Well, I suppose they were meant to be a direct representation of an unbridled capitalist society and mindset rather than a symbol (and BTW I'm not saying the Borg were intended by the writers to serve as the kind of symbol I'm talking about, just that that's one of the ways I see them).


But anyway, setting that distinction aside, I also think that the Ferengi ended up being just a bit too cute and unthreatening to effectively represent the darkest side of capitalism. Maybe I just didn't see enough of Deep Space 9, but my impression was that they were often intended to draw a chuckle from the audience: "Oh, those crazy Ferengi and their primitive greed, what'll they do next?!"

Yes, as you gentlemen say, the Ferengi started out as "the bad guys" for TNG but were quickly relegated to minor threat or even comic relief. However, thanks to DS9's tendency to explore alien cultures more fully than any other TREK series (because of its more static nature, I think), we were eventually treated to a richer handling of that business-savvy people.

At first, their extreme form of economic liberalism (coupled with their dismal treatment of females) made them an easy target for jokes and a way to caricature our real world's economic attitudes. The Ferengi were pretty much all that is bad about capitalism.

Had they remained just that, the nutty capitalists from space, they would have remained two-dimensional. However, evcen they were eventually treated with respect (even if an amused respect) by the show's producer: in one episode, Nog deplores that the Federation loves to act all high and virtuous when dealing with the Ferengi, really looking down on them because of their attachment to something as crass as money. But he showed that there was more than a little hypocrisy in that. And in the episode "Treachery, faith and the great river", the business acumen of Nog (and the Ferenegi concept of the Great Material Continuum) solves many, many problems... showing that even Ferengi philosophy has something to contribute.

I loved that about the show. It could be preachy, but usually made its point more subtly. Like Root Beer, it could be insidious!

I disagree!!  Very much so, in fact.   I LOVED Tripp and Malcolm.   Tripp, IMO, is the best engineer character in Star Trek lore (even with the goofy faking his death and making him a spy at the end).  Miles better than Geordi (who is the most boring of the TNG cast) and Scotty (a fun stereotype, but a stereotype none the less), IMO.   

Malcolm was just so much fun... yes, it most of his character didn't make sense in context of the future federation, but it totally didn't matter.  

Of course, I haven't really watched much DS9, perhaps once I do I'll agree more.   I'd personally always range the Original first, baring in mind when it was made and what they had to work with.   TNG was probably a better show overall, but they had so much more 'slickness'... TOS wins for exceeding expectations.  Totally agree Voyager is a distant 5th.. hell, I'd probably but the 'New Earth' set up from PAD ahead of it even without a TV show.   

I DID mention in the same post you're quoting that I really liked Tripp



Bite your damned tongue, sir! Geordi was the nice, shy, every-dork, as well as a fun straightman to Data. Wesley was a poor attempt at a Gary Stu that utterly failed to understand the age and maturity of the viewing demographic, but in the later seasons, the writers figured out that Geordi was a far more accurate embodiment of everyone who was watching the show, and they nailed the Gary Stu approach far more effectively with him.

Malcolm was a total a**hole, and multiple episodes spent a lot of time exploring this. I honestly have no idea what was likable about that character beyond his accent.

In hindsight, there was really only one aspect of the series that I didn't find worthwhile. The whole Pah Wraith thing was a terrible idea. That aside, literally everything the series ever spent time on and gave attention to was worthwhile. Everything.

Yes... Yes, that's true. And Gul Dukat, who was a marvelous character, up to that point, was kind of wasted on that. 

You lnow one thing I think DS9 managed better than all the other series? It was at giving depth to characters or species that would have served their purpose even if they had been all surface and no content.

The Bajorans, for example, were the courageous people who resisted an occupation. They could have been all heroic (if a little hard to reason with); a whole race of Kira Nerys. But we were also shown that these people for whom we rooted were also annoying religious fanatics, so that gave them more dimension. And then we were shown that even religious fanatics among them didn't need to be all bad. In the end we were left with this description of a complex people, neither good nor bad... the way people are in real life.

DS9 did a lot of that, making us realize that you couldn't simplify all situations into a case of good and evil, right or wrong. Even Weyoun, that sycophantic server of the genocidal Founders, was shown to be a truly honest soul at one point; and we saw the all pure and virtuous federation pull some very dirty stunts in its war against the Dominion. ("It's a faaaaaaaaaake!")

Man, I feel like watching the show all over, now!

TELEVISION PROGRAMS


My favorite Star Trek Program has always been - The Next Generation, then the Original Series.

Star Trek: The Original Series - 2nd Best
Star Trek: The Next Generation - 1st Best
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine - 4th Best (tied with Enterprise)
Star Trek: Voyager - 3rd Best
Star Trek: Enterprise - 4th Best (tied with DS9)

My favorite Character of all Television Program - Been Data, on the Next Generation, followed by Spock, of the Original Series, and Deanna Troi of Generation in that order.

Best Captain - To me it's tie between Picard and Kirk.

I'm not much a fan of DS9 at all, but I do like the Avery Brooks who played Captain Sisko.

Enterprise is the least entertaining of the series - but I do like the direction of this show and I do like the prequel aspects of it.