tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post3783155885203268064..comments2024-03-19T05:25:43.067-07:00Comments on Rocketpunk Manifesto: Science Fiction versus FantasyRickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-23311034033696587992012-03-11T10:42:37.988-07:002012-03-11T10:42:37.988-07:00Thucydides said...
And of course the use of &...Thucydides said...<br /><br /> And of course the use of "War" as a metaphor has become a political cliche: how many candidates have used service in the "War on Drugs" or the "War on Poverty" as their credentials for electoral office?<br /><br />=================<br />As I get older I begin to realize they are all essentially battle hardened veterans of "The War on Logic"<br /><br />Our political and economic systems have attained the status of Dogma.<br /> <br />Which is often a theme of Science Fiction. Including some interpretations of "Starship Troopers"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-19562216921246847972011-12-16T11:11:51.569-08:002011-12-16T11:11:51.569-08:00Milo:
"Umm, disapproving of a practice is no...Milo:<br /><br /><i>"Umm, disapproving of a practice is not identical to being ignorant of historic examples of that practice."</i><br /><br />To the degree that a lot of people's values depend upon their (often wilfull) ignorance of history, it's precisely the same thing.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-48450031566157961852011-12-15T10:53:45.962-08:002011-12-15T10:53:45.962-08:00=Milo=
Tony:
"IOW, the entire controversy...=Milo=<br /><br /><br /><br />Tony:<br /><br /><i>"IOW, the entire controversy is a symptom of historical ignorance, not any radical thought process of Heinlein's."</i><br /><br />Umm, disapproving of a practice is not identical to being ignorant of historic examples of that practice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-79009909071607310552011-12-15T10:28:42.366-08:002011-12-15T10:28:42.366-08:00Thucydides:
"Sort of like Tribunes (Tribunes...Thucydides:<br /><br /><i>"Sort of like Tribunes (Tribunes Militium) who notionally commanded the Roman Legions? So long as they stayed quiet and let professionals (Tribunus Cohortis) run things it wasn't much of an issue, but there are plenty of horrible examples where this didn't work out quite so well..."</i><br /><br />Heinlein is explicitly of the opinon that there are those that talk about things and those who do things. For example, he had the unlamented Ted Hendricks talk himself not only out of the Mobile Infantry, but out of the service and his voting franchise altogether. Hendricks's fault? He had entered the service to gain political viability and had failed at putting first things first -- serving honorably and well. IOW, the service has its own ruthless way of sidelining those that wish to seem, in favor of those that wish to be.<br /><br />It's not like it would be a new thing to the service to deal with glory hunters. Every service, in every country, has had its "glory hounds", "neck pains", etc.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-39159496574929361732011-12-15T10:14:11.766-08:002011-12-15T10:14:11.766-08:00A general rule is that: "You get what you mea...<i>A general rule is that: "You get what you measure."<br /><br />At best this means that the military will fill up with political hacks setting out to get blooded.</i><br /><br />Sort of like Tribunes (<i>Tribunes Militium</i>) who notionally commanded the Roman Legions? So long as they stayed quiet and let professionals (<i>Tribunus Cohortis</i>) run things it wasn't much of an issue, but there are plenty of horrible examples where this didn't work out quite so well...Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-43830102602949472412011-12-15T07:57:25.383-08:002011-12-15T07:57:25.383-08:00zornhau:
"If active service becomes a prereq...zornhau:<br /><br /><i>"If active service becomes a prerequisite for being President, except to see a lot of small wars engineered for that purpose."</i><br /><br />In <i>Starship Troopers</i>, wartime service was a prerequisite for becoming an <i>officer</i>. Any military service, of any character -- as long as it was honorably completed -- was sufficient for full political participation.<br /><br />WRT our situation here in the US, I reiterate, it's a point of discussion -- and often contention -- not a prerequisite. Though when otherwise viable candidates with wartime service are available, they tended to get elected, until quite recently. Whether things are permanently changing away from that remains to be seen. And, while I personally would weigh a candidate's (honorable, of course) military service heavily in his favor, I think it's right that we let the electorate as a whole determine how important that is.<br /><br />Speaking of the electorate's wisdom WRT military service, <i>nota bene</i> the 1988 election, where Dukakis riding in and M1 tank was negatively compared to actual combat photographer footage of Bush 41 being rescued by a submarine after being shot down. Talk about dumb photo op ideas...Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-64174854943995561562011-12-15T07:41:29.487-08:002011-12-15T07:41:29.487-08:00A general rule is that: "You get what you mea...A general rule is that: "You get what you measure."