Thursday, September 29, 2016

A rare political move: @TrekAgainstTrump takes a stand

Well, this is unprecedented.

Nearly 100 names and faces who brought Gene Roddenberry's hopeful, future universe to life over five decades are diving into Campaign 2016 with "Trek Against Trump." From the original series right through to the Kelvin timeline films and even Discovery—before and behind the camera alike, and alongside too.

And, I'm proud to say, me too.

It's not unusual in Hollywood —or in sports, or music, for that matter—to see celebs turn activist and political advocate. Kate Mulgrew, for one, stumped hard for her then-husband Tim Hagan when he was the Democratic nominee for governor of Ohio in 2002. Still, it's
unusual for Star Trek, and most assuredly when done en masse. I'm sure that makes some fans queasy—or, since it's 2016, even outright hostile.

But here's the deal: It is 2016, and this group of Trek-related veterans have banded together for a political moment, wading into partisan waters with a joint message for their fans to at least consider—from actors, writers, producers, designers, and crew veterans of all incarnations. "Trek Against Trump" is the result: a simple yet pointed statement against perhaps the most controversial Presidential candidate ever arising from the mainstream two-party system, Donald J. Trump.

And it's a stand, the backers say, that leaves them uniquely affected because of their unofficial role as Ambassadors Emeritus for the Gene Roddenberry legacy of ideals, optimism, respect and future hope that they worked in: the core of Star Trek.

This all just came together in the past few days, and I've been proud to help contact and notify some of the names you see, and to consult on the social media logistics. You LN readers and followers know it's no secret where my politics lie, but they rarely if ever rear up on Trekland—as it should be. But, once again, the news reminds us daily how this is not even a typically partisan year.

And hey— this is an unusual step, and lots of the folks who signed on may have hesitated as to the normal effect that might have on career and even fanbase— not just for the stand, but in taking one at all, and so publicly.

But that again points to how so many see this election as not normal, like the signs for The Donald
that are everywherefrom a stunningly historic lack of newspaper endorsements to a heavily split and divided party "behind" him. And yet we have a younger generation who see a protest vote as a viable option, who do not remember the bigger-picture consequences from the similar events of 2000—if nothing else, as depicted in the film Recount (check it out). As no less than Bernie Sanders himself has said, this is no time for a protest vote.

How will fans react to this "partisan stand" that backers say is not a stunt, but a natural reaction to counter their helpless feeling that "something should be done!"? There's a lot of high-power names here—and no doubt some fans will be incensed that their apolitical heroes got involved. Can it be barely two weeks since John Billingsley and Bonita Friedericy (Phlox and Rooney, if you need the prompt) felt compelled to launch their funny @MartiniShots anti-Trump mini-videos? Soon to be followed by Rick Berman's now famous tweet...

By that time, Armin Shimerman and John de Lancie were joining forces with John B, got more on board as signers and as help... and voila, here we are today.

So, yes, I'm glad to help.

If it's your cup o'tea, please join and share the simple Trek Against Trump Facebook (@TrekNotTrump on Twitter) everywhere. If not... well, this will all be over in just six weeks or so. Just dial up Netflix or slip in a new Blu-ray... and enjoy a non-political episode of Trek. If you can find one.

Oh, here's a list for that rewatch you might to check out: "The Drumhead" on TNG..."Past Tense" or "Home Front/Paradise Lost" on DS9... "Distant Origin" on Voyager, "Terra Prime/ Demons" on Enterprise... or, of course, Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

Because, once again, that's Trek. And that's the whole point.


VWgal said...

Glad to see so many of the Star Trek family taking this stand. Makes me love this fandom even more.

Heath said...

It's great to be against Trump. But who are you FOR? Hillary represents the opposite of everything Star Trek stands for as much as Trump does. Never ending war. Division. Reductions in liberty. Mass government surveillance on citizens. Trump and Clinton are Bele and Lokai from "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield."

Larry Nemecek said...

Hey, I was for Bernie. Nobody is perfect. But if nothing else, false equivalency will kill this country faster than either terrorrists or viral plagues. We have lost the ability to tally, to critically "contrast and compare" and get the big picture. I'm for Hillary NOW. Easily.

But hey, how about we let John Oliver and killer raisins explain it:

Mark L said...

Neither major party candidate has earned my vote. Quite simply, neither can be trusted. Trump is the worse of the two options, but HRC isn't much better. I'm tired of beating my head against the two-party wall and expecting things to change. That's the definition of insanity. The parties have continued to drive moderates out. Until Americans wake up and start supporting alternate candidates, we will continue to see the extremes run the airwaves and the two-party system. We need leaders willing to listen to each other and compromise, instead catering primarily to their bases.

Anonymous said...

John Oliver who I usually like, was extremely reductive when he addressed Hillary's downsides. He chose 3, then dealt with parts, then resolved portions of the parts of the 3. There are 25 scandals involving Hillary. There are many politicians we consider corrupt for far less. Scrutiny is clearly needed.

Trump has a bad demeanor, but so far it is all words. Hillary has years of scandalous actions behind her. They both suck. It is a false equivalence, but Hillary is by far worse, because of her actions.

Johnson is the rational choice. You may not agree with his politics entirely, but he is as globalist and moderate as any libertarian so far.

Heath said...

I can certainly understand being Anti-Trump. I can't understand being pro-Hillary. If you are anti-war, if you value civil liberties, if you believe government officials should be held to the same standards as any other citizen, if you don't like a corrupt government, if you don't like victims of a sexual predator being intimidated and threatened, then you can't be pro-Hillary.

If Trump and Hillary were literally the only two choices, then I could see picking one over the other based on what differences there are. But they're not the only choices. Maybe Hillary is the "lesser evil" of the two. Maybe Trump is. I don't know which is the lesser. On a scale of 1 to 10, one of them is 10 and the other is 11. You can split hairs to figure out which is which all day, but it doesn't matter because they're both evil. I wouldn't blame anybody for supporting either one if there weren't better options. But there are better options. To ignore and not support the better options you do yourself, the country, and our democratic system a disservice.

Anonymous said...

lol. So much for IDIC.