Starship Troopers

[Dan From Smithville]

Fascism is very much at odds with libertarianism.
what some far leftish wags claim notwithstanding.

It does not make much sense that the two would be one.

The novel, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" has always struck me as an send up to libertarian views. It is one of Heinlein's more well-known works from 1968. In it, the citizens of the moon are rebelling against the tyranny of an oppressive Earth that extracts their resources without reasonable compensation or consideration to their drain on resources.

 

[Howard Is]

Starship Troopers was a war propaganda movie, just like the movies and cartoons that dehumanized Germans and Japanese.

Iraq-nids,.

For **** sake.

Swarming Arab insects.

Desert Storm psyops.

 

[Howard Is]

Worst film ever. Never made clear what the conflict was about, or even who the 'good guys' were. The only motivation seemed to be blind loyalty to the state.

It was about slaughtering Arabs in the desert. Jeebers Charisma, isn’t that obvious ?
But yes, also about blind loyalty to the state, and rocking out to some crunch metal to make the killing more enjoyable. As they do.

 

[Revoltingest]

It does not make much sense that the two would be one.

True, but we'v some critics of libertarianism who'll claim any old insult for the purpose.

The novel, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" has always struck me as an send up to libertarian views. It is one of Heinlein's more well-known works from 1968. In it, the citizens of the moon are rebelling against the tyranny of an oppressive Earth that extracts their resources without reasonable compensation or consideration to their drain on resources.

I'm unfamiliar with it.
I read somewhere that Spiderman leans libertarian.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

True, but we'v some critics of libertarianism who'll claim any old insult for the purpose.

I'm unfamiliar with it.
I read somewhere that Spiderman leans libertarian.

I do not know if anyone can predict which direction Spiderman will swing. But I am sure it will be to a friendly neighborhood.

 

[Revoltingest]

I do not know if anyone can predict which direction Spiderman will swing. But I am sure it will be to a friendly neighborhood.

One example I see is in a Toby Maguire movie.
Peter Parker refuses financial assistance from Norman Osborne.
The scene is about his independence...making his own way,
unlike his friend Harry.

I expect that fans of altruism will like Spiderman too.
But I note that Spidey does what he does with opposition
from the state, rather than at its behest.

 

[Stevicus]

It's not about military objectives.
The point of using infantry is so that the main characters
face challenges, & we get to see vicious bugs rip them apart.

I'd have developed the Mother Of All Boots.

And then a robot to wear them, & squash the bugs.

That might work. These kids were doing their part:

 

[Goodman John]

I read the book Starship Troopers when I was in 6th grade and through successive readings over the years it formed a lot of my attitude towards the relationship between the citizen and the state and the military.

As for the movie rendition, it was a sloppy and lazy attempt to bring the story to the screen. Of course, it may have been intended that way, but in comparison the movie is far outstripped by the book. Despite the similarities, the director could have just as easily slapped a different name on it, it was so far removed from the original. As a campy, over-the-top war film, it did okay.

I watched one of the sequel movies, but it was so bad I swore to avoid the others.

The strength of the movie, though, could have been as a launch pad for a TV series- I know it did go to an animated series for a while and it was pretty decent- maybe something along the lines how the short-lived Space: Above and Beyond was done.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I read the book Starship Troopers when I was in 6th grade and through successive readings over the years it formed a lot of my attitude towards the relationship between the citizen and the state and the military.

As for the movie rendition, it was a sloppy and lazy attempt to bring the story to the screen. Of course, it may have been intended that way, but in comparison the movie is far outstripped by the book. Despite the similarities, the director could have just as easily slapped a different name on it, it was so far removed from the original. As a campy, over-the-top war film, it did okay.

I watched one of the sequel movies, but it was so bad I swore to avoid the others.

The strength of the movie, though, could have been as a launch pad for a TV series- I know it did go to an animated series for a while and it was pretty decent- maybe something along the lines how the short-lived Space: Above and Beyond was done.

