Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Military Science Fiction Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Starship Troopers - Neofascist or not?
mike_golf    1/18/2004 9:24:18 PM
Okay, I've read two different pieces that categorized the political scenario in Robert Heinlein's "Starship Troopers" as fascist or neofascist. I've just got to hope they are saying this because they saw the movie, but didn't read the book. While I don't necessarily agree with the concept of earning your citizenship by military service (although I don't fully disagree either) that doesn't make it fascist. In fact, it is made quite clear throughout the book that those who are not citizens hold the military in contempt for the most part and don't value the franchise to vote highly at all. This is quite the opposite of the fascist paradigm, so full of military and para-military propaganda, pomp and spectacle. In a fascist country everyone can vote, but the person they will vote for is pre-determined. Often it is their only choice. I think that Heinlein used the government as a tool to point out some of the flaws in our current government in the US. Heinlein was heavily influenced by Ayn Rand and by precepts of Libertarianism (Originally called Liberalism before Liberal came to be synonymous with social democracy) and was extremely unlikely to ever advocate anything as authoritarian as a fascist government. So, if you think that the government in "Starship Troopers" is fascist because you saw the movie, read the book. It will dramatically open your eyes to what Heinlein was really getting at. If you think it's fascist and you have read the book, well I just don't understand what you consider fascist.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16   NEXT
ilpars    Roman solution for politics.   6/7/2004 4:02:54 AM
How about a Roman solution for politics? 2 Consuls for a fix period (could be 1 to 5 years) instead of a president. No reelection or no reelection for 2 periods in a row.
 
Quote    Reply

wkwillis    Imperial Judiciary   6/7/2004 7:23:22 AM
The Nevada Supreme Court (Republican) passed a tax that was specifically voted down by the Nevada Legislature (Republican) after a lawsuit that was filed by the Nevada Governor (Republican). The Imperial Judiciary is alive and well. Then there is the denial of the bill of rights for anybody the President or his advisors classifly as an "enemy combatant". The US Supreme Court refused to hear appeals until recently. The appeals will probably take place before the elections, but not necessarily. And of course there was the way the US Supreme Court overruled the Florida laws and courts on the vote, with that special little provision at the end that said it couldn't be used as a basis for any other lawsuit, that it wasn't really a precedent. That last clause was impeachable all by itself.
 
Quote    Reply

wkwillis    RE:Starship Troopers as Leninist   6/7/2004 7:29:59 AM
When only the Communist Party members are allowed to run for office, and where you can be stripped of your membership if you run in opposition to the party establishment, you pretty soon stop being even partially democratic. I think that Heinlein's society will stop being even partially democratic very soon. On the other hand, Israel has much the same system. Israeli citizens of Islamic Arab descent can get access to schools for their children just as if they were Jewish if they serve in the Israeli army. They also qualify for social security and medicare, welfare, unemployment, civil service positions, etc. Israel does not allow you to take citizenship away. Maybe that is why it is still more or less democratic if you are Jewish. They aren't racist. European Jews and Arab Jews are both allowed to vote, and Arab Jews are now a majority of the country. You just have to be Jewish and you are allowed to convert, and after you have served in the army you are allowed access to services equal to if you were born Jewish.
 
Quote    Reply

oregon_x_marine    RE:WK willis   6/7/2004 12:57:08 PM
I recall the Nevada ruling ago and almost barfed. This was as bad as the KC, MO judge who ordered a tax increase because of "unequal" funding for schools. Damn few people have reported that even with millions of extra funding for "minority" schools their graduation rates haven't changed. I don't worry about the enemy combatant issue because we're in a war, and these people are literally planning on killing us. Liberty is certainly not a suicide pact. I advise reading the dissent of the Chief Justice of the Florida State Supreme Court before attacking the US Supreme Courts election year 2000 decision. The Florida Chief Justice's dissent completely destroys the majority's opinion and exposes the majority's blantant activism. 7 member of the US Supreme Court opined that there were due process errors but only 5 voted to shut down the recount. I have come to admire the 5 justices' courage for basically saying "enough of this chaos" and don't know why people would want this case thrown back to an irresponsible, out of control Florida Supreme Court.
 
