had enough of violence, war, hatred, and every thing else that tries to teach us that we are different instead of teaching us to embrace our common purpose and similarities?

    Trek Liberal

    December 27, 2009 at 12:19 am

  36. I was actually searching for something else Star Trek related and came across this… this… I’m not sure how to describe that. The title caught my eye when I said it on Google, and I couldn’t resist the urge to click and see what kind of paranoia this was.

    It wasn’t what I expected. It was far worse. I read this article with a mixture of amusement and disbelief, both of them at the very idea that this movie had anything at all to do with the things the author of this article accused it of doing.

    I can’t help feeling that people who think this way have some deep seated guilt inside of them for something that they believe, and that’s why they see things like this everywhere, even when it isn’t present.

    Apparently, we can’t have a villain using a drill now without a right-wing nutcase screaming at the top of his lungs that the film is calling America evil because it uses a drill for oil just like the villain used a drill for something totally different. Did you ever consider that maybe the makers of the film were saying that carpenters were evil? Haha.

    One of the… no, THE most far reaching claim this guy makes is that the creators of the film used red matter as a reference to American capitalism. I can’t even fathom how something like that can come into a person’s mind. How is that, in any way, analogous? I suppose it isn’t to any same person.

    His use of the phrase “motley collection of ethnics” shows his predujice, if not outright racism and bigotry against anything or anyone different than himself, though that’s not surprising for people who think this way about the world.

    If I remember correctly, and I do, there was nothing at the end of the movie that can be related to, or implying that American society will collapse because of capitalism. For goodness sake, the movie only exists because of capitalism. The entire entertainment industry flourishes because of capitalism. The writers, actors, director, and producers are where they are and can continue entertaining people because of capitalism.

    Naturally, the Romulans were likely waterboarding Pike, but you say that like it’s a bad thing, and you obviously support torture as a means to an end, so why are you complaining about that? You should’ve been cheering at that part, right? And, please, how is Doctor McCoy an advertisement for socialized medicine???

    I think, though, that the worse thing in this entire article is when he tries to equate anything in the movie with 9/11. To borrow his phrasing, in the ultimate bit of disrespect to the survivors of terrorism, he uses the attacks of 9/11 as nothing more than a tool to bash a movie because of his own political leanings. It’s beyond disgraceful.

    The author of this article obviously wants the world to be in a constant state of chaos, upheaval, death, and destruction. I thought the right-wing theory was that we can have peace through strength, but this guy, with his statement that he wanted to “replace all that lovey dovey garbage with a healthy dose of explosions” shows one thing to me: he doesn’t want, or hope for the world to have a better future than it has right now. In fact, with a measure of peace in certain parts of the world as I type this, I wouldn’t be surprised if he wanted the world to be in worse shape than it’s in now.

    This person is obviously not a fan of Star Trek at all. From it’s inception, the series has been about the hope for a brighter future, an end to war, and death, and destruction. It’s been about peaceful coexistence with other races/species and anyone who is different than you are, whether mentally, sexually, physically, or any other difference that you can imagine.

    Star Trek has also always been about exploration. It says that in the very opening of every episode of the original series and the Next Generation. The Starfleet’s primary goal is to seek out new life and new civilizations, but not to dominate them, as this author would no doubt wish, but make peaceful contact and hope for a new alliance to add to the reach and influence of the Federation, as well as to know more about other peoples and perhaps learn something in the process.

    Yet, through all of it’s talk about peaceful coexistence and exploration, Star Trek has never been a franchise about total peace and “lovey dovey garbage” as the author so inaptly put it. The Federation has always had its enemies, from the Klingons and Romulans to the Cardassians, the Dominion, and the Borg, just to name a few. Another message has always been that the barbarians are always at the gates, if you will.

    Naturally, any sane minded person would want to at least try to talk peacefully with them and negotiate rather than carelessly throwing away the lives of many through immediate hostility. Yet, Star Trek has a message that we are stronger when we stand together. The more people standing on the side of good means that the side of evil has even less chance of victory. That is another purpose of the Federation, if not directly stated. The more power you have on your side, the less likely death and destruction will be, but if the other side is determined to fight, having allies, even if those allies can’t always agree on every triviality, will ensure that the lost of life from an unavoidable fight isn’t as widespread.

    In some ways, the goals of the Federation is the same as the original goals of the United Nations, but I won’t go into detail about that, as it is complicated and not the purpose of this message.

    There is no doubt that the author of this article is severely disturbed and utterly paranoid. Part of me feels sorry for him. A greater part of me believes that he should be committed to a mental institution were he can get the help that he so obviously needs before he ends up hurting someone because of his paranoia… that is, if he’s even brave enough to walk out of his own home without fearing that the black helicopters are on the way to get him…

    Cameron Kain

    June 19, 2010 at 1:41 pm

  37. I would like to say one last thing, if I can keep myself to only saying one thing, as I do tend to go on longer than people are willing to read… and I’m about to do it again just explaining that, so let me get to the point…

    The Federation can be equated to the United Nations, and Star Fleet can be equated to NATO, but in the case of the UN and NATO, America is, arguably, the leading force in those groups, whether the participants or opponents of those groups which to admit it or not. Likewise, Earth is the leading force in the Federation, and Humans are the majority of Starfleet. The Federation headquarters is on Earth. Starfleet is based on Earth. Just as other countries have to come to the United States to the United Nations building, the species of the Star Trek universe must come to Earth to visit the Federation HQ and Starfleet HQ.

    To say that the Romulans are supposed to be America shows a lack of basic knowledge of Star Trek. Earth is America. America is Earth.

