Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Season 4 “Starship Down” and “Little Green Men”

How do I turn this into a profit?

I’ve completed my re-watch of “Star Trek: The Next Generation.” Now it’s time to start Deep Space Nine! I am much less familiar with this show, though I’m pretty sure I’ve seen about 80-90% of the episodes. It’s been so long that I’m sure it will all feel brand new. My wife has never seen the show. She and I will go through, review every episode, and give commentary and a grade from A-F. There are SPOILERS for each episode below. Without further adieu, here’s:

“Starship Down”

Synopsis

The Defiant is dispatched to continue trade negotiations with some people in the Gamma Quadrant. They’re mad because of tariffs Quark imposed, and Quark is ordered to fix the situation. However, just as the negotiations are in in force, Jem’Hadar attack and an unexploded torpedo hits the ship right where Quark and other alien are negotiating. They bond over trying to disable the bomb while everybody else fixes the ship. High fives and trade agreements abound.

Commentary

Okay, basically every scene with Quark steals the show in this one. Quark is such an interesting–and entertaining–character that it works. Whether it’s trying to dismantle a dud torpedo or settling down to talk trade deals with the ship still getting repaired, Quark completely steals the show in this one. The rest of the episode is okay, but it really is just a rac to figure out how to repair the ship. That’s about it. And yet I liked this one. It also has Sisko and Kira making a deeper connection as they agree to go watch a game of baseball after it’s all over.

Grade: B “It’s a little silly and disjointed, but wow can Quark sell an episode or what?”

Wife’s Grade and Comment: B “It was good, but it felt a bit disjointed to me.”

“Little Green Men”

Synopsis

Quark ropes Nog and Rom into helping him with a “business venture,” promising that it is nothing illegal that would get them in trouble with Starfleet. Turns out that the ship Quark acquired was not such a benevolent gift however, and he goes back in time with the two–and Odo, who was surreptitiously snooping–to Roswell! Yes, turns out that those stories of aliens were true–they were Ferengi! Odo, with the help of some benevolent earthlings, manages to free the Ferengi from the clutches of a military that wants to do experiments on them, and they manage to return to their own time, no serious damage done. Quark, though, is taken in for smuggling.

Commentary

Ever wonder what really happened at Roswell? Yeah, that’s easy: it was the Ferengi, obviously. This delightful episode plays with our sense of the surreal while interweaving campiness and characterization–I mean, you know Odo wants to catch Quark at all costs–makes this a good move. It’s the kind of episode that DS9 has been able to get away with more easily because it so rarely has truly ridiculous episodes. There was a short run of them before, but unlike the previous two Trek series, this one almost needs the silliness as a break in the ever-heightening tension. DS9 is so serious sometimes. I mean the last episode basically made a joke out of an episode long death threat from a torpedo! It’s like a breath of fresh air to have this kind of silliness once in a while, and not distracting at all from the broader narrative.

There’s little to dislike here, from the intentional over-acting on the part of the soldiers to the wonderful sepia tones at times and the camera angels, it’s all done quite well.

Grade: A “This one is even sillier than the previous one, but it’s all intentional. The explanation for what ‘Really Happened’ at Area 51 was great. I loved it!”

Wife’s Grade and Comment: A+ “It was just a really excellent episode. I enjoyed its self-referential silliness.”

Links

J.W. Wartick- Always Have a Reason– Check out my “main site” which talks about philosophy of religion, theology, and Christian apologetics (among other random topics). I love science fiction so that comes up integrated with theology fairly frequently as well. I’d love to have you follow there, too!

Be sure to follow me on Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies/scifi/sports and more!

Star Trek: DS9– For more episode reviews, follow this site and also click this link to read more (scroll down as needed)! Drop me a comment to let me know what you thought!

SDG.

Advertisements

Presidential Biographies: Martin Van Buren #8

My quest to read (at least) one biography per President continues with Martin Van Buren, the eighth President of the United States. The biography I chose with my selection process (reading reviews online and utilizing and  this website- My Journey Through the Best Presidential Biographies), I picked Martin Van Buren and the American Political System by Donald Cole.

Here, I’ll offer my thoughts on that biography, and proceed to the DEFINITIVE RANKING OF PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES!!!!!!

Martin Van Buren and the American Political System by Donald B. Cole

Martin Van Buren – Lived 1782-1862 ; President 1837-1841

Van Buren was a true politician, though not in the way that we may think of that term today. Yes, at times it seems that he simply followed the winds of popularity, but at other times he picked a stance and stood up for it regardless of possible consequences. It is difficult to get a feel for him as a person, however, due to this propensity for changing positions and picking battles. Who was Van Buren, truly? I’m not sure I have a good answer to that question after this biography. However, from reading comments about him other places, I find that to be a somewhat typical response.

A capable lawyer who spoke English as a second language (Dutch being his first), Van Buren leveraged his acumen for people to organize the Democractic-Republican Party in New York. He also helped found the Albany Regency, a powerful political machine that is certainly one of the first organizations that may rightly claim that label. The Regency was a group that exerted much power politically both in New York state and nationwide. Van Buren would spearhead this group and ride its influence to the White House.

Van Buren was very careful to try to give balance to his statements and positions. He allied himself with Jackson and leveraged that connection to expand his influence. He even managed to turn his resignation as Secretary of State during the Petticoat Affair (a scandal in the White House involving members of Jackson’s cabinet in which the wives of several cabinet members worked to ostracize another) into a political win and increase of his power.

One example of how he rode the line between positions is his treatment of slavery. For many years and throughout the Jackson Presidency, he was concerned with alienating Southern power and so he continued to favor policies which slaveowners also favored. However, later in his life he became known as a major proponent of abolition and supporter of Abraham Lincoln. The latter was perhaps not as large a swing as one may think, however. At the time, many Republicans favored abolition, though certainly did not favor equality of all people. Van Buren’s shift on this question may not truly show a change of heart so much as a change on feelings towards forced labor. It was, perhaps, a change of politics, as with many parts of Van Buren’s life.

As President, Van Buren wasn’t as successful as one may have anticipated given his demonstrated capabilities related to political maneuvering otherwise. The beginning of his Presidency was struck with a depression, leading to several blaming him for the economic collapse. He came up with a plan that would eventually turn around the economy of the country by keeping federal funds independent of various state banks, but this plan wouldn’t be implemented until enough hardship had happened for many to become embittered against him. Van Buren was also hesitant to upset the balance that was created from the Missouri Compromise and so fought against annexation of Texas, not only hoping to prevent war with Mexico but also seeing it as something that could spur on further North-South conflict. Though Van Buren preached a Jacksonian policy–and certainly continued the horrors that were visited upon various Native groups in the North America through these policies–he modified it towards his own ends, spurring on the strength of the Democractic Party. As President, however, few of his policies were adopted.

After his Presidency, Van Buren leaned increasingly towards abolition and, as I said, became a large supporter of Abraham Lincoln in his anti-slavery efforts.

Martin Van Buren and the American Political System is a worthy read, if it is a bit dry at times. Cole certainly gives a huge amount of background on the issues that surrounded Van Buren throughout his life. Van Buren is a difficult figure to analyze

THE DEFINITIVE RANKING OF PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES*

My criteria for ranking the Presidents will be somewhat arbitrary. Random things I’ve thought of so far is whether they improved our infrastructure, how Presidential they acted/looked, whether they got us into any silly wars, and the like. As you can see, these criteria are somewhat… subjective. So you’ll probably end up disagreeing with me. I look forward to your comments!

1. George Washington (1st President- original ranking- #1): Washington basically defined the office of the President for all who followed him. It was left intentionally vague by the framers, so he had to work within those strictures while trying to expand on them. Not easy, but he seems to have done it rather ably, refusing to become a major partisan while still demanding certain powers of the Executive Branch. During his Presidency the national bank was created, the country’s credit recovered, massive trade booms occurred, the Mississippi was opened for exploration, and beneficial partnerships with other countries were being formed. On the other hand, during his Presidency and life generally, slavery was tolerated and even expanded, Native Americans were brutalized, and throughout it all Washington either participated directly or turned his face the other way. It is difficult to underestimate the impact of Washington on the office of the President. On the other hand, we ought not to lionize him or see him as perfection itself.

2. Thomas Jefferson (3rd President- original ranking- #2): Jefferson’s accomplishments as President, Secretary of State, and Revolutionary cannot be understated. He deftly handled relationships with such countries as France and Spain, while also helping to secure borders of the United States for decades to come. One of the biggest splashes of his Presidency was the Louisiana Purchase, which vastly increased the size of the country. However, Jefferson was also a blatant womanizer, a slave owner who pandered to abolitionist leanings while owning slaves, was clearly racist, and encouraged the destruction of Native groups living on the land that was “purchased” from Napoleon. Back on the positive side, he advocated for religious tolerance–even of other faiths–despite his Deistic leanings. His diplomatic skill is beyond dispute. He actively sought compromise and valued even minority opinions–lessons we need to re-learn now. The legacy he left would impact almost every aspect of the country going forward, for good or ill. It is difficult to fully analyze such a complex, contradictory man.

3. James Madison (4th President- original ranking- #3): Called the “Father of the Constitution,” Madison’s impact is perhaps most important for what he did prior to becoming President. The sheer amount of work he did to get the Constitution written, improve upon it, amend it, and put it to vote is astonishing. As President, perhaps the most important event in his career was the War of 1812, itself a possible foreshadowing of the many and sundry conflicts the United States has entered with tenuous justification since. Though often disastrous, the War did lead to, somewhat paradoxically, better relations between the United States and Britain going forward. Perhaps it is best said that Madison was the consummate compromiser, for good or ill. As with many others, his owning of slaves directly conflicted with his affirmation of the idea that all people are created equal.

4. John Quincy Adams (6th President – original ranking #4): It would be easy to argue that John Quincy Adams was a more successful member of Congress and Foreign Minister than he was a President, and I would concede that argument. So yes, I absolutely tilted his score based on his achievements outside of the Presidency, but that’s because they were such monumental and important achievements it is tough to mark him down due to the opposition his Presidency received. What were those achievements? He negotiated the end of the War of 1812, drafted the Monroe Doctrine, helped shape our country through treaties regarding borders along Canada, Florida, Texas, and California, successfully regained the right of petition for the American people, and stood up against slavery in the courts–specifically with the Amistad case. Yeah, I think that’s worth a significant bump on this list.