<br /><br />At best this means that the military will fill up with political hacks setting out to get blooded.M Harold Pagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08949772130509527838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-28297125246294060002011-12-15T07:28:08.657-08:002011-12-15T07:28:08.657-08:00One hardly needs to "engineer" small war...One hardly needs to "engineer" small wars for any purpose, plenty of people around the globe are quite willing to do so for their own purposes. (The trick here is to try to engage the greater powers into joining your side. See Libya for the latest example).<br /><br />I have also seen comparisons to criminal activity in the United States being a form of insurgent warfare; the gangs are erecting "parallel structures" that impose taxes, protect gang property and impose an internal "rule of law" that is disconnected from the general society. The primary difference here is this is not a deliberate attempt to undermine the Polity and replace it with a different order, but to fill what has essentially turned into a power vacuum at the local level of government (which is no longer effectively supplying these services).<br /><br />And of course the use of "War" as a metaphor has become a political cliche: how many candidates have used service in the "War on Drugs" or the "War on Poverty" as their credentials for electoral office?Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-4124889443090605392011-12-15T01:29:38.906-08:002011-12-15T01:29:38.906-08:00If active service becomes a prerequisite for being...If active service becomes a prerequisite for being President, except to see a lot of small wars engineered for that purpose.M Harold Pagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08949772130509527838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-41886604112361991822011-12-15T00:15:18.768-08:002011-12-15T00:15:18.768-08:00WRT why the non-voters might be willing to support...WRT why the non-voters might be willing to support the system, let's remember that many social systems that had concentrated ruling classes, however justified, were capable of generating the support of the non-ruling classes. Our current faith in Jacksonian Democracy blinds many of us to that fact. Most people, in most times and places, simply wouldn't have understood the issue -- the bosses were bosses for whatever good (or at least practical) reason, and that was the end of the argument. As long as the secured food and protection without being too capriciously mean, good enough.<br /><br />Also, based on current apathy towards a freely available voting right, one wonders how much value most people actually set in possessing and using political power. Given that this reality matches one of the primary justifications of the Federal Service system, I'm not so certain Heinlein was that far out in left field.<br /><br />WRT combat experience being required for MI officer candidacy, that constraint would have worked fairly well throughout the history of the US, up to the current time. For most of the history of the United States, the Army and Marine Corps have been small, and regularly involved in small wars. But those wars did indeed exist and combat experience among a significant fraction of the land warfare force has been standard. On need not imagine a Federation being any worse -- or better -- than the good ol' US of A as far as militarism or adventurism are concerned. Heinlein just projected the military history of the "peace-loving" United States forward into the future.<br /><br />12/15/2011:<br />You know, I think I'll stand by all of that today, without addition, retraction, or modification.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-34202360521413687562011-12-15T00:13:30.252-08:002011-12-15T00:13:30.252-08:00Rick:
"But I think the 'reception' o...Rick:<br /><br /><i>"But I think the 'reception' of the book is entangled with things like the floggings. And I can easily imagine scenarios in which federal service would devolve into a sort of fraternity hazing that prospective members of a governing elite undergo to become members of the club."</i><br /><br />I'm morally ambivalent about the floggings. Maybe it was presented in a bit too meta manner for some to catch, but I think you'll agree that the idea was consistent with the social theories in play. Flogging was preferred because it represented an immediate appeal to the offender's survival mechanism, while incarceration was deprecated because all it really does is restrict liberty and delay certain forms of gratification. (Though Heilein doesn't go into it in "Starship Troopers", it's pretty obvious from stories like "Coventry" that he knew that imprisonment is just a cost of doing business to hardened criminals.)<br /><br />WRT the hazards of Federal Service becoming a rite of passage, well, I thought that was explicitly accepted by those who supported the system. The whole point was to ensure that the electoral franchise came with a recognizable and voluntarily accepted cost.<br /><br />As for the epithet "hazing", I personally don't have a problem with it. IMO, people who don't like hazing per se don't understand its social purpose, which is to determine who can be counted on in the clutch. It's simply a social adaptation to the modern world where people can't be tested in the hunt or at war as readily as they used to be. Also IMO, people who don't like hazing because it can be abused are just throwing the baby out with the bath water. Anything can be abused, not just hazing. <br /><br />continued...Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-22266483820527316432011-12-15T00:12:37.431-08:002011-12-15T00:12:37.431-08:00Rick:
