zenosanalytic:

ironiconion:

zenosanalytic:

diftor-heh-snusnu:

faarev-sevik:

adora-mill:

faarev-sevik:

A Vulcan Hello

Is nobody going to talk about how the Vulcans adopted a policy of “shoot first” against the Klingons and that that was what helped keep them at a respectful distance for such a long time because I have a hard time wrapping my head around it.

It was only logical. The culture of war cherished by Klingons had helped them to win their place under the suns of the overcrowded Galaxy. As in a pack of wolves, the strongest is the lead. Vulcans had no choice but to prove they’re the force one cannot ignore. Also take into consideration the time when Klingon-Vulcan interraction took place. It’s the time of Earth pre-Warp-5, before Archer’s Vulcans – intolerable, arrogant, half-aggressive. The Kir’Shara was a myth most of Vulcans didn’t even believe to be true but a fairy tale (or a nightmare for Vulcan High Command). So, nothing surprising here.

I still haven’t watched ENT so I can’t say a lot about that time. It just baffles me.

A species that adopts complete non-violence shoots first. Like damn.

It reminds me of the debate of how to be peaceful and keep your peaceful culture when you’re being invaded? Aren’t you allowed to defend yourself? Where does the line of self-defense end?

It seems kinda like the fascism discourse around here right now (that a democratic society is uniquely vulnerable to democratically-structured bids for it to destroy itself)–Vulcan society couldn’t have withstood anything less than shooting first against the Klingons. The losses they’d have incurred attempting to argue logic with a wholly uninterested attacking empire would have just been too severe, and they probably couldn’t have figured out how to leave an impression on them anyway.

Georgiou’s thesis (and Starfleet’s) seems to be that they’re stronger than that–Starfleet personnel can die trying, can die in support of Federation ideals, because their society and the codes of behavior backing them are strong enough to withstand the Klingon threat WITHOUT compromise.

The Vulcans chose to compromise their principles locally in order to maintain them globally, because they decided (and I think) that they weren’t up to handling it any other way. They had to meet the Klingons halfway–Starfleet doesn’t.

I think Vulcans are more deeply resistant to violence than dedicated to non-violence no matter what. Spock doesn’t like to use violence, is even more resistant to killing, and is deeply disdainful of humanity’s “logical” justifications for violence, but is willing to both be violent and to kill if out of options. The Galileo Seven(where he concedes they might have to use violence but insists on exhausting the alternatives first) and The Devil in the Dark(where the creature’s hostility forces him to kill it) come to mind. Also there’s obvsl a range of opinions on violence within “orthodox” Vulcan society given the much greater ease Tuvok has with violent options compared to Spock, and how he doesn’t insist on exhausting other avenues first. Given Spock’s class position(his family seems to be Vulcan nobility from Amok Time, is involved not only in the Science Academy and setting Vulcan’s diplomatic policy but also with preserving and adjudicating Vulcan culture[or at least, I’m assuming that bit from the reboot movie was based on something in-canon; I never read the books or anything]), and the anxiety caused by his hybrid nature, I think it’d make sense for him to be a bit more “puritanical” about philo-cultural issues like pacifism than other, or even most, Vulcans.

So A Vulcan Hello didn’t strike me as far outside the realm of Vulcan behavior; I think they’d just be very careful about the justification for it and that there’d be disagreement and debate around the policy(this could have easily been one of the many things Spock and Sarek fought over, for instance). There are two threads within larger Vulcan logical axioms that I can think of right now that might have been used to justify such a policy.

1. “The Needs of the Many outweigh the Needs of the Few”: Mostly just a rehash of mbl up there. The idea behind this is basically that context matters: in RoK terms that, while it is illogical to throw away one’s life, it is logical when doing so is required to preserve a greater number of lives. Generalized, this idea could be restated as “It is better to allow for a minor, limited, specific abrogation of a generally correct principle that preserves the greater good, than to adhere to that principle without compromise, even when doing so both causes greater harm than violating it would, and contradicts the core concept of the principle itself”. Vulcans are pacifists because killing is illogical(that which is alive definitionally ought to be alive. There are other reasons obvsl but this is the relevant one). Approaching the Klingons non-violently consistently led to destructions of life which threatened to create a modus vivendi inimical to life’s preservation(a state of unlimited aggression between Vulcans and Klingons). Therefore, modifying their approach to allow for a limited amount of violence scaled to their understanding of the importance violence holds culturally for Klingons, only to the point and time when Klingons will engage in dialogue, preserves life, both Vulcan and Klingon, by both preventing immediate deaths, and eventually allowing peaceful coexistence and mutual autonomy to be established.
2. “Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination”: Vulcans recognize that their culture is not other people’s culture. Recognizing that, they would recognize that other cultures don’t conceive of violence in the same way. Recognizing that, they would logically display a willingness to be violent, if conditions dictated its necessity for establishing dialogue, or the response of their interlocutor required it to prevent loss of life. So, once they understood the central place of violence in Klingon culture, it wouldn’t be surprising if some Vulcans would argue that displaying violence themselves only to the point where dialogue could be established is a logical choice. But again I think they’d be very cautious with this reasoning given how easily it can get away from you.

Proportionality is the main issue here. I don’t think Vulcans would be cruising around, just opening fire on every Klingon ship and colony they find; it makes more sense to me to think of them as raising shields and returning fire until Klingon ships either leave, open dialogue, or are disabled, only destroying them when given no other choice.

to your point about differing views on violence outside “orthodox” vulcans, in the TOS episode “the savage curtain”, spock is in the position to fight alongside surak, the seminal figure of vulcan. and while spock, as always, is resistant to violence but willing to use it when necessary, surak is completely personally devoted to nonviolence, refusing to fight at all.

Thanks for the addition! I totally forgot about this ep, but luckily in a big fandom there’s always other folks to remember what you can’t ^u^