Quote    Reply

oregon_x_marine    RE:Mike Golf   6/7/2004 1:44:31 PM
Victor Davis Hanson, a Californian, has some intersting words that you will appreciate. Our Real Dilemma. We do have a grave problem in this country, but it is not the plan for Iraq, the neoconservatives, or targeting Saddam. Face it: This present generation of leaders at home would never have made it to Normandy Beach. They would instead have called off the advance to hold hearings on Pearl Harbor, cast around blame for the Japanese internment, sued over the light armor and guns of Sherman tanks, apologized for bombing German civilians, and recalled General Eisenhower to Washington to explain the rough treatment of Axis prisoners. We are becoming a crazed culture of cheap criticism and pious moralizing, and in our self-absorption may well lose what we inherited from a better generation. Our groaning and hissing elite indulges itself, while better but forgotten folks risk their lives on our behalf in pretty horrible places. Judging from our newspapers, we seem to care little about the soldiers while they are alive and fighting, but we suddenly put their names on our screens and speak up when a dozen err or die. And, in the latter case, our concern is not out of respect for their sacrifice but more likely a protest against what we don't like done in our name. So ABC's Nightline reads the names of the fallen from Iraq, but not those from the less controversial Afghanistan, because ideological purity — not remembering the departed per se — is once again the real aim.
 
Quote    Reply

oregon_x_marine    RE:Mike_Golf Regimental System   6/9/2004 9:04:33 PM
Describe your ideal regimental system. Would a soldier be a permanent part of the BDE (unit of action) or would he part part of a regiment that has battalions only serving in a select number of BDE/UA? Why did the Army use the designation of Armored Infantry and Mechanized Infantry instead of Dragoon? I think the word "dragoon" sounds better than "stryker," especially since I always think of the movie "Ariplane" whenever someone says striker!
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Mike_Golf Regimental System   6/9/2004 11:21:26 PM
Well, I must admit that I liked the Armored Cavalry system. Three regiments and the soldiers moved individually between the regiments. But that only works for small organizations, Armored Cav, Rangers, Special Forces. For the larger conventional forces you need to use a system like the British use. Regiments are administrative in nature. Every regiment has several battalions. When a soldier joins the Army they join for a specific regiment. It could be regionally based, or just allow the soldier to list preferences based on unit traditions and history. The soldier, unless they change MOS, will remain in the regiment for their whole career. They can, and will, change battalions over time, especially when promoted from enlisted ranks to NCO ranks. Entire battalions will rotate duty assignments instead of individual soldiers. Not a partial answer like the COHORT's of the 80's, where the enlisted ranks rotated but the officers and NCO's didn't. Everybody rotates to Korea for a tour with a brigade there, or Iraq, or wherever. Then they rotate back to home station together. Schools and unit changes due to promotions can be synchronized with the rotation with a bit of planning. The Army left behind traditional unit designations during WW2. After WW1 cavalry was slowly declared dead. Prior to WW1 the cavalry and engineers were the most powerful branches in the US Army. By 1941 power was transitioning to the infantry. They were able, successfully, to get cavalry declared dead and a new branch called armor created. With the extremely visible success of the airborne, the airborne infantry gained control of the Army. If you have been around the Army for any length of time you have heard the term "Airborne Mafia" and maybe even "West Point Protective Association". During the 1940's, 50's and 60's the mafia and WPPA were running the military. The only reason the crossed sabers of cavalry ended up on the armor branch insignia is because several influential cavalry generals pitched a fit until it happened, most notably I.D. White. They were lucky to get that much. The infantry kept their traditions and ditched the cavalry and engineer traditions. So, it was army politics, sadly, that did away with so much tradition. The only places it is really left is in the cavalry regiments and division cavalry squadrons.
 