5. James Monroe (5th President – original ranking- #4): Monroe was a master of foreign policy, and his Presidency and political career reflected that. Certainly left his mark on U.S. policy in ways that we still feel regarding Europe and South America in particular. Probably to be considered a “moderate” regarding relations with Native Americans and for his stance on slavery, though his positions were still bigoted and rather arrogant regarding both groups of people. Little by way of scandal (see Jefferson for an early example of some rather scandalous things going on with Presidents), so that makes him more Presidential than some. Also, he appeared to be a loving husband and father, overall.

6. John Adams (2nd President- original ranking- #2): There’s something to be said for the fact that Adams basically held the line against all the forces threatening to either break the United States back apart or subsume it under an “alliance” that would turn it into a kind of vassal state. Adams did that, and he managed to keep the US out of another war in its infancy. The political treatises Adams wrote went on to define the constitutions of many states and help clarify the relationship between the state and federal government. Adams did, however, fail to hold his own political party together, whether through inaction or simply not being charismatic enough or willing enough to step into the leadership role he needed to take. Moreover, Adams was an absentee (at best) father and husband.

7. Martin Van Buren (8th President- original ranking- #7): How do you analyze a man who was perhaps first and foremost a politician? Though that word has become something of a pejorative depending on its usage now, Van Buren didn’t play the system so much as he created one. He created what would develop into the modern day political party, taking what Andrew Jackson had started and running with it. He did so on a local and then national level, leveraging it to eventually become President of the United States. His continuation of Jackson’s policies towards Native groups caused enormous harm. His outright support of slavery may be baffling in light of his being remembered by contemporaries as a voracious abolitionist, but this change in policy was later in life and cynics may argue that it was a policy of convenience. He struggled as President to get much passed, largely due to his shouldering the blame for the economic crisis that greeted the beginning of his Presidency. His political skill helped create our modern political system, for better or ill. No matter what you think of him, he does at least give me the chance to use my new favorite phrase of this list: “He’s still a better President than Andrew Jackson.”

8. Andrew Jackson (7th President- original ranking- #7): I’m genuinely flabbergasted by how Jackson manages to get ranked so highly on so many lists of Presidents. On the positive side, he did help prevent an earlier Civil War by, eventually, ending the nullification crisis. He defined the office of President as representative of the people. He also was the first to truly form up a political party around himself and help use it to shape the dynamics of policy. Not an unimpressive list of accomplishments. Yet he was also an extremely staunch defender of slavery, to the point of failing in his office to enforce the law by allowing freedom of speech to be impeded by federal postmasters through the south. He personally oversaw slaughters of Native groups and set up and endorsed policies that would lead to countless thousands of deaths and atrocities against Native Americans. He callously saw only white people as worthy of the words of the Constitution, as demonstrated in both of these actions. Moreover, he used federal power and authority only when it suited him–if he wanted something to happen, he had no qualms about using federal authority; if he did not, he shamelessly looked the other way. He was concerned primarily with himself and ensuring his own success. He is vastly overrated.

*Rankings not definitive

Links

J.W. Wartick- Always Have a Reason– Check out my “main site” which talks about philosophy of religion, theology, and Christian apologetics (among other random topics). I love science fiction so that comes up integrated with theology fairly frequently as well. I’d love to have you follow there, too!

Be sure to follow me on Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies/scifi/sports and more!

SDG.

Reading through the [Alleged] Best 100 Science Fiction books- #51-55

I’m a huge science fiction fan, but realized I haven’t read a lot of those works considered classics or greats. I decided to remedy that, and found a list online of the Top 100 Science Fiction Books. The list is determined by vote from sci-fi fans online, so it may change over time. I am going off the order of the list as it was when I first saw it. Each book will receive a grade between F and A+ as well as very brief comments. I’m interested to read what you think about these books as well. There will be very minor spoilers in some of these.

51. Frankenstein by Mary Shelley Grade: A-
“It’s not really like any film version I’ve seen. The book was intriguing, historically grounded, and foreboding in a very different way than a green man with screws in his head. Not only is it a rather good novel, but it also helped me to see one of the biggest themes in science fiction playing out at a more removed time: that of writing in fear of that which is new. Many novels coming out are centered around dystopic scenarios based on things like social media, nanotech, and the like. Frankenstein is about electricity and it helps convey the sheer joy and utter terror that such a discovery would have conveyed to those who first encountered it. It’s truly moving in that regard. I enjoyed it immensely, and certainly much more than I thought I would.”

52. Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes Grade: A
“Heart-rending and poignant, Keyes has created an enduring masterpiece. Yes, some aspects of it haven’t aged well (such as outdated psychological theories), but it’s the kind of science fiction that could be set in the past as something that has happened, so that doesn’t matter. It’s got one of the best aspects of science fiction storytelling, namely that it asks us to look at ourselves as humans and see what we are more fully. I readily admit I did not think I’d enjoy this one going in. It had all the makings of one of those books that is more literary than it is plot, but it is not that at all. I wept bitterly at more than one point in this haunting work. It’s a beautiful book.”

53. Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard Grade: D
“Utterly bloated and in dire need of editing, Battlefield Earth is like a pulp science fiction novel gone wrong. The whole concept of pulpy sci-fi demands episodic structure with plenty of action. Though there is a lot of action here, it is annoyingly repetitive, and if I have to read about the need for ‘leverage’ one more time I’m going to go insane. But I must write about leverage: having an alien who is so concerned with self-interest was intriguing, but like basically every other idea in this novel, it was never developed beyond the surface level, at best. It’s like Hubbard thought ‘Hey, self-interested alien… that’d be a cool way to drive the plot.’ But then, instead of developing further, he just decided to write about ‘leverage’ every single time that alien showed up. Where’s my leverage. I must have leverage. Leverage! We get it, Hubbard. We get it. The book also spends about 150 pages at the beginning with an alien trying to figure out what to feed a human. Not a joke. Well, let’s just say I am not impressed by this one.”

54. Journey to the Center of the Earth by Jules Verne Grade: B-
“It was a wonderful adventure full of imagination. Verne was far ahead of his time, and his novels, like those of Wells’, make you really appreciate the ‘speculative’ aspect of speculative fiction. However, it never felt like we got to fully cash in on the strangeness of the world. Simply having a premordial sea in which dinosaurs and ancient creatures move about was not as cool as it could have been. It’s clearly good, but dated.”

55. To Your Scattered Bodies Go by Philip Jose Farmer Grade: C-
“Farmer had all of humanity to choose from for his characters, and he chose some truly awesome figures. The problem is that he never gave any one character the time or space to develop properly and show the unique personality of each. The characters should surely speak in radically different voices, have conflicting concerns, and even see the world in quite diverse ways. But instead, each character was a fairly standard science fiction trope with a historical figure’s name slapped onto him or her. Their voices all sounded the same to me on almost every page. The book came very highly recommended from a number of sources. I’m pretty disappointed, to be honest.”

Links

J.W. Wartick- Always Have a Reason– Check out my “main site” which talks about philosophy of religion, theology, and Christian apologetics (among other random topics). I love science fiction so that comes up integrated with theology fairly frequently as well. I’d love to have you follow there, too!

Be sure to follow me on Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies/scifi/sports and more!

Reading through the [Alleged] Best 100 Science Fiction Books– Check out more posts in this series as I continue.

SDG.

Vaccines: A Resource List

Source: By Photo Credit: James GathanyContent Providers(s): CDC – This media comes from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Public Health Image Library (PHIL), with identification number #2674. Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=367791

I have engaged with a few people who are anti-vaccination for a number of reasons. I believe that people who are against the use of vaccines believe that they have strong reasons for their beliefs and practices. I wish to engage with people–some of whom I know personally–on a thoughtful level that does not denigrate their sometimes deeply held beliefs. I do believe that those who line up in the anti-vaccination camp are mistaken on a number of topics, and I understand the anger that some have against those who refuse to vaccinate, but I wish to avoid that with this list that I’m putting together.

Here, I hope to gather a list of links to engage with arguments from the anti-vaccination side in a thoughtful way. I hope to avoid putting anything on here that will denigrate those who are anti-vaccination, but rather make it a resource list to engage with. The list will grow as I find more links to add. It is by no means complete, and will begin here with far fewer resources than I hope to have later. I’ve arranged it by either key words or topics, and added what I hope is a fair summary of the anti-vaccination argument under the topic before I link some evidence against the argument. In some cases I’ve type up a brief response to go along with the resource(s). I hope you find this useful, whatever your background. If you have some resources you believe belong on this list, please share them, though I make no guarantees I will add them. Please, if you wish to share resources, make sure they have adequate citations, are not memes, and do not belittle others.

Vaccine Injury Court

Anti-Vaccination Argument(s): The fact that we have a vaccine injury court suggests that vaccines are unsafe. After all, if they were safe, there’d be no need to have such a court. The court has paid out billions of dollars for vaccine injuries, which means that vaccines are not safe.

Brief Response: Simply having a vaccine injury court does not guarantee that vaccines are dangerous. Though it is true that $3.18 billion has been paid out for vaccine-related injuries by this court, a large percentage of these were settled without ever agreeing that the vaccine caused an injury. Moreover, if one divides the $3.18 billion by the number of vaccines administered in the United States (2.5 billion between 2006-2014 alone), you get an average of $1.27 per vaccine being awarded. That’s incredibly low and suggests that simply based on dollars spent on purported injuries, vaccines are, in fact, incredibly safe. Of course the 3.18 billion should be divided by all vaccines since 1988 when the fund was established, but that would make the number much lower.

Resource(s)

Here’s How the Anti-Vaxxers’ Strongest Argument Falls Apart– the title is a bit provocative, but the information it contains is strong. It notes how the vaccine injury court is set up, how frequently it is less expensive to settle than to try to disprove a claim of vaccine injury, and demonstrates that the numbers do not hold up to saying vaccines are harmful.

Doctors Against Vaccines

Argument: Some doctors are also against use of vaccines, so the evidence can go either way. 

Brief Response: Anecdotal evidence does not trump research and numerous studies that seem to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of vaccines. As in almost any area where there is a consensus position, there will be a limited number of people who dissent. 

Vaccines Cause Autism

Argument: Some study(ies) demonstrated that vaccines are linked to autism. There is a correlation between the number of vaccines administered and the increase of cases of autism in the United States. 

Brief response: Correlations are often spurious, as a rather entertaining website can help you explore. Correlation is not (always) evidence of causation, and correlations between all kinds of unrelated things can easily be drawn (again, check out the linked text in the sentence before this one). Not only that, but the studies that purport to demonstrate this link have been largely discredited.

Resources

Autism Science Foundation– This website, dedicated to looking at scientific evidence related to autism and research in that area, states clearly: “Vaccines save lives; they do not cause autism. Numerous studies have failed to show a causal link between vaccines and autism. Vaccine safety research should continue to be conducted by the public health system in order to ensure vaccine safety and maintain confidence in our national vaccine program, but further investment of limited autism research dollars is not warranted at this time.” The site also has its own list of resources related to studies that have shown that there is no causal link between vaccines and autism.

Doctor in MMR-Autism Scare Ruled Unethical– Dr. Andrew Wakefield is a big name in the anti-vaccination movement, and his studies are sometimes taken to be definitive justification for several of that movement’s positions. However, it is worth noting that Wakefield’s research has been ruled unethical–including paying children at a birthday party to give blood. Moreover, his research practice was deemed dishonest and irresponsible according to the medical panel’s ruling. It is difficult to see why he should continue to be trusted without a quite extraordinary conspiracy going on to discredit his research. It is the research itself that has been demonstrated to be wrong, and his methodology shown to be flawed and “dishonest.” In light of these findings, those who wish to continue to use Wakefield as a source must demonstrate the reliability of his research rather than simply pointing to it as a kind of dissent from consensus.

Presidential Biographies: Andrew Jackson #7

My quest to read (at least) one biography per President continues with Andrew Jackson, the seventh President of the United States. The biography I chose with my selection process (reading reviews online and utilizing and  this website- My Journey Through the Best Presidential Biographies), I picked

Here, I’ll offer my thoughts on that biography, and proceed to the DEFINITIVE RANKING OF PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES!!!!!!

American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House by Jon Meachem

Andrew Jackson – Lived 1767-1845 ; President from 1829-1837

I was looking forward to reading more about Andrew Jackson, whom I’ve heard much about, both flattering and unflattering. I see him consistently listed, at minimum, in the top half of Presidents when it comes to ranking Presidents. Given the particularly egregious wrongs I’d read about him perpetrating, I figured there must be some truly amazing positives to shoot him so high up lists. Reading this Pulitzer Prize-winning biography by Jon Meachem leaves me quite confused as to how Jackson has managed to be regarded so highly.

Andrew Jackson’s rise to power is seen as interesting because he was more of a self-made figure than one who’d inherited position and fame. Even this facet seems a little overdone–no one would care about George Washington if he hadn’t worked so hard to achieve what he did. Nevertheless, Jackson was born in relative poverty compared with his contemporary Presidents. He made a name for himself militarily, through what he saw as a retributive attack on the Creek people after they’d attacked Fort Mims, itself a harbor for soldiers and settlers who had previously attacked the Red Sticks people. Jackson led the strike which exacted an awful toll and saw it as completely just. Later, he won the Battle of New Orleans, though only after using the powers of martial law and a kind of dictatorial power to do what he wanted–something that would become a theme in his Presidency. His victory over the British at New Orleans cemented his name on the national stage and he would use it to propel himself to the office of President–though not before a bitter defeat by John Quincy Adams the first go-round.

The Jackson Presidency was full of events and it would be impossible to provide a concise summary of them all. There was much drama surrounding his friendship with the Eaton family and the possibly sordid details involved therein, eventually leading to the first ever dissolution of a cabinet by a President. There was his retributive strike against Quallah Battoo after a U.S. ship had been attacked and stolen. This event was one of the earliest projections of U.S. power globally, showing that the States would be unafraid to send its military abroad to defend its interests. However, the man Jackson picked to lead this counter-strike was uneven of temper and rather than negotiating, simply slaughtered the Malay’s wholesale. Jackson had politically maneuvered himself out of accountability for this, however. These events were important, but don’t do as much to define the Jackson Presidency as others.

Perhaps the biggest win for Jackson was his prevention of civil war… for the moment. A tariff was passed that many Southerners felt impacted the South more than the North. The Tariff basically raised an exorbitant fee on imports that were outcompeting Northern manufactured goods, and the idea was to make it so that the American industrial areas could compete with imported goods by price. The South felt this was unfair and favored the North, which was unconstitutional. Thus began the Nullification Crisis, in which South Carolina effectively tried to nullify or make void the Tariff and not enforce it. Jackson, ever bullheaded, determined not to allow this violation of Federal Law to happen. The crisis extended for years, but when push came to shove Jackson threatened intervention through military means if necessary. Ultimately, a kind of compromise was reached in which the tariffs were somewhat lowered but South Carolina must enforce them. The crisis had pushed the Union to its brink, but not over it. Jackson was intimately involved in the crisis, though I’m not convinced he deserves all the credit for making sure it didn’t boil over into war.

Jackson was also vehemently opposed to the Bank of the United States. Andrew Jackson was opposed to having that amount of power in a private institution, among other things, and he clashed with the Bank over any number of issues. The Bank had to be rechartered to continue its existence, and Jackson made opposition to it a personal vendetta–as he did with so many other things. After he was re-elected, he felt he had the voice of the people behind him and vetoed the bill to recharter the bank. This led to a censure of the President by Senate, but Jackson’s unrelenting personality led to a restructuring of the Bank in ways that echo to today.