    The Vulcans made first contact with an American, Zefram Cochrane, who was the first human to invent warp drive, and he did it in Bozeman, Montana.

    The first captain that we get to see in Star Trek is American. Whether you want it to be Pike, born in Mojave, California, or Kirk, born in Riverside, Iowa, the first captain seen was American, not to mention that the prequel, Star Trek: Enterprise had an American captain, and he was indeed the first captain that Starfleet ever had, in the form of Johnathan Archer, born in Upstate New York, and spending the majority of his life in San Francisco, where Starfleet HQ is based. In fact, aside from Jean-Luc Picard, every captain that’s starred in a Star Trek series has been American, the other to being Sisko from New Orelans, and Janeway from Indiana.

    There is no shortage of information that shows that Earth is meant to represent America. If other races in Trek canon are meant to represent other nations of the world, I can’t readily say what they could be. Klingons are a warlike people who value honor highly. Many people in history could fit one or both of those criteria. They’ve also been at war and allied with the Federation at various times. America has “frienemies” like that.

    I highly doubt that the Romulans are meant to represent any nation on Earth. The Romulans and the Feration have always been either in a weak truce or all out war with each other. It is possible that, when they were first invented in the 60s, they were meant to represent communist China. By that same token, I could assume that the Vulcans are meant to represent Japan, as China and Japan have some common ancestry if you go back far enough, as do Romulans and Vulcans. Not to mention that the hairstyle both races have is eerily similar to the idea of what Asian hairstyles are viewed to be by the West.

    In any event, it’s plainly obvious that Earth is America, not Romulus. Any unbiased person who isn’t trying to use a simple film as a propaganda tool for there crazy conspiracy theories could see that.

    Cameron Kain

    June 19, 2010 at 2:22 pm

  38. Yeah, it’s me again. I’m just brewing with brilliant analysis today. 🙂

    My god… how can you say that Dark Knight and Night at the Museum are somehow trying to push a liberal message? This is outright insanity. You know that, don’t you? So what now? If any movie does well, it’s got a liberal message? Night at the Museum was just a fun kiddy movie.

    Secondly, the Federation is not a Communist regime. That really not only shows a lack of knowledge about what Star Trek is, but a lack of knowledge about what Communism is…

    You do know what Communism is, don’t you? All property is held in common, ownership being to the whole community, or to the state, as opposed to an individual. OR… a system where economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single political party.

    Neither of those things describe the Federation. THere is ownership in the Federation. There is currency in the Federation. Benjamin Sisko’s father owns a restaurant in New Orleans, prepares stuff rather than replicating ready made meals, and he doesn’t give the stuff out for free, he charges. The system that Earth and/or the Federation operates under may be a bit over your heads because there isn’t meaningless “paper” (yes I know that US dollars aren’t made of paper…did you?) being used as currency, but there is currency, there is an economy, and the government does not control it.

    I suppose limited minds can’t grasp how there can be an economy without multinational corporations involved in it (which has never actually been addressed one way or the other, and may I add that our multinational corporations are proving to be the thing that can really hurt America, not other countries because many Americans embrace these corporations, love them, and turn a blind eye that they are MULTINATIONAL holding no loyalty to any nation). There is an economy there, however, as I have said. There are non-Federation controlled freighters doing business all the time with Federation members and with others, especially the Ferengi who, if ANY race besides Humans could be called America, it’s them, as they are one of the most capitalist societies in the franchise.

    I’ll leave it at that. I’m sure small minds won’t even want to consider these things, because it would shatter said small minds. Those that actually think on a higher plain than an ant will see what I’m talking about, understand it, and agree with it.

    Cameron Kain

    June 19, 2010 at 2:52 pm

  39. Wow Cameron you write a lot. I’m assuming this is because as a Star Trek fan you don’t have much to do on a Friday night.

    thatsrightnate

    June 19, 2010 at 7:05 pm

  40. Talk about delusions of paranoia. This is the worst conspiracy theory I’ve heard in a long time. I didn’t think it was a great movies because it lacked originality (too similar to the previous movie), and it was far fetched (not for technological reasons but for practical ones–ie. giving someone a ship right out of training), but talk about projecting views, beliefs, and likes and dislikes on to something.

    Bill Watson

    July 18, 2010 at 9:18 am

  41. So, if I were to watch the new Star Trek movie and if I enjoy it(which I should check out sometime), I’m automatically a liberal? Amazing logic, Nate. I know this is an old “review” but this was just stupid. Just….wow.

    Michael

    January 18, 2012 at 2:17 pm

  42. Nate you sir are an idiot. You do not have a clue about the Star Trek Universe. United Earth is not in any way communist. SMH. The United Earth of Star Trek would best be described as democratic socialism. Just in case you don’t understand the concept, here is a brief discription. Only certain parts of the society are government controlled; such as the power grid, water supply, communications, medical, and the military. The reasons for the first 4 are simple each is considered to be a necessity for common existence. Each is operated by the government at a cost of sustainability and improvement but not for profit. That would be immoral and against the greater good. The military same as now no change. There is ample evidence to show that private “enterprise” exists in the Star Trek universe, so your communism theory goes out the window. As to the multi-ethnic nature of the crews,,,,, and? The only problem I see is your racism, bigotry, and ethnocentric xenophobia. I’d tell you to put on your tin foil hat, but you would probably think it was some kind of a romulan tracking device.

    You really shouldn’t get your nickers in a twist it’s bad for your health.

    C_MO

    May 5, 2012 at 12:22 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: