Starship Troopers...

I'm always surprised when we agree on some things. It's a nice feeling, but still it's a surprise. What we should bear in mind is that Heinlein was of a much older generation and grew to adulthood reading books, listening to the radio and to lectures and debates only. When he was initially formulating his politics and ideology and analyzing culture there was neither television nor internet, and nor was it a convenient matter at first -- outside of trains -- to travel the nation and expose oneself to different sub-cultures and so forth.

So since he was a brilliant man who always tried to bear in mind the remote possibility that he could occasionally be mistaken about things he remained somewhat open to revising his beliefs systems as he aged and matured and as culture and technology continued to change. Thus depending on what decade one investigates you are likely to encounter a different Heinlein. This was far more evident over the range and decades of his writings than was the norm for almost any other writer of science-fiction.

 

You sir are a scholar and a gentleman - I have a birthday coming up soon. So yay for me and volume 2

 

Finest kind!

 

Well, I don't grant apotheosis to any writer....but I am a RAH, RAH. R.A.H. fan (title of a Spider Robinson apologia to critics of Heinlein).

"ST" seems born of a man who saw his World War-II view of the military and war and "honor and glory", becoming out-dated due to the Korean War (police actions, armistices not 'victories', disillusion with the idea of 'good wars'). Plus recall a good portion of the book is more about his idea of "civil virtue"....the idea of a "military democracy", i.e. only veterans gain sufferage. Also Heinlein's view of the rise of "juvenile deliquency" in the 1950s, which his prescription for was for punishment for the parents....common today as well....but which show despotic use of Governmental power that the otherwise libertarian Heinlein abhors in other books.

More "nuanced" elements of those stories are excluded. As noted the Arachnids are totally inhuman aliens with a hive "Communism" mentality and no redeeming qualities. It would (and later did) become harder for Heinlein to push a "Starship Troopers" idea with an enemy that shared human emotions or mental outlooks. IOW, it's easy to kill 1000s of "Bugs"....but when villages got torched or little kids were blown up as "collateral damage" in Vietnam....war got a lot more "dicey" to take on the "ST" attitude towards it.

Simplistic fans of the book mistakenly think the ideas in it are workable. Ironically, many of those fans are on the political Right....whose mentors or politicians failed to serve when they could or served in safe non-combat duties (Dubya, Quayle, Cheney, Limbaugh, etc.).....which means those individuals would never have gotten to vote, where guys like John McCain and John Kerry would have under Heinlein's "Terran Federation".

As for his later work, it's funny that Heinlein completely drops the idea of a benevolent world government....his "World Federation" in "Stranger in a Strange Land" is a corrupt bureaucracy. But he still endorsed the idea of universal sufferage.

He also dropped the "evil inhuman aliens"....the Bugs of Klendathu, replaced with the crab/insect-like Martians who adopted Valentine Michael Smith. And while the Martians were coldly impassive to suffering (even their own), they were not the "monsters" of "ST".

At that point, I think his libertarinism had reached its "full bloom". No more Col. Dubois teaching his students about their "duty" and the need for responsible and responsive government....it's Jubal Harshaw preaching full-out individualism and anti-government bordering on anarchy.

 

Yep that's about the size of it so far as his altering perspectives as a writer went. It was very interesting to notice the changes over time as he aged and simplistic solutions to complex issues turned into no solutions at all except to get out of the corrupted system. In his later years he rejected the general principles of both conservatism and liberalism in favor of a rather anarchist style of libertarianism; but I think what he was actually doing was admitting that due to the fact that once civilizations get past a certain point with chronically corrupt officials and the culturally and economically corrosive effects of socialism and Marxism (by whatever cute new names they are issued by their adherents) that civilization is doomed and then its up to individuals to bail, march boldly forth, and start all over again someplace far, far away . . . and heaven help everyone if there's no place for such rugged individualist to go to.

It was a cynical and pessimistic perspective and one that was probably correct on the whole considering that we are seeing precisely that increasingly happen to the United States of America decade by decade and I believe that we have now traveled too far along certain paths to alter the grim outcome. Heinlein was correct. Son of a gun!

 

But Federal Service and voting was not seen as important from what I can tell the civilians ,non-voters, were happy and the majority by far of the human race. As in socialist not fascist in nature. Power held by those who serve the state by choice.

 

A benevolent dictatorship, is still a dictatorship.
Terran Federation was a fascist society.

The book was a vehicle for Heinlein's anti-communist political viewpoint. It is a snapshot of the "Red scare" era of the 1950s.

Big surprise, I'm very anti-communist also...however a society does not need to embrace military fetishism in order to combat communism.

 

I read Starship Troopers ages ago. From a technical POV, I always thought that the MI would have gone in in combat suits - basically one-man flying tanks, with nav equipment built in. The critter had racks to dispense everything up to nukes, as I recall. The suits would have obviated the landing craft from the movie, & would have made for a more interesting drop. ST the first movie, dispensed with the combat suits - I assumed that it was an sfx budget problem - they could have suitably vicious-looking insectoids, etc. or they could have combat suits, but not both. Yah, so they sacrificed the suits, & had the humans doing stupid human wave stuff. V. foolish.

The ST movie seems to be deliberately over the top, without much thought about any higher purpose that Heinlein might have had. Too bad - there's a serious movie to be made there, but I don't think Hollywood is going to deliver it.

 

They might make a serious movie out of it.

‘Starship Troopers’ Reboot Officially In The Works

 

Book view the system worked and everyone was happy. And what dictatorship to vote the party just needed to serve two years not all military service you could mine ore or cook food. Then your in the system voting. And so I would say another 10% run things but Franchise open to all unlike now where the wealthy elites do.

