This ties into an earlier scene with Garack and Bashir wherein Bashir has gone through his entire lunch while Garack has barely touched his and he remarks that humans always eat like someone will snatch the plate away despite humanity haging had abundance for centuries. "Fear of starvation amongst plenty... Someone really should do a study." Garack hints throughout the series that he understands the dark underbelly of humanity far, far better than any alien should.
@@tatianalyulkin410 maybe you should not have let nazis into power. ive seen the massacre videos and execution of russian POW. have you see the street of angels in donetsk? your people did their crimes, now you have woken the russian bear. the bear will feast on the corpse of your corrupt country and racist people. not everyone is fooled by the clownsky comedians propaganda. we know who you are. you can clean my toliets and sell your body. I SAW THE VIDEOS OF THE GENOCIDE YOUR PEOPLE COMMITED. IM 40 YEARS OLD AND ITS THE WORST THING IVE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFE. Ukraine deserves its fate.
And on the reverse side, him being a Cardassian, they pretty much have accepted scarcity as part of life, so it makes sense that he would drag out a meal to savor the sensation of a content belly.
Ragitsu : He wasn't comparing humans to those other species on a base level. What he was basically saying is that (to make an analogy) we're like domesticated animals. Happy, friendly, fun to be around, but back us into a corner and make us feel threatened and we bear our teeth and fight like hell. Not an issue of "want to or don't want to", but an issue of INSTINCT.
Yeah. While he was always confused, frustrated, and sometimes annoyed by his brother and nephew, he did show through deed if not by word he really did care for and only want what was best for them. Granted, his and their idea of "best" often clashed. But he would at the least (if grudgingly) not stand in their way and was still there for them when things went wrong.
The one thing about this episode is that it shows there's far more to Quark than being a greedy bar keep. He knew how to use his senses to protect his nephew, and was able to gun down a trained Jem' Hadar soldier before he could get a shot off. Then there was the whole 'solving war through economics' thing in another episode.
When Nog decides to join Starfleet, Quark is one of the biggest naysayers of it. Many people think this is because Quark is selfish and doesn't want to lose a good waiter or because has some bad personal feelings about the Federation. But I'm pretty sure it's because Quark knows humans VERY well and knows how hard it will be for Nog to deal with what will surely be blatant discrimination on Earth, even at the academy, for being the first Ferengi in Starfleet. Shit, even Sisko doubted Nog. Just something that cements Quark as one of the best Star Trek characters in my mind,
In Joe Haldeman’s Trek novel “World Without End”, two Klingons discuss dealing with Humans: K1: “Humans are weak. There is no reason to fear them” K2: “Brother, I have fought them before. They worship soft and stupid words, but underneath they are ferocious. Believe me”.
Those soft and stupid words, in a Klingon's mind? They are the thin mental line between, for instance, the life of a natural architect and that of a totalitarian dictator.
@@VampireYoshi Klingons forget sometimes that humans first met Vulcans after coming back from a nuclear apocalypse and Resource War POST WWIII and Eugenics War. A wise Klingon knows not to push humans too far. A foolish Klingon witnesses just why humans are galactic cockroaches and can rise from ANY catastrophe stronger than ever. Why humans are the most numerous member of the Federation.
"This isn't the Star Fleet you know" Even after all these years, this episode and especially this scene are unforgettable. It shows us that not all conflict is solved by star ships fighting out in space. You still have to get down in the dirt and face your enemy face to face in hand to hand combat.
Yes and no. There is only conflict because the federation wants to expand its territory. The only logical end to that is either control over the area or war because somebody doesn't let you control the area.
@@DarkNexarius *_There is only conflict because the federation wants to expand its territory._* The Federation is not a government and thus has no "territory" of it's own. All species that are members of the Federation (which itself is just a United Nations in space) still retain their respective "territories," though per the treaty members are not permitted to invade/attack their neighbors. The Federation's interest in acquiring new members is merely to promote peace and stability in the galaxy, not territorial expansion. The Federation does not "control" any of the areas designated as foreign territory. For example, Klingons are members of the Federation, but the Federation has no say in how Klingons conduct their own government. If the Klingons were to do something that violates the treaty (such as supporting the Dominion), then they can be booted from the Federation, but that's all. The Federation is not a fascist dictatorship seeking total control/subjugation of other species. Again, this is analogous to the United Nations -- Germany is a member, but the United States (nor any other member of the UN) has any direct influence on German politics.
@@Marinealver No, the goals are not the same. Not in the least. Some of you clearly did not pass your political science classes in high school. Imperialism seeks to expand it's own government's territory by subjugating weaker ones. The British Partition of India for example, or the colonizing of the Americas are examples of imperialism, because the British government is a monarchy, and they make no apologies for their imperialist ways. Federalism on the other hand, seeks to strengthen the whole by inviting others to join the community. However unlike imperialism, Federalism does not subjugate it's members, nor does one member have greater authority over others in a federation. For example, in Star Trek, the United Federation of Planets is made up of numerous governments - Vulcan, Klingon, Andorian, Orion, Ferengi, Bajoran, etc. But each of these respective governments still enjoy full independence; the Klingons are members of the Federation, but their government is still the Klingon Empire. Klingons are not subject to Earth's government any more than the Borg. A Federation - particularly one made up of multiple governments - is just a "United Nations" in space. The US, Japan, Canada, etc are all members of the UN, but they each have separate governments and are independent from one another. Imperialism is expansion in service to it's empire, federalism is growing a community in service to the whole.
One of the reasons why I liked DS9, it took apart the future Roddenberry had built where humans were seemingly free of racism, hunger, poverty, war but there's a price to be paid for paradise. Quark is right about one thing humans are peaceful as long as our basic needs are met take that away and we'd be indistinguishable from any other Klingon. The line between civility and savagery is paper thin.
It fits surprisingly well with the fantrek theories ... first contact with Ferengi in TNG depicted them as a brutal, combative, savage species ... because (it is speculated) the Ferengi had examined humans and determined that we're an insanely militant bloodthirsty species, so they attempted to seize an advantage by presenting themselves as a fearsomely powerful threat. (Which didn't really work out well for them, since they're all abject cowards so they just ended up looking like clowns, but hey anything which can make a profit is worth the effort, yes?)
Every once in a while, we need reminders of why we need to sort out our problems... because we won't like what will come for us if we're not better prepared.
I mean, he was absolutely right. But compared to o other races like klingons and jem hadar the humans were pretty mild, and also, people like cap Sisko or Bashir were extremely human abnormally good evem in worst situations. So even if quark was right. The bad state of humans in this universe is conditional, and also only individual, not a rule. However humans in the real world are almost always trash
ArcaneAzmadi Completely agree. When this series started I hated his character, by the end of the series I realized some of my favourite episodes were the ones based around him.
CCJJ160Channels that's because tng set Ferengi characters up to be let downs. DS9 made sure we wanted to see more Ferengi, they were the best critics of humans.
+V Guyver i agree. tng ferengi were just caricatures. ds9 ferengi were people, with an actual culture. tng is my favourite series, but ds9 with its superior character development is a very close second.
The introduction of the Ferengi in the TNG pilot has to stand out as one of the cringiest introductions of an alien species in all of science fiction history. Like the Klingons of the TOS, they were introduced as a pure villain species. But the Klingons at least as stand-ins for Nazis or Communists were at least regarded as human equivalents - a "but for the grace of God there go I" sort of race. They weren't really any different than the mirrorverse Terran Empire, and TOS drew the parallel explicitly in the introduction of the species in "Errand of Mercy" where the ending shows that the two species really aren't that different after all. TNG isn't nearly as subtle in its hatred or derision or "speciesism". The Ferengi are all the things the conventional dominant morality of the day hated drawn in the crudest possible way as subhuman pitiful evil beings without any redeeming virtue - not even honorable enemies. DS9 manages to redeem the Ferengi and in doing so redeems the TNG era morality a bit by showing that how the Federation views things is itself just a bias and an arrogance.
@@celebrim1 Klingons weren't Nazi or Communist stand ins, the Federation was Communist. Everyone in the Federation shared resources equally. Klingons were the old school American (and British, and Roman, and every other reasonable culture in human history) idea of "If I take it it's mine".
@@willdavis3802 Simplistic and false. Even the federation isn't really communist, they're just post-scarcity on SOME well-advanced settlements. Currency exists, and 'the people' don't have ownership over everything. Romulans were more akin to Russia cold war, Cardassians were the NAZI comparison. I get it, lefties want complete ownership over the fandom and they use the myth of the communist federation to cement their claim and kick out any rightoids. But any Treckie with critical thinking skills knows this is absurd.
@@DemonEyes622 Actually they can't pronounce "human" correctly due to their mouth structure, so they do the best approximation. Most Ferengi are like Quark. They ADORE humans normally... but also fear them.
This is why human beings work to hold _on_ to our creature comforts. We _know_ bad things happen to us when we go hungry. That's why we work and fight not to go hungry. Bad things happen when the sleeping giant awakens, so we strive to keep him asleep.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits. If you haven't noticed, Deep Space Nine takes digs at anything and everything even vaguely positive from the Star Trek series which preceded it.
@@Ragitsu while you are right, you forget that some humans willingly AND joyfully tortures members of our own species. simply "because its fun". if a creature can derive a sick pleasure from torturing other members of its own species, Then Quark is as right as right can be :)
@@Ragitsu To be real, compared to a lot of species in Trek, humans do tend to represent their "dark side" which makes it that much more dangerous when that door gets opened. About the only thing more vicious when it snaps is a Vulcan during pon farr and for the same reasons. Humanity in Trek thinks that by suppressing their darker emotions they've somehow become more evolved. However, it's easy to be a saint in paradise. DS9 isn't so much taking a jab at humanity, but reminding people that, while better, humanity still has much room for improvement. Hell, even from the beginning with Q's Trial of Humanity, there's been a contention that humanity isn't *truly* there yet, but is overall on a good path towards it.
@@InfernosReaper "To be real, compared to a lot of species in Trek, humans do tend to represent their "dark side" which makes it that much more dangerous when that door gets opened. " That's a problem with the writers failing to flesh out alien species...or rather, keeping them a certain way to make the Humans alongside them contrast (in terms of personality) that much more sharply. As is, I'd rather reside with Humans instead of most Klingons, Cardassians, Breen, Hirogen, Vaadwaur, et cetera. On the other hand, most any species *more* benevolent than Humans would make for fantastic neighbors.
@@scar445 "some humans willingly AND joyfully tortures members of our own species. " Yes, but they are aberrations. Other species are entirely - or almost entirely - sadistic/psychopathic.
My father served in Vietnam and the Korean War, and he said that he saw people collect ears off of corpses as "tally markers". When I was older, he showed me actual photos of just that. The ketracel-white tube necklace is a brutal real-world comparison, and it sells it all that much more. An amazing episode, and an amazing scene.
+effluviah the writer had served in Vietnam. That's why it's so accurate. War makes good people turn into monsters over time. There were a few GI's from WWII who had been very good friends in one town, over the years most of them had passed away, but recently one of their widow's came forth to another GI with bleached human remains of Japanese soldiers skulls and thumbs. They were war trophies, from an otherwise popular respected soldier, and family member. It wasn't revealed until this incident that the majority of the townships veterans had done this during the war.
The Borg caused Picard to go full captain Ahab and ignited the militarization of the federation basically after the borg arrived you saw the shift in the Federation becoming a more warlike organization and the Dominion further brought that into play
Reminds me of an old WWII vet I was speaking to a few years ago as I fixed his computer. We got to talking about the current foreign conflicts the US are involved with and things that happen during war, he told me about witnessing American soldiers throwing pliers over the fence towards Japanese POW's and shooting whomever they landed closest too. If anything Quark undersells humanity here.
War is no limits hardball. Where you can do whatever you want. And your only limits is what the enemy stops you from doing and what you stop yourself from doing.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
I've always thought like this: Klingons are imperialist Japan. Roumulans are soviets. Cardassians are Nazis. Ferengi are hypercapitalists. Borg are evil.
This scene reminds me of the scene in the dark night when the joker says: you'll see, when the chips are down, these civilized people, they'll eat each other. They're only as good as the world allows them to be.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living.
Exactly, it isn't limited to just humans. Vulcans are very violent without their logic and they have the strength when they are furious. Klingons already embraced their violent nature, put them in a similar situation and they may be violent towards each other as well, fighting for even some water or food of such scarcity. Any species in the universe can fall into this kind of violent behavior if someone or some event puts them there. I think they have been some exaggeration, but I can say that humans aren't the only ones who can cross lines of falling into brutal violence when you think about it fictionally. In reality, we're still the only species in the Solar System on Earth.
While the ST universe is full of humanoid species who could fit Quark's description of what happens after exposure to prolonged stress and violence, humans seem to be the only ones claiming it could never happen to them. That's the difference.
AVoiceOfOpinion93 I feel sorry for them too. They have much in common with the Klingons. They love to fight but they still try to behave with honor. It's just that the founders konditoned them and addicted them to a drug so they are forced to do whatever they say.
Avatarbee They don't have a concept of honor outside of just serving the founders. DS9 showed that they were bred to be blood thirsty maniacs, and that's what they mostly were. But a few decent Jem'Hadar who were "Honered Elders" eventually lived long enough to start to develope some sort of honor because they were bestowed some. Odo and the founders are apparently trying to fix the more negative qualities of the Jem'Hadar.
It doesn’t take much to push us over the edge. We are generally happy as quark said with our creature comforts. Take it away, Put our survival on the line, and we can and will turn into monsters. We’ve spent centuries suppressing those animalistic urges. They come out in war and hardship. Watch what happens when food runs out in the stores. It will NOT be pretty. We will revert to our base tribal mentality. Take care of you and yours because no one else matters when you need to feed and care for yourself and family. That is what will happen if we run out of “stuff” in the stores.
And so the rest of the galaxy decided it was in their best interests not to fuck around with Humanity, and they all basked in the eternal glory of the Terran Empire. The End.
After what I have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan and the stuff veterans of those wars and others have told me, and even what everyone can readily see on the internet... I would agree with Quark's assessment.
@@Neyonius the irony is that the western men in those war hell holes are there starved stupid men doing the bedding of evil western bankers. The entire western population has become corrupted by stupidity.... and soon hunger...
@@rauldatta474 - LOL. That's the biggest load of nonsense I've seen all day. No, we weren't "starved stupid men doing the bidding of evil western bankers." "Evil western bankers" is just a recycled antisemitic slur, anyway.
@@marcusfranconium3392 You're wrong. Do you know why appeasement happened? Because those "savage" men served in WWI and had become leaders of their nations 20 years later and REMEMBERED what that was like and DIDN'T WANT it to happen again. That's why they were so recalcitrant to engage in war as long as they felt they might get away with not doing so. Only when it was apparent that Hitler wasn't going to be appeased did they finally shift focus to stopping him. If he had stopped after the first few conquests, the war would never have happened. A modern day example of this is Putin. Putin basically owns Crimea. Sure, the maps all have it as Ukrainian, but in every way that actually counts, it now belongs to Russia and has for six years...and no one's done anything about it NOR WOULD anyone. Even Ukraine had largely written it off and was merely trying to contain how much Russia took by contesting them in Donbas. Had Putin stopped there, people would mention it from time to time, but no one would care. But now he's invaded Ukraine itself and marched on the capital in Kiev while attacking all over the country and... ...the world offers "severe sanctions" instead of war. All mankind resorts to savagery when they are forced against a wall, but NOT all mankind resort to savagery ABSENT being forced against a wall. That is the distinction.
Personally, I've always loved Star Trek's optimism, but I have to admit that scenes like these were very refreshing. Quark made some very strong points here. Another great episode was "In the Pale Moonlight", in which Sisko became an accessory to murder (committed by Garak) in order to trick the Romulans into declaring war against the Dominion. Quark and Garak were excellent characters.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
@@Ragitsuwell, then let's discuss that: 1 - Vulcans. They come off as possibly the wisest species. They have ability for emotional balance, as well as a focus on logical approaches. While they do have a standing army, they are more diplomats. 2 - Ferengi. Space Jews - I'm not gonna sugarcoat it. Their whole approach on capitalistic economy is revered so much, they consider it religion. They protect their interest, and ihis has been reflected throughout all of TNG. 3 - Klingons. The funky looking Alien Spartans. They were, in fact, enemies of the Federation. They also gave the Federation a run for its money. Like Humanity, they were victims to infighting themselves. The Federation found its niche, and preceded to submit the Klingons into the (Khatamer) Accords. There are others, but these are the 3 main ones I know. They also reflect humanity the best: we are philosophical, we are cunning, and we are violent. Having all 3 eventually balancing out is what helped create the stepping stones for the Federation.
Sisko was not an accessory to murder he help architect it. Garak was pulled into the web cause he could do what Sisko could not. That was the whole point of mixing Garak in in the first place. Sisko only issue was knowing what he was a part of results and all could he live with it?
I loved DS9. The earlier Treks were about establishing human ideals. This Trek was about putting those ideals to the fire and seeing how well they held up.
This is why I love Deep Space 9. The Original Star Trek, and Next Generation showed a very idealized humanity. A human race that has somehow managed to suppress its most violent impulses, a humanity that lives in a veritable utopia with no real war, hunger, disease, or any of the other maladies of the human race. The result is a humanity that is smug and superior, a human race that views its past with nothing but contempt, seeing its ancestors as barbarians who were slave to their base urges to kill and pillage. But Deep Space 9 abandons that. Deep Space 9 shows a much more nuanced view of human violence. It shows that underneath all the smugness and superiority, humans are still humans. That when their backs are really to the wall, the human race won't just back down and let the Dominion roll over them. They will fight, they will kill, and they will go to any and all lengths to destroy their enemy. It shows humanity's violent nature as an inherent part of the human experience but it also shows it in a much more fair light. Yes, we're violent. But our violence can be useful when our lives are threatened. What Picard might have dismissed as base bloodthirst and cruelty, Sisko might applaud as resolve and defiance in the face of a genocidal invader. It has a more nuanced message that while yes, we should try to be better, we should not suppress our violent nature entirely. Rather, our violent nature can still be valuable when it is controlled, when it is brought out in times of great crisis. With the right state of mind, with the right focus, violence and bloodlust can be come courage and bravery. The desire to kill the enemy can be honed into the desire to defend your family. The indifference to death can give you the resolve to suffer through a battlefield.
An award-winning essay, and should it have been voiced by any character in the Star Trek universe in conflict, it would have likely won several television awards and would have been epic... could still be epic should you allow Star Trek to still use it. ;)
It always bemuses me when someone views humans and the Federation in TOS and TNG as having a smug and superior attitude. Especially given there's so many episodes across each that deal with even the long-term consequences of their very human and aggressive and less than ideal ways of handling things in both their ancient past as well as their recent past during Federation years. Time and time again the crew of each stumbles upon aliens with different cultures and ways of doing things and instead of thinking "Gosh, these are lower life forms and are so pathetic compared to us, they can't even communicate the same way we do!" or something similar they go out of their way to figure out how to communicate, how to learn about these people, etc, etc. That is not something a group of people that had a smug superior view of themselves would do. They often talk about how bad their past was, how they're ever trying to be better than that while never forgetting the lessons of their past. The only difference is that DS9 bludgeons you over the head with "HUMANS ARE BAD AND HAVE A BAD PAST" and the other two confront that more discreetly without the need to take you back to the past in one form or another and show you examples of "HUMANS ARE BAD AND HAVE A BAD PAST" because for the other two it's about space exploration primarily and so simple dialogue about such things is often enough. DS9, however, isn't about exploration. It's about culture and diversity because the station has a very multicultural aspect to it. To this extent it has room to be a more heavy handed commentary on humanity, its past, its successes and failures, and the like. There's no nuance here, it's very blunt with its messaging, to the point that even the most oblivious of racists, bigots, and fascists get the message of "These shitty things that some people do are shitty and the people that do these things are shitty, too", which is why such people dislike DS9, because even they aren't so oblivious as to miss the fact they're being called out as shitty people, where as the others handle such topics more discreetly to the point that it can be lost on those who aren't really paying attention.
Well he's not wrong. Deprive people of the necessities of living and put them in a dangerous situation where there in a heightened state of fear for an extended space of time.... and most people will turn into bloodthirsty savages, doing anything to stay alive just a little while longer.
+SirCraigius Which is technically an evolutionary advantage, as if it were Not for that capability, you'd simply die. Pathetically. Moreover, that is not a permanent state of mind. People can, and do, come back from that edge. It's not easy, but it's possible. The human mind has a way of subconsciously compartmentalizing feelings and emotions, suppressing them and filing them away to deal with later. Essentially, "You don't have time to worry and mope about the morality of what you are doing and have to do in order to survive. We will deal with this later when your life is not in danger. Right now, you need to focus on surviving and getting out of here by any means necessary." This 'dealing with it later' part, generally becomes PTSD.
+SirCraigius That is why morality would not apply in a lawless scenario: when the luxuries you take for granted on a daily basis go away and people don't know if they will live to see another day, everyone will abandon the façade placed on them by their peers.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
I think his point is simply that humans are not perfect, even if we like to think we are. I do think we're ahead of many. What would take terrible circumstances are embraced in everyday life of like Klingons and Jem'hadar. But even when we can keep a lid, those capabilities still lurk beneath the surface. I grant you that Quark sometimes does it too, trying to act like his own people are superior. He says their history doesn't have some of the lows of humanity. But then we see how they treated women up until Ishga started to change things.
Hands down the best scene of the series, amazingly acted and directed! A Bartender is going to be one of the best judges of sentient beings, and Quark is a good bartender
You forgot the last part: "Maybe. But I like 'em." -Nog Fuck this series was awesome. Of all the Star Trek series and movies this is the only one I truly loved with a passion. So many great scenes and great episodes. I remember in season one I hated Quark (and all the stupid Ferengi episodes) but even they grew on me.
Amazing observer of people. He seems more scared to be surrounded by this group of humans than he does around the big bads of the series. He knows this is a different, more primitive and dangerous version, just by looking at them.
@@WhydoIsuddenlyhaveahandle the Changeling would rather have you alive. Enslaved. Kneeling. After all, you can't pay dues and worship if you're dead. The Borg wants you assimilated- you're of no use to them otherwise. The Klingon will not even bother with you if you aren't a warrior they can test themselves against. But humans? Humans will just flat out fucking kill you, full stop, no questions asked, do not pass Go do not collect 200 bars of gold-plated latinum, if we have been reduced to throwing civility out the window. And we will seek to kill you, and everyone who looks like you, by the most efficient means possible.
Alright be honest, how often do we see Quark act seriously when he's not talking about latinum, profits, or holosuites. During this whole episode he acts more like Nog's father than Rom, he even puts Sisko on notice when Nog got injured
Quark has always looked after Nog, even if it wasn't that obvious. Don't forget episode 1; Quark only stayed on DS9 to keep Nog out of prison. Which is a hell of a thing to do for a Ferengi, especially when it's not his own son. Even Nog's mother abandoned him, afterall. And this was at a time where DS9 was certainly not safe for anyone.
@@jakepullman4914 quark didn't deny that. He simply pointed out that humans claiming that they're so enlightened and evolved is bullshit. He might've said Ferengi were superior on occasion but was saying it more as an insult than anything well thought out. A shitty flawed being is just as capable, if not more, of making an accurate assessment of humanity
@@jakepullman4914 ferengi are even notoriously delicate, their hypersensitive ears cause them all kinds of pain. It's probably why they don't start many wars, ferengi would make crap soldiers. And even better, quark himself is a bit of a wimp, whining and getting his ass kicked repeatedly Still, I think this scene is less about a condemnation of the human race, and more about teaching nog about the danger he's in. Nog won't or can't see the truth of the matter, because he's inexperienced, Quark is just trying to disillusion him
I think it still fits with Gene's hopes for the future. Even he must have known that Human nature can't be so easily changed. Quark is right of course.
Even in TOS and TNG we see humans that are ..well, humans. They are not many but they exist. They often were just the villain of the week, dispatched at the end of the episode, but it shows us that there were still "evil" humans, or extremely ambitious/corrupt etc..In a situation of war, without their comforts, that side is bound to show up.
@@3Rayfire I've always wondered about that, because Quark does not consistently pronounce it that way, and frankly when he says it normally, I am always a little bit disappointed, LOL!
Quark failed to realize one thing. Like so many times in our own past, freedom and liberty had to defend itself against tyranny. I give the creators of DS9 credit for one thing: No matter how peaceful you are, there will always come a time when another power is bent on taking your freedom and liberty.
Yes other humans. You see the nonsense? Freedom and Liberty championed by humans against Tyranny created by other humans? An endless cycle of stupidity.
nightsaber99 No, changing the definition won't help ~ people which are actually happy and content because they're well treated and have an abundance of entertainment options are unlikely to riot.
Shogun1982 The first of most important part of 'happy and content', is well fed. It wasn't simply a shortage of bread, it was a shortage of food in general. Being on the losing end of a few unsuccessful wars drained the countries wealth, followed by bad harvests causing shortages of food, sparked the people of France to seek the elimination of what they perceived as a weak and ineffectual government.
I agree with what he says about humans and I am actually proud of it. It may scare others that we can go from friendly and wonderful to violent and merciless, but life isn't all war OR peace. Life is a cruel, confusing mixture of war AND peace. It's hard not to lash out at your closest allies or capitalute to sweet-talking villains, but humans adapt.
I think that Quark makes an interesting observation, and yet I think that he draws the wrong conclusion. Yes, put people, humans, in a very difficult (wartime) situation and we can become really nasty (i.e. like Klingons). But I don't think that that's necessarily a bad thing. I think that one could call it a survival instinct. The key thing is what do we do when the situation returns to normal (i.e. peace). Do we return to being nice people or not? I think that most do, but some are changed by the experience even though they may not wish to be. And people like that probably need all the help they can get.
Quark is telling the truth. At first I didn't like DS9 but I watched it again and I fell in love with it. It showed how humanity would really react if everything were lost. DS9 is a crown jewel in all of Star Trek.
There was always a flip side of this that i don't see people talking about as often, a bookend if you will. After quark gives this a little further in this episode, Nog is wounded, and quark stays by his bedside. The perimeter is breached, and Jem'Hadar enter the infirmary. In a single instant, Quark becomes ferocious and blasts a Jem'Hadar in the heart while screaming, face twisted with aggression. After the danger has passed, his face stays hard, but there is a look in his eyes, like he knows he has become just as dangerous as the humans he warned Nog about. And it all happened in a single instant.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living.
Humans have an unusually war like tendency and past compared to most of the other Star Trek races. I don't think Roddenberry would have minded Quark pointing this out as it shows humans have generally advanced beyond that war like stage.
I recall an episode of The Enterprise where some Vulcans are sent back in time and stranded on earth. They refuse to hunt wild animals because they say they would rather die than "resort to something so barbaric". Many other races have extremely rigid ethics and philosophies, whether it is warlike such as Klingons, or peaceful like Vulcans. So I would say in this universe, it is not necessarily true. There are many philosophies or religions on earth today even, that would rather die than commit certain acts they see as socially deleterious.
I loved this series but after coming home from Afghanistan it had new significance for me. 3 particular episodes come to mind, Nor the Battle to The Strong, The Siege of AR-558, and It’s Only a Paper Moon. Those 3 became my favorites. I find it odd that sci fi shows from my childhood offer the most realistic portrayals of modern war.
This is why I love DS9, it took a lot of aliens from TNG and evolved them into real characters. The early Ferenghi were little more then greedy trolls but here we get to see that at least two of them can be more.
DS9 actually did a pretty good job of turning the supposed "utopian" ideals of star fleet on their head. Another favorite of mine is where Jake tries to explain to Nog why humans dont need money... While trying to get some money from him. Some of Starfleets actions during the Dominion War, and Section 31as a whole are two other good examples.
If you don't want to be a beast, don't go to war. If war must come, weep the day it is declared, for one no comes out of it better than when they went into it, even if they win. The winner of a war is the one who loses the least.
I hate to say it, but Quark was correct. While dire circumstances can bring out the best in some humans, often times, they bring out the worst. It's easy to be nice to others when all is well. But it's a set of desperate circumstances that truly put our moral and ethical values to the test. A test that in my opinion, most people would fail. Perhaps even myself.
They made the same observations earlier in the series about the Maquis. Their acts were considered unthinkable from the point of view of anyone living on Earth, which was practically a paradise in that time. But what about in the frontier where you live a far less affluent life? Then the matter takes a different turn.
The founding species of the Federation, despite all the progress they''ve achieved are still Vulcans, Humans, Andorians, and Tellarites, all very capable of serious violence. For humans and ESPECIALLY Vulcans, *extreme* violence.
I really wish we had an episode, dedicated to quarks background that would showcase why he seems to have insider knowledge to how dark humans can be. Because there’s a story there that they never told us. Because he you hear it in his voice in this episode, it’s not just like others of his kind that look down at them for getting rid of money.
@batlantern Armin Shimmerman said one of the primary reasons he took the role of Quark was to undo the damage TNG did to the Ferengi. (He played the first Ferengi essentially, the one who spoke the most in "The Last Outpost"). He said the Ferengi were ridiculous in their first episode and damaged what they were trying to do to the point where the Ferengi couldn't be the top villain the writers were trying to establish them in being, because no one would have taken them seriously.
Everytime I watch this part I can't stop thinking at the scene of ST ENT were the terrestrial ambassador of Vulcan talks to admiral Forrest and says how much humans scares the Vulcans
Geesh guys. Take it for what it is worth. Star Trek and all fiction is full of observations and inferences meant to make you think. They are little reflective pieces that together describe our natures. None of them alone are a complete picture. Humans are capable of both ends of the spectrum in ALL circumstances. There are counter examples at either end. To all you misanthropes: Odo and other characters have many positive (and true) things to say about humans. The bottom line is that there is no hard fast rule that describes humanity 100%. In addition (and to all who deny that this is a human tendency), the point of many religions is to overcome our "base" natures. Those who do so tend to be the ones who defy this logic. Those who don't tend to quibble and argue without trying to understand their opponents.
