Robert Heinlein's Militarist Utopia MOD CHALLENGE PAGE 4

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Robert Heinlein's Militarist Utopia MOD CHALLENGE PAGE 4

CainFortea: Oct 15, 2004

Melthir posted:

I still think you guys are missing the biggest joke in the book. The protagonist was to loving stupid to do anything else but infantry.

Hey now. Infantry are not the dumbest MOS.

That's cooks and truck drivers.

# ¿ Feb 10, 2023 21:54

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 04:40

CainFortea: Oct 15, 2004

He quite literally wrote Starship Troopers after reading about people wanting to do nuclear disarmament and wanted to respond with a book that illustrates how stupid those people are.

# ¿ Feb 12, 2023 00:17

CainFortea: Oct 15, 2004

Kurzon posted:

I can get my own electronic copy easily enough, thanks.

I think Heinlein's idea that service makes you wiser somehow would be better if applied to leaders, not voters. Selectorate theory tells me that it is bad to disenfranchise people for any reason, whether it be lack of military service or poor education. Leaders are another matter. I in fact think people should be barred from running in elections if they lack education or have a criminal history. If only veterans can serve as leaders, that's OK because as long as they must depend on a broad support base to stay in office, they are incentivized to deliver good public policy.

Yo you should try reading the book that you're talking about.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2023 16:48

CainFortea: Oct 15, 2004

Grip it and rip it posted:

lol what the gently caress

Fascism is bad.

Also only the "right kind" of people should hold office.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2023 17:26

CainFortea: Oct 15, 2004

Officers are typically the first to throw their underlings in a wood chipper for a slight increase in their evaluation score. Which if you think about it is a really poor trait to have in a politician.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2023 20:11

CainFortea: Oct 15, 2004

I served under two officers that I would call not terrible people. And they both were very good at communicating the mission to their people, and ensuring that we had the tools and material required to complete the mission to the best of our abilities. The difference between the two of them is that the great officer once he did all of that, went to his office and shut the gently caress up. The only other things he would have us do were play quake 2 capture the flag against each other as practice for our regular matches against the computer shop.

The good but not great officer tended to walk around and get involved in everybody else's stuff, but he rarely changed what people were doing or anything he was more of a distraction. That's the only reason he wasn't great.

# ¿ Feb 15, 2023 16:42

CainFortea: Oct 15, 2004

Fivemarks posted:

Which fits in with the general western ideal paradigm, but what about military traditions that don't have NCO's and put less of an emphasis on individual initiative and the idea that soldiers can be trusted to poo poo without an officer micromanage it? Like the Russians, traditionally, or what I've heard of some middle eastern militaries like the Egyptians and Saudis?

Russian lieutenants are equivalent to western sgt. Their name might be the same as our officer name, but the job isn't the same. They also aren't treated as nobles like our LTs are.

# ¿ Feb 15, 2023 17:30