https://subspacechatter.substack.com/p/infinite-diversity-in-infinite-combinations?sd=pf
IDIC was Roddenberry's way to ensure that Star Trek would be forever woke
I have to imagine a lot of this "I'm done with woke star trek" crap is perpetuated by bots and shills. Post histories on Reddit for accounts saying these right wing talking points were either days old in response to some new Trek show or episode, or years old accounts that haven't posted in forever then suddenly posted a bunch of talking points in every thread they could find.
There were definitely legit accounts of people upset by new Trek for other reasons but far outnumbered by "anti wokester" puppet accounts. When it came to Twitter I wouldn't bat a lash if one out of every hundred accounts were bots. After noticing their trends they get easier to spot. It's the only thing that makes sense when the alternative is there are legions of trek fans that never noticed how progressive the shows were and suddenly decided to be angry in the past couple years.
There are real humans who have effectively been turned into "anti-woke" internet spammers who never watched Star Trek and are suddenly pretending to be very invested.
Just like all those man who thought women's sports was a joke, but are suddenly incredibly personally invested in women's sports whenever a trans women is involved.
"anti-woke" internet spammers
And the funny thing is when you ask them what, according to them, woke means they're either stumped or you get an incoherent answer.
When that happens, just remind them that the opposite of woke is comatose, and ask if they prefer being a vegetable.
But also: 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.' - Mark Twain
Being the work of bots makes a lot of sense. I'm not a Luddite with social media, but I definitely qualify as a dabbler, i.e. I'm not signed up with most social media sites. I know of bots, and the damage they can do online, but I keep not factoring in bots for something like Star Trek. When I don't like something I spend less time on it, not more.
Bots and shills accounts are a huge problem in any public discourse about any topic, but they really come out in full force when "hot button" topics come up. IE: I watch Doctor Who, also a highly political and progressive show with "fans" suddenly and inexplicably divided the second there was a whiff of casting news regarding a new Doctor.
Years ago, before Jodie Whittaker got the role officially, there were reports that Phoebe Waller-Bridge might be in talks to play the Doctor and the Doctor Who subreddit exploded with "as a woman I don't think the Doctor should be played by a woman" posts. After Jodie was announced the posts exploded again. Then later, there were talks a black actor could be playing the Doctor and once again inexplicably tons of 'as a black man I don't care about representation... " posts went flying.
Even little subs like PrintSF for sf/fantasy etc. books got the occasional comments when it was time for Hugos. Any mention of female or diverse authors being nominated got random accounts never accessing the sub before saying shit like "anyone else notice all the books are by LGBTQ authors? I'm just asking questions" never to be seen again after Hugos were over. There's still a remnant of Sad Puppy/Puppygate bad faith posters and shills sewing discord years later after the whole drama subsided.
It just seems like anytime potential division can be created there's an influx in new/ random accounts pushing it where it makes no sense, like with Star Trek or Doctor Who specifically being great examples. I hope fediverse places make this kinda blatant discord harder to create.
I really do believe there is a concentrated organized effort aimed at sewing that kind of discord in every online community, regardless of subject. Fandom has long been a place for people of all stripes to come together and bridge divisions that might exist in the outside world, and that is a threat to certain people in power who benefit from conflict.
I am NOT saying that all objectors to casting choices or "woke" story beats are paid shills. What I'm saying is that they are riled up and encouraged by a relatively small but dedicated contingent of actual paid trolls, working for shady troll farms, funded via dark money by those who profit from division.
Great points, bubbles of fandom being divided over wider political, civil, or national issues seems to be highly prevalent. Agreed I'm sure there's a minority of shills and bots but their message gets amplified by the "national debate" or what not surrounding whatever topic, it appears to be relatively easy to manipulate large groups of people with very few comments or ideas.
That's be a use most people don't realize what's going on. They don't understand that their natural lizard-brain response is being weaponized en masse to fuel the conflict. The only way to combat this is just to keep repeating it: we are all being manipulated.
Just knowing that, and not even knowing how or why, is enough to diffuse the effectiveness of it.
Don't let strangers rile you up and you'll keep your feet. It's pretty simple, but knowing is half the battle.
Just to keep the conspiracy going, I agree, and also feel like at least some of that has to be from the studios themselves. Like, anti-woke protests are obnoxious, but they're also advertising for whatever they're protesting against. Some people will hate-watch it. Some will tune in just to see what the fuss is about. It would take relatively little investment to seed a few trolls out there and rile up the anti-woke crowd to create engagement that far outstrips traditional advertising, so why shouldn't Paramount kick the hornet's nest a bit?
I'm also reminded of the time a few years ago (but post gamergate) when the total war subreddit got flooded by people lamenting the wokeness in Rome 2 due to "being able to have all female armies"... Except this wasn't true, the screenshot floating around depicting all female armies was from a mod.
The average internet user might not be able to discern that, though, and so we're stuck with the dilemma of whether to (A) ignore the bots/trolls and let them keep distorting the narrative or to (2) verbally hit back and thus amplify the manufactured conflict even further.
I agree. Star Trek has always been woke. Comments that this is a new phenomena confound me. I have no idea what sort of mental gymnastics are required for such a stance. Star Trek's IDIC happened right under their noses, yet they didn't notice. TOS by today's standards may not be considered as pushing boundaries. At the time it was broadcast, TOS put out some radical ideas. No more wars between countries on Earth. An end to racism. Uhura and Sulu as part of the command staff on the bridge. Dr. Richard Daystrom was portrayed by William Marshall, a Black actor. Majel Barrett's Number One in TOS's "The Cage" was no a damsel in distress. There are other examples in TOS, too. Subsequent Star Trek series continued and expanded on IDIC with the series stars, guest stars, and stories. But, still there are those who think Star Trek "suddenly" went woke?
Sometimes I think that referring to Star Trek as being suddenly woke is just a dog whistle. But then I'm back to what Star Trek any folks using that term were watching in the first place.
Currently (re)watching TNG S05E17 AKA the anti-Trans conversion therapy episode. From 1991. Starting to understand why I have the values I do, since I grew up with this crew.
There are always going to be people that are offended by diversity, but if anything we've witnessed from the fan response to these recent Star Trek shows like lower decks, STD, Picard, and strange new worlds, It's that there's different ways of using diversity in a story.
Diversity that seems natural to the plot and diversity that seems to be the plot are treated very differently by different kinds of fans. The former seems to be well received even by people that aren't huge fans of diversity. The latter seems to be grating on a large number of fans.
What I think almost all of Star Trek except STD did very well is to use the infinitely diverse universe to tell stories about the human condition and the future of hope. Why I think STD failed at this is not for the inclusion or the diversity but because it made it the A plot repeatedly in a time when the society we are shown the universe through is supposed to take diversity=strength for granted.
Other treks wouldn't care that you are gay, black, trans, or the descendant of a bad man, but there was still inter species conflict and an intense fear of genetic engineering that created a context for exploring various modes and motives for conflict.
Diversity that seems natural to the plot and diversity that seems to be the plot are treated very differently by different kinds of fans. The former seems to be well received even by people that aren't huge fans of diversity. The latter seems to be grating on a large number of fans.
I actually really like social commentary, I don't like tired, hamfisted, and insultingly performative puppet shows of social commentary. STD gave me vibes that a boardroom full of old white guys in expensive suits had a conference call with the writers that went something like "market research says progressive bullshit sells well to our target demographic, so I want 24 scripts about being ethnic or queer or something on my desk by morning. Make sure you really spell it out, too, the [slur]s are fucking stupid to get it otherwise."
STD gave me vibes that a boardroom full of old white guys in expensive suits had a conference call with the writers that went something like...
I 100% believe that this ham-fisted diversity bullshit is what happens when a board room of old white guys are just checking boxes instead of anyone actually trying to tell a cohesive story.
Oh, it felt more then that. After the pile of garbage was written, the editors and the showrunners were bypassed to the marketing department and senior execs who decided to cut continuity and plain "making sense" to "make sure we cram in more woke" (and not real "progress by a strong person that identifies as a certain way" but outright insubordination), poor decision making to make controversy at every level, or heroin induced flights of fancy... My favourite was that time some producer wanted a fight on top of a turbolift, so they showed that 90% of the interior of the ship is empty space where turbolift apparently just fly around. https://www.cbr.com/star-trek-discovery-turbolifts-season-3-finale/
Often, but not always. Remember it didn't originate as a right wing epithet. Time to take it back.
I don't think this article justifies it's central premise that anyone thinks Star Trek wasn't always "woke".
Yeah, I have to agree with you, here. I hate to be a language prescriptivist, but when I see anyone using that word, I automatically switch off.
Because it's usually right wingers using it as a derogatory term against the socially conscious. Maybe not in this case.