SM Book Club- Starship Trooper- DISCUSSION

Well according to the article posted above, and quoted below, Singapore at least has a minimal crime problem and criminals are not mollycoddled with a slap on the wrist, not when a beating with a cane on the back seems so much more effective.

"The Ministry of Home Affairs, which oversees the criminal justice system, said in a statement that tough laws had kept Singapore "orderly and relatively crime free."

"We do not have a situation where acts of vandalism are commonplace," the ministry said, "as in cities like New York, where even police cars are not spared the acts of vandals."

However, this is getting off track when we are SUPPOSED to be talking about Starship Troopers, so let's get back on topic and talk about the book.

 

My apologies as I missed this thread...just rediscovered it. I reread the book just so I could have the book fresh in my mind...
Why reading it, I took a few notes and it appears that most, if not all, of these topics have been discussed but perhaps not to conclusion. To list a few and perhaps stir the grey matter a bit more:

1. Floggings - As noted by many here, this is still practiced in many countries and its reasoning is not only as punishment but as humiliation. The question remains, "Does it work?" Personally, I would say yes, to a degree.
2. Citizenship via service - 2 years but one can be 'indefinitely extended.' Again, I agree with it but 4 years.
3. No voting privilege while in service - seems to me to be sensible but thought I would throw it in here.
4. Extremely dangerous military training - seems much more dangerous that any modern military.
5. Capital punishment - an example of 'violence' providing a permanent solution

One thing I have always wondered... if Heinlein used the name 'Dubois' specifically for a subtle meaning...?

 

I've been zooming thru other reviews of SST and found an interesting take:

Written during the Cold War between capitalism and communism, Robert Heinlein proposed a society and a vision that chose a third option, one in which merit, hierarchy, service, and sacrifice were rewarded instead of the decadent and slothful capitalist democracies or the enslaved tyranny of communism. Heinlein believed in a society in which the only citizens of the future society are those who had volunteered and served in the military.

(Fascism in Science Fiction Part One: Starship Troopers)

Not the so-called Third Way often opined about in the US, but a real alternative to two very distinct societies.
We have witnessed in our time the complete failure that was Communism. Trouble is, Capitalism ain't doing so well either.

And since I always try to ID concepts not familiar to many readers, I give you this:

In politics, the Third Way is a position akin to centrism that tries to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of right-wing economic and left-wing social policies.
The Third Way was created as a serious re-evaluation of political policies within various centre-left progressive movements in response to international doubt regarding the economic viability of the state; economic interventionist policies that had previously been popularized by Keynesianism and contrasted with the corresponding rise of popularity for economic liberalism and the New Right.

The trouble with this - that the body politic in North America has moved so far to the left, that the Progressives of even the recent past would be viewed as Neanderthals by today's standards....

 

@DKR Hmmmm.... A Third Way? A Center? Frankly, Does this not exists now and even on this forum? I find few people are ultra left or right. I certainly am in more of the center as have some left leaning views and some conservative views. A Moderate? An Independent? A Centralist? I find I like the term and idea of 'Centralist' and may adopt it. But, I concur that the Left (I detest calling them Progressives and hate calling them Liberals) have gone so far left that they have dropped off the map ('Where there be dragons!') - and - in some cases, many of the Rights have done so also, too many in my opinion.

The other thought is...can not a person of democracy or even communism show and have 'merit, hierarchy, service, and sacrifice'? Communism is a grand idea, on paper, and it's only flaw is that it doesn't work in reality given mankind's nature (did a long paper in university on it because of my big mouth, don't ask). So, I sort of disagree that Heinlein was trying to reinvent the wheel. I do think he was showing that those points are what society should be based upon, a sort of tuning of democracy, not on amount of wealth or equal distribution of wealth...and not on equality as simply being born or gender or race or etc. was not enough. Thinking about this, I laugh when remembering quotes from Churchill about democracy, "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." and "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.“.... LOL! Okay, I have lost my train of thought so time for this Centralist to leave! LOL!

 

I can see the appeal of 'beating people into submission' we all have someone who disagrees with us that we would like to cane. The devil is in the details. Where do you draw the line?

Do you cane someone for throwing trash on the ground? (this is a punishment in Thailand) what if it happens to fly out the window because your child let it slip out of his fingers?

What if, a presidential order is signed and we dont find out we are in violation until they cane you? Would corporal punishment have been better in Utah? or Texas? against the FBI?

Secondly, consider that social pressure is a huge punishment for most of the younger people who are alive right now. They live for social media and they think that 'spinning' a story in their favor makes them right. We have so much info now that no one really knows who to believe so who is to say that if we had corporal punishment it wouldn't be based on social pressure. (the Salem witch trials come to mind)

So while corporal punishment may satisfy some urge for revenge I would not say its an effective behavior modification tactic or deterrent except in a suppressed society where might or popularity makes you king for the day.

