Strawman posted:

Seems like Heinlein fans have to spend a lot of time thinking about why Heinlein doesn't believe what he says he believes.

Jazerus posted:

starship troopers is definitely not libertarian

honestly it's hard to tell whether it's satire of the far-right like the film but much subtler, or just full-on fascist, sometimes, but i lean toward the former

i don't think that the "history and philosophy" sections are intended to be read as "i, the author, robert heinlein, fully endorse the following" as most people seem to. heinlein constructs a society that's best described as democratic fascism, which was seen as a pretty bizarre idea at the time it was written, and then presents it from the perspective of a guy who's really just too dumb and too low in society to have an independent perspective on anything. johnny is the distilled spirit of his society, and he's dreadful, and i'm not really sure that was accidental

Jazerus posted:

starship troopers is definitely not libertarian

honestly it's hard to tell whether it's satire of the far-right like the film but much subtler, or just full-on fascist, sometimes, but i lean toward the former

i don't think that the "history and philosophy" sections are intended to be read as "i, the author, robert heinlein, fully endorse the following" as most people seem to. heinlein constructs a society that's best described as democratic fascism, which was seen as a pretty bizarre idea at the time it was written, and then presents it from the perspective of a guy who's really just too dumb and too low in society to have an independent perspective on anything. johnny is the distilled spirit of his society, and he's dreadful, and i'm not really sure that was accidental

nepetaMisekiryoiki posted:

Starship Troopers is not satire of the hard right. It is definite not libertarian or fascist but deliberately aim towards all of these thing. It is novel of the military culture but not of militarism. It is about how Heinlein felt changed and guided in his term of military service and is about how some persons like of Johnny can only thrive with it.

Johnny Rico is character who can only muddle through adequately in his civilian life and is not particular good or that enthusiast of soldier for much of book. In some way, he is even insulting caricature of people Heinlein was in military with and that he considered himself better of.

The book make clear that the military/Federal Service cover vast swathes of life beyond traditional military service, and certain beyond combat. Some persons read book as being clear that only 'military' counts for the citizen but in reading it seems clear and the author say that most of the Federal Service is plain civil service. We do not see much of, because Johnny is our main view, and Johnny doesn't pay much attention beside his own military life. Even still - the use of the term "Federal Service" tells clear message that the society believes important to present itself as not all military even with military having clear major power in the world.

Ultimate this is why I feel the book is not fascist or meant to fascist parody as the society construction is against it. Aside from federal service accepting genders, races, backgrounds equal there is also desire to downplay killing and violent as such during peace. There is seeming sincere democracy among the citizens, there is not the personality cult figure at leadership besides reverence towards the military structure, there is open tolerance of the most population that does not accept service.

The book openly accepts several right wing concepts of its time, and variations of others. It also pulls in much of other ideology and a general socialistoid structure of social care but definite not anarchism-left. It is not parody or satire of any this things though beyond how concepts it present are inherently satire or parodical appearance when shown. If this book had been publish not of Heinlein with his background other books that heavily present a fascist take and other that present libertarianism, and other that present thing that looks libertarian at first but rely on deep socialist like structure once you get past start. You not have people so quick to say "it is this" "it is that" about it. Pull generic contemporary scifi journeyman writer and it comes from him, people would be more to accept of this author is intentional putting together many things to talk about the military and society.


Final I say, if you go and read the Starship Troopers and your response is to go "this is fascist and I love it" or "this agrees with I the rational libertarian genius", you may be a Johnny Rico. ;-)

Strawman posted:

Seems like Heinlein fans have to spend a lot of time thinking about why Heinlein doesn't believe what he says he believes.

Stinky_Pete posted:

The Old Iron Dream covers this and other authoritarian trends in science fiction

QuarkJets posted:

While I don't think that Starship Troopers is a perfect description of fascism, it does have a lot of major fascist themes.

A society viewing itself as being welcoming and open is part of fascist mythos. The Nazis believed that they were practicing tolerance by accepting everyone of Aryan heritage, they simply viewed others as being different, and not worthy of being treated as equals. The Bugs in Starship Troopers take on that role of an "other". This allows the reader to more easily accept fascism, as the "other" is literally a different species, which is easier to accept for most people than the "other" being human jews or gays or gypsies. People are literally fed propaganda that otherizes the aliens, glorifies the military killing them, and shames the more "liberal" members of society who would seek peace with the bugs.

