Star Trek and History (19 page)

The writers of this episode weren't implying that this was an accurate reflection of human history; probably no human group that draws its inspiration for how to live from a book has ever followed it as faithfully as the Iotians did. Still, “A Piece of the Action” fits nicely within a pattern seen across several of
Star Trek
's historical episodes, in which the complex histories of cause and effect are overlooked in favor of explanations that rely on individual actions or random chance.

Along similar lines, the classic episode “City on the Edge of Forever” hypothesizes that one person can change a major event in history, in this case America's entry into World War II. This episode finds the
Enterprise
investigating a temporal disturbance centered on a nearby planet. During the course of these investigations, Lt. Sulu is caught in a console explosion, and when Dr. McCoy attempts to awaken him, another disturbance shakes the
Enterprise
, causing McCoy to inject himself accidentally with an overdose of cordrazine and to become violently paranoid. A delusional McCoy then escapes from the ship and beams down to the planet. The landing party, following McCoy down to the planet, soon finds the source of the time distortions, an ancient ring of glowing stones that identifies itself as the “Guardian of Forever,” a doorway to any time and place. The trouble really begins when McCoy breaks free, jumps through the portal, and vanishes, forcing Kirk and Spock to go after him and back in time to Depression-era New York.

There they meet Edith Keeler, a social worker at the 21st Street mission house where Kirk and Spock take up residence. Edith has also found McCoy and is nursing him back to health in another part of the mission, unbeknownst to Kirk and Spock. Although they are unable to find McCoy, Kirk and Spock make another discovery; their presence at this moment will potentially alter Earth history. If Edith does not die, she will go on to form a pacifist movement whose influence would delay the entry of the United States into World War II; this delay would gave Nazi Germany time to develop an atomic bomb and ultimately to conquer the world. Although Kirk has growing feelings for Edith, he realizes that she must die in order for the “proper” timeline to be secured.

The next evening, as Kirk and Edith are walking to the theater to see a Clark Gable movie, Kirk remarks that he does not recognize who Clark Gable is. Edith replies that “Doctor McCoy does not either.” As Kirk goes to tell Spock that he has found McCoy, McCoy emerges from the mission. A surprised Edith crosses the street to join them, but she fails to notice a truck approaching. Kirk instinctively moves to save her, but he freezes when Spock cries, “No, Jim!” McCoy then tries to save Edith but Kirk holds him back; the truck hits Edith and she is killed. A shocked McCoy exclaims, “I could have saved her . . . do you know what you just did?” Spock replies, “He knows, Doctor. He knows” (
TOS
, “City on the Edge of Forever”).

Unlike “A Piece of the Action,” which can be dismissed as entirely fanciful, “City on the Edge of Forever” is rooted in a more plausible contention—that one individual leading a social movement could ultimately reshape world events—in this instance delaying U.S. entry into World War II. This is more plausible because history often shows us examples of one individual leading a social movement that brings about great social change; for example, Martin Luther King or Mohandas Gandhi. It's also true that some Americans, most notably Charles Lindbergh, were wary of getting involved in Europe's affairs in the years leading up to World War II. If we want to determine whether
Star Trek
's writers got this history right, the question to answer here is whether such a social movement had the ability to prevent the United States from getting involved in World War II. Let's have a look at the events leading up to America's involvement in that conflict.

Historians point out that the United States, despite its formal position of neutrality, was moving away from isolationism long before the bombing of Pearl Harbor. In September 1940, the U.S. government both reinstated the draft, requiring the registration of all men between twenty-one and thirty-five years of age, and transferred fifty old destroyers to Britain in exchange for the use of eight British Atlantic bases. By November 1940, the United States agreed to lend further military equipment to Britain. Although President Franklin Roosevelt claimed these measures would ensure that U.S. soldiers would not have to fight the Nazis directly, this deal decisively aligned the United States with the Allies in the European conflict. This pro-British stance was confirmed with the Atlantic Charter in August 1941, in which Roosevelt and Winston Churchill coordinated war aims, dedicated themselves to the policy of self-determination for Nazi-occupied Europe, and condemned Nazism.

Roosevelt's support for Great Britain was, in turn, supported by the U.S. public. According to Gallup polls conducted between October 24 and 29, 1941, 64 percent of Americans agreed that “the United States should take steps now to prevent Japan from becoming more powerful, even if this means risking a war with Japan.”
2
One month later, in response to the question “Which of these two things do you think is more important—that this country keep out of war or that Germany be defeated?” 68 percent of respondents answered “defeat Germany.”
3

To be fair to
Star Trek
's writers, it is unclear how many men and materials U.S. citizens would have been willing to commit in pursuit of these goals; therefore, one could plausibly maintain that a strong advocate of nonintervention might have slowed America's entry into the war, at least until Pearl Harbor. Similar to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Pearl Harbor galvanized America's determination to strike back at the perpetrators. Japanese Americans and sympathizers were rounded up and put into internment camps along the West Coast, and an air of suspicion surrounded anyone who was not willing to fight to protect the country.
4

Let's consider Edith Keeler against this backdrop: she was not a famous person, just a social worker who ran a flophouse in New York, and she had no national campaign to help her. If someone as influential as Charles Lindbergh couldn't make headway against the rising tide of the war sentiment, what kind of impact could a virtually unknown social worker have?

As in the other two episodes discussed in this chapter, “Patterns of Force” shows us an entire society changing as a result of the actions of one man. The man in this instance is John Gill, Kirk's former history professor, who had traveled to the planet Ekos as a cultural observer. At the beginning of “Patterns of Force” we learn that Gill has not been heard from in several years, and the
Enterprise
has been dispatched to ensure Gill's safety. Approaching Ekos, the
Enterprise
is attacked by a rocket equipped with a nuclear warhead, technology that is supposed to be beyond the capability of the Ekosians. Fearing that Gill's mission has been compromised and that the Prime Directive has been violated, Kirk and Spock beam down to Ekos, where they find a culture almost identical to that of Nazi Germany, down to the uniforms, the salutes, the hatred of the neighboring planet Zeon, and the concept of the Führer: Gill himself.

When they attempt to meet with Gill, Kirk and Spock are arrested and jailed. After their escape, they ally themselves with members of the Zeon underground and, posing as Nazi soldiers, infiltrate Nazi Party headquarters. Eluding the guards, the landing party finally finds Gill, heavily drugged and essentially a puppet ruler who is controlled by a subordinate, Melakon. Partly revived by McCoy, Gill reveals what happened: Gill took matters into his own hands on Ekos, which was in a state of anarchy. He organized the planet by using the efficiency of the Nazi system but tried to prevent it from sliding into sadism; however, Melakon began a takeover and drugged Gill. As a revived Gill delivers a speech halting the persecution of Zeon, he is shot by Melakon, who in turn is shot by members of the underground resistance, thus freeing the Ekosians from Nazi rule and ideology, offering the two planets a chance at peaceful coexistence (
TOS
, “Patterns of Force”).

Unlike “A Piece of the Action” and “City on the Edge of Forever,” which we might dismiss as being historically unlikely, it's more than a little tempting to treat “Patterns of Force” as something that comes closer to the historical truth about Nazi Germany, since historians generally agree that Adolf Hitler's personal magnetism and powerful speaking skills were important factors in the Nazis' rise to power. Where
Star Trek
's writers get history wrong in this episode is their stress on a powerful leader being the
only
cause of Nazism and the Holocaust: the historical record clearly demonstrates the importance of other factors as well.

The National Socialist Party was founded in 1919, fourteen years before they actually came to power. Hitler soon became known for his magnetic speeches, and the party's leaders developed a strong infrastructure during the 1920s, including solid precinct work and polling to predict which slogans or themes resonated with voters. Despite this, the Nazis' attempted takeover of the Bavarian government in 1923 failed and, even as late as 1928, less than 3 percent of German voters supported the Nazi Party in national elections.