+moverseve Honestly in many cases religion seems to embrace them. Shun and discriminate against those who don't believe. Only Our religion is right, the others are Wrong. Stone/kill those who refuse to believe, kill the apostates. This doesn't apply to everyone, but it's enough to drive home that religion doesn't do jack shit to control our 'base' natures. That is up to every individual to do or not do on their own; religion hardly factors in to it, and in many cases is used to justify embracing our darker nature.
Um... did I say anything about religion? Your complaints remind me of another truth spoken by Iron Maiden "The evil that men do lives on and on..." That is another unfortunate truth. Many people obsess over the evil that men do.... especially religious people for oh so many reasons; but mostly because it justifies their own. However, since you brought it up.. for every evil that a religious man does there are probably 5 more religious people who actually live their religion and do good in the world that goes unnoticed because good news doesn't sell.
moverseve Yes you did actually. "the point of many religions is to overcome our "base" natures". It hasn't actually worked out well, like I said. They arn't inherently better than people who arn't religious at any rate; you don't need religion to be good, and being religious doesn't inherently Make you good; the amount of terrorism committed in the name of and justified by various religions shows that well enough. Essentially they arn't any better, or necessarily worse, than the non-religious; they just have another 'reason' to justify their actions. i.e. "This is the Right thing to do! This fairy tale says so!"
+WitheringintheDark in general I am in complete agreement with your last post (except your assumptions about religion itself.. to say it is comprised of "fairy tales" is a groundless system of belief since even science can't prove or disprove it). The teachings of many (if not most) religions themselves explicitly state that their followers aren't any better or worse than anyone else. They all explicitly state that the purpose of life is to overcome human nature. They also say (if you study them close enough) that those who use their religion to justify their evil actions are just as bad or worse off than anyone who does the same as a non-believer. The whole point of many (not all) religions is to accept that human nature is "flawed" to some extent and to reach for something better. I would wager that the "religious" people you speak of who commit atrocities really have no clue what their religion is really about. This is why I think that people who hold up these reprobates as the reason they don't believe in something have no ground to stand on.
moverseve moverseve Eggs-fuckin-zactly People have forgotten that the entire point of Story, all the way back to the oral traditions, is to create a social political narrative. I don't say that to denigrate the idea or imply it's political propaganda, not in the way such is commonly thought, but that Story, when done right, is meant to give both insight into the world and structural behavior to act upon it in a way that benefits both the self and society. But it's not a one-size-fits-all concept. They are observations by the writer about specific things.
Quark of all people should know that it applies to everyone, not just humans. He was around Bajor during the Cardassian occupation, and being exposed to such injustice and oppression turned the Bajorians into fierce people.
Define superhero? If by hero like superman? Then no that dude is more human than most humans on that planet. Or we talking real life heros like doctors or honest cops or hardworking teachers? Don't see those guys walking around without any humanity. The one thing you sacrifice when you become a hero is your life. Because at that point you stop living for yourself and you live for the world.
So do other races not experience desperation? Either way, it's interesting watching him sneak about, terrified of the humans around him, like they're dangerous animals. It's not a perspective we get to see a lot in the very cliche sci fi genre, where every alien is either a noble savage or a highly verbose tech geek, or a "doesn't understand sarcasm" guy. I want to see more alien perspectives about human behavior that aren't just "those foolish humans will destroy themselves"
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
Ferengi were money driven but they were not warlike. They always tried to negotiate peace and in their history never partake in genocide or slavery. For them the humans and other similar species seem warlike and brutal.
Yea Ferengi are and were relatively peaceful compared to most other major species. Vulcans nearly destroyed themselves and train for years to eliminate emotion, Romulans and Cardissians are militaristic and oppressive, Klingons embrace violence as a way of life, and humans nuked themselves back a century before Vulcans fixed their shit. I know Ferengi are supposed to be everything wrong with capitalism but they imo didn't do a good job showing that over the series. The worse thing they've ever done was oppress women, which while terrible, comparatively doesn't seem as bad as other species who've done that then some.
The funny thing is that during Kirk's redshirt era against the Klingons they were pretty much more aggressive, militaristic than they are in TNG but only because they were equal in tech TNG gave the Feddies more tech and they got complacent because of it (more utopian ideals), only when the Borg came along (which got Picard to reorganise the whole Starfleet) and DS9 hit with the Dominion using superior/equivalent tech they actually started to realise that some aliens just can't be reasoned with. Like Q said with the Borg they just can't relate ever to your ideals and successes with other species they just take what they want. Under this pressure without science to cushion everything comes the instinctive side of humanity.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
This ties into an earlier scene with Garack and Bashir wherein Bashir has gone through his entire lunch while Garack has barely touched his and he remarks that humans always eat like someone will snatch the plate away despite humanity haging had abundance for centuries.
"Fear of starvation amongst plenty... Someone really should do a study."
Garack hints throughout the series that he understands the dark underbelly of humanity far, far better than any alien should.
Garak was my favorite character
You can't be good at your job.....a tailor....without having a good sense of observation.
Well, I can't speak for the entire human race but I'm Ukrainian and the Holodomor and WWII and recent events are part of me.
@@tatianalyulkin410 maybe you should not have let nazis into power. ive seen the massacre videos and execution of russian POW. have you see the street of angels in donetsk? your people did their crimes, now you have woken the russian bear. the bear will feast on the corpse of your corrupt country and racist people. not everyone is fooled by the clownsky comedians propaganda. we know who you are. you can clean my toliets and sell your body. I SAW THE VIDEOS OF THE GENOCIDE YOUR PEOPLE COMMITED. IM 40 YEARS OLD AND ITS THE WORST THING IVE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFE. Ukraine deserves its fate.
And on the reverse side, him being a Cardassian, they pretty much have accepted scarcity as part of life, so it makes sense that he would drag out a meal to savor the sensation of a content belly.
Gotta say it: When Quark's right, he's right.
He's always right, except for that time he got fooled and only got Worthless Gold.
What Quark misses: most humans don't WANT that kind of living situation, whereas certain other species do.
GreatGrandpa : Quark was always my favorite character on DS9. The episodes that centered around him were the best in my opinion.
Ragitsu : He wasn't comparing humans to those other species on a base level. What he was basically saying is that (to make an analogy) we're like domesticated animals. Happy, friendly, fun to be around, but back us into a corner and make us feel threatened and we bear our teeth and fight like hell.
Not an issue of "want to or don't want to", but an issue of INSTINCT.
Mr. Big said it best.
We may evolved but, deep down were still animals.
One thing I really like about this scene is that it shows that Quark, for all his scheming, does deep down care for his nephew
Yeah. While he was always confused, frustrated, and sometimes annoyed by his brother and nephew, he did show through deed if not by word he really did care for and only want what was best for them. Granted, his and their idea of "best" often clashed. But he would at the least (if grudgingly) not stand in their way and was still there for them when things went wrong.
The one thing about this episode is that it shows there's far more to Quark than being a greedy bar keep. He knew how to use his senses to protect his nephew, and was able to gun down a trained Jem' Hadar soldier before he could get a shot off.
Then there was the whole 'solving war through economics' thing in another episode.
Yeah, Quark cares more about people, especially his family, than he wants to admit.
And he is absolutely correct. And we can turn on a dime and become kind again.
When Nog decides to join Starfleet, Quark is one of the biggest naysayers of it. Many people think this is because Quark is selfish and doesn't want to lose a good waiter or because has some bad personal feelings about the Federation. But I'm pretty sure it's because Quark knows humans VERY well and knows how hard it will be for Nog to deal with what will surely be blatant discrimination on Earth, even at the academy, for being the first Ferengi in Starfleet. Shit, even Sisko doubted Nog. Just something that cements Quark as one of the best Star Trek characters in my mind,
In Joe Haldeman’s Trek novel “World Without End”, two Klingons discuss dealing with Humans:
K1: “Humans are weak. There is no reason to fear them”
K2: “Brother, I have fought them before. They worship soft and stupid words, but underneath they are ferocious. Believe me”.
*Vietnam Flashbacks
Those soft and stupid words, in a Klingon's mind? They are the thin mental line between, for instance, the life of a natural architect and that of a totalitarian dictator.
@@VampireYoshi Klingons forget sometimes that humans first met Vulcans after coming back from a nuclear apocalypse and Resource War POST WWIII and Eugenics War. A wise Klingon knows not to push humans too far. A foolish Klingon witnesses just why humans are galactic cockroaches and can rise from ANY catastrophe stronger than ever. Why humans are the most numerous member of the Federation.
@@setojurai When mankind makes it off this fetid rock in a meaningful way is when the universe should mark its final hours.
Fear Humanity, for we are the Space Orcs
"This isn't the Star Fleet you know"
Even after all these years, this episode and especially this scene are unforgettable.
It shows us that not all conflict is solved by star ships fighting out in space.
You still have to get down in the dirt and face your enemy face to face in hand to hand combat.
Yes and no.
There is only conflict because the federation wants to expand its territory.
The only logical end to that is either control over the area or war because somebody doesn't let you control the area.
@@DarkNexarius what about when someone else attacks their area? Oh, and tortures and murders millions of people?
@@DarkNexarius *_There is only conflict because the federation wants to expand its territory._*
The Federation is not a government and thus has no "territory" of it's own. All species that are members of the Federation (which itself is just a United Nations in space) still retain their respective "territories," though per the treaty members are not permitted to invade/attack their neighbors. The Federation's interest in acquiring new members is merely to promote peace and stability in the galaxy, not territorial expansion.
The Federation does not "control" any of the areas designated as foreign territory. For example, Klingons are members of the Federation, but the Federation has no say in how Klingons conduct their own government. If the Klingons were to do something that violates the treaty (such as supporting the Dominion), then they can be booted from the Federation, but that's all.
The Federation is not a fascist dictatorship seeking total control/subjugation of other species.
Again, this is analogous to the United Nations -- Germany is a member, but the United States (nor any other member of the UN) has any direct influence on German politics.
@@sixstanger00 Federalism over Imperialism.
The methods are different but the goals are the same.