When the main character, Rico, tells his father that he wants to join the civil service his father immediately tells him not to because he has an anti-war position. This heavily implies that the civil service is mostly military service. This implication is reinforced by literally all of the characters being placed into various branches of the military after taking the civil service exam. The novel also glorifies the military, even characters who have lost limbs are able to serve again in positions of honor and respect, and the idiot main character gains honor and respect through his military service.

At one point, a teacher tells the main character that the best solution to political problems is violence. That's a quintessential aspect of fascism. Note that The Bugs are being pushed out of their home planets by human armies so that the humans can set up colonies in their place. This is literally what the Germans did under the guise of seeking "living space".

Halloween Jack posted:

I think Heinlein, as much as anyone, embodied a kind of liberal reactionary that's a huge influence in American culture but is almost never clearly identified for what it is. The kind of person who believes in individual freedom, and may be a dope-smoking vegan polyamorous hippie, but has a basically feudal view of society and power.

nepetaMisekiryoiki posted:

Indeed it has fascist themes, but it is to be quite different from being fascist. I know often people see talk of Umberto Eco ur-fascism writings as saying that everything is fascist, but the thrust of he work was instead that there are fascist-like and fascist tendencies in so much of society all over. Particular of course he brings up his own life story where he looks at how Italy embrace fascism from multiple different angles, yet was not fascist itself before. You follow?

So to see in the Starship Troopers, yes there is an "other" and that's pretty danger to apply to human. But can we say really that fighting the alien race is fasicst inherently instead of just normal non-fascist imperialist colony in space? Many people today who are conscientous objector/pacifist refuse to have dealings with service just somewhat connected to military service too. The intentional unclear division of the Federal Service between real war fighting/traditional military grunt work outside battle/outright civil service things is intended allow room for people who support the overall society to sign up, even though those who hate military service can be rightfully sure if they joined they'd be tied into war support. You see of it?

And as far as the principle that violence is the best solution - there are big numbers of people from across time who would solve their own problems with their own violences, and some of what they solve are nazi faces around. We can't go assigning high opinion of violence to be only for nazi, it something that well predate.


This is true. He had at any one time completely weird mixtures of ideas, especially for a man who primarily wrote sci for young children in his career. At his apparent core is quite a lot of military worship yet hatred of any sort raw dictator thing. Certainly not the kind of guy who's take a Bible seriously, but finds a few sentiment is apt for his use.

A man who has very few true convictions, but a lot of ideology trinkets to throw about.

Halloween Jack posted:

I would definitely like to read this. I also went looking for some critical reviews of his latest book, but I only found a couple reviewers who even took up the question of how North Korean propaganda compared to that of other socialist countries.

Halloween Jack posted:

The site let me download a PDF.

I promise I will address it more thoroughly later, but for the moment, I cannot hold this back: I continue to doubt that an ideology which barely mentions Confucianism in its texts, and then often critically, is in fact a thoroughly Confucian worldview in Marxist-Leninist drag. I'm sure everyone in North Korea is a Confucian in the same way that I am an Aristotelian, i.e. arguably so but without ever discussing it or thinking about it.

As far as I can tell, Confucianism is a magic word we invoke when some aspect of an East Asian culture baffles us. I mean, no one really knows who Confucianus was, or what doctrines she taught.

KayTee posted:

https://twitter.com/WarPlanPurple/status/1029633104804302848?s=19

This. This meme and the account it is from. This appears to be genuine. I cannot find anyone calling it out as fake.

I'm hoping someone here can tell me otherwise because facing the reality of this is making me go crosseyed.


e:


https://twitter.com/WarPlanPurple/status/1030643846672277509?s=19

quote:

The fascist version would be "citizenship guarantees service."

OwlFancier posted:

Sort of possibly on point if UKIP still has any libertarian weirdness to it, though given how many leaders it's gone through and the drop in membership it could be a loving posadist party at this point.