 

@Ganado You do make a valid point however I think I disagree. I have to give it more thought but at the moment, yes, I disagree.

Reference caning... I think if used correctly that it indeed can serve a purpose. As you say, 'the devil is in the details' but is this not for each and every law that is passed? And, those laws each have the 'intent of the law' and the 'letter of the law.' For example, trash flies out the window as doing so one breaks the law. This is not the 'intent of the law' which is to stop people purposely littering but the 'letter of the law' would have the individual caned. However, this is why we have judges to interpret the law, and hopefully keep it fair, just.

I also think your point of "social pressure is a huge punishment for...younger people" is valid and agree entirely. As such, the humiliation of being caned could indeed proved to be a deterrent and save the young individual a worse state in the future. I honest don't know but this is what I think. I do know this. I have lived is some of the real hell holes on this earth and what makes them relatively safe is fear. Fear of what happens if they are caught in a crime. There is no fear in America and most of the first world countries as the worse case the criminals are locked away in clean facilities, treated well, and fed regularly...nit so in the rest of the world and frankly I am more afraid in America than I ever was abroad...but I digress. So, if a young man faces caning, in public, more than liking also shown on Facebook, for writing graffiti on public or someone's private property - is that not a more personal deterrent, one surely to be remembered, than say probation where he is inconvenienced very little?
Frankly, I could take this a step further and wonder if public Floggings would be a better punishment for specific crimes: drunk driving, spouse abuse, etc. etc. etc.

"they think that 'spinning' a story in their favor makes them right." Right is right and wrong is wrong and a test of sanity is if the individual knows the difference between the two. So...if they 'think' this and the social media 'thinks' this - well - does that make it right? No, of course not.

"corporal punishment may satisfy some urge for revenge I would not say its an effective behavior modification tactic or deterrent"
You are correct. But, it is not suppose to be a method to 'modify' behavior but end it. It is does not serve as a 'deterrent' for those that perform those crimes that carry this punishment know it well and are welling to risk it. What it does is ensure this individual can never do it again and rids society of them entirely, to include their burden of care and their threat. That's it. It is not suppose to do anything else. No deterrent. No modification of behavior. For me, Capital Punishment serves the purpose of not putting the burden of care on society for crimes committed by the individual and ensuring they are out of the gene pool along with their threat to us. Frankly, I can see no reason not to have capital punishment. Now, I am not saying to put in an 'express lane' but let the law run its course and if found guilty...

Anyway...my thoughts/opinions...

 

Corporeal punishment for 'revenge' is not the objective.

It is a consequence

As Heinlein was fond of math in SST - X (crime) earns (=) Punishment to show society does not approve (liberal judges aside). IOW one begets the other.

In his book Farnham's Freehold RAH offers the "punishment as learning tool" meme on two occasions. Again - a nod to his peculiar outlook on many things.

A society without rules (call it a social contract if you will) is not a working society. Nor, is that ever to become one. Having rules and following same is what makes a rabble into a 'culture'.

History tells us a great leap toward "civilization' was Hamumurabi posting written law in a public place for all to see. In this I tend to agree. One can argue over a law as to its fairness, but having a code to define certain relationships is needed for a society to grow past a certain point.

(Background if you slept thru Western Civ class)
The Code of Hammurabi is inscribed on this seven-foot basalt stele. The stele is now at the Louvre. The Code of Hammurabi refers to a set of rules or laws enacted by the Babylonian King Hammurabi (reign 1792-1750 B.C.). The code governed the people living in his fast-growing empire.

 

Part of what I got out of the book was that it was Heinlein's reaction to surviving in a world that had no real security, and that being part of a band of brother's gave you an alternative. Not only the survival of your comrades in arms was at stake, but of your parents, nation, world, and even species was in danger. How does a man born into an age when horses were the dominant means of individual travel adapt to a world with atomic bombs on missiles? My take on Starship Troopers is that he went back to the basics and it sets up a modern version of Sparta to meet the almost endless problems we face to our survival now even without the threat of other species.

 

The neat thing about being a speculative fiction author is that the author can create any kind of world for his/her characters that they wish....the world, so created doesn't have to have any resemblance to reality. The reality of Sparta, was that it was not a very sustainable model of societal development, having been eventually absorbed into the late Roman Republic. History of Sparta - Wikipedia

 

Problem with most things is, people in politics maneuver their way out of what every one else is required to do. THAT WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE. Case in point, "Obama care"
I very much liked the concept of earning the right to vote and have children amongst other things , people with nothing invested will always vote for more free things for them selves, not caring the burden it is on society.
I think other incentives, like reduced taxes for X amount of time served and greater recognition incentives for those in armed services and actually combat positions and or seriously policing events . preference in the job market ,public office, and so on.

