There's actually nothing fascist about Starship Troopers - the movie leans that way, but the book does not. Heinlein wrote it because he was pissed at the way our Nuclear and Military policy was being handled. Nobody in the book is forced to serve the government, as you would be in fascism - the government doesn't own the economy, as a fascist one would. It's true that the franchise isn't automatically granted, but that just makes it elitist, not fascist. The franchise isn't automatically granted in the US either - you have to reach a certain age - and in some states in the past you had to prove you could read, or pay a tax, or some such. Some of those individual policies may have been unjust, but that doesn't mean the government was fascist.
Also, the military is not allowed free rein in the book - members of the military/civil service do not participate in the government until AFTER their service - and even then the majority of citizens were not actually in the military, but in the civil service.
Don't take my word for it, this review is not favorable towards the book, but denies that it is fascist:
If you think Starship Troopers was meant as satire, perhaps you enjoyed the satire of such other political apologies as The Federalist Papers, the Communist Manifesto, or Mein Kampf. The fact that Mein Kampf, let's say, could be easily lampooned or refuted doesn't mean that it was meant as as satire. Or perhaps you remember the movie, which is satirical (of Heinlein). Contrary to the opinion of many, our (the US) military is not populated by idiots.
The Marine Corps also encourages the reading of Sun Tzu's Art of War - centuries old and still a great set of military insights. Also encouraged is Starship Troopers - which is best read as an ode to the infantry, and exemplifies the esprit de corps that the Marines strive for.
Logan's Run - Lastday. Year of the city - 2274. Carousel begins. What happens when everyone must die at the age of 30 - and when Peter Ustinov lives in the Capitol building with hundreds of cats.
This movie was the shit for Sci-Fi until Star Wars came out the following year, consigning Logan's Run to its current fate of discount DVD bins in record stores across the land. First use of "laser holography" in film. Featuring Basil Exposition as Logan, and Duncan Idaho as his best friend. (For that matter Dune is underappreciated, but I don't want to start a flame war...)
I remember seeing this when I was about 8 and I think it was the first time it occured to me that our civilization might not last, and in fact might be violently replaced in some way.
I wonder if you mean the government education system, or American schools in general. While you are probably right in either case, many private schools actually do teach their students well, because if they didn't their parents would not pay. Not an option for all, obviously, but an option nonetheless.
Oh, and we spent three days covering World War II. You have a problem with that?
Well, that pretty much gives you a day for each theater of operations. I do have a problem with that. You shouldn't necessarily learn of all the battles that turned the tide one way or the other (ineresting as that is), but it should take more than three days to discuss the rise of fascism, Japanese imperialism, European appeasement (connections to present day?), European imperialism, Stalin and Hitler in bed together, coaling stations in the pacific, you get the idea. Hell, Band of Brothers was 10 hours.
Sadly, the school didn't think I could, though, and placed me in a standard math class.
That certainly does suck if you cannot take classes at your intellectual level. This was also the case for me until I got to a private High School (the kind that teaches stuff). I also had a few wonderful teachers in Middle School who knew how to challenge the exceptional students. I also remember that ridiculous system of pairing grades together. Not only were there two grades in each class, we learned the same curriculum. What is the friggin point of that? If it doesn't matter the order you teach 5th and 4th grade math then something is wrong
I still belong in a higher level class
Go to college. Don't take fluff. You'l learn and be challenged.
That is a pretty insightful comment. I'm currently in military flight training, and many of the instructors have stories to the effect of "on my last deployment, we lost an F-18 for so-and-so. Both crewmembers were killed. I knew them personally..."
Those stories always make my heart skip a beat, but what I felt when I heard about this morning's disaster went much deeper. I think it is because of the "shaken public confidence" sort of thing you mention. Losing a crew of astronauts is, for many of us, losing some of the soldiers on the front lines of human progress. Maybe I read too much Heinlein as a kid (and as an adult), but I really believe that mankind must move out to the stars to survive. This is like losing one of those early colonies on the American continent - it represents a stumble in our efforts to go new places and do new things.