OwlFancier posted:

quote:

Rational people

Megillah Gorilla posted:

Megillah Gorilla posted:

A lifetime in STEM has taught me when someone describes themselves as a rational person, you can barely count to ten before they start spewing out poorly thought out bigotry.

I'm not being racist, population data and IQ scores clearly show

Caros posted:

Judging by the YouTube 'rationalist' movement, this is extremely accurate.

QuarkJets posted:

You're right, that does seem to happen a lot. It's as much of a red flag as someone prefacing a statement with "I'm not racist" or "I'm not a misogynist". People who have formed rational opinions don't need to explain to everyone that they're rational, doing so is meant to convey that they don't hate black people because of their skin color ergo they're not racist (nevermind that they believe in and perpetuate racist ideas and stereotypes)

ToxicSlurpee posted:

I always like trotting out the "If I Were a Poor Black Kid" article because it just exposes the entire thought process perfectly while demonstrating how badly people like that understand reality. It's also pretty much "well if I was a poor black kid I'd just work harder to get where I am now then I had to as a not poor white person!" Part of your brain dies when you read it the first time because of how unimaginably stupid the entire article is. It's like "hmmm yes well I know the playing field is uneven. They should just work harder, it'll fix literally every problem they have! It's simple! Look at how smart I am. I've solved all their problems for them. Therefore if they don't succeed it's their own fault for not just working harder than I was expected to."

David Simon, in "The Corner: A Year in the Life of an Inner-City Neighborhood" posted:

That's the myth of it, the required lie that allows us to render our judgments. Parasites, criminals, dope fiends, dope peddlers, whores--when we can ride past them at Fayette and Monroe, car doors locked, our field of vision cautiously restricted to the road ahead, then the long journey into darkness is underway. Pale-skinned hillbillies and hard-faced yos, toothless white trash and gold-front gangsters--when we can glide on and feel only fear, we're well on the way. And if, after a time, we can glimpse the spectacle of the corner and manage nothing beyond loathing and contempt, then we've arrived at last at that naked place where a man finally sees the sense in stretching razor wire and building barracks and directing cattle cars into the compound.

It's a reckoning of another kind, perhaps, and one that becomes a possibility only through the arrogance and certainty that so easily accompanies a well-planned and well-tended life. We know ourselves, we believe in ourselves; from what we value most, we grant ourselves the illusion that it's not chance in circumstance, that opportunity itself isn't the defining issue. We want the high ground; we want our own worth to be acknowledged. Morality, intelligence, values--we want those things measured and counted. We want it to be about Us.

Yes, if we were down there, if we were the damned of the American cities, we would not fail. We would rise above the corner. And when we tell ourselves such things, we unthinkably assume that we would be consigned to places like Fayette Street fully equipped, with all the graces and disciplines, talents and training that we now posses. Our parents would still be our parents, our teachers still our teachers, our broker still our broker. Amid the stench of so much defeat and despair, we would kick fate in the teeth and claim our deserved victory. We would escape to live the life we were supposed to live, the life we are living now. We would be saved, and as it always is in matters of salvation, we know this as a matter of perfect, pristine faith.

Why? The truth is plain:

We were not born to be niggers.

Captain_Maclaine posted:

Sephyr posted:

Holy crap i need to read that.

JustJeff88 posted:

I totally agree; it's an extension of the Just-World Fallacy that people cling to because, without it, life seems absurd. I consider the JWF the most dangerous myth ever propagated among human kind; it's the parent of its non-secular child the Prosperity Gospel and the constantly disproved idea that there exists an infallible and loving God who rewards the good and punishes the wicked.

White Coke posted:

Plus the JWF and PG contradict a lot of pretty basic Christian beliefs. God doesn’t just reward good people and punish bad ones. Jesus himself is proof of that, he wouldn’t have been crucified in a Just World.

Stinky_Pete posted:

I returned and saw under the sun that the race is not to the swift, nor the contest to the strong nor wealth to the wise, but time and chance happen to all

QuarkJets posted:

Jesus violated the NAP, my immortal soul is my property you can't just go and "save" it without a signed contract

Sephyr posted:

Holy crap i need to read that.