Andrew Jackson was a racist through and through; there’s simply no denying that. As Meachem put it,

The common theme [in Jackson’s mind regarding Native groups]: As a people Indians were neither autonomous or independent but were to be manipulated and managed in what most benefited Jackson’s America–white America. Missionaries and humanitarian reformers struggled to make the case for the innate rights of the Indians, but the white agenda–more land, fewer Indians, complete control–took precedence.

Similar comments can easily be made about Jackson and slavery–they were tools of white people to push forward the agenda of more land, money, and power. Regarding Native Americans, Jackson not only personally led massacres, he also was a huge proponent of the Indian Removal Act which empowered Jackson to “negotiate” to remove Native tribes from east of the Mississippi. He wielded this power multiple times, fighting wars against the Seminoles in Florida and setting stage for the Trail of Tears and many other travesties. Meachem argues that Jackson tended to see Native Americans not as independent people but as inherently enemies/squatters on American land or as allies of foreign powers. Thus, the President felt they had to be destroyed or removed.

Andrew Jackson was a vicious proponent of slavery, as both his actions and personal writings attest. He personally offered rewards for returned slaves and in at least one case increased the reward if the escaped slave was given 100 lashes! More damningly, he tried to use Federal power to squelch freedom of speech. Initially this was planned to be an active silencing of abolitionists. In practice, it became Andrew Jackson simply refusing to make federal postmasters allow for freedom of speech. He allowed them to refuse to send antislavery pamphlets, which in his own mind would cause slave revolts and violence to break out. This is particularly interesting because Jackson never refused to use federal power for his own ends, as in the case of the Nullification Crisis, but when it came to something that might impact his own pocket book–slavery–he simply decided he would not enforce the law. Later, Jackson would also support the banning of the right to petition in the case of slavery, yet another example of his suppression of freedom of speech for his own ends.

American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House is a readable, interesting biography that perhaps meanders a bit too much at times. Overall, it presents a straightforward look at the flaws of Jackson, while not making apologies or excuses. There are a few points it seemed a bit vague on. Overall, however, it is an excellent biography well worth reading to learn more of the history of the United States. I was astonished to learn all these things about Jackson and realize he is still seen as some kind of American hero.

THE DEFINITIVE RANKING OF PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES*

My criteria for ranking the Presidents will be somewhat arbitrary. Random things I’ve thought of so far is whether they improved our infrastructure, how Presidential they acted/looked, whether they got us into any silly wars, and the like. As you can see, these criteria are somewhat… subjective. So you’ll probably end up disagreeing with me. I look forward to your comments!

1. George Washington (1st President- original ranking- #1): Washington basically defined the office of the President for all who followed him. It was left intentionally vague by the framers, so he had to work within those strictures while trying to expand on them. Not easy, but he seems to have done it rather ably, refusing to become a major partisan while still demanding certain powers of the Executive Branch. During his Presidency the national bank was created, the country’s credit recovered, massive trade booms occurred, the Mississippi was opened for exploration, and beneficial partnerships with other countries were being formed. On the other hand, during his Presidency and life generally, slavery was tolerated and even expanded, Native Americans were brutalized, and throughout it all Washington either participated directly or turned his face the other way. It is difficult to underestimate the impact of Washington on the office of the President. On the other hand, we ought not to lionize him or see him as perfection itself.

2. Thomas Jefferson (3rd President- original ranking- #2): Jefferson’s accomplishments as President, Secretary of State, and Revolutionary cannot be understated. He deftly handled relationships with such countries as France and Spain, while also helping to secure borders of the United States for decades to come. One of the biggest splashes of his Presidency was the Louisiana Purchase, which vastly increased the size of the country. However, Jefferson was also a blatant womanizer, a slave owner who pandered to abolitionist leanings while owning slaves, was clearly racist, and encouraged the destruction of Native groups living on the land that was “purchased” from Napoleon. Back on the positive side, he advocated for religious tolerance–even of other faiths–despite his Deistic leanings. His diplomatic skill is beyond dispute. He actively sought compromise and valued even minority opinions–lessons we need to re-learn now. The legacy he left would impact almost every aspect of the country going forward, for good or ill. It is difficult to fully analyze such a complex, contradictory man.

3. James Madison (4th President- original ranking- #3): Called the “Father of the Constitution,” Madison’s impact is perhaps most important for what he did prior to becoming President. The sheer amount of work he did to get the Constitution written, improve upon it, amend it, and put it to vote is astonishing. As President, perhaps the most important event in his career was the War of 1812, itself a possible foreshadowing of the many and sundry conflicts the United States has entered with tenuous justification since. Though often disastrous, the War did lead to, somewhat paradoxically, better relations between the United States and Britain going forward. Perhaps it is best said that Madison was the consummate compromiser, for good or ill. As with many others, his owning of slaves directly conflicted with his affirmation of the idea that all people are created equal.