And regarding the parent of the thread (prayer) - please try to be sensitive. Yes, it will do more good to concentrate on search and rescue, NTSB type investigation, engineering and everything else that this disaster implies, but some people pray - there is no reason to try to assert what you see as your moral superiority when all it will do is piss people off and won't do any good (especially at a time like this). I'm an atheist myself, but right now on of the more comforting things tumbling though my head is this verse to an old Navy Hymn:
Lord guard and guide the men who fly,
through the great spaces in the sky.
Be with them always in the air,
in darkening storms or sunlight fair.
Oh hear us when we lift our prayer,
for those in peril in the air.
Also appropriate is:
We pray for one last landing,
on the globe that gave us birth;
Let us rest our eyes on fleecy skies,
and the cool, green hills of earth.
You're right - the X program was far from making it to orbit in the 1960s. The use of the word "Nearly" is a matter of personal judgement. but just think where the program could be today if it had been continued by some very paranoid cold warriors...
The best thing about the X program is that it was Piloted flight in a craft suited both to atmospheric and non-atmospheric flight. It proved that it might be possible someday for a man to take off in a craft like an airplane, fly to an orbit, and land like an airplane, even if that particular feat was still years off.
Re:Hard to defend a logical morality?
on
Google vs. Evil
·
· Score: 1
If there was only one person on the planet, there would be no need for morality.
Very good points. However, I don't think that Man only needs morality when he lives in a society. To paraphrase good ol' Ayn Rand, a Man on a desert island would have a great need of morality. You point out that what enhances the survival of a society is Good, and that which does not is Evil. Same thing for a single human - what helps him survive is Good, and what kills him is Evil.
On a desert island, with survival as his goal, a man must decide that it will be Good for him to build shelter and eat fish (the kind without spines...), and Evil for him to become food for sharks.
Things obviously get harder with more people and more complicated issues, but as long as you have wants and needs, you need morality even by yourself. In fact, you have morality even if you don't want it because it is what tells you how to achieve your wants and needs, and which ones to ignore.
As others mentioned - "catapult launched" rocket - launched by catapult then continues under its own power (ala When Worlds Collide, Wright Brothers, carrier launched plane, RAH, etc etc).
Also, the Mercury astronauts (and their doctor) endured up to 20 gravities in a centrifuge in their training, all without blacking out, and Alan Shepard endured 12 Gs for quite a time on his re-entry - so "all humans" would not necessarily black out at 15Gs for a couple of seconds, even if the catapult did go that fast. This is described in the book "The Right Stuff."
This attitude of "I know more than this guy does about one topic" appears way too often on Slashdot, my own comment may be an example, but I had to bust this guy's pomposity, contained mainly in his last sentence "Personally I think this guy should learn more fundamental physics, like basic Newtonian mechanics."
Clones have to be born just like "normal" kids. I doubt cloning will increase the population growth rate until some way to avoid "natural" births is found.
I think the best thing that could eventually come out of this cloning technology is the growing of specific organs, appendages for replacement after they are damaged or aged . . .
Well, there may indeed be better books. However, I don't think it's fair to say that the poll was skewed because of the movie, if you will notice that the article in question is dated Monday January 20, 1997. This is, of course, over five years ago, when Peter Jackson's film version was merely a rumor, and had not touched the conciousness of the common film goer.
Fact is, the common reader, such as myself, probably has different reasons for liking a book than does a literary critic, or other professional of that sort.
Also, the US has used Australia for a Capcom for many missions - starting with the John Glenn orbit. This makes it possible for the blokes in Houston to talk to the people in orbit on the other sie of the earth.
From what I understand, we also relayed much Apollo moon TV through Austrailia, and much of this work was done by Austrailian engineers. There was an independent film made about this recently, the name of which I do not remember.
I wish our friends Down Under and the Russians many successes! I also hope this kicks my own country (US) out of its stupor when it comes to space. If we don't wake up I may have to consider the opportunities offered in these other countries...
I think this is really neat. Another aspect of this, is that I have always been interested in the thought that on each planet we colonize there could be a completely new and unique internet, only accesible from other planets in highly latent, or mirrored (also latently) form.