What changed the fortunes of the Nazi Party was the worldwide economic depression following the 1929 American stock market crash, a calamity that more than tripled the German unemployment rate, from 1.25 million in 1929 to roughly four million by the end of 1930. As the German economy worsened, Nazi Party fortunes improved; beginning with only twelve seats in the Reichstag (German Parliament) in 1928, the Nazis' total rose to 107 seats in the September 1930 elections and jumped to 230 seats by July 1932. Once on the doorstep of a parliamentary majority, the Nazis forced the Reichstag to pass an extraconstitutional “Enabling Act,” supplemented by illegal methods (arrests and intimidation of political opponents) to install Hitler as the nation's chancellor. These methods were possible, however, only because of economic factors quite beyond the control of Hitler and the Nazis, factors the
Star Trek
writers ignore when creating the Nazi state on Ekos.
5

We can't leave this episode without also mentioning the most prominent feature of Nazi Germany as well as on Ekos: hatred of another group, which on Earth led to the genocide of millions, a fate that the
Enterprise
's intervention helps the Ekosians avoid.
Star Trek
's writers are clearly referring to the Holocaust; their choice of names for the Ekosians' victims (the planet Zeon and the characters Abrom and Isak) are not-so-subtle plays on important aspects of Jewish history (the holy land of Zion and two Jewish patriarchs, Abraham and Isaac).

It's very tempting (and perhaps morally easier) to ascribe such genocidal hatred to momentary craziness inspired by a powerful yet flawed leader. It's also clear that
Star Trek
's writers want us to see it that way, at least on Ekos. While they are in prison, Kirk and Spock learn from Isak that at first Zeons were welcomed in Ekos. It was only with the beginning of the Nazi movement that trouble began, and in particular with the rise of Melakon. Once Melakon is eliminated, Ekosians and Zeons can resume a harmonious coexistence. In case viewers hadn't gotten the message, Kirk notes at the end of the episode that “the problem wasn't only that Nazi leaders were mean, evil men . . . but also the leader principle of investing too much power in one man.”

There are many studies in several academic disciplines that demonstrate that ordinary men and women who are asked to brutalize others in the name of scientific research will do so, if they think the authority giving the order is legitimate.
6
But a great body of historical and sociological research indicates that unquestioning allegiance to a leader
alone
cannot explain how the Holocaust developed and was implemented by German authorities. In Germany, and throughout the rest of Europe, anti-Semitism had a long history, and nineteenth-century nationalists such as the French novelist Count Joseph Arthur de Gobineau had even developed somewhat fringe racist theories about the “Aryan master race,” which the National Socialists and other extreme nationalists picked up on and developed.

During the 1920s, a minority of anti-Semitic German voters even believed that the Jews had “stabbed Germany in the back” during World War I, identifying Jews as bankers who supplied other European countries with money; as international go-betweens who sought peace rather than German conquest; and as intellectuals who sought the unity of all mankind rather than the dominance of the Aryan race. Supporters of this extreme German nationalism gravitated toward the National Socialists during the late 1920s, although these voters made up only a minority of even the National Socialists' base.

After Hitler came to power, however, he and other anti-Semitic Nazi leaders gradually implemented a series of anti-Semitic policies and laws that restricted German Jews' educational and professional opportunities, property rights, and political and civic rights, and they created a public atmosphere that was openly anti-Semitic. Many Christian Germans did not agree with these policies, but few of them dared to speak publically against this slow tightening of the noose. Nonetheless, a Nazi-organized boycott of all German Jewish businesses in April 1933 was an open and (for the Nazis) humiliating failure, as German consumers refused to boycott the shops of their Jewish neighbors.

Still, many German citizens slowly became accustomed to anti-Semitic policies as the “new normal” of German political culture over the course of the 1930s, and they were often insensitive and oblivious to the increasingly stressful and difficult circumstances that German Jews were now living under. The shift and redefinition of who was “really” German took years, and it was not nearly so sudden or top-down as it is shown to be on Ekos. Since Ekos lacked the entire backdrop of events and political culture (for example, Germany's defeat in World War I) that the Nazis used to justify their “new normal” of extremely anti-Semitic policies and laws, we can be skeptical about whether Melakon could have implemented such drastic changes so suddenly, with apparently no popular resistance.
7