Today I learned +

[Cadence]

I read a summary of this movie and bloody hell, it sure sounded like body horror, and not just on Dog man's origin.

But 100% it sounds like something I'd have loved when I was like 7 though I would have sided with the terrorist cat.

I read the first several to my son and bought him many others over the years... and the body horror aspect never occurred to me today... when I mentioned to someone "Imagine the reboot in 20 years, Dog Man vs Man Dog, where they find out the other two halves didn't really die".

 

[Thomas Shey]

No I forget the name of the book, it's much later from his libertarian bang-your-grand-daughter SF period, or even later than that, and it's explicitly about the books he wrote, not a short story with a similar setting. Last time I tried looking it up I couldn't find it lol which is why I don't casually provide a title. Please don't make me go dig for it!

You might be conflating it with Friday, which has a baked in refutation of one of his early-ish novelettes.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

That's because its military also serves as civil-service, and the "make work" part is because everyone is permitted to enlist, and some people are incapable of filling any actual useful role.

Basically to compare to the "military" in ST you have to look at essentially everyone in the modern world who is directly employed by the government, not just the parts we call military (though if you're looking at the U.S. the ratios are probably not that far off) since we have an oversized military even relative to our size).

That just doesn't match up with the "counting the hairs on a caterpillar" example that the book actually gives. It sounds more like the later retcon (which I'm wondering now if it wasn't in a magazine or something, in which case good luck to me trying to find that!).

Anyway the "counting the hairs on a caterpillar" example would be completely unnecessary if it was true that it was also the civil service, and also the whole "you could alternatively test out dangerous new devices" thing would be unnecessary if it was also the civil service, because it would be utterly trivial to find a job for a completely blind person in the civil service, so why on earth would the bizarre "hairs on a caterpillar" example be used rather the teacher just furrowing his brow and saying "Well he'd go work in an office..." like an even slightly sane person would say if the civil service stuff was true, because that'd a be a dumbass question. Instead it's treated like a valid question (which again it would not be if the civil service was really included when the book was written). Why would the "dangerous machinery testing" jobs even exist? Would they only be for illiterates or something? Seems like you're punishing people for society screwing up if you give a man who is literate a cushy office job which is like 95% of civil service jobs (and even some military ones), but send some illiterate but otherwise fit man to get blown up by a malfunctioning test suit of power armour.

He clearly hadn't thought it through to the level you're describing. He later wanted to change it so it was more like that, but the "hairs on a caterpillar" example permanently derails such attempted retcons. It's hard-incompatible with them. And if you don't know what I'm talking about, I'm surprised because it's one of the wildest and most memorable things in the entire book.

Anyway when the actual book was written, it's clear that Heinlein was only thinking about MANLY and RISKY jobs as worthy of citizenship, which is why his examples are soldiers, firefighters, and experimental machinery testers, all stuff where you could get killed. But many years later very different views Heinlein wants to backfill/retcon so it's not obviously dumb (and sexist - though he did admittedly address ableism in the crudest and most insulting possible way - but hey that's why this is only fascist and not Nazi, they're not exterminating "those people", just treating them as totally incapable!).

 

[Mannahnin]

TIL That the novel Starship troopers was on the USMC reading list

Well, it's full of idealistic cheering for the idea of military service and civil service in general.

and now i have learned that both Ready Player One and Ender's game are on the recommended reading list for the USMC

Ugh for the former. Can't imagine why. The latter makes more sense, though yeah, it's a bit of a surprise as it's a good bit anti-war.

One of the bigger questions asked in "Starship Troopers" was, "Should people who aren't willing to give to society be able to control that society's direction?" I say question, not statement, because I think that's what is intended. The themes are very heavy on Civic Duty and the topic of Civics in general. Sometimes a story is written to amplify a point, to make sure that it's clearly made.

Right. The whole thing sprang out of 1) A conversation he and Poul Anderson had about compulsory civil service, based on the Swiss system, and 2) His existential fear that the Soviets were beating the West in the space and technology race.

The problem with this is that Starship Troopers isn't "just asking questions".