Quote    Reply

oregon_x_marine    RE:Mike_Golf Regimental System   6/10/2004 12:39:46 AM
Further questions 1) Would the battalions in your regimental system be “single branch” or combined arms? An aside: I know there has been a lot of posts on this subject, but do you know if the UA's battalions are going to be combined arms? If they are going to be combined arms battalions, how would the army designate them: armored infantry, combined arms BNs, armored dragoons, Cav?? .... and speaking of the 2 X 2 combined arms BNs in the UA: a) With 6 platoons each of mech infantry and armor per BN, what would be the permanent composition of each CO/Team? : - 4 co of combined arms (2 armor x 2 mech) - 1 co armor, 1 co Mech, 2 co of combined arms? - some other combination? b) In combat does the composition of each co/team change? If so, how often? back to your regimental system…. 2) How many battalions would be in each regiment? Would you have 3 or try to reduce the number of regiments by having 5 - 7 battalions? Would any of a regiment’s battalions be in a reserve capacity? 3) Can a career soldier stay within a single multi-battalion regiment for most of his career? You mentioned that you spent time in 3 different ACRs; could you have stayed in one ACR for most of your career? Will combined arms battalions work best in a regimental system? 4) Would combat service support and combat support be organized into regiments? Other related questions 5) How many ACRs will be needed for the new “brigade centric” army? Is the mission of the ARC going to change? Will a cavalry squadron still screen for a division/UE? 6)” They (infantry branch) were able, successfully, to get cavalry declared dead and a new branch called armor created.” Are you implying here that armor should have had a cavalry designation? 7) Which “mafia” currently controls the army? Since I always have a lot of operational questions, can you recommend a web site or book that would be a good primer? Here is a good article about life in Portland. Read it and you will understand why I’m going to move some day! http://www.brainstormnw.com/featuredstory_cover.html BTW, do you know of any good marketing jobs in your area? My brother, who lives in SJC and works for a Fortune 50 company, is about to be laid off! He has done international and domestic marketing in transportation for over 12 years. Look forward to your reply.
 
Quote    Reply

sanman    RE:Starship Troopers - Neofascist or not?   6/10/2004 11:59:31 AM
Paul Verhoeven's movie was a blatantly dystopian caricature of Heinlein's book. Because Verhoeven didn't like Heinlein's political views, he deliberately made his movie into an exaggerated caricature of what Heinlein's book was about. Verhoeven as you remember, scored a hit with his similarly dystopian Robocop, in which a future Detroit is ruled by the powerful while the poor suffer in squalor in the crime-ridden streets. So Verhoeven was trying to portray something similar in his Starship Troopers parody, by depicting Heinlein's heroes as fascists. I would suggest to you that if you didn't like the satirical tone of this movie, check out the very cool Starship Troopers CG-animated TV series. Now that rocked! At least in the TV series, the deaths of soldiers aren't portrayed as senseless, but rather as courageous sacrifices. The bugs aren't the demonized Jews as the ending of Verhoeven's movie implies, but rather they are themselves an exterminating menace. The one thing I didn't like about the series was the opening theme music, which was too MASH-like in its diffidence. The rest of the music was great, though -- very hip. Check out the Starship Troopers TV series, it was truly excellent. I'd like to hear comments from others who have seen the series, on what their opinions are of it.
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Mike_Golf Regimental System   6/11/2004 1:00:34 AM
Well x_marine, I have a preference for combined arms at the battalion level. The Army finally agrees with me, the UA's will be combined arms with both infantry and armor companies in each battalion. I would say that the regiments should have 3 or 4 active duty battalions and 2 or 3 reserve component battalions. This will allow for two things. The reserve component shares in the tradition of the regiment. And when a soldier finishes his active duty commitment and decides to go into the reserve component, it will be in the same regiment. As I understand the new Army TO&E there will be three cavalry regiments: 2nd Cavalry will be light, supporting the 18th Airborne Corps. 3rd Armored Cavalry will be heavy 11th Armored Cavalry will be heavy, and assigned as the OpFor at Fort Irwin National Training Center. In a true regimental system a career soldier should remain in the regiment for his entire career. I actually only served in two ACR's, 3rd and 11th. I started in the 11th, went to the 3rd when I returned to the states and then back to the 11th. When I was selected for promotion to E-7 my branch detailer decided I needed exposure to the conventional heavy units and assigned me first to 1-33 Armor Battalion, a I Corps asset, and then to the 24th ID. I finished my career in the 24th, retiring a couple years after Somalia. Yes, I am implying that armor branch should really be called cavalry. They are the direct descendants and inheritors of the cavalry. It doesn't matter whether they are mounted on horses or in tanks and M-3's, they perform the mission of cavalry. Today's Army seems to be in a transition state from armor to SF being in control. We'll see where that leads. One of the best book series (fictional) to understand the politics and life of the Army is W.E.B. Griffin's Brotherhood of War series. For non-fiction Clancy's Armored Cavalry Regiment is excellent. I don't know of anything in marketing this moment, but I'll ask a few questions. If I hear something I'll let you know.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics