NationStates Jolt Archive

Many people don't understand Trekkies aka Trekkers (which is more politically correct). But if you look at the series closely it is a perfect metaphor for today's political landscape. Earth has developed into a republic much like that described by Emmanuel Kant. Humanity's basic needs are met, we have evolved above our natural tendencies towards destruction and can now try to better our minds (another step in evolution). The Klingon Empire is like the Soviet Union of the cold war. They are/were enemies but at least they are not fanatical and have some honour. The Cardasians are like modern day terrorist/fundamentalists who don't care what the means are as long as it obtains their ends. I could go on but would like to read if anyone else agrees.

Star Wars is merely good versus evil but Star Trek takes on the full political spectrum of history.

The most important question I would like to put out there is who would win in a fight (hand to hand combat): Han Solo of 1977 vs Captain James T. Kirk of 1963. I personally think Kirk would kick Han Solo's ass!!!!! :headbang:

And besides, Starfleet has the dreaded Deflector Dish, with which every enemy, great and small, can be defeated.

Nerds!!!!!!

Nerds!!!!!!

You say that like it's a bad thing...Do you dare defy us...?

Have we ever seen Han Solo fight hand to hand? He mostly sticks to blasters.

Captain James T. Kirk (circa 1963)

One look at that babe in the metallic slave garb & Kirk would have all the gumtion he'd need to win the fight.

Course there's a rumor running about that wimmin' are not quite Kirks' cup of tea. Maybe so - in this case the fight would be drawn out & brutal.

Solo is hardly, & far from being, a push over. My moneys' still on Kirk.

Nerds!!!!!!


I second that! Compliment or not!

Have we ever seen Han Solo fight hand to hand? He mostly sticks to blasters.
Whereas Kirk does seem to be a connoisseur of a good ole' Rock-em Sock-em Drag-em-out.

Nerds!!!!!!

And I forgot to mention:

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE, YOU WILL BE PWNZOR'D!

Whereas Kirk does seem to be a connoisseur of a good ole' Rock-em Sock-em Drag-em-out.

Also known as: Kirk-Fu.

I'm going to make a poll that's a little fairer.

Also known as: Kirk-Fu.

I'm going to make a poll that's a little fairer.
;)

Nerds!!!!!!
Nerds are better in bed!!!! :fluffle:

The most important question I would like to put out there is who would win in a fight (hand to hand combat): Han Solo of 1977 vs Captain James T. Kirk of 1963.
This is the wrong question. You should be asking, would you rather sleep with Han Solo of 1977, or Captain Kirk (ever). Han Solo wins, every time!

Psh. As if Han Solo would be dumb enough to give anyone a fair fight.

Many people don't understand Trekkies aka Trekkers (which is more politically correct).
To Hell with political correctness!
Down with the demigod-ism in sci-fi! It's high time that sci-fi just follows regular normal people (the one redeeming thing about Star Wars is Han Solo - he's just some guy, not a demigod - and he still pwns!)

But come on, we're still using starfighters? All I will say is that they are futile...

Psh. As if Han Solo would be dumb enough to give anyone a fair fight.
Point for Solo. Although Kirk would not be put off even so. Not so smart; but, that might be just what is needed for Solo to beat him.

Maybe Solo could ... encourage ... McCoy to 'doctor up' Kirk inbetween rounds?

Point for Solo. Although Kirk would not be put off even so. Not so smart; but, that might be just what is needed for Solo to beat him.

Maybe Solo could ... encourage ... McCoy to 'doctor up' Kirk inbetween rounds?


McCoy is irish,he can be bribed with booze!!!

What they don't want you to know (http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/1999/06/15/brin_main/index.html)

McCoy is irish,he can be bribed with booze!!!
Damm straight!

Keeps his Captain on the straight & narrow - with a little drinking party at the end to drown Kirks' sorrows.

I like it!

If kirk lay a hand on Solo, Chewie would just rip him into two halves.

Nothing against Han, who was a formitable warrior, but Kirk would kick his ass.