It's asking them and then answering them before you can even consider them, let alone open your mouth to answer.

It does this over and over. That's part of why it doesn't stop to let you think about the natural flaws of such a system, it immediately starts trying to paper over them.

Yup. He lectures, and the book's biggest flaw (aside from the ghastly apologism for corporal punishment) is that he doesn't think through and answer some of the implications.

This is further confirmed, note, by the fact that later on, Heinlein devoted part of an entire other book (on his work, I forget the title) to backfill and retcon on Starship Troopers, absolutely none of which was needed if your thesis about "just asking questions" was true, but which is exactly what you'd do if you believed the political ideology in said book had merit and needed to be protected.

You may be thinking of his comments in Expanded Universe, where he tried to explain that actually most Federal service was NON-military, although that's really not what the book portrays. I know he rushed in writing it, but he doesn't get to pretend it says something different than is actually in the text.

Chapter 12 does have the following passage, where in officer school they're talking about the vote and why it's limited to veterans:

"Sally answered, "Uh, service men are disciplined, sir."

Major Reid was gentle with him. "Sorry. An appealing theory not backed up by facts. You and I are not permitted to vote as long as we remain in the Service, nor is it verifiable that military discipline makes a man self-disciplined once he is out; the crime rate of veterans is much like that of civilians. And you have forgotten that in peacetime most veterans come from non-combatant auxiliary services and have not been subjected to the full rigors of military discipline."

(emphasis mine)

No, not really. This is a weird thing to say in fact. The start of the book is very heavy on that, and then its almost people forgotten in favour of weird xenophobic stuff which really LOOKS like it's trying to glorify corporal punishment and wars against Asian people (esp. as a lot of the accusations thrown at the nebulous enemy sound awwwwwfully like ones thrown at communist China at that time). Civics is rapidly forgotten in favour of macho naughty word generally.

No, you're misremembering. The most consistent through-line of the entire book is the nature of public service and the concept of earning the right to wield the power of of vote by serving first. That people esteem too lightly what they obtain too cheaply, and the idea (springing from his convo with Anderson) that if people had to earn the vote (that is, the power to wield the force of law on your neighbors) through hard work and personal sacrifice, they'd use it more responsibly. There IS other crappy stuff in there, but this is the main theme of the book.

There is definitely some implied anti-Communist stuff, but that's more about the Soviets than the Chinese.

It's not just tone, it's text. And the society described can literally only function in a 40K-style "In the grim darkness of the far future there is only war"-style situation, because he has an insanely massive and by the book's own admission, "make work" military.

I think you're misremembering the text and/or interpolating. The Mobile Infantry is described as chronically short on officers, and as staffing desk jobs with the disabled. The only "make-work" they talk about is for people capable of understanding and taking the service oath but physically incapable of doing a useful job, for whom it says they'll come up with something equally strenuous and difficult to do matching your capabilities, so you can still earn your vote.

From Chapter 2:

I asked one of the doctors what percentage of the victims flunked the physical.

He looked startled."Why, wenever fail anyone. The law doesn’t permit us to."

"Huh? I mean, Excuse me, Doctor? Then what’s the point of this goose-flesh parade?"

"Why, the purpose is," he answered, hauling off and hitting me in the knee with a hammer (I kicked him,but not hard), "to find out what duties you are physically able to perform. But if you came in here in awheel chair and blind in both eyes and were silly enough to insist on enrolling, they would find something silly enough to match. Counting the fuzz on a caterpillar by touch, maybe. The only way you can fail is by having the psychiatrists decide that you are not able to understand the oath."

"Oh. Uh... Doctor, were you already a doctor when you joined up? Or did they decide you ought to be a doctor and send you to school?"

"Me?" He seemed shocked. "Youngster, do I look that silly? I’m a civilian employee."

"Oh. Sorry, sir."

"No offense. But military service is for ants. Believe me. I see ‘em go, I see ‘em come back — when they do come back. I see what it’s done to them. And for what? A purely nominal political privilege that pays not one centavo and that most of them aren’t competent to use wisely anyhow. Now if they would let medical men run things — but never mind that; you might think I was talking treason, free speech or not. But, youngster, if you’ve got savvy enough to count ten, you’ll back out while you still can. Here, take these papers back to the recruiting sergeant — and remember what I said."