I'm afraid I am only familiar with the series of movies SSTroopers, I'm not a book worm .
What frustrated me was the imbalance of technology and the stupidity of the scientists .
Does the movie fallow the book very well?
The other frustration is that it seems to me they were thinning the herd of man in this event for ground troops rather then using their technology to fight the enemy.
Not far from the spirit of Star wars
, killing a lot of people to justify machinery for the more killing of a lot more people .

 

@Bandit99 I really appreciate your different view point and from having read your response, I can see that in some cases the intent is different, again it's having to rely on someone else to interpret the law with regard to corporal punishment.

One thing that I did enjoy was the part where Johnny is going to resign and he overhears the Lt and Sargent Zim. Zim takes an ass chewing for having let the recruit get to the point of swinging at him and forcing the Lt. To start proceedings.

Both the Lt and the Sgt felt that had failed the recruits because they knew where they were psychology in their program. This is a level of personal responsibility that I think has been lost.

This conversation changes Johnny's viewpoint about quitting. He doesn't realize the depth of commitment both of these men have to the men under them until he 'overhears' this conversation

 

@Ganado "This is a level of personal responsibility that I think has been lost."
I agree totally in society as a whole but in the military I can assure you it is not. Yes, there are a-holes there too but in general personal responsibility is a keystone and one is held accountable for the good, bad and ugly. This is one of the reasons why military people and former military people could not tolerate Clinton as it sicken us to see her political tap dance around the responsibility that was obviously hers. She made a huge political mistake but she is such a political animal that she couldn't help herself.

 

If you hadn't noticed...TRump is a dab hand at not only tap dancing, but Olympic gold winning back flipping (aka pivoting). As to TRump assuming personal responsibility for his gaffes and blunders....Not when there are scapegoats that he can dump them on. But that's ok...he gets a free pass, simply because he's not Klinton.

 

It also undermines the principal of personal responsibility that is being made much of in earlier posts; if one can be absolved of assuming one's own personal responsibility, simply because there is someone who is worse than one is, who allegedly doesn't assume their own personal responsibility either.

Each assumes personal responsibility for their own f#ck ups. TRump for his...Klinton for hers....but it would appear that neither do. Partisans will forgive their own, and deplore "the other"...that's just the nature of the political beast.

 

BLA

BLAH! BLAH! BLAH! BLAH! That is your opinion. And, mine is I would rather have 6 Trumps than 1 Clinton, especially since I have to live under them so hee-hee, ha-ha, and ho-ho...since I am not in the mood to put cute icons on my post.

 

I do not know.We currently have lots of rules, laws and yet we are seeing things breaking down in areas (inner city)

You are correct, he is trying to figure out social issues (IMO). I could not imagine what the world would be like if we had a threat from another planet. I kept wondering if the others Johnny fought were actually a representation of other countries or cultures. Like his first assignment, the planet Johnny went to sort of reminded me of the Muslim population. I do not know why but there were lots of them.

I question if most soldiers realize why in training/boot camp. I think until you actually work together, banding together most don't recognize the commitment that has been instilled or pass to them through their instructors.

@arleigh I did not watch the movie but some have. Maybe @Legion489 or someone knows.

I talked to my kids about this book and I laid out the society and the use of whipping. I pointed out that this was used as a deterrent so that society could function without constant crimes. I asked them what they thought and they firmly stated whipping is cruel and inhumane. I think that is why whipping was stopped, because people felt that way. So by treating a criminal kindly, we are cruel and inhumane to the victims.

 

"

They don't have the crime we do in Singapore, and poor little Johnny Fay STILL jumps and screams when he hears WHISH! SMACK! So much for ADD and not learning! Cruel? He learned a lesson and never did it again and untold tax dollar were not wasted housing and feeding him or other criminals and crime went DOWN! Saving EVERYONE money. You get rid of criminals and crime goes down! You put the fear of God in criminal (CCW) and crime goes down. Rule of law is RESTORED. In what way is the honest, law abiding citizen NOT being attacked, NOT afraid to go out at night, NOT being in fear of their life "cruel and inhumane"? It is MORE cruel and inhumane when they ARE and criminals are NOT!

 

The movie version of SST was horrible. I did read somewhere that the director (or was it the producer?) wanted it to be horrible. He definitely succeeded. It really isn't worth watching, definitely not like the book. As far as caning/flogging/whipping as a deterrent to lower crime...deterrents only work if they are scary enough, actually put fear in someone. But, they do work! I have seen that with my own eyes in extremely poor countries where the fear of imprisonment or the punishment was so great that they wouldn't steal a mouthful of bread. The other point that Heinlein made was after one paid for their mistake with a flogging their record was clean. They had paid in full and there was nothing to follow them around for the rest of their life for a rash or silly or even stupid mistake.