4. John Quincy Adams (6th President – original ranking #4): It would be easy to argue that John Quincy Adams was a more successful member of Congress and Foreign Minister than he was a President, and I would concede that argument. So yes, I absolutely tilted his score based on his achievements outside of the Presidency, but that’s because they were such monumental and important achievements it is tough to mark him down due to the opposition his Presidency received. What were those achievements? He negotiated the end of the War of 1812, drafted the Monroe Doctrine, helped shape our country through treaties regarding borders along Canada, Florida, Texas, and California, successfully regained the right of petition for the American people, and stood up against slavery in the courts–specifically with the Amistad case. Yeah, I think that’s worth a significant bump on this list.

5. James Monroe (5th President – original ranking- #4): Monroe was a master of foreign policy, and his Presidency and political career reflected that. Certainly left his mark on U.S. policy in ways that we still feel regarding Europe and South America in particular. Probably to be considered a “moderate” regarding relations with Native Americans and for his stance on slavery, though his positions were still bigoted and rather arrogant regarding both groups of people. Little by way of scandal (see Jefferson for an early example of some rather scandalous things going on with Presidents), so that makes him more Presidential than some. Also, he appeared to be a loving husband and father, overall.

6. John Adams (2nd President- original ranking- #2): There’s something to be said for the fact that Adams basically held the line against all the forces threatening to either break the United States back apart or subsume it under an “alliance” that would turn it into a kind of vassal state. Adams did that, and he managed to keep the US out of another war in its infancy. The political treatises Adams wrote went on to define the constitutions of many states and help clarify the relationship between the state and federal government. Adams did, however, fail to hold his own political party together, whether through inaction or simply not being charismatic enough or willing enough to step into the leadership role he needed to take. Moreover, Adams was an absentee (at best) father and husband.

7. Andrew Jackson (7th President- original ranking- #7): I’m genuinely flabbergasted by how Jackson manages to get ranked so highly on so many lists of Presidents. On the positive side, he did help prevent an earlier Civil War by, eventually, ending the nullification crisis. He defined the office of President as representative of the people. He also was the first to truly form up a political party around himself and help use it to shape the dynamics of policy. Not an unimpressive list of accomplishments. Yet he was also an extremely staunch defender of slavery, to the point of failing in his office to enforce the law by allowing freedom of speech to be impeded by federal postmasters through the south. He personally oversaw slaughters of Native groups and set up and endorsed policies that would lead to countless thousands of deaths and atrocities against Native Americans. He callously saw only white people as worthy of the words of the Constitution, as demonstrated in both of these actions. Moreover, he used federal power and authority only when it suited him–if he wanted something to happen, he had no qualms about using federal authority; if he did not, he shamelessly looked the other way. He was concerned primarily with himself and ensuring his own success. He is vastly overrated.

*Rankings not definitive

Links

J.W. Wartick- Always Have a Reason– Check out my “main site” which talks about philosophy of religion, theology, and Christian apologetics (among other random topics). I love science fiction so that comes up integrated with theology fairly frequently as well. I’d love to have you follow there, too!

Be sure to follow me on Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies/scifi/sports and more!

SDG.

 

 

Star Trek: DS9 Season 4 “Indiscretion” and “Rejoined”

Welp, this is awkward.

I’ve completed my re-watch of “Star Trek: The Next Generation.” Now it’s time to start Deep Space Nine! I am much less familiar with this show, though I’m pretty sure I’ve seen about 80-90% of the episodes. It’s been so long that I’m sure it will all feel brand new. My wife has never seen the show. She and I will go through, review every episode, and give commentary and a grade from A-F. There are SPOILERS for each episode below. Without further adieu, here’s:

“Indiscretion”

Synopsis

Kira learns of the possible fate of a friend when a piece of the ship the friend was on shows up at DS9. She goes to investigate, but the Cardassians insist upon sending a representative who is, of course, Dukat. They travel together and discover the wreckage of the ship, but also graves that show that some people survived. It turns out Dukat is so interested because he has a daughter, Tora Ziyal, whom he had with a Bajoran mistress. He also reveals he must kill his daughter because it would ruin him if she were discovered. Kira tells him in no uncertain terms she won’t allow that, but they continue to investigate and eventually find the survivors who have been forced into labor. They rescue them and at the critical moment, Ziyal’s clear love for Dukat warms his heart and he decides to face the consequences of bringing her home with him.

Commentary

We keep learning more and more about Dukat. That’s perhaps one of the things that makes DS9 so interesting- even the “bad guys” get fleshed out quite a bit. Though it seems quite out of left field to have Dukat have a Bajoran mistress, it is also plausible enough that it doesn’t require a complete rethinking of his character to understand it. The way the episode plays out is also great, as it allows both Kira and Dukat to show their personalities and develop their relationship alongside each other. Ziyal is well-cast and certainly adds to the “believable” factor in the story.

The episode also has a rather memorable scene–the one where Dukat and Kira are each digging through the graves to see if the one they’re looking for is there. For Kira, it seems obvious, but for Dukat, you’re not yet sure what he’s looking for. Once you find out, the combination of trepidation and fear and perhaps a sick kind of hope combined in that scene make it even more powerful.

Grade: B+ “It was a good character piece on Dukat.”

Wife’s Grade and Comment: B+ “I thought it was a good story, but the jump from ‘Definitely gonna kill her’ to ‘not gonna kill her’ seemed too abrupt.”

“Rejoined”

Synopsis

Surprise! A previous Dax had a wife, Lenara Kahn,  who is still alive and she’s on DS9! Jadzia Dax must struggle with Trill society’s social mores while also trying to figure out how she personally feels alongside the Dax symbiont. Turns out she has feelings for Kahn but just as she determines to shun her society’s strictures, Kahn leaves, having decided she does not want to live in exile.