 

Hopefully they get the APE suits right...

 

In this fictional world of Heinlein's, there is a division in society; it is between "citizens" and "civilians." . In Heinlein's fictional world the supreme power is given to citizens, and citizenship must be earned by some sort of public service.

The right to vote is the basic right without which all others are meaningless. It gives people, as individuals, control over their own destinies.

Are people aware that at one point in America's history, certain minorities were not allowed to vote...women were not allowed...to vote.
A shameful legacy to the say the least that has since been addressed and amended.

Why do an about face and then claim, that the most basic right to vote must now be earned by some sort of state determined system.

Fascism = radical, authoritarian nationalism.

 

Sounds good to me...

I think they're cute...

[video=youtube;SmR6XYJVnTE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmR6XYJVnTE[/video]

...but I wouldn't let a chipmunk vote...

Go join the Army and then maybe you might learn what a colorblind meritocracy operates...

Citizen Determined State actually... but you'd know that if you'd read the book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

That's Wiki so I'd cross-reference your State Supplied and Certified Textbooks with something a little older if I were you...

[video=youtube;1_bQNeIxGe4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_bQNeIxGe4[/video]
.
.
.
;

 

I'm sorry but I'm not sure you really understand what fascism is. Limiting the vote isn't fascistic, and by that standard, having a voting age would be considered fascistic. Was the US a fascist state until 1964?

 

You're aware the book was written for juveniles?

Therefore, there is no direct revelation as to what sort of society this actually is...it's revealed in the protagonists conversations with teachers, etc...

What we do know is that the Terran Federation had aspects of a meritocracy in regard to full citizenship, based on voluntarily assuming a responsibility for the common good. Suffrage, voting, can only be earned by those willing to serve their society by at least two years of volunteer Federal Service.

From the book Fascism and Political Theory: Critical Perspectives on Fascist Ideology

Obviously Star Troopers was not racist....however...it did valorize Federal service...predominantly military service as the path to full citizenship...the right to vote, the right to hold public office was merit based.

A central tenet of the fascist state was meritocracy.

 

As I recall (and it's been many years since I read the book), Federal service was looked down upon by the civilian population. Didn't Johnny's dad try to talk him out of it to go into business? That's not the typical position of the population of a fascist state. So although the military had the same virtues it always did, they were not shared by the population at large and were largely looked down upon- kind of like now. Then again, maybe I'm just not understanding your argument. I'm looking at fascism as a political-economic system and you seem to be viewing it as an aspect of culture.

 

Study feudal Japan(Edo?). The Merchant class were frowned upon by the Samurai. The Samurai were both feared and frowned upon by both the mercs and the Buddhist peasants.

Only samurai could carry arms. They regularly abused that "authority" by killing mercs and peasants who had- "Insulted their honor"

Hence the rise of the Ninja...

 

Well I hope that if they do perform a reboot that this time the producer and director actually bother to read Heinlein's book and then produce something remotely in the ballpark of what he wrote about and was striving to accomplish . . . or don't bother to reboot at all.

Better yet, hand the project and the funding over to the British and ask them to do what we almost never accomplish . . . which is produce a more or less faithful to the source, and yet also a fresh look at it, product.

 

We spend all our free-time fighting each other, so I'd really hate to be a bug in these sights...
[video=youtube;faFuaYA-daw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faFuaYA-daw[/video]

 

Well they do say that practice makes perfect . . . . . . and we most definitely do practice all the damn time . . . alas.

 

Sorry, there we break company. We're the ONLY industrialized nation that doesn't have universal health care....our individual tax rates are among the lowest in the world....and any idiot who can pass a simple test can walk around with a gun strapped under his armpit...

these are hardly the makings of a country in the grip of "Marxism" and "lack of individual liberty". More like one trying to re-embrace a Mythic Past of the 19th Century.

"Galt's Gulch" was created by a woman who, in later life, gleefully took her Social Security and Medicare.

 

We are headed in that direction . . . I didn't say that we were there yet. Like Heinlein, however, I also think that once you pass a certain point then the downfall is inevitable. Unlike Heinlein, however, I'm not a good enough writer to become a millionaire saying so. It's a mug's life, eh?

Anyway, depending on the era one can interpret Heinlein just about anyway you want. Stranger in a Strange Land was . . . interesting.

 

1. Folks have been claiming we are "heading in the direction of Marxism"....since they could no longer machine gun strikers and 9 year olds were no longer allowed to work in coal mines. (Seriously...pull up some of the old quotes of the opponents of child labor laws in the 1890s).

2. In general he has been mostly a consistant libertarian. In addition to his distrust of Government, he also showed it of Organized Religion. Again, it's been said that to know the real Heinlein, look to his self-created and self-identified character of Jubal Harshaw....a sort of idealized verrsion of himself (brilliant writer, doctor, lawyer, iconoclast, and "sympathetic misanthrope"). Many RAH fans would say when you hear Harshaw in "SIASL" ...you're hearing the true voice of Heinlen.

 

Yes, I got that impression as well. The problem being that in reality he never was that character. I am not talking about the multiple degrees and over the top accomplishments . . . and mainly because with his personal wealth and worldwide acclaim he could have become just that sort of fellow had he had it in him so to be. Sophistry on my part, perhaps; but I think that the real Heinlein was the fellow the world saw; a nice enough man in person, who was probably more kind and gentle than many of his characters, who would not shoot first and think about having talked things over after the fact. He was an interesting man, but a more interesting writer.

 

[video=youtube;rogr0deZ35Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rogr0deZ35Y[/video]