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You may be thinking of his comments in Expanded Universe, where he tried to explain that actually most Federal service was NON-military, although that's really not what the book portrays. I know he rushed in writing it, but he doesn't get to pretend it says something different than is actually in the text.

Okay yes it WAS Expanded Universe, thank you, now I don't have to go digging, thank you!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Chapter 12 does have the following passage, where in officer school they're talking about the vote and why it's limited to veterans:

Yeah that's pretty clearly referring to something that's not the civil service though, otherwise they'd have just said that! But I think you agree.

Re: "forever war", I dunno man, I get the feeling they're "done" with peacetime in that society.

 

[Ryujin]

I think you're misremembering the text and/or interpolating. The Mobile Infantry is described as chronically short on officers, and as staffing desk jobs with the disabled. The only "make-work" they talk about is for people capable of understanding and taking the service oath but physically incapable of doing a useful job, for whom it says they'll come up with something equally strenuous and difficult to do matching your capabilities, so you can still earn your vote.

There is also the undercurrent that they staff recruitment centres with current and former military who have been maimed, during service, as a means of dissuading people, who aren't really willing to sacrifice for citizenship, from joining up for public service. You have to be committed to serving in order to earn your vote.

 

[Mannahnin]

Yeah that's pretty clearly referring to something that's not the civil service though, otherwise they'd have just said that! But I think you agree.

Re: "forever war", I dunno man, I get the feeling they're "done" with peacetime in that society.

Chapter 2:

"Let’s table that, shall we? Listen, and let me tell you what you are going to do — because you want to. In the first place this family has stayed out of politics and cultivated its own garden for over a hundred years — I see no reason for you to break that fine record. I suppose it’s the influence of that fellow at your high school — what’s his name? You know the one I mean."

He meant our instructor in History and Moral Philosophy — a veteran, naturally. "Mr. Dubois."

"Hmmph, a silly name — it suits him. Foreigner, no doubt. It ought to be against the law to use the schools as undercover recruiting stations. I think I’m going to write a pretty sharp letter about it — a taxpayer has some rights!"

"But, Father, he doesn’t do that at all! He — " I stopped, not knowing how to describe it. Mr. Dubois had a snotty, superior manner; he acted as if none of us was really good enough to volunteer for service. I didn’t like him. "Uh, if anything, he discourages it."

"Hmmph! Do you know how to lead a pig? Never mind. When you graduate, you’re going to study business at Harvard; you know that. After that, you will go on to the Sorbonne and you’ll travel a bit along with it, meet some of our distributors, find out how business is done elsewhere. Then you’ll come home and go to work. You’ll start with the usual menial job, stock clerk or something, just for form’s sake — but you’ll be an executive before you can catch your breath, because I’m not getting any younger and the quicker you can pick up the load, the better. As soon as you’re able and willing, you’ll be boss. There! How does that strike you as a program? As compared with wasting two years of your life?"

I didn’t say anything. None of it was news to me; I’d thought about it. Father stood up and put a hand on my shoulder. "Son, don’t think I don’t sympathize with you; I do. But look at the real facts. If there were a war, I’ll be the first to cheer you on — and to put the business on a war footing. But there isn’t,and praise God there never will be again. We’ve outgrown wars. This planet is now peaceful and happy and we enjoy good enough relations with other planets. So what is this so called ‘Federal Service’? Parasitism, pure and simple. A functionless organ, utterly obsolete, living on the taxpayers. A decidedly expensive way for inferior people who otherwise would be unemployed to live at public expense for a term of years, then give themselves airs for the rest of their lives. Is that what you want to do?"

There is also the undercurrent that they staff recruitment centres with current and former military who have been maimed, during service, as a means of dissuading people, who aren't really willing to sacrifice for citizenship, from joining up for public service. You have to be committed to serving in order to earn your vote.

It's not an undercurrent; that's explicitly in the text.