Commentary

I thought this was an interesting way to explore Trill society and the complexity of the relationships it would entail. I was genuinely surprised by the ending because I kind of thought they’d kill Kahn off or perhaps find some way to resolve the tension. Instead, having Kahn basically just decide the past was the past was bittersweet and unexpected.  It leaves the future open for any further interactions, though I don’t recall there being any. If there is a complaint about the episode it is that it is awfully slow. Very little seems to happen other than Dax struggling with herself.

Grade: B “Trill society is complicated.”

Wife’s Grade and Comment: B+ “The good was the Trill storyline, which was fun–and the development of Dax’s character. The bad–I just felt like there should have been more action.

Links

J.W. Wartick- Always Have a Reason– Check out my “main site” which talks about philosophy of religion, theology, and Christian apologetics (among other random topics). I love science fiction so that comes up integrated with theology fairly frequently as well. I’d love to have you follow there, too!

Be sure to follow me on Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies/scifi/sports and more!

Star Trek: DS9– For more episode reviews, follow this site and also click this link to read more (scroll down as needed)! Drop me a comment to let me know what you thought!

SDG.

Reading through the [Alleged] Best 100 Science Fiction Books- #46-50

I’m a huge science fiction fan, but realized I haven’t read a lot of those works considered classics or greats. I decided to remedy that, and found a list online of the Top 100 Science Fiction Books. The list is determined by vote from sci-fi fans online, so it may change over time. I am going off the order of the list as it was when I first saw it. Each book will receive a grade between F and A+ as well as very brief comments. I’m interested to read what you think about these books as well. There will be very minor spoilers in some of these.

46. Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson Grade: B-
“It reads a little like a poor folk’s Ben Bova. The trappings of hard science fiction are all present, but it never quite hits its stride with characterization, nor does it quite live up to its own lofty scope. At times, it is amazing. At others, it is bogged down with ever-increasing broadening of scope. I think the main problem here is that the book feels like an attempt to combine space opera and hard science fiction, and while I’ve enjoyed such a combination, it does not work as well here. But it has enough going for it to make it worth the read, regardless.”

47. A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess Grade: C-
“Do you mind trying to figure out slang? If so, don’t read this. At first it is very difficult to get into due to the word-swapping that is used throughout the book, but it eases up as you begin to understand what’s happening. It is relentlessly violent and dark, with very little hope until the very last chapter. Even there, though, it’s hardly enough. The whole thing seems kind of pointless after a while, to be honest. It’s not bad, but it’s not very good either.”

48. Time Enough for Love by Robert A. Heinlein Grade: F
“What the hell did I just read? Heinlein went off the deep end. Basically he just wanted to write an attack on religious sexual mores, but he did so in a way that seemed to combine crudeness, disgust, and a kind of remarkably naive misogyny into one confused, awful mess. Indeed, he basically admits that the book is an attack on any kind of sexual code as he, through the main character, writes that ”’incest” was a religious concept, not a scientific one… the last twenty years had washed away in his mind almost the last trace of his tribal taboo.’ Sin is similarly chalked up not as wrongdoing or evil but as a tired, backward way of looking at the world. Yep, incest is a-ok in Heinlein’s book, or at least that of his protagonist. Not only that, but those silly religious people and their ideas of not having sexual thoughts about very young minors, not sleeping with your sibling/parent, etc. Oh yeah, but let’s not forget that this is all couched in decidedly 1940s/50s concepts of male-female relations, such that it is accompanied by a not-so-subtle male-dominance matrix.  Forward thinking? not so much. Terrible, terrible book.”

49. The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin Grade: A-
“Ever read a book that makes you think… a lot? No? Well, pick this one up. Ursula K. Le Guin sketches out a remarkably detailed anarchist society, while pitting its pseudo-utopian problems alongside problems with capitalism and socialism. It’s really well done and incredibly deep. She also explores the question of how much our upbringing can cloud our thoughts regarding being self-critical and analyzing our own views. Why not the highest possible score? Because other than the main character, an intriguing scientist with a good amount of depth, every other character is exactly what you might expect. They’re created purely for the sake of the plot. A great book, but not totally transcendent.”

50. The End of Eternity by Isaac Asimov Grade: C-
“Asimov again shows that he is more interested in ideas than execution. The novel spends almost as much time talking about scientific theory as it does giving readers a sense of the world around themselves. Like each Asimov book I’ve read on this list so far, I see the sparks that would make many readers fall in love, but as someone who enjoys well-written characters, the paper-thin motivation used throughout this novel falls flat. It’s as much a treatise as a novel, but not in a good way.”

Links

J.W. Wartick- Always Have a Reason– Check out my “main site” which talks about philosophy of religion, theology, and Christian apologetics (among other random topics). I love science fiction so that comes up integrated with theology fairly frequently as well. I’d love to have you follow there, too!

Be sure to follow me on Twitter for discussion of posts, links to other pages of interest, random talk about theology/philosophy/apologetics/movies/scifi/sports and more!

Reading through the [Alleged] Best 100 Science Fiction Books– Check out more posts in this series as I continue.

SDG.