Babylon 5 Rewatch Pt. 2

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Mandy,

[quote]I've merely tried to explain the situation, I'm not placing judgement whether it's "right" from an ethical POV - nor do I think the show does. Sheridan's not a standard impeccable hero, and not everything he does is ethically impeccable either (nor is Delenn, for that matter). And while in some parts of the series the ambiguity of some of his decisions is shown and commented on quite clearly, in others not so much. While I find it quite gratifying that the audience is trusted to have a brain of their own for once, there are some instances when I find the show too vague and I'd have preferred a bit more explicit comments or elaboration on the consequences for other people. This is one of them.[/quote]

Indeed. However, most of those comments were in the context of military service about your commander having the moral authority to say sometimes you might not come back. However, we aren't talking about the military. We're talking about civilians who are affected by the military. That side of the moral equation regarding the choice to fight is left unaddressed in these episodes. Not a huge hole given the show and it's context, but a hole none the less.

[Title edit to prevent Paddy's confusion. :P ]

[MinDonner]

An interesting point, but it's not like they don't have the choice to leave. Until Clarke sets up the embargo, there seems to be a lot of traffic between Earth and B5, even tourists (witness the family that gets scared of grubby Dr Franklin on walkabout), so if anyone was really uncomfortable with the situation then they could always get out of there. I imagine it's much the same situation as contractors in Iraq, who don't have much say in whether the military have been annoying the local warlord or whatever.

[mandy_k]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1288701' date='Mar 26 2008, 13.27']Mandy,

Indeed. However, most of those comments were in the context of military service about your commander having the moral authority to say sometimes you might not come back. However, we aren't talking about the military. We're talking about civilians who are affected by the military. That side of the moral equation regarding the choice to fight is left unaddressed in these episodes. Not a huge hole given the show and it's context, but a hole none the less.[/quote]

I agree. There are a few other instances I have the same problem with - like when Sheridan decides to do things "the easy way" by spreading fear among the alliance members to get them to stick together in the aftermath of the Shadow war. Granted, the line "I'm tired to do things the hard way! There's an easy way to do it!" is an alarm in itself, but still ... I'd have liked to see a bit more consequence of this particular decision. I also found it a bit unfortunate that Garibaldi's criticism of Sheridan's "messianic behaviour" in the end came across as being solely due to Bester's manipulations. From JMS' comments on the DVD, it seems that it also wasn't intended to come across quite this way.

With respect to Sheridan's decision in the secession issue, there is the question whether Sheridan actually would've had a workable solution to this ethical problem. How to deal with the aliens who aren't Earth citizens, should they have a vote in this matter as well? Is it ethically *right* that a referendum among the shop owners, Lurkers etc. could force Sheridan and the command staff to violate his oath to the Earth constitution? Is it even possible to bring about a referendum within the Lurkers, are they somehow registered, or does anyone know who lives in Down Below?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Min,

[quote name='Minot Donoir' post='1288706' date='Mar 26 2008, 07.31']An interesting point, but it's not like they don't have the choice to leave. Until Clarke sets up the embargo, there seems to be a lot of traffic between Earth and B5, even tourists (witness the family that gets scared of grubby Dr Franklin on walkabout), so if anyone was really uncomfortable with the situation then they could always get out of there. I imagine it's much the same situation as contractors in Iraq, who don't have much say in whether the military have been annoying the local warlord or whatever.[/quote]

Interesting analogy. However, the local warlord in Iraq or Afganistan doesn't have the ablity to blow a hole and vent the atmosphere out of the house the contractor are living in. The situation on a space station would be much more precarious.

[Ran]

I would guess people who indulge in space travel are generally aware of the risks and dangers involved. Life in space is precarious. That's how it goes. It doesn't change the fact that it's a military base with a military command who serve under oath to a particular government, and who may be ordered to do things that are contrary to the interests of the populace, and who may in turn carry out actions in fulfillment of their duties (as they interpret them) that are also contrary to the interests of the populace. For example, B5 providing aid to the Narn vessel risked a conflict with the Centauri, and I'm sure a large part of the population wouldn't have cared for that idea. But they weren't asked, because it's not their business.

It just seems strange to argue that the decision should have been made democratically, when it never was and never pretended to be a democratically-run locale. It's an armed station, with a history of attracting danger.

[Jon AS]

More importantly, there is a practical issue involved: Sheridan can't accept a "No" in this hypothetical referendum. Apart from the conflict with Clarke, Babylon 5 is needed for the Shadow War. So I don't think a vote would ever have been on the agenda, but it would have been nice to see some of the characters struggle with that aspect of the decision a bit more. On the other hand, it was a damn hard thing to do in the first place, so choosing to ignore this particular issue might be understandable.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ran,

[quote name='Ran' post='1288721' date='Mar 26 2008, 07.50']I would guess people who indulge in space travel are generally aware of the risks and dangers involved. Life in space is precarious. That's how it goes. It doesn't change the fact that it's a military base with a military command who serve under oath to a particular government, and who may be ordered to do things that are contrary to the interests of the populace, and who may in turn carry out actions in fulfillment of their duties (as they interpret them) that are also contrary to the interests of the populace. For example, B5 providing aid to the Narn vessel risked a conflict with the Centauri, and I'm sure a large part of the population wouldn't have cared for that idea. But they weren't asked, because it's not their business.

It just seems strange to argue that the decision should have been made democratically, when it never was and never pretended to be a democratically-run locale. It's an armed station, with a history of attracting danger.[/quote]

No doubt. However, seperating the station from the Government that put Sheridan in command is a bit beyond the scope of his command. Hence I think it should have been addressed specifically. The episodes are great this is simply a nitpick.