Starship Troopers, the book, is how a nationalistic military 'democracy' would look.
Starship Troopers, the movie, is how such a society would turn into a tribalistic military dystopia.
Personally, I prefer the movie.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

True, but we'v some critics of libertarianism who'll claim any old insult for the purpose.

I'm unfamiliar with it.
I read somewhere that Spiderman leans libertarian.

There's a libertarian spiderman spoof comic making fun of libertarians, but no. The vast majority of spiderman's villains are corrupt corporate leaders or the thugs they outfit with illegal tech. And spiderman has worked with a superhero oversight force (shield) since silver age and sided with iron man on more oversight in civil war.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Worst film ever. Never made clear what the conflict was about, or even who the 'good guys' were. The only motivation seemed to be blind loyalty to the state.

That's kind of the point, being a satire against military nationalism.

 

[Revoltingest]

The vast majority of spiderman's villains are corrupt corporate leaders....

Not the one's I know of, eg, The Kingpin, Doc Oc.
But even so your argument appears to assume that
a libertarian wouldn't oppose corrupt business types,
or that business types are libertarian.
Spiderman is still an independent contractor kind of
crime fighter. And when he works with others, it's
a voluntary association. No taking orders from cops
or politicians.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Not the one's I know of, eg, The Kingpin, Doc Oc.

Kingpin is the corrupt CEO of Fisk Industries.
Doc Oct is an exception but often works for Fisk or Oscorp.

 

[Revoltingest]

Kingpin is the corrupt CEO of Fisk Industries.
Doc Oct is an exception but often works for Fisk or Oscorp.

The Kingpin is an organized crime boss,
hardly a corporate organization.
But you're ignoring my more significant
claims of libertarianage, eg, independence
& voluntary relationships.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

The Kingpin is an organized crime boss,
hardly a corporate organization.
But you're ignoring my more significant
claims of libertarianage, eg, independence
& voluntary relationships.

Fisk Industries is the corporation which facilitates his criminal empire.

Spiderman isn't independent. He is moreso in the movies because of Sony's limited rights, but very early in the comics he worked under government agencies. From Shield to the CIA. He falls heavily on the 'US superheros should have accountability to the us government and have oversight to prevent abuse' side of the equation.

He also was heavily against using superhero powers to personally enrich himself, counting it a his duty to provide for his hometown regardless of their means (if anything moreso for the poor). Unlike libertarian spiderman.

 

[Revoltingest]

He also was heavily against using superhero powers to personally enrich himself, counting it a his duty to provide for his hometown regardless of their means (if anything moreso for the poor). Unlike libertarian spiderman.

You so misunderstand what it is to be a libertarian.
He's making a personal choice, one which doesn't
infringe upon the rights of others. Some choose
to pursue wealth, while some of us pursue other
things, eg, volunteerism.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

You so misunderstand what it is to be a libertarian.
He's making a personal choice, one which doesn't
infringe upon the rights of others. Some choose
to pursue wealth, while some of us pursue other
things, eg, volunteerism.

No, I just don't accept the volunteerism fantasy. I just see that libertarian objectivism that values wealth and doesn't ever actually 'volunteer' to be socially productive without inequitable accrument of personal wealth. And it is the cancer killing us through crony capitalism and soft corporate oligarchy.

But that's for another thread.

For now 'with great power comes great responsibility' is antithetical to 'only help if you feel like it.' It is not a half step away from 'from each according to his ability to each according to his need.'

 

[Revoltingest]

No, I just don't accept the volunteerism fantasy. I just see that libertarian objectivism that values wealth....

We'll have to agree to disagree about what libertarianism is about.
You're lucky that I'm not telling you what all you liberals are all like.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

We'll have to agree to disagree about what libertarianism is about.
You're lucky that I'm not telling you what all you liberals are all like.

Lucky me. I'll have to wait *checks watch* 60 more seconds for that.
You have your reasons why you think socialism doesn't work, I have reasons why I think libertarianism doesn't work.

 

[Revoltingest]

Lucky me. I'll have to wait *checks watch* 60 more seconds for that.

I don't need to.
Just imagine my taking your approach, ie,
generalizing from the worst stereotypes.