This is just one way in which different human societies will develop as we wrest life from our solar system.
Sounds good, but there are technologies needed for Mars that cannot be tested on the moon. Moon has no atmosphere - Mars does. Mars has more gravity than the moon - a differently engineered landing technique is needed.
At least one other poster has mentioned Robert Zubrin. His Book The Case For Mars explains how we could go to Mars cheaply and within 10 years starting from scratch. Remember Apollo was "zero to the moon" in about ten years. We are not starting from zero here (although nearly zero because of twenty years of stagnation).
What you say makes sense, but come on - never say never. Need I bring up the bloke at the US patent office at the end of the 19 century that thought everything had already been invented?
Perhaps you can deduce the future from the current quantum states of the objects around you?
Something will likely replace the digital computer someday, and you and I don't know what it will be.
I think what the AC is saying, is rather something like this than the Big Business or Big Government regulation. Big Business and Big government would likely turn off certain types of access altogether, whereas this scheme still allows the user to chose what will be seen.
But that quote is from a professor of public affairs - whatever that means. Sure, once the concept has been dilluted to his, and my level of understanding, it seems pretty simple.
And, by definition, if you are coasting, you are already in an orbit. If you coast "to" your orbit without modifying your path (accellerating) then you were in orbit when you began the "coast."
Without 2600, Patrick says he would "probably be one of those pot-smoking, crack-sniffing guys who gave up on life a long time ago."
Funny, the way it's worded, I think the kid made the comment about himself.
Course, I could be wrong because at least two posters thought it was the dad... But I don't hink I'm wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps IHBT but I'll bite.
There's actually nothing fascist about Starship Troopers - the movie leans that way, but the book does not. Heinlein wrote it because he was pissed at the way our Nuclear and Military policy was being handled. Nobody in the book is forced to serve the government, as you would be in fascism - the government doesn't own the economy, as a fascist one would. It's true that the franchise isn't automatically granted, but that just makes it elitist, not fascist. The franchise isn't automatically granted in the US either - you have to reach a certain age - and in some states in the past you had to prove you could read, or pay a tax, or some such. Some of those individual policies may have been unjust, but that doesn't mean the government was fascist.
Also, the military is not allowed free rein in the book - members of the military/civil service do not participate in the government until AFTER their service - and even then the majority of citizens were not actually in the military, but in the civil service.
Don't take my word for it, this review is not favorable towards the book, but denies that it is fascist:
t m
http://home.golden.net/~csp/cd/reviews/starship.h
Or try this page for another view:
http://www.kentaurus.com/troopers.htm
If you think Starship Troopers was meant as satire, perhaps you enjoyed the satire of such other political apologies as The Federalist Papers, the Communist Manifesto, or Mein Kampf. The fact that Mein Kampf, let's say, could be easily lampooned or refuted doesn't mean that it was meant as as satire. Or perhaps you remember the movie, which is satirical (of Heinlein). Contrary to the opinion of many, our (the US) military is not populated by idiots.
The Marine Corps also encourages the reading of Sun Tzu's Art of War - centuries old and still a great set of military insights. Also encouraged is Starship Troopers - which is best read as an ode to the infantry, and exemplifies the esprit de corps that the Marines strive for.
Hey, uh - you got any gum?
Something from the meatcase, Linda?
Let me tell you how brazen the rats are...
Logan's Run - Lastday. Year of the city - 2274. Carousel begins. What happens when everyone must die at the age of 30 - and when Peter Ustinov lives in the Capitol building with hundreds of cats.
This movie was the shit for Sci-Fi until Star Wars came out the following year, consigning Logan's Run to its current fate of discount DVD bins in record stores across the land. First use of "laser holography" in film. Featuring Basil Exposition as Logan, and Duncan Idaho as his best friend. (For that matter Dune is underappreciated, but I don't want to start a flame war...)
I remember seeing this when I was about 8 and I think it was the first time it occured to me that our civilization might not last, and in fact might be violently replaced in some way.
The American education system is a joke.