"Just for the record I'll link my ...Rick:<br /><br /><i>"Just for the record I'll link my take on </i>Starship Troopers<i>.'</i><br /><br />To save too much clicking back and forth on the part of the reader, I'll repost my subsequent comments here:<br /><br />1. Heinlein was fudging when he said that there was a vote-earning civil service option. The whole point of Federal service was to make the ballot go with the bayonet.<br /><br />2. The sentiment that the ballot must be accompanied by the bayonet was hardly unique to Heinlein. It can be traced all the way back to Classical Greece, where the males capable of affording and using a hoplite panoply were the only people who were considered full-fledged citizens. The same was true of Republican Rome. Feudal societies the world over implicitly matched military power with political power. Prior to universal female suffrage being written into the US Constitution, one of the arguments against it was that women couldn't fight, therefore they weren't qualified to exercise political power over those that could. In Heinlein's day, the draft was predicated upon the idea that enjoying democracy included a duty to protect it with one's own life. In fact, this duty was often cast as a "privelege" by many opinion leaders in politics and the media.<br /><br />So attaching military service to the vote is hardly implausible. What Heinlein did that shocked so many people was a simple inversion of the usual logic. He made the vote a benefit of military service, rather than military service a liability of the vote. Even here he was not terrible out of line, historically speaking. The Athenians originally only gave the vote to the hoplite class. And when they extended the vote to the hired help, it was based primarily on their demonstrated service to the state as trireme rowers. Those who know their history know that thw Romans extended citizenship to non-Italians through legionary service.<br /><br />IOW, the entire controversy is a symptom of historical ignorance, not any radical thought process of Heinlein's.<br /><br />3. The training described in the novel was Mobile Infantry (MI) training only, not standard military training. Heinlein explicitly states that anybody who applies will be accepted for service, and given some job that he can do, even if it is some preposterous caricature of makework. He also states that those who fall out of MI training through lack of physical skill or stamina would be given an easier service job. Rico later encounters one such person as a Navy cook on a troop transport.<br /><br />Heinlein further states that the MI is a very small army in comparison to the whole Federation population. Yet some Federation jurisdictions have near unanimous subscription to service. They can't all be going to Camp Currie or its Siberian equivalent. Most are going in the Navy, combat support (combat engineers appear in one battle), combat service support ("logistics" is mentioned), or some facsimile of military service that the Federation is required by law to provide to people are useless for anything else.<br /><br />So, the Federation would not be run by bitter old men with unreasonably hard-nosed attitudes. It would be run by former anything from starship pilots to box kickers, with grunts being in a small minority. <br /><br />Continued...Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-14004025770073863762011-12-14T18:15:39.150-08:002011-12-14T18:15:39.150-08:00Just for the record I'll link my take on Stars...Just for the record I'll link <a href="http://www.rocketpunk-manifesto.com/2010/03/starship-troopers-gets-dozen-at-grating.html" rel="nofollow">my take on <i>Starship Troopers</i></a>.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-23040856806054650042011-12-14T08:46:33.213-08:002011-12-14T08:46:33.213-08:00Re: Chris Lopes