Nerds are better in bed!!!! :fluffle:
Sezzzz who? Nerd nookie...not!! :rolleyes:

Captain Kirk (the Canadian), would kick the stuffin' outta Hans Solo because he keeps his hands so low. :D

I don't think Kirk ever lost a fight or battle?

If kirk lay a hand on Solo, Chewie would just rip him into two halves.
Naw....Spock would perform a mind meld with Chewy and they would both break out into a Backa Beat Boogie. :eek:

BTW Plator welcome to NS. May the force be with you and may you boldly go where no man has gone before!! :D

Star Wars is merely good versus evil but Star Trek takes on the full political spectrum of history.

Star Wars is very two sided. Many Star Wars fans know alot about Star Wars that is not public knowledge. There is more to it than first meets the eye: The Grueling and Bloody Mandalorian Wars, The Scourge of the Yuuzhan Vong, The Reign of Lord Nyax, and the Sith Civil Wars.

There are many fundamentalist terrorists in Star Wars, and even more cults. When you've read a little more into, you'll know.

Goddamned trekkies. After tons of failed series, and mediocre movies, when will you get the damned hint that realize people want you pinko commies to die already?

Put it this way:

Kirk surrounded himself with a Glutton, women, skinny russians, skinny asians, an old doctor, and a vulcan.

Han solo surrounded himself with jedi, a wookie, and a woman. But he wanted to hit that shit, so its ok.

(Robots not counted)

Goddamned trekkies. After tons of failed series, and mediocre movies, when will you get the damned hint that realize people want you pinko commies to die already?

I wouldn't call four series, three of which went over four years (TNG going 8) a failure. Networks consider two years a success for syndication of reruns. Plus nine movies.

Sezzzz who? Nerd nookie...not!! :rolleyes:

Captain Kirk (the Canadian), would kick the stuffin' outta Hans Solo because he keeps his hands so low. :D

I don't think Kirk ever lost a fight or battle?

Nerds are more considerate in bed because they don't get it often (unless you're Bill Gates) so they will satisfy a person more than someone who gets often and is only thinking for themselves!!!

Kirk!

Solo is good with his weapon :eek: but Kirk has had so many fist fights and has managed to get his shirt ripped every time.

Goddamned trekkies. After tons of failed series, and mediocre movies, when will you get the damned hint that realize people want you pinko commies to die already?

Not our fault if you lack the intelligence to understand Star Trek.

Oh, and you sound like a caricature. :D

Han Solo would win by cheating somehow, so I vote for him.

Kirk can cheat as well.

I think it depends on the motivation personally. What is each man fighting for??

I am too busy to read it all but would like to point out (just in case nobody has) that comparing star wars to star trek based on who "lives in a nicer world" isn't really a fair comparison.

sure star trek seems more like what we are striving for but it is set in the future, star wars (like you should know) was set in the past "a long time ago in a galaxy far far away"


that being said, I am a star wars person who married a trekkie (note trekkie and trekkers are different types of star trek fans) I had never seen star trek when I married him, mostly out of rebelion against my grandpa who always said "star trek will make you think, star wars is just shooting a lot of people"

needless to say I have partially crossed over to the trekkie side (the dark side as I used to call it.) even my kids are named after star trek characters, it is just a better show (shows, movies) than star wars, the characters are richer, the stories are better, and the conventions are more fun. :p

sorry I forgot to answer the question and without an answer my post is just spam :eek:
Kirk would win. I get the feeling Han would only be good with a gun, not so much as to have to apply the skills you would need in a fist fight, mostly he just shoots at stuff and doesn't hit it.

Many people don't understand Trekkies aka Trekkers (which is more politically correct). But if you look at the series closely it is a perfect metaphor for today's political landscape. Earth has developed into a republic much like that described by Emmanuel Kant. Humanity's basic needs are met, we have evolved above our natural tendencies towards destruction and can now try to better our minds (another step in evolution). The Klingon Empire is like the Soviet Union of the cold war. They are/were enemies but at least they are not fanatical and have some honour. The Cardasians are like modern day terrorist/fundamentalists who don't care what the means are as long as it obtains their ends. I could go on but would like to read if anyone else agrees.

Star Wars is merely good versus evil but Star Trek takes on the full political spectrum of history.
exactly :fluffle:
plus trek shows us how we could be - its inspirational

exactly :fluffle:
plus trek shows us how we could be - its inspirational
Not exactly (http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm)

Another thing in Solo's favor would be simply being a Star Wars character as opposed to a Star Trek character. Kirk & Friends live in a much less violent and more livable galaxy, whereas Solo is from Star Wars. Emphasis on WARS, as opposed to a pleasent little TREK through the woods. Star Wars characters are either tough or dead.

Also, I would just like to point out that Star Wars is not sci-fi, but fantasy. You can only have so many uberpowerful spell-warriors before crossing from sci-fi into fantasy. Plus, even if you don't count that, Star Wars is clearly missing the "sci" part of "sci-fi."

Not exactly (http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm)
"Although exotic extraterrestrials, like the Klingons and Bajorans, have quaint religious beliefs and practices, absolutely nothing seems to be left of the historic religions of Earth: There are no Jews, no Christians, no Moslems, no Buddhists, no Hindus, no Jains, no Confucians, and no Sikhs, or anything else, on any starship or settlement in the Federation."

And this is a...bad thing?

Star Wars is better and that hunk Hans Solo Pwns.

Not exactly (http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm)

I read that a long time ago, but thank you for bringing it back to my attention. There are one or two fairly good points (such as the effects of space battles on children not being adressed in Trek), but most of it makes little sense.

For one thing, the author seems to expect Starfleet to function exactly along the principles of the US Navy. Which, I hardly need to point out, is absurd. Second, he keeps insisting that a society without money would not be viable. At least he doesn't go so far as to claim that the Federation must actually be a Stalinist dictatorship (which some websites do), but the crucial element which he misses completely is that there has obviously been a fundamental evolution in human thoughts, principles and ethics by the 24th century. That's basic to any utopia, and above all literary utopias, and it brings his whole argument crashing down. He obviously knows very little about utopias.

"Although exotic extraterrestrials, like the Klingons and Bajorans, have quaint religious beliefs and practices, absolutely nothing seems to be left of the historic religions of Earth: There are no Jews, no Christians, no Moslems, no Buddhists, no Hindus, no Jains, no Confucians, and no Sikhs, or anything else, on any starship or settlement in the Federation."

Erm... what about Chakotay? Last time I checked, the Native Americans had a religion and that is apparantly an enduring one in Star Trek! This guy must think that it doesn't count as a real religion or something, which blows his credibility right out of the water to begin with.

That whole article is a means to find fault with Star Trek because of it's vision of a healthy society free of capitalism. Why shouldn't we imagine and strive for a life free of financial entanglements? Where people are motivated by the desire for self-improvement and make careeres based on what they enjoy rather than what will bring them the most profit?

Personally, I find Star Trek inspiring and I hope we will develop in that direction. Of course, we must remember that it took a 3rd world war and serious devastation for us to get to that point in the ST universe, let's hope in real life we can achieve it without such events.

Well said, Froudland!

Incidentally, there are at least a couple of Voyager episodes which look at spirituality as an open question, rather than be dismissive of it. I'm an atheist myself, but the episodes are nicely done. (One is "Barge of the Dead", the other I can't remember the title of).

Also, there was an interesting shift between TOS and later Trek. In TOS, there were numerous references to God, and it seemed everyone on Earth had adopted monotheistic religion. That vanished (thankfully) as from TNG.

Another thing in Solo's favor would be simply being a Star Wars character as opposed to a Star Trek character. Kirk & Friends live in a much less violent and more livable galaxy, whereas Solo is from Star Wars. Emphasis on WARS, as opposed to a pleasent little TREK through the woods. Star Wars characters are either tough or dead.