I wonder if you mean the government education system, or American schools in general. While you are probably right in either case, many private schools actually do teach their students well, because if they didn't their parents would not pay. Not an option for all, obviously, but an option nonetheless.
Oh, and we spent three days covering World War II. You have a problem with that?
Well, that pretty much gives you a day for each theater of operations. I do have a problem with that. You shouldn't necessarily learn of all the battles that turned the tide one way or the other (ineresting as that is), but it should take more than three days to discuss the rise of fascism, Japanese imperialism, European appeasement (connections to present day?), European imperialism, Stalin and Hitler in bed together, coaling stations in the pacific, you get the idea. Hell, Band of Brothers was 10 hours.
Sadly, the school didn't think I could, though, and placed me in a standard math class.
That certainly does suck if you cannot take classes at your intellectual level. This was also the case for me until I got to a private High School (the kind that teaches stuff). I also had a few wonderful teachers in Middle School who knew how to challenge the exceptional students. I also remember that ridiculous system of pairing grades together. Not only were there two grades in each class, we learned the same curriculum. What is the friggin point of that? If it doesn't matter the order you teach 5th and 4th grade math then something is wrong
I still belong in a higher level class
Go to college. Don't take fluff. You'l learn and be challenged.
Still, it will be hard to make a fishtank out of the flat-panel iMACs...
On the other hand, it will be easy to make a fishtank out of eMacs because it already contains the kitchen sink.
Whoops, wrong EMACS.
Damn! Change the combination on my luggage!
That is a pretty insightful comment. I'm currently in military flight training, and many of the instructors have stories to the effect of "on my last deployment, we lost an F-18 for so-and-so. Both crewmembers were killed. I knew them personally..."
Those stories always make my heart skip a beat, but what I felt when I heard about this morning's disaster went much deeper. I think it is because of the "shaken public confidence" sort of thing you mention. Losing a crew of astronauts is, for many of us, losing some of the soldiers on the front lines of human progress. Maybe I read too much Heinlein as a kid (and as an adult), but I really believe that mankind must move out to the stars to survive. This is like losing one of those early colonies on the American continent - it represents a stumble in our efforts to go new places and do new things.
And regarding the parent of the thread (prayer) - please try to be sensitive. Yes, it will do more good to concentrate on search and rescue, NTSB type investigation, engineering and everything else that this disaster implies, but some people pray - there is no reason to try to assert what you see as your moral superiority when all it will do is piss people off and won't do any good (especially at a time like this). I'm an atheist myself, but right now on of the more comforting things tumbling though my head is this verse to an old Navy Hymn:
Lord guard and guide the men who fly,
through the great spaces in the sky.
Be with them always in the air,
in darkening storms or sunlight fair.
Oh hear us when we lift our prayer,
for those in peril in the air.
Also appropriate is:
We pray for one last landing,
on the globe that gave us birth;
Let us rest our eyes on fleecy skies,
and the cool, green hills of earth.
You're right - the X program was far from making it to orbit in the 1960s. The use of the word "Nearly" is a matter of personal judgement. but just think where the program could be today if it had been continued by some very paranoid cold warriors...
The best thing about the X program is that it was Piloted flight in a craft suited both to atmospheric and non-atmospheric flight. It proved that it might be possible someday for a man to take off in a craft like an airplane, fly to an orbit, and land like an airplane, even if that particular feat was still years off.
If there was only one person on the planet, there would be no need for morality.
Very good points. However, I don't think that Man only needs morality when he lives in a society. To paraphrase good ol' Ayn Rand, a Man on a desert island would have a great need of morality. You point out that what enhances the survival of a society is Good, and that which does not is Evil. Same thing for a single human - what helps him survive is Good, and what kills him is Evil.
On a desert island, with survival as his goal, a man must decide that it will be Good for him to build shelter and eat fish (the kind without spines...), and Evil for him to become food for sharks.
Things obviously get harder with more people and more complicated issues, but as long as you have wants and needs, you need morality even by yourself. In fact, you have morality even if you don't want it because it is what tells you how to achieve your wants and needs, and which ones to ignore.