 

[overgeeked]

There is also the undercurrent that they staff recruitment centres with current and former military who have been maimed, during service, as a means of dissuading people, who aren't really willing to sacrifice for citizenship, from joining up for public service. You have to be committed to serving in order to earn your vote.

That’s the part most people gloss over when they say it’s fascism. They’re openly showing people there’s a very real possibility of being hurt and maimed by joining the military and actively push people to join non-combat service. Most people gloss over that you don’t have to carry a gun to earn the vote. Being a teacher, librarian, or any other kind of public servant gets you the vote, too. Considering the comparative casualty rates of ground pounders and school teachers, the resulting society would be decidedly non-militaristic. This is overshadowed by the fact that it’s a military sci-fi novel that focuses on the war with the bugs.

ETA: At this point the topic should be its own thread.

 

[Thomas Shey]

That just doesn't match up with the "counting the hairs on a caterpillar" example that the book actually gives. It sounds more like the later retcon (which I'm wondering now if it wasn't in a magazine or something, in which case good luck to me trying to find that!).

Anyway the "counting the hairs on a caterpillar" example would be completely unnecessary if it was true that it was also the civil service, and also the

No, it absolutely does. Remember the context of that line was about someone who wanted to enlist--as was their right--if they were severely physically impaired. It was an example of the fact that they absolutely did not turn people away. It was basically an indication they'd find some job for you, even if it was busy-work. Because while everyone had a right to enlist--and thus get franchise--no one was supposed to get a free pass.

whole "you could alternatively test out dangerous new devices" thing would be unnecessary if it was also the civil service, because it would be utterly trivial to find a job for a completely blind person in the civil service, so why on earth would the bizarre "hairs on a caterpillar" example be used rather the teacher just furrowing his brow and saying "Well he'd go work in an office..."

Because it was an example of an extreme case--one where even office work would have been difficult and pointless--and thus hyperbole.

like an even slightly sane person would say if the civil service stuff was true, because that'd a be a dumbass question. Instead it's treated like a valid question (which again it would not be if the civil service was really included when the book was written). Why would the "dangerous machinery testing" jobs even exist? Would they only be for illiterates or something? Seems like you're punishing people for society screwing up if you give a man who is literate a cushy office job which is like 95% of civil service jobs (and even some military ones), but send some illiterate but otherwise fit man to get blown up by a malfunctioning test suit of power armour.

That might very well be--the point was that the job was supposed to be a sacrifice for the person in one fashion or another. Whether it always was is another question and one more about failures of execution in any process than what the intention of the process is.

Remember, they really did consider it an intention for you to go in with no certainty you were going to get a job of the sort you'd prefer--and one of the factors were what jobs they needed done. Since they did use a military and a large one, some of those jobs were going to be dangerous and/or unpleasant, and that was considered a virtue of how it worked, because the whole point was to make people do something that required a commitment of some stripe to win franchise. It was just a question of what form that took. It might be, in the case of someone who had some useful skills, it'd just be working at a normal job while living in a dorm and making a tenth of what you could in the civilian market. But it was at least not intended to be a desirable choice for most people, one way or another.

He clearly hadn't thought it through to the level you're describing. He later wanted to change it so it was more like that, but the "hairs on a caterpillar" example permanently derails such attempted retcons. It's hard-incompatible with them. And if you don't know what I'm talking about, I'm surprised because it's one of the wildest and most memorable things in the entire book.

I don't think it does, and I've explained why.

Anyway when the actual book was written, it's clear that Heinlein was only thinking about MANLY and RISKY jobs as worthy of citizenship, which is why his examples are soldiers, firefighters, and experimental machinery testers, all stuff where you could get killed. But many years later very different views Heinlein wants to backfill/retcon so it's not obviously dumb (and sexist - though he did admittedly address ableism in the crudest and most insulting possible way - but hey that's why this is only fascist and not Nazi, they're not exterminating "those people", just treating them as totally incapable!).

Do I have to note the example early in the book that indicates that, at least by the standard of the time, he was not automatically ableist? Admittedly, its an injured veteran, but he's still right there.