Anybody else suprised how cheap the Mimbari are regarding the new uniforms? Only the command staff got new duds.

[Jon AS]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison']Anybody else suprised how cheap the Mimbari are regarding the new uniforms? Only the command staff got new duds.[/quote]

When Zack is fitted for one later, Lennier explains that the uniforms are actually composed of some very rare fabrics, so they aren't exactly "cheap". Besides, security still got new uniforms and in C&C it's always casual friday, what with everyone just wearing shirts.;)

[Lord of Oop North]

[quote name='Jon AS' post='1288801' date='Mar 26 2008, 09.08']When Zack is fitted for one later, Lennier explains that the uniforms are actually composed of some very rare fabrics, so they aren't exactly "cheap". Besides, security still got new uniforms and in C&C it's always casual friday, what with everyone just wearing shirts.;)[/quote]

The new security uniforms are hilarious.

I liked the original grey ones better.

[Ran]

Ser Scot,

[quote]However, seperating the station from the Government that put Sheridan in command is a bit beyond the scope of his command.[/quote]

This doesn't strike me as correct, if he believes the government has become an illegal one, with no authority over the station until such time as it has been made duly legitimized. And clearly, that's what he believes. The legitimacy of his command over the station is from his point of view is of course not in question. Disavowing the Clark administration's actions now does not mean he has to also disavow its actions prior to its illegal actions, such as appointing him to run B5. Just like if a current President went crazy and started committing all sorts of illegal things, it doesn't mean that everyone appointed by them -- even before the bout of illegality -- has to give up their position.

Realistically, what happens after a restoration of a legal government is that everyone appointed by the previous president steps down and the new legal authority decides what to do. But then, that's sorted out, since Sheridan gives up his commission at the end.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ran,

[quote name='Ran' post='1288854' date='Mar 26 2008, 09.53']Ser Scot,

This doesn't strike me as correct, if he believes the government has become an illegal one, with no authority over the station until such time as it has been made duly legitimized. And clearly, that's what he believes. The legitimacy of his command over the station is from his point of view is of course not in question. Disavowing the Clark administration's actions now does not mean he has to also disavow its actions prior to its illegal actions, such as appointing him to run B5. Just like if a current President went crazy and started committing all sorts of illegal things, it doesn't mean that everyone appointed by them -- even before the bout of illegality -- has to give up their position.

Realistically, what happens after a restoration of a legal government is that everyone appointed by the previous president steps down and the new legal authority decides what to do. But then, that's sorted out, since Sheridan gives up his commission at the end.[/quote]

Before the choice to secede if people on the Station didn't like Sheridan's choices they could complain up the chain of command or to civilian authorities who could exert political pressure on the President or on the EA joint chiefs to reign in Sheridan. That is lost after secession. The only government on the station was Sheridan. While I understand why the choice is made in the course of the story I still think the choice to secede is so dramatic that those not among the command staff should have had input.

[MinDonner]

:lol: Is Ser Scot arguing against secession now? Scot, did the South get a vote about whether or not to secede from the Union? Or should I not be going there? :unsure:

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Min,

No, I'm arguing secession is something that should not be undertaken unilaterally without the approval of the people affected by it.

[Lord of Oop North]

I thought he gave them that choice in the next episode, when they started letting people leave.

And it was a military station, and technically, the people there don't have much say it is operation.

[Ran]

It remains a military installation. It's not a democracy, and the fact that some people may live there in a civilian capacity isn't relevant to the decisions the military commanders must take in fulfillment of their duties.

[Werthead]

The next two episodes, whilst a long way from [b]B5[/b] at its worst, require a certain amount of willpower to be built up before I tackle them.

[Jon AS]

[quote name='Werthead']The next two episodes, whilst a long way from [b]B5[/b] at its worst, require a certain amount of willpower to be built up before I tackle them.[/quote]

G'kar is awesome in [i]A late Delivery from Avalon[/i], so there's that to look forward to.

[Maltaran]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1289007' date='Mar 26 2008, 16.48']Min,

No, I'm arguing secession is something that should not be undertaken unilaterally without the approval of the people affected by it.[/quote]

IIRC Sheridan gave everyone the option of leaving.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ran,

[quote name='Ran' post='1289038' date='Mar 26 2008, 13.05']It remains a military installation. It's not a democracy, and the fact that some people may live there in a civilian capacity isn't relevant to the decisions the military commanders must take in fulfillment of their duties.[/quote]

Okay, part of what military organization? I never said it was a democracy. I'm simply saying choosing to remove B5 from EA control by a unilateral statement of secession is unfair to the perminant residents. This is, of course, not to mention the alien governments who had a stake in the construction of B5. Perhaps a better course would have been to get those governments to demand B5 be treated as an "open" territory without allegence to any particular government. Then again that wasn't possible at the time due to the incipent "Shadow War."

Malt, LoN,

The "don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out" option wouldn't have been very appealing to those who couldn't afford transport off the station or who would have had to leave behind siginficant assets (like their shops and merchanise) on short notice.

[Lord of Oop North]

Ser Scot,

But it does not matter. Babylon 5 is a military installation under Sheridan's command. He doesn't need the residents' approval to do anything. His decision was made with the authority granted and the law upheld by the lawful Earth government, which Clark had subverted and suspended. He owed no loyalty to a Dictator and an illegal government. The unilateral decision to secede was something that Clark would use against him in the propaganda campaign against the station.