More like how long before the Greenpeace hippies get on his ass for poisoning ponds and butterflies.
'tain't so.
In other news, Quantum Physics too complicated for many.
As others mentioned - "catapult launched" rocket - launched by catapult then continues under its own power (ala When Worlds Collide, Wright Brothers, carrier launched plane, RAH, etc etc).
Also, the Mercury astronauts (and their doctor) endured up to 20 gravities in a centrifuge in their training, all without blacking out, and Alan Shepard endured 12 Gs for quite a time on his re-entry - so "all humans" would not necessarily black out at 15Gs for a couple of seconds, even if the catapult did go that fast. This is described in the book "The Right Stuff."
This attitude of "I know more than this guy does about one topic" appears way too often on Slashdot, my own comment may be an example, but I had to bust this guy's pomposity, contained mainly in his last sentence "Personally I think this guy should learn more fundamental physics, like basic Newtonian mechanics."
Clones have to be born just like "normal" kids. I doubt cloning will increase the population growth rate until some way to avoid "natural" births is found.
I think the best thing that could eventually come out of this cloning technology is the growing of specific organs, appendages for replacement after they are damaged or aged . . .
Well, there may indeed be better books. However, I don't think it's fair to say that the poll was skewed because of the movie, if you will notice that the article in question is dated Monday January 20, 1997. This is, of course, over five years ago, when Peter Jackson's film version was merely a rumor, and had not touched the conciousness of the common film goer.
Fact is, the common reader, such as myself, probably has different reasons for liking a book than does a literary critic, or other professional of that sort.
I have no idea if you could actually have a female clone - but check out Heinlein's "Time Enough for Love"
Also, the US has used Australia for a Capcom for many missions - starting with the John Glenn orbit. This makes it possible for the blokes in Houston to talk to the people in orbit on the other sie of the earth.
From what I understand, we also relayed much Apollo moon TV through Austrailia, and much of this work was done by Austrailian engineers. There was an independent film made about this recently, the name of which I do not remember.
I wish our friends Down Under and the Russians many successes! I also hope this kicks my own country (US) out of its stupor when it comes to space. If we don't wake up I may have to consider the opportunities offered in these other countries...
I think this is really neat. Another aspect of this, is that I have always been interested in the thought that on each planet we colonize there could be a completely new and unique internet, only accesible from other planets in highly latent, or mirrored (also latently) form.
This is just one way in which different human societies will develop as we wrest life from our solar system.
I wonder too. Anyone from the ACLU reading? This seems like the exact sort of case they could jump all over.
Sounds good, but there are technologies needed for Mars that cannot be tested on the moon. Moon has no atmosphere - Mars does. Mars has more gravity than the moon - a differently engineered landing technique is needed.
At least one other poster has mentioned Robert Zubrin. His Book The Case For Mars explains how we could go to Mars cheaply and within 10 years starting from scratch. Remember Apollo was "zero to the moon" in about ten years. We are not starting from zero here (although nearly zero because of twenty years of stagnation).
What you say makes sense, but come on - never say never. Need I bring up the bloke at the US patent office at the end of the 19 century that thought everything had already been invented?
Perhaps you can deduce the future from the current quantum states of the objects around you?
Something will likely replace the digital computer someday, and you and I don't know what it will be.
And thanks, I will check out qubit.org
I think what the AC is saying, is rather something like this than the Big Business or Big Government regulation. Big Business and Big government would likely turn off certain types of access altogether, whereas this scheme still allows the user to chose what will be seen.
But that quote is from a professor of public affairs - whatever that means. Sure, once the concept has been dilluted to his, and my level of understanding, it seems pretty simple.
And, by definition, if you are coasting, you are already in an orbit. If you coast "to" your orbit without modifying your path (accellerating) then you were in orbit when you began the "coast."
Without 2600, Patrick says he would "probably be one of those pot-smoking, crack-sniffing guys who gave up on life a long time ago."
Funny, the way it's worded, I think the kid made the comment about himself.
Course, I could be wrong because at least two posters thought it was the dad... But I don't hink I'm wrong.