I still don't see Solo beating Kirk in a 1-1 without blasters.

Remember the question was refering to hand to hand combat & as peaceful as Trek world may be in comparison, Kirk is a guy that loves to talk with his fists & Solo is a blaster nut.

Well, I haven't seen enough Trek (or read enough into Wars either - I stick to films and games) to comment on the deeper arguments here really, but I will say this.

Han Solo would definitely kick Kirk's arse - no contest there - come on, it's loveable ol', down and dirty Han against more honourable (pretty much anyway ;)) Kirk - no contest.

However, if you were to say Captain Picard, then I'd definitely side with Jean-Luc and his awesome forehead. Sure he may be older, but all that means is that he has more experience than Kirk (or Solo for that matter) and that he's been in enough fights already to know how to win them :D

Have we ever seen Han Solo fight hand to hand? He mostly sticks to blasters.
Exactly, he fights dirty

Not exactly (http://www.friesian.com/trek.htm)

so um, because Star Trek never really discusses religion(not true) and doesn't concern itself over the welfare of children(not true) thus it is fascist? Um, I don't thinkn so Tim.

so um, because Star Trek never really discusses religion(not true) and doesn't concern itself over the welfare of children(not true) thus it is fascist? Um, I don't thinkn so Tim.

Gotta do more than skim the dreaded anti-Trek screed...

These comments apply to STTNG and after, not to TOS.

No earth religions (no Jews, Christians, Hindus, Moslems, Buddhists, etc). Alien religions are viewed as cultural, not spiritual. No spiritual life.

No money or any kind of regular economy. Trading is done by bartering.
Capitalism regarded as evil and primitive, akin to thievery (see the Ferengi).

We only see a militaristic view of life on STTNG. No private space ships. All transportation and communications are controlled by Star Fleet, the military arm of government.

And although the article doesn't go into it, Star Fleet seems to be the most powerful branch of government. Any entity that controls all means of transportation and communications, and also functions as a police force when needed, has children aboard military vessels which are subject to attack or major fatal technical malfunctions constantly, with no motivation other than to serve the needs of the state, and especially when that entity is the military, implies a fascistic form of government.

I would rather live on a fringe world of the Empire and be mostly left alone, rather than forced to live in the Federation and leave God behind, and hear on the news how another starship, complete with the crews' entire families, has blown up, the only comfort being that it was for the "good of the whole." ;)

I am a star wars fan, but I would have to say kirk he seemed smarter than han. Trek to my understading was socialist, well the federation anyway, this evidence was from John Luke saying "People are no longer obsessed with making money" and the federation within itself did not have a currency. The rebels just seemed to stand against communism. Communism was the way George Lucas refered to the Imperials in the dvd commentary. So I have no idea what the rebels really were. For all I know they were socialist too.

"Although exotic extraterrestrials, like the Klingons and Bajorans, have quaint religious beliefs and practices, absolutely nothing seems to be left of the historic religions of Earth: There are no Jews, no Christians, no Moslems, no Buddhists, no Hindus, no Jains, no Confucians, and no Sikhs, or anything else, on any starship or settlement in the Federation."

And this is a...bad thing?
Well Chakote (from ST Voyager) is into the spiritual practices of the North American Native. And they did touch of the Garden Eden in Star Trek Five the Final Frontier. Where Kirk stood up to God. "Why does God need a starship?"

What they don't want you to know (http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/1999/06/15/brin_main/index.html)
That is so full of bullshit. First of all, a benevolent dictator would be the best form of government. Second, the Jedi didn’t rule anything, they protected the Republic. Third, there were non-force using heroes. The rebels thought the Jedi had been wiped out, they weren’t fighting for them. What about Han Solo and Princess Leia? Hell, Lando Calrsissian and Wedge Antilles destroyed the second Death Star. Fourth, the assertion that good and evil are determined by who is “pretty” in Star Wars, is ridiculous. I guess Admiral Akbar, Nein Numn, Chewbacca, Yoda and all those freaky looking Jedi were evil.