An interesting observation which suggests that by the TNG time the Federation had become pretty elitist and relativist to the point of being amoral. I like how you can see an evolution from a more moral-minded, exception-oriented TOS Federation to a 24th century one that is so used to their comfortable chairs and perfectly peaceful Earth that they condemn their own people to opression (Cardassians and the Maquis, addressed beautifully by Captain Sisko) and consider letting planets be destroyed rather than interfere in a way that DOES NOT AT ALL affect the development of the planet. Obviously, this is why the Federation in TOS was willing to stop the asteroid from destroying the planet in The Paradise Syndrome.Rochey wrote:The PD, in theory, is an excelent idea. Preventing captains from doing whatever they like with races that can't stop them is a must for any space-faring organisation. In TOS that's how it was treated: a way to stop people f*cking around with other races, while still allowing leeway for some situations that call for intervention.
In TNG, however, the PD was taken to the extreme. You could no longer get involved at all, regardless of what the situation was. This meant that not only were crews forced to sit back and watch entire species get wiped out, but they called it moral to do so.
We also, of course, get to see the Federation's principles decay to the point of being nonexistent. The Prime Directive seems to go along with this trend.