@@Marinealver No, the goals are not the same. Not in the least. Some of you clearly did not pass your political science classes in high school.
Imperialism seeks to expand it's own government's territory by subjugating weaker ones. The British Partition of India for example, or the colonizing of the Americas are examples of imperialism, because the British government is a monarchy, and they make no apologies for their imperialist ways.
Federalism on the other hand, seeks to strengthen the whole by inviting others to join the community. However unlike imperialism, Federalism does not subjugate it's members, nor does one member have greater authority over others in a federation.
For example, in Star Trek, the United Federation of Planets is made up of numerous governments - Vulcan, Klingon, Andorian, Orion, Ferengi, Bajoran, etc. But each of these respective governments still enjoy full independence; the Klingons are members of the Federation, but their government is still the Klingon Empire. Klingons are not subject to Earth's government any more than the Borg.
A Federation - particularly one made up of multiple governments - is just a "United Nations" in space. The US, Japan, Canada, etc are all members of the UN, but they each have separate governments and are independent from one another.
Imperialism is expansion in service to it's empire, federalism is growing a community in service to the whole.
One of the reasons why I liked DS9, it took apart the future Roddenberry had built where humans were seemingly free of racism, hunger, poverty, war but there's a price to be paid for paradise. Quark is right about one thing humans are peaceful as long as our basic needs are met take that away and we'd be indistinguishable from any other Klingon. The line between civility and savagery is paper thin.
It fits surprisingly well with the fantrek theories ... first contact with Ferengi in TNG depicted them as a brutal, combative, savage species ... because (it is speculated) the Ferengi had examined humans and determined that we're an insanely militant bloodthirsty species, so they attempted to seize an advantage by presenting themselves as a fearsomely powerful threat. (Which didn't really work out well for them, since they're all abject cowards so they just ended up looking like clowns, but hey anything which can make a profit is worth the effort, yes?)
Every once in a while, we need reminders of why we need to sort out our problems... because we won't like what will come for us if we're not better prepared.
I mean, he was absolutely right. But compared to o other races like klingons and jem hadar the humans were pretty mild, and also, people like cap Sisko or Bashir were extremely human abnormally good evem in worst situations. So even if quark was right. The bad state of humans in this universe is conditional, and also only individual, not a rule. However humans in the real world are almost always trash
@@mule2081 well we didnt hunt the megafauna into extinction with bare hands, we used projectiles like arow and spear
@@daanvos194 lmao...humans did not hunt megafauna into extinction. That's such a stupid theory with no evidence in the fossil record.
Armin Shimmerman highlighted this as one of his most favourite parts that he ever got to perform as Quark.
ArcaneAzmadi Completely agree. When this series started I hated his character, by the end of the series I realized some of my favourite episodes were the ones based around him.
CCJJ160Channels that's because tng set Ferengi characters up to be let downs. DS9 made sure we wanted to see more Ferengi, they were the best critics of humans.
+V Guyver
i agree. tng ferengi were just caricatures.
ds9 ferengi were people, with an actual culture.
tng is my favourite series, but ds9 with its superior character development is a very close second.
I haven't seen the TNG Ferengi but on Ds9 I feel they made them more rounded . Do any of you recommend any episodes of TNG for me to checkout
"The Last Outpost", episode 5 of season1. Basically, the Ferengi are clowns.
i love how Ferengi isn't just a filler space goblins. they are just a cynical misunderstood race who actually makes many great points
The introduction of the Ferengi in the TNG pilot has to stand out as one of the cringiest introductions of an alien species in all of science fiction history. Like the Klingons of the TOS, they were introduced as a pure villain species. But the Klingons at least as stand-ins for Nazis or Communists were at least regarded as human equivalents - a "but for the grace of God there go I" sort of race. They weren't really any different than the mirrorverse Terran Empire, and TOS drew the parallel explicitly in the introduction of the species in "Errand of Mercy" where the ending shows that the two species really aren't that different after all.
TNG isn't nearly as subtle in its hatred or derision or "speciesism". The Ferengi are all the things the conventional dominant morality of the day hated drawn in the crudest possible way as subhuman pitiful evil beings without any redeeming virtue - not even honorable enemies.
DS9 manages to redeem the Ferengi and in doing so redeems the TNG era morality a bit by showing that how the Federation views things is itself just a bias and an arrogance.
@@celebrim1 I have never heard it explained so well before.
Those fucking laser dildos, man...
the laser dildo's...
@@celebrim1 Klingons weren't Nazi or Communist stand ins, the Federation was Communist. Everyone in the Federation shared resources equally. Klingons were the old school American (and British, and Roman, and every other reasonable culture in human history) idea of "If I take it it's mine".
@@willdavis3802 Simplistic and false. Even the federation isn't really communist, they're just post-scarcity on SOME well-advanced settlements. Currency exists, and 'the people' don't have ownership over everything. Romulans were more akin to Russia cold war, Cardassians were the NAZI comparison. I get it, lefties want complete ownership over the fandom and they use the myth of the communist federation to cement their claim and kick out any rightoids.
But any Treckie with critical thinking skills knows this is absurd.
@@willdavis3802"Star Trek is communist". Which is why it was written by man who was a fan of ayn rand?
I love how Quark says "Hyoo-mon"
Wil Manric hooman c:
ferengi must have evolved from cats
It's probably a sort of insult in Ferenginese, like "gringo", "gaijin", or "gweilo".
@@DemonEyes622 Actually they can't pronounce "human" correctly due to their mouth structure, so they do the best approximation. Most Ferengi are like Quark. They ADORE humans normally... but also fear them.
This is why human beings work to hold _on_ to our creature comforts. We _know_ bad things happen to us when we go hungry. That's why we work and fight not to go hungry. Bad things happen when the sleeping giant awakens, so we strive to keep him asleep.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
If you haven't noticed, Deep Space Nine takes digs at anything and everything even vaguely positive from the Star Trek series which preceded it.
@@Ragitsu while you are right, you forget that some humans willingly AND joyfully tortures members of our own species. simply "because its fun".
if a creature can derive a sick pleasure from torturing other members of its own species, Then Quark is as right as right can be :)
@@Ragitsu To be real, compared to a lot of species in Trek, humans do tend to represent their "dark side" which makes it that much more dangerous when that door gets opened. About the only thing more vicious when it snaps is a Vulcan during pon farr and for the same reasons.
Humanity in Trek thinks that by suppressing their darker emotions they've somehow become more evolved. However, it's easy to be a saint in paradise.
DS9 isn't so much taking a jab at humanity, but reminding people that, while better, humanity still has much room for improvement.
Hell, even from the beginning with Q's Trial of Humanity, there's been a contention that humanity isn't *truly* there yet, but is overall on a good path towards it.
@@InfernosReaper "To be real, compared to a lot of species in Trek, humans do tend to represent their "dark side" which makes it that much more dangerous when that door gets opened. "
That's a problem with the writers failing to flesh out alien species...or rather, keeping them a certain way to make the Humans alongside them contrast (in terms of personality) that much more sharply. As is, I'd rather reside with Humans instead of most Klingons, Cardassians, Breen, Hirogen, Vaadwaur, et cetera. On the other hand, most any species *more* benevolent than Humans would make for fantastic neighbors.
@@scar445 "some humans willingly AND joyfully tortures members of our own species. "
Yes, but they are aberrations. Other species are entirely - or almost entirely - sadistic/psychopathic.
My father served in Vietnam and the Korean War, and he said that he saw people collect ears off of corpses as "tally markers". When I was older, he showed me actual photos of just that. The ketracel-white tube necklace is a brutal real-world comparison, and it sells it all that much more. An amazing episode, and an amazing scene.
+effluviah the writer had served in Vietnam. That's why it's so accurate. War makes good people turn into monsters over time. There were a few GI's from WWII who had been very good friends in one town, over the years most of them had passed away, but recently one of their widow's came forth to another GI with bleached human remains of Japanese soldiers skulls and thumbs. They were war trophies, from an otherwise popular respected soldier, and family member. It wasn't revealed until this incident that the majority of the townships veterans had done this during the war.
+V Guyver That is what I love about this episode: it doesn't whitewash war, it shows us the brutality of it.
The Borg caused Picard to go full captain Ahab and ignited the militarization of the federation basically after the borg arrived you saw the shift in the Federation becoming a more warlike organization and the Dominion further brought that into play
Reminds me of an old WWII vet I was speaking to a few years ago as I fixed his computer. We got to talking about the current foreign conflicts the US are involved with and things that happen during war, he told me about witnessing American soldiers throwing pliers over the fence towards Japanese POW's and shooting whomever they landed closest too.
If anything Quark undersells humanity here.
War is no limits hardball. Where you can do whatever you want. And your only limits is what the enemy stops you from doing and what you stop yourself from doing.
Quark couldn't be more right. It is refreshing to hear it said so plainly and not sugar-coated like it usually is in a TV series or movie.
+Aleatha Vogel Hell it's refreshing to hear it more so in Star Trek, a show that likes to show humans being nearly flawless.
Even more rare in Star Trek.
Furthermore, later in the episode, Quark finds himself pulling that same will to kill out in order to protect Nog.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
@@Ragitsu and you look like a fucking idiot for copy-pasting the same comment.
RIP Aron. Thank you for bringing something special to the Ferengi and the world of Star Trek.
Take away their toilet paper...
Too soon :D
LMAO
That just makes his point more valid
🤣🤣😭😂😂
Sad thing is thats not funny, its scarily true.
What a wonderful way for the writers to say "All of these species are an exploration of humanity." This show is so damned great!
I've always thought like this:
Klingons are imperialist Japan.
Roumulans are soviets.
Cardassians are Nazis.
Ferengi are hypercapitalists.
Borg are evil.
You think of how we make aliens mostly humanoid. It shows that we see aliens in a commonly anthropomorphic perspective. Still love their creativity.
This scene reminds me of the scene in the dark night when the joker says: you'll see, when the chips are down, these civilized people, they'll eat each other. They're only as good as the world allows them to be.
of coruse they fucking are sherlock, we're just animals. That's why we build societies so we don't end up like that
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living.
