Was the Executioner right?

[welfconfed 2]

After having recently rewatched "The Conscience of the King", a statement made by Kodos the executioner began to make me wonder.

 

After a fugal infection destroyed most of the food supply of the colony of Tarus IV, Governor Kodos had half the colonists (the half he saw as unfit) killed. However the deaths were not necessary as the relief ships made it to the colony in time to prevent mass starvation.

 

Kodos stated that had the relief ships not arrived sooner than expected that he would have been seen as a hero for saving half the colony from starvation.

 

My question is was he right? If not a hero, would he have been seen as someone forced to take drastic action and the incident swept under the rug?

[Theunicornhunter 2]

That's a good question and I thought about it myself the last time I watched the episode. What would we do if food shortages ever hit - would we share what we had with everyone and when that was gone let everyone starve or just give food to only those most likely to survive and let the rest starve imediately so all would not be lost?

 

The next question is whether you could live yourself if you got food and your neighbor didn't?

 

I think he'd still be a monster in people's eyes because of what he did - he killed people outright even if technically his way would have kept everyone from starving. And he made a value judgment on people's lives - that alone most people would find unforgiveable.

[GhostofMajorHayes 10]

I think his motives were right - to keep as many people alive as possible. His methods, however were.... questionable to say the least. Yet, many people went along with him, he couldn't have carried out his policies alone. Imo, he was wrong to condemn a segment of the population to death, but I can understand where he would've thought he was doing some good.

[welfconfed 2]

That's a good question and I thought about it myself the last time I watched the episode. What would we do if food shortages ever hit - would we share what we had with everyone and when that was gone let everyone starve or just give food to only those most likely to survive and let the rest starve imediately so all would not be lost?

 

The next question is whether you could live yourself if you got food and your neighbor didn't?

 

I think he'd still be a monster in people's eyes because of what he did - he killed people outright even if technically his way would have kept everyone from starving. And he made a value judgment on people's lives - that alone most people would find unforgiveable.

 

I agree that public opinion would have ruled Kodos a monster, if the truth came out. However, who would be left to tell the tale but Kodos and those he 'saved'. Without the full horror coming out in the open, wouldn't the Federation Council simply ignore the whole distasteful affair.

Edited August 11, 2008 by welfconfed