I said it was a strong undercurre...Re: Chris Lopes<br /><br />I said it was a strong undercurrent, not a deciding factor. The service records of Gore and Bush were certainly a subject of discussion during the election.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-14195567520333171332011-12-14T08:31:21.647-08:002011-12-14T08:31:21.647-08:00"Certainly in the United States there has lon..."Certainly in the United States there has long been a strong political undercurrent that the chief executive should not have the power to send men to fight if he has not fought himself."<br /><br />Except that it hasn't really worked out that way, at least not recently. Clinton (in both races), Bush (again, in both races), and Obama all beat opponents who had more military (as in combat) experience than they did. Their lack of comparative military experience didn't hurt them much, if at all.<br /><br />What Americans tend to want in a chief executive is someone with a proven record of leadership. Sometimes, that role can be filled with prior military service, but often it just means having survived in politics for long enough. Military service is seen as just another form of government service these days.Chris Lopeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15603182786879935663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-75619422535326712622011-12-14T08:23:59.689-08:002011-12-14T08:23:59.689-08:00tracktrackjollyreaperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673007647719726846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-7861950429593823332011-12-13T21:09:58.989-08:002011-12-13T21:09:58.989-08:00Thucydides:
"While being a military commande...Thucydides:<br /><br /><i>"While being a military commander is certainly a demonstration of some leadership and executive talents, by itself it isn't enough to ensure that an ex officer (or NCO for that matter) would make a good political leader."</i><br /><br />Of course it isn't sufficient in itself, but it's pretty clear Heinlein thought it a prerequisite. Certainly in the United States there has long been a strong political undercurrent that the chief executive should not have the power to send men to fight if he has not fought himself.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-14956937640635950482011-12-13T14:21:37.083-08:002011-12-13T14:21:37.083-08:00Just to emphasise the point, Prince Andrew is not ...Just to emphasise the point, Prince Andrew is not only an active service officer in the Royal Navy, during the Falkland Islands war his job was to fly a helicopter with a large radar target as a decoy to draw enemy missiles away from the Royal Navy's aircraft carriers.<br /><br />More recently, Prince Henry ("Harry") served in Afghanistan, but was pulled after his presence was publicized, since it was felt this would draw too much enemy activity against the unit trying to score a coup against the Royal Family and the UK.<br /><br />While being a military commander is certainly a demonstration of some leadership and executive talents, by itself it isn't enough to ensure that an ex officer (or NCO for that matter) would make a good political leader. We can point to many examples across history of good, bad and indifferent commanders turned leader; many of the skills that make a good politician are not the same as those that make a good leader, and even leadership traits that are useful in the military, business or academia are not necessarily the ones that translate well into politics.<br /><br />Niven and Pournelle explored the idea a bit in the CoDominium series of stories and books; aristocrats trained from an early age to assume responsibility for their polity were often the protagonists of the stories; Pournelle said it was probably as good a system as anything else tried in history.Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-45396789266840554502011-12-13T11:23:32.113-08:002011-12-13T11:23:32.113-08:00Chris Lopes:
"Interestingly enough, Heinlein...Chris Lopes:<br /><br /><i>"Interestingly enough, Heinlein didn't. The main purpose of Starship Troopers (aside from getting Heinlein out from under the Scribner's contract) was as a response to calls for a ban on nuclear weapons testing. It's an ode to military virtues, especially those practiced by the infantry. His critics certainly saw it as 'right wing'."</i><br /><br />As was pointed out rather pithily in <i>Back To School</i>, critics are often wrong. The idea that the ruling class must be congruent with the warfighting class in a healthy society is pretty universal. Even at this late, benighted date, it is considered commendable that the British royal males do their military duty. The participation and character of candidates' military service has constantly been an issue in American Presidential elections since at least the Civil War. It's hardly a right wing point of view.<br /><br />Heinlein did indeed hold a volunteerist ideal, and expressed it forcefully in <i>Starship Troopers</i>. But that was a subsidiary point. His main point was that power must be balanced with responsibility. Even if he couldn't have a society that could defend itself through voluntary military participation, for his own reasoning to be consistent he would have to agree that at the very least the franchise must bear with it the liability for military service.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-68857302901636478782011-12-13T10:33:11.479-08:002011-12-13T10:33:11.479-08:00"Both Republicans and Democrats implicitly su..."Both Republicans and Democrats implicitly supported both the wartime and peacetime draft."<br /><br />Interestingly enough, Heinlein didn't. The main purpose of Starship Troopers (aside from getting Heinlein out from under the Scribner's contract) was as a response to calls for a ban on nuclear weapons testing. It's an ode to military virtues, especially those practiced by the infantry. His critics certainly saw it as "right wing".Chris Lopeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15603182786879935663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-10323559926415070772011-12-12T23:27:46.211-08:002011-12-12T23:27:46.211-08:00Chris Lopes:
"Starship Troopers is as conven...Chris Lopes:<br /><br /><i>"Starship Troopers is as conventionally right wing as it gets..."</i><br /><br />Here's where historical literacy really undermines a lot of political positions people take WRT to literature and what they suppose the author is trying to say. The political system in <i>Starship Troopers</i> is older than the Roman Empire. The idea that only those who take up arms in defense of the state should be allowed to vote goes back at least as far as Classical Greece. In at least one way, Heinlein's Federation was liberal by 5th Century BC Greek standards -- <i>anybody</i> could volunteeer and through service receive a vote. In ancient Greece one had to be of good enough means to supply one's own hoplite armor.<br /><br />Leaving semi-direct historical analogues aside, the time when when wielding the bayonet was considered a liability of casting a vote is easily within living memory. And it was not considered a partisan position. Both Republicans and Democrats implicitly supported both the wartime and peacetime draft. Heinlein perceived that ethic to be slipping away in the late 50s <i>Starship Troopers</i> was primarily written for other -- not entirely unassociated -- reasons, but Heinlein structured his Federal Service to make the point that only those who are willing to fight deserve to wield power through the vote.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-84667948695780135422011-12-12T21:03:48.036-08:002011-12-12T21:03:48.036-08:00I think it's pretty obvious that both genres t...I think it's pretty obvious that both genres tend to appeal to the same kinds of people, so putting them together on the same shelves makes a certain amount of sense. As to Brin's point, I can see where he is going, but I don't think it's that simple. As others have pointed out, the politics of a genre can not really be described as easily as Brin wants to believe.<br /><br />For instance, his LOTR analogy is all wrong. Yes you have a king at the end of the story, but Middle Earth is hardly the same place it was in the beginning. That's kind of the whole point (aside from "hey gang, look at the really cool world I just built") of the story, that the world is changing. The elves are leaving and the age of man is upon middle Earth. It may not be representative democracy yet, but if they follow our history, it will be. <br /><br />His thesis doesn't apply to science fiction either, not even for the same author. Starship Troopers is as conventionally right wing as it gets, while Stranger in a Strange Land became a counter culture classic. So I'm not sure where he's getting that idea.Chris Lopeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15603182786879935663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-27938644719334611262011-12-12T19:24:45.723-08:002011-12-12T19:24:45.723-08:00As someone who loves both SF and fantasy, Brin'...As someone who loves both SF and fantasy, Brin's holy war against the latter drives me crazy. Arguing "all fantasy is reactionary", "all fantasy idealises the past", or "all fantasy has sloppy worldbuilding" makes about as much sense as judging all SF politics by David Weber, all SF prose and characterisation by the 1930s pulps, and all SF plots by Hollywood.<br /><br />Fantasy, like SF, is a big tent. Ultimately what makes a work fantasy is its trappings -- magic, quasi-historical settings, whatever -- and not its themes.Peterhttp://www.matchstickeyes.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-40827087561304936152011-12-12T18:23:45.447-08:002011-12-12T18:23:45.447-08:00FWIW I read more SF than Fantasy, but I do read so...FWIW I read more SF than Fantasy, but I do read some fantasy.<br /><br />I tend to like fantasy in which the author has thought out how the magic works. Unlike Rick I enjoyed Sprague de Camps & Nivens fantasies.<br /><br />I very much enjoyed Dave Duncan's _Man of His Word_ novel in the 4 volumes. It had a mystery story aspect in that the main characters were figuring out how the magic worked & the reader is trying to figure out the next twist before the characters do.Jim Baergnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-58658172524911369332011-12-12T11:29:04.664-08:002011-12-12T11:29:04.664-08:00ElAntonious:
"Your argument is that there ex...ElAntonious:<br /><br /><i>"Your argument is that there exists two completely disparate groups of people that go to the same conventions, go to the same sections of the book store, read books from the same publishers, read the same authors, yet never cross over? That doesn't pass the sniff test."</i><br /><br />I am arguing that, but not to the exclusion of a third, crossover group. What I am saying is that crossover is not a defining feature of the genres in question. It's a niche. And that passes the sniff test in the discussion of <i>any</i> two mostly exclusive phenomena that still experience a degree of crossover.Tonynoreply@blogger.com