Exactly, it isn't limited to just humans. Vulcans are very violent without their logic and they have the strength when they are furious. Klingons already embraced their violent nature, put them in a similar situation and they may be violent towards each other as well, fighting for even some water or food of such scarcity. Any species in the universe can fall into this kind of violent behavior if someone or some event puts them there. I think they have been some exaggeration, but I can say that humans aren't the only ones who can cross lines of falling into brutal violence when you think about it fictionally. In reality, we're still the only species in the Solar System on Earth.
Take the darkest path into the deepest hell, but protect your own as I have sought to protect mine. Did I do right, Doctor? Tell me. --Davros
While the ST universe is full of humanoid species who could fit Quark's description of what happens after exposure to prolonged stress and violence, humans seem to be the only ones claiming it could never happen to them. That's the difference.
"I feel sorry for the Jem'Hadar."
--- Nog, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.
AVoiceOfOpinion93 I feel sorry for them too. They have much in common with the Klingons. They love to fight but they still try to behave with honor. It's just that the founders konditoned them and addicted them to a drug so they are forced to do whatever they say.
Avatarbee They don't have a concept of honor outside of just serving the founders. DS9 showed that they were bred to be blood thirsty maniacs, and that's what they mostly were. But a few decent Jem'Hadar who were "Honered Elders" eventually lived long enough to start to develope some sort of honor because they were bestowed some.
Odo and the founders are apparently trying to fix the more negative qualities of the Jem'Hadar.
AVoiceOfOpinion93 This needed to be in the video. It was the best possible riposte and my favorite line in DS9.
AVoiceOfOpinion93 That is what Nog said next.
the jem hadar fight for nothing. the humans fight for themselves. there is no contest.
"You know what I think Uncle? I feel sorry for the Jem'Hadar."
Humans are a kind race, but deprive them from toilet paper ...
It doesn’t take much to push us over the edge. We are generally happy as quark said with our creature comforts. Take it away, Put our survival on the line, and we can and will turn into monsters. We’ve spent centuries suppressing those animalistic urges. They come out in war and hardship. Watch what happens when food runs out in the stores. It will NOT be pretty. We will revert to our base tribal mentality. Take care of you and yours because no one else matters when you need to feed and care for yourself and family. That is what will happen if we run out of “stuff” in the stores.
@@Rikimaru0523 Humanity is the Kind Monster.
Ahhh covid. Lol.
And so the rest of the galaxy decided it was in their best interests not to fuck around with Humanity, and they all basked in the eternal glory of the Terran Empire.
The End.
DarkNova50 The only ones who didn't get the memo was the Borg.
And look how that turned out
@Leo Jansen I know I'm saying that humans could turn the Borg against Borg remember Voyager
GLORY TO THE EMPEROR OF MANKIND!
Then the bugs said "No more."
After what I have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan and the stuff veterans of those wars and others have told me, and even what everyone can readily see on the internet...
I would agree with Quark's assessment.
A stupid man starved is infinitely more dangerous than an educated man with a full stomach.
@@Neyonius the irony is that the western men in those war hell holes are there starved stupid men doing the bedding of evil western bankers. The entire western population has become corrupted by stupidity.... and soon hunger...
Now you know why ww2 was so savage , as those same people that run that war came out of a meatgrinder of the first world war.
@@rauldatta474 - LOL. That's the biggest load of nonsense I've seen all day. No, we weren't "starved stupid men doing the bidding of evil western bankers." "Evil western bankers" is just a recycled antisemitic slur, anyway.
@@marcusfranconium3392 You're wrong.
Do you know why appeasement happened?
Because those "savage" men served in WWI and had become leaders of their nations 20 years later and REMEMBERED what that was like and DIDN'T WANT it to happen again. That's why they were so recalcitrant to engage in war as long as they felt they might get away with not doing so. Only when it was apparent that Hitler wasn't going to be appeased did they finally shift focus to stopping him. If he had stopped after the first few conquests, the war would never have happened.
A modern day example of this is Putin. Putin basically owns Crimea. Sure, the maps all have it as Ukrainian, but in every way that actually counts, it now belongs to Russia and has for six years...and no one's done anything about it NOR WOULD anyone. Even Ukraine had largely written it off and was merely trying to contain how much Russia took by contesting them in Donbas. Had Putin stopped there, people would mention it from time to time, but no one would care.
But now he's invaded Ukraine itself and marched on the capital in Kiev while attacking all over the country and...
...the world offers "severe sanctions" instead of war.
All mankind resorts to savagery when they are forced against a wall, but NOT all mankind resort to savagery ABSENT being forced against a wall. That is the distinction.
Personally, I've always loved Star Trek's optimism, but I have to admit that scenes like these were very refreshing. Quark made some very strong points here. Another great episode was "In the Pale Moonlight", in which Sisko became an accessory to murder (committed by Garak) in order to trick the Romulans into declaring war against the Dominion. Quark and Garak were excellent characters.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
@@Ragitsuwell, then let's discuss that:
1 - Vulcans. They come off as possibly the wisest species. They have ability for emotional balance, as well as a focus on logical approaches. While they do have a standing army, they are more diplomats.
2 - Ferengi. Space Jews - I'm not gonna sugarcoat it. Their whole approach on capitalistic economy is revered so much, they consider it religion. They protect their interest, and ihis has been reflected throughout all of TNG.
3 - Klingons. The funky looking Alien Spartans. They were, in fact, enemies of the Federation. They also gave the Federation a run for its money. Like Humanity, they were victims to infighting themselves. The Federation found its niche, and preceded to submit the Klingons into the (Khatamer) Accords.
There are others, but these are the 3 main ones I know. They also reflect humanity the best: we are philosophical, we are cunning, and we are violent. Having all 3 eventually balancing out is what helped create the stepping stones for the Federation.
Sisko was not an accessory to murder he help architect it. Garak was pulled into the web cause he could do what Sisko could not. That was the whole point of mixing Garak in in the first place. Sisko only issue was knowing what he was a part of results and all could he live with it?
I loved DS9. The earlier Treks were about establishing human ideals. This Trek was about putting those ideals to the fire and seeing how well they held up.
This is why I love Deep Space 9. The Original Star Trek, and Next Generation showed a very idealized humanity. A human race that has somehow managed to suppress its most violent impulses, a humanity that lives in a veritable utopia with no real war, hunger, disease, or any of the other maladies of the human race. The result is a humanity that is smug and superior, a human race that views its past with nothing but contempt, seeing its ancestors as barbarians who were slave to their base urges to kill and pillage.
But Deep Space 9 abandons that. Deep Space 9 shows a much more nuanced view of human violence. It shows that underneath all the smugness and superiority, humans are still humans. That when their backs are really to the wall, the human race won't just back down and let the Dominion roll over them. They will fight, they will kill, and they will go to any and all lengths to destroy their enemy. It shows humanity's violent nature as an inherent part of the human experience but it also shows it in a much more fair light. Yes, we're violent. But our violence can be useful when our lives are threatened. What Picard might have dismissed as base bloodthirst and cruelty, Sisko might applaud as resolve and defiance in the face of a genocidal invader.
It has a more nuanced message that while yes, we should try to be better, we should not suppress our violent nature entirely. Rather, our violent nature can still be valuable when it is controlled, when it is brought out in times of great crisis. With the right state of mind, with the right focus, violence and bloodlust can be come courage and bravery. The desire to kill the enemy can be honed into the desire to defend your family. The indifference to death can give you the resolve to suffer through a battlefield.
Beautiful Comment. I’ve have not read a better synopsis on the Human Condition as well as DS9’s examination of it. Excellently done!
An award-winning essay, and should it have been voiced by any character in the Star Trek universe in conflict, it would have likely won several television awards and would have been epic... could still be epic should you allow Star Trek to still use it. ;)
Your words have aged well, fast forward one year later. Considering Ukraine, this rings ever more true.
Damn, I really need to finally watch Star Trek.
It always bemuses me when someone views humans and the Federation in TOS and TNG as having a smug and superior attitude. Especially given there's so many episodes across each that deal with even the long-term consequences of their very human and aggressive and less than ideal ways of handling things in both their ancient past as well as their recent past during Federation years. Time and time again the crew of each stumbles upon aliens with different cultures and ways of doing things and instead of thinking "Gosh, these are lower life forms and are so pathetic compared to us, they can't even communicate the same way we do!" or something similar they go out of their way to figure out how to communicate, how to learn about these people, etc, etc.
That is not something a group of people that had a smug superior view of themselves would do. They often talk about how bad their past was, how they're ever trying to be better than that while never forgetting the lessons of their past. The only difference is that DS9 bludgeons you over the head with "HUMANS ARE BAD AND HAVE A BAD PAST" and the other two confront that more discreetly without the need to take you back to the past in one form or another and show you examples of "HUMANS ARE BAD AND HAVE A BAD PAST" because for the other two it's about space exploration primarily and so simple dialogue about such things is often enough.
DS9, however, isn't about exploration. It's about culture and diversity because the station has a very multicultural aspect to it. To this extent it has room to be a more heavy handed commentary on humanity, its past, its successes and failures, and the like. There's no nuance here, it's very blunt with its messaging, to the point that even the most oblivious of racists, bigots, and fascists get the message of "These shitty things that some people do are shitty and the people that do these things are shitty, too", which is why such people dislike DS9, because even they aren't so oblivious as to miss the fact they're being called out as shitty people, where as the others handle such topics more discreetly to the point that it can be lost on those who aren't really paying attention.
"It's easy to be a saint in Paradise"
Monsters come when it's cold and dark. We are those monsters
This scene is DS9 in a nutshell and why it holds up far better in 2020 than any older Star Trek show.
They really made it timeless
Well he's not wrong. Deprive people of the necessities of living and put them in a dangerous situation where there in a heightened state of fear for an extended space of time.... and most people will turn into bloodthirsty savages, doing anything to stay alive just a little while longer.
+SirCraigius Which is technically an evolutionary advantage, as if it were Not for that capability, you'd simply die. Pathetically.
Moreover, that is not a permanent state of mind. People can, and do, come back from that edge. It's not easy, but it's possible. The human mind has a way of subconsciously compartmentalizing feelings and emotions, suppressing them and filing them away to deal with later. Essentially, "You don't have time to worry and mope about the morality of what you are doing and have to do in order to survive. We will deal with this later when your life is not in danger. Right now, you need to focus on surviving and getting out of here by any means necessary."
This 'dealing with it later' part, generally becomes PTSD.
+SirCraigius That is why morality would not apply in a lawless scenario: when the luxuries you take for granted on a daily basis go away and people don't know if they will live to see another day, everyone will abandon the façade placed on them by their peers.
***** You forgot about the rise of tribal warlords and petty kingdoms fighting over the scraps.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
I think his point is simply that humans are not perfect, even if we like to think we are. I do think we're ahead of many. What would take terrible circumstances are embraced in everyday life of like Klingons and Jem'hadar. But even when we can keep a lid, those capabilities still lurk beneath the surface.
I grant you that Quark sometimes does it too, trying to act like his own people are superior. He says their history doesn't have some of the lows of humanity. But then we see how they treated women up until Ishga started to change things.
Hands down the best scene of the series, amazingly acted and directed! A Bartender is going to be one of the best judges of sentient beings, and Quark is a good bartender
You forgot the last part: "Maybe. But I like 'em." -Nog
Fuck this series was awesome. Of all the Star Trek series and movies this is the only one I truly loved with a passion. So many great scenes and great episodes.
I remember in season one I hated Quark (and all the stupid Ferengi episodes) but even they grew on me.
Actually...Nog replies with 'I feel sorry for the Jem Hadar'. I just watched the episode again.
Dude, you missed the best part of this. "I feel sorry for the Jem'Hadar"
Quark is an underrated character and very deep thinker.
Amazing observer of people. He seems more scared to be surrounded by this group of humans than he does around the big bads of the series. He knows this is a different, more primitive and dangerous version, just by looking at them.
@@WhydoIsuddenlyhaveahandle the Changeling would rather have you alive. Enslaved. Kneeling. After all, you can't pay dues and worship if you're dead. The Borg wants you assimilated- you're of no use to them otherwise. The Klingon will not even bother with you if you aren't a warrior they can test themselves against. But humans? Humans will just flat out fucking kill you, full stop, no questions asked, do not pass Go do not collect 200 bars of gold-plated latinum, if we have been reduced to throwing civility out the window. And we will seek to kill you, and everyone who looks like you, by the most efficient means possible.
Alright be honest, how often do we see Quark act seriously when he's not talking about latinum, profits, or holosuites. During this whole episode he acts more like Nog's father than Rom, he even puts Sisko on notice when Nog got injured
Quark has always looked after Nog, even if it wasn't that obvious.
Don't forget episode 1; Quark only stayed on DS9 to keep Nog out of prison. Which is a hell of a thing to do for a Ferengi, especially when it's not his own son. Even Nog's mother abandoned him, afterall. And this was at a time where DS9 was certainly not safe for anyone.
Take away a Ferengi's gold and watch'em go apeshit! lol
gold is worthless, Latnium is everything
It is funny that a Ferengi is criticizing human reliance on creature comforts. I've never seen a Ferengi "roughing it".
@@jakepullman4914 quark didn't deny that. He simply pointed out that humans claiming that they're so enlightened and evolved is bullshit. He might've said Ferengi were superior on occasion but was saying it more as an insult than anything well thought out.
A shitty flawed being is just as capable, if not more, of making an accurate assessment of humanity
@@joehill4094 yup. Latinum is one such material they can't replicate. So it's valuable.
@@jakepullman4914 ferengi are even notoriously delicate, their hypersensitive ears cause them all kinds of pain. It's probably why they don't start many wars, ferengi would make crap soldiers. And even better, quark himself is a bit of a wimp, whining and getting his ass kicked repeatedly
Still, I think this scene is less about a condemnation of the human race, and more about teaching nog about the danger he's in. Nog won't or can't see the truth of the matter, because he's inexperienced, Quark is just trying to disillusion him
I think it still fits with Gene's hopes for the future. Even he must have known that Human nature can't be so easily changed.
Quark is right of course.
Even in TOS and TNG we see humans that are ..well, humans. They are not many but they exist. They often were just the villain of the week, dispatched at the end of the episode, but it shows us that there were still "evil" humans, or extremely ambitious/corrupt etc..In a situation of war, without their comforts, that side is bound to show up.
I love the way the Ferengi say hu-mons
The interesting thing is that when he was talking to Garak he said it normally. I think it's intentional.
it's a slur of some sort.
@@3Rayfire I've always wondered about that, because Quark does not consistently pronounce it that way, and frankly when he says it normally, I am always a little bit disappointed, LOL!
He's not wrong....
Quark failed to realize one thing. Like so many times in our own past, freedom and liberty had to defend itself against tyranny. I give the creators of DS9 credit for one thing: No matter how peaceful you are, there will always come a time when another power is bent on taking your freedom and liberty.
Yes other humans. You see the nonsense? Freedom and Liberty championed by humans against Tyranny created by other humans? An endless cycle of stupidity.
@@EmptyMan000 Tell me you don't understand the human condition without telling me you don't understand.
See, this is why you want to keep your people happy and content ... revolutions and insurrections have started for less ...
All you have to do is define what happiness and contentment are.
nightsaber99 No, changing the definition won't help ~ people which are actually happy and content because they're well treated and have an abundance of entertainment options are unlikely to riot.
Herd the French Revolution was sparked by a shortage of flippin' bread as the last straw. Remember, "Let them eat cake"?
Shogun1982 The first of most important part of 'happy and content', is well fed. It wasn't simply a shortage of bread, it was a shortage of food in general. Being on the losing end of a few unsuccessful wars drained the countries wealth, followed by bad harvests causing shortages of food, sparked the people of France to seek the elimination of what they perceived as a weak and ineffectual government.
Guitardrumr Always good to see a student of history.
He is talking about survival instinct. pure and simple. We do what we feel we have to to survive.
There is a reason why humans have so many rules.
I agree with what he says about humans and I am actually proud of it. It may scare others that we can go from friendly and wonderful to violent and merciless, but life isn't all war OR peace. Life is a cruel, confusing mixture of war AND peace. It's hard not to lash out at your closest allies or capitalute to sweet-talking villains, but humans adapt.
Lashing out at your closest allies? You really are crazy.
I think that Quark makes an interesting observation, and yet I think that he draws the wrong conclusion. Yes, put people, humans, in a very difficult (wartime) situation and we can become really nasty (i.e. like Klingons). But I don't think that that's necessarily a bad thing. I think that one could call it a survival instinct. The key thing is what do we do when the situation returns to normal (i.e. peace). Do we return to being nice people or not? I think that most do, but some are changed by the experience even though they may not wish to be. And people like that probably need all the help they can get.
Tbh humans are more brutal and sadistuc then klingons
@@cancerbucket2245 except they aren't.....
The Romans pretty much didn't when they fight hannibal.
Because no one came back
@@cancerbucket2245 We learned it from nature.
One of Quarks best lines in the series, and my favorite exchange between he and Nog. RIP Aron!
Lmao at "Mail order?"....Quark is by far the best character on the show in my opinion
This episode, and in the pale moon light are why DS9 is my favourite Star Trek series
Yes. They could relax and have fun, too. "Take Me Out to the Holosuite" and "You Are Cordially Invited".
Quark was a fantastic character. This show had top tier writing and character development.
Quark is telling the truth. At first I didn't like DS9 but I watched it again and I fell in love with it. It showed how humanity would really react if everything were lost. DS9 is a crown jewel in all of Star Trek.
R.I.P. Aron Eisenberg :( This Episode and It's Only a Paper Moon are probably his best performances in DS9.
An Andorian acquaintance once said, "Don't push the pink skins to the thin ice." It wasn't very eloquent, but................
Quark was right ...
is is
There was always a flip side of this that i don't see people talking about as often, a bookend if you will. After quark gives this a little further in this episode, Nog is wounded, and quark stays by his bedside. The perimeter is breached, and Jem'Hadar enter the infirmary. In a single instant, Quark becomes ferocious and blasts a Jem'Hadar in the heart while screaming, face twisted with aggression. After the danger has passed, his face stays hard, but there is a look in his eyes, like he knows he has become just as dangerous as the humans he warned Nog about.
And it all happened in a single instant.
You are right Quark, but even so, you wanted to sell root bear again...
He was making money off of it.
+Frank G
greed is the greatest virtue
I think that would be true for any race, not just humans.
I think so too. Self-preservation is a powerful motivator.
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living.
Humans have an unusually war like tendency and past compared to most of the other Star Trek races. I don't think Roddenberry would have minded Quark pointing this out as it shows humans have generally advanced beyond that war like stage.
I recall an episode of The Enterprise where some Vulcans are sent back in time and stranded on earth. They refuse to hunt wild animals because they say they would rather die than "resort to something so barbaric". Many other races have extremely rigid ethics and philosophies, whether it is warlike such as Klingons, or peaceful like Vulcans. So I would say in this universe, it is not necessarily true. There are many philosophies or religions on earth today even, that would rather die than commit certain acts they see as socially deleterious.
Except that the point behind scenes like this is that they/we haven't. Not really.
'When you're pushed. Killings as easy as breathing.' - John Rambo.
.... and that's why humans will always overcome any threat.... because we are sweet, and kind, and helpful, until we aren't'.
Specifically looked this video up for Covid-19 comments. Was not disappointed.
What Quark misses is most humans don't WANT that kind of living situation, whereas certain other species do.
and you look like a fucking idiot for copy-pasting the same comment.
@@pendraco2000 Pot meet kettle.
"Feed men, and then ask of them virtue!" - The Grand Inquisitor
A reminder the nicest dog is only three denied meals away from a wolf.
I loved this series but after coming home from Afghanistan it had new significance for me. 3 particular episodes come to mind, Nor the Battle to The Strong, The Siege of AR-558, and It’s Only a Paper Moon. Those 3 became my favorites. I find it odd that sci fi shows from my childhood offer the most realistic portrayals of modern war.
Don't push the pink skins to the thin ice.
"When the chips are down, these so-called civilized people? They'll eat each other" - The Dark Knight
Keep in mind, humans are three meals away from savagery.
This is why I love DS9, it took a lot of aliens from TNG and evolved them into real characters. The early Ferenghi were little more then greedy trolls but here we get to see that at least two of them can be more.
Never thought I’d see the day when Quark and the Joker make the same (accurate) observation.
Considering in our own history, how savage, cruel, evil and vicious Humans can be to each other, Quark is more than correct.
Humanity's hunger for survival is as strong today as it ever was, and would still exist in the 24th century.
DS9 actually did a pretty good job of turning the supposed "utopian" ideals of star fleet on their head. Another favorite of mine is where Jake tries to explain to Nog why humans dont need money... While trying to get some money from him.
Some of Starfleets actions during the Dominion War, and Section 31as a whole are two other good examples.
If you don't want to be a beast, don't go to war. If war must come, weep the day it is declared, for one no comes out of it better than when they went into it, even if they win. The winner of a war is the one who loses the least.
The war (and struggle in general) is of the things that can let out the best (and worst) in people and is key factor for human progress.
Change it up a little:
If you don't want to be a beast, don't go to war. But if war comes to you ... the winner is the one who has not lost the beast.
i dont think that russia lost the least...they won and lost the most.
Rule of Acquisition #125 You can't make a deal if you're dead. Quark quotes this one later in the episode.
feel like he really did just describe existence in general... what animal or interstellar species wouldn't act like this... is called desperation
I hate to say it, but Quark was correct. While dire circumstances can bring out the best in some humans, often times, they bring out the worst. It's easy to be nice to others when all is well. But it's a set of desperate circumstances that truly put our moral and ethical values to the test. A test that in my opinion, most people would fail. Perhaps even myself.
They made the same observations earlier in the series about the Maquis. Their acts were considered unthinkable from the point of view of anyone living on Earth, which was practically a paradise in that time. But what about in the frontier where you live a far less affluent life? Then the matter takes a different turn.
@@DkSchadow and then ofcourse they got pressed by the changelings and we saw how earth reacted to pressure.
Put his kin in danger, and even Quark will be just as savage as any. Later in the show, we see him cut down a Jem'Hadar without blinking.
You cut off one of the best parts... where Nog says he feels sorry for the dominion.
The founding species of the Federation, despite all the progress they''ve achieved are still Vulcans, Humans, Andorians, and Tellarites, all very capable of serious violence. For humans and ESPECIALLY Vulcans, *extreme* violence.
I really wish we had an episode, dedicated to quarks background that would showcase why he seems to have insider knowledge to how dark humans can be. Because there’s a story there that they never told us. Because he you hear it in his voice in this episode, it’s not just like others of his kind that look down at them for getting rid of money.
"hoo-mans: they're a wonderful friendly people, as long as their bellies are full and their holodecks are working"
@batlantern Armin Shimmerman said one of the primary reasons he took the role of Quark was to undo the damage TNG did to the Ferengi. (He played the first Ferengi essentially, the one who spoke the most in "The Last Outpost"). He said the Ferengi were ridiculous in their first episode and damaged what they were trying to do to the point where the Ferengi couldn't be the top villain the writers were trying to establish them in being, because no one would have taken them seriously.
Everytime I watch this part I can't stop thinking at the scene of ST ENT were the terrestrial ambassador of Vulcan talks to admiral Forrest and says how much humans scares the Vulcans
The siege of AR-558. Classic and Iconic.
Geesh guys. Take it for what it is worth. Star Trek and all fiction is full of observations and inferences meant to make you think. They are little reflective pieces that together describe our natures. None of them alone are a complete picture. Humans are capable of both ends of the spectrum in ALL circumstances. There are counter examples at either end. To all you misanthropes: Odo and other characters have many positive (and true) things to say about humans. The bottom line is that there is no hard fast rule that describes humanity 100%. In addition (and to all who deny that this is a human tendency), the point of many religions is to overcome our "base" natures. Those who do so tend to be the ones who defy this logic. Those who don't tend to quibble and argue without trying to understand their opponents.
+moverseve Honestly in many cases religion seems to embrace them. Shun and discriminate against those who don't believe. Only Our religion is right, the others are Wrong. Stone/kill those who refuse to believe, kill the apostates. This doesn't apply to everyone, but it's enough to drive home that religion doesn't do jack shit to control our 'base' natures. That is up to every individual to do or not do on their own; religion hardly factors in to it, and in many cases is used to justify embracing our darker nature.
Um... did I say anything about religion? Your complaints remind me of another truth spoken by Iron Maiden "The evil that men do lives on and on..."
That is another unfortunate truth. Many people obsess over the evil that men do.... especially religious people for oh so many reasons; but mostly because it justifies their own. However, since you brought it up.. for every evil that a religious man does there are probably 5 more religious people who actually live their religion and do good in the world that goes unnoticed because good news doesn't sell.
moverseve
Yes you did actually. "the point of many religions is to overcome our "base" natures".
It hasn't actually worked out well, like I said. They arn't inherently better than people who arn't religious at any rate; you don't need religion to be good, and being religious doesn't inherently Make you good; the amount of terrorism committed in the name of and justified by various religions shows that well enough.
Essentially they arn't any better, or necessarily worse, than the non-religious; they just have another 'reason' to justify their actions. i.e. "This is the Right thing to do! This fairy tale says so!"
+WitheringintheDark in general I am in complete agreement with your last post (except your assumptions about religion itself.. to say it is comprised of "fairy tales" is a groundless system of belief since even science can't prove or disprove it). The teachings of many (if not most) religions themselves explicitly state that their followers aren't any better or worse than anyone else. They all explicitly state that the purpose of life is to overcome human nature. They also say (if you study them close enough) that those who use their religion to justify their evil actions are just as bad or worse off than anyone who does the same as a non-believer. The whole point of many (not all) religions is to accept that human nature is "flawed" to some extent and to reach for something better. I would wager that the "religious" people you speak of who commit atrocities really have no clue what their religion is really about. This is why I think that people who hold up these reprobates as the reason they don't believe in something have no ground to stand on.
moverseve moverseve Eggs-fuckin-zactly
People have forgotten that the entire point of Story, all the way back to the oral traditions, is to create a social political narrative. I don't say that to denigrate the idea or imply it's political propaganda, not in the way such is commonly thought, but that Story, when done right, is meant to give both insight into the world and structural behavior to act upon it in a way that benefits both the self and society. But it's not a one-size-fits-all concept. They are observations by the writer about specific things.
Have a Snickers bar!
Why?
Because you're not yourself when you're hungry!
It's almost as if, when threatened with injury, starvation, the death of loved ones, etc, we'll do anything and everything to NOT die 🤷♂️
Nog wasn't meant to be a Ferengi. He was meant to be a honorable warrior. Rip Aron Eisenberg
His critical years culturally were spent on a Federation outpost surrounded by humans, its sort of an important point of the show
Don't push the pink skins on to thin ice
What about the dark skins?
Quark of all people should know that it applies to everyone, not just humans. He was around Bajor during the Cardassian occupation, and being exposed to such injustice and oppression turned the Bajorians into fierce people.
Truth is, that's often what you sacrifice to become a hero: Your humanity.
Boss.
Define superhero? If by hero like superman? Then no that dude is more human than most humans on that planet. Or we talking real life heros like doctors or honest cops or hardworking teachers? Don't see those guys walking around without any humanity. The one thing you sacrifice when you become a hero is your life. Because at that point you stop living for yourself and you live for the world.
Quark really helped this series, loved the character. Excellent acting on behalf of the star himself ...
People can be beyond violent when we are forced to damn mobile app
Great. Thanks for the the post. AR-558 was the best episode of any Star Trek...ever!
You know the Ferengi would fit right into current Human society.
So do other races not experience desperation?
Either way, it's interesting watching him sneak about, terrified of the humans around him, like they're dangerous animals. It's not a perspective we get to see a lot in the very cliche sci fi genre, where every alien is either a noble savage or a highly verbose tech geek, or a "doesn't understand sarcasm" guy. I want to see more alien perspectives about human behavior that aren't just "those foolish humans will destroy themselves"
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
Dude, just why? Say it once and stop.
Ferengi were money driven but they were not warlike. They always tried to negotiate peace and in their history never partake in genocide or slavery. For them the humans and other similar species seem warlike and brutal.
Yea Ferengi are and were relatively peaceful compared to most other major species. Vulcans nearly destroyed themselves and train for years to eliminate emotion, Romulans and Cardissians are militaristic and oppressive, Klingons embrace violence as a way of life, and humans nuked themselves back a century before Vulcans fixed their shit. I know Ferengi are supposed to be everything wrong with capitalism but they imo didn't do a good job showing that over the series. The worse thing they've ever done was oppress women, which while terrible, comparatively doesn't seem as bad as other species who've done that then some.
@@Ragitsu and you look like a fucking idiot for copy-pasting the same comment.
Why I so like the Ferengi!
This episode was so intense.
I always remembered this line. Thank you for posting it.
The funny thing is that during Kirk's redshirt era against the Klingons they were pretty much more aggressive, militaristic than they are in TNG but only because they were equal in tech
TNG gave the Feddies more tech and they got complacent because of it (more utopian ideals), only when the Borg came along (which got Picard to reorganise the whole Starfleet) and DS9 hit with the Dominion using superior/equivalent tech they actually started to realise that some aliens just can't be reasoned with. Like Q said with the Borg they just can't relate ever to your ideals and successes with other species they just take what they want. Under this pressure without science to cushion everything comes the instinctive side of humanity.
humans in a nutshell
The problem with the writer of Quark's dialog trying to be clever is that humans are but one sapient species in a universe chock full of them. There are other species that would become bitter or even violent if you were to deprive them of their essentials of living. While some may view Quark's prejudicial observation as insightful, to me, it comes off as hollow when actually placed in the context of the fictional realm he inhabits.
Great scene. I remember it after all these years.
"An Andorian acquaintance once said: 'Never push the pink-skins to the thin ice.'"
- Ambassador Soval, Prelude to Axanar
This is one of the best scenes in all of Star Trek, which is at its best when it looks at humans and tells us an ugly truth about ourselves.
I don't see anything ugly about it.
Brian Bock that sounds like something a hu-mon would say