I haven’t read a lot of Heinlein – shame on me – but didn’t one of his characters assert, in one of the books about colonizing a planet and setting up a new government structure, that in representative democracy geography was one of the worst ways for society to organize itself into voting districts? Hearing about that has always had my wheels spinning. It may have been right and natural in 1776 but are there other ways that make more sense now? For example, it might make infinitely more sense to district the U.S. by age instead of geography (or more reasonably a combination of the two because of our size).
I’m going from memory and don’t recall the exact details, but in the book the world (I’m not sure whether the “Federation” was in place at the time, or came later) was saved from societal collapse by military veterans. When the worst was over and civil rights were restored, they — more likely one or more strong leaders — determined that since they as a class had rescued society, they as a class would retain control.
By Juan Rico’s time the opportunity to attain full citizenship had broadened to include service other than the military, but the principle remained the same: that anyone who wished to exert control over society by voting and holding office first had to demonstrate a commitment to that society. One of Juan’s teachers referred to the demonstration as (paraphrasing) “a light workout to your caveman ancestors,” but it was pretty clear that it wasn’t for the faint of heart: his friend Carl had the chops to land a research position, but that research position sent him to Pluto.
They know. They’re joking.
There sorta was a movie:
Cameron had the actors read Starship Troopers in preparation for the parts.
He still didn’t give them Combat Suits, though. One of Heinlein’s Marauders would’ve cut a swath through a nest of Aliens, as long as he didn’t get the acid blood on him.
Duh. I know.
I was being obtuse for humorous effect.
Actually, it’s outright stated many times that you must have served to be considered a “citizen”, otherwise you’re just a “resident”:
From the Recruiting sergeant trying to talk them out of enlisting:
“…or at the very least make them remember for the rest of their lives that their citizenship is valuable to them because they’ve paid a high price for it.”
From the enlistment oath:
"I swear to uphold and defend the Constitution of the Federation against all its enemies on or off Terra, to protect and defend the Constitutional liberties and privileges of all citizens and lawful residents of the Federation…
…on being honorably discharged at the completion of my full term of active service or upon being placed on inactive retired status after having completed such full term, to carry out all duties and obligations and to enjoy all privileges of Federation citizenship including but not limited to the duty, obligation and privilege of exercising sovereign franchise for the rest of my natural life…"
Johnny thinking about Hendricks after he was flogged & discharged:
"Ted had made a bad mistake, one that lasted all of half a second. And it really had been just a mistake, too, because, while he hated the outfit (who liked it?), he had been trying to sweat it out and win his franchise; he meant to go into politics — he talked a lot about how, when he got his citizenship, “There will be some changes made — you wait and see.” "
“We were a proud family; the only thing we lacked was citizenship and Father regarded that as no real honor, a vain and useless thing. But if I were flogged — Well, he’d probably have a stroke.”
Dubois’ letter to Johnny:
“You are now going through the hardest part of your service — not the hardest physically (though physical hardship will never trouble you again; you now have its measure), but the hardest spiritually… the deep, soul-turning readjustments and re-evaluations necessary to metamorphize a potential citizen into one in being.”
Johnny’s reaction to the letter:
“Of course we had known that he was a veteran since History and Moral Philosophy must be taught by a citizen.”
Johnny thinking about the deserter who was hanged for murder:
“I suppose it must wear on a man’s nerves to be a fugitive when everybody else is either a citizen or a legal resident, even when the police aren’t trying to find him.”
Dubois description of 20th century western civilization:
“And that was the soft spot which destroyed what was in many ways an admirable culture. The junior hoodlums who roamed their streets were symptoms of a greater sickness; their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’… and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.”
Johnny pondering whether to go career and apply to OCS:
"Had I ever cared about voting? No, it was the prestige, the pride, the status… of being a citizen. Or was it? I couldn’t to save my life remember why I had signed up. Anyhow, it wasn’t the process of voting that made a citizen — the Lieutenant had been a citizen in the truest sense of the word, even though he had not lived long enough ever to cast a ballot. He had “voted” every time he made a drop. And so had I! I could hear Colonel Dubois in my mind: “Citizenship is an attitude, a state of mind, an emotional conviction that the whole is greater than the part… and that the part should be humbly proud to sacrifice itself that the whole may live.”
The H&MP instructor at OCS:
“Furthermore, our franchised citizens are not everywhere a small fraction; you know or should know that the percentage of citizens among adults ranges from over eighty per cent on Iskander to less than three per cent in some Terran nations yet government is much the same everywhere.”
That happens in “The Moon is A Harsh Mistress” - a main character makes many such suggestions, encouraging the delegates to the Constitutional Convention on the Moon to open their minds to a wide variety of options:
"Suppose instead of election a man were qualified for office by petition signed by four thousand citizens. He would then represent those four thousand affirmatively, with no disgruntled minority, for what would have been a minority in a territorial constituency would all be free to start other petitions or join in them. All would then be represented by men of their choice. Or a man with eight thousand supporters might have two votes in this body. Difficulties, objections, practical points to be worked out — many of them! But you could work them out. . . and thereby avoid the chronic sickness of representative government, the disgruntled minority which feels — correctly! — that it has been disenfranchised. "
"I note one proposal to make this Congress a two-house body. Excellent — the more impediments to legislation the better. But, instead of following tradition, I suggest one house of legislators, another whose single duty is to repeal laws. Let the legislators pass laws only with a two-thirds majority… while the repealers are able to cancel any law through a mere one-third minority. Preposterous? Think about it. If a bill is so poor that it cannot command two-thirds of your consents, is it not likely that it would make a poor law? And if a law is disliked by as many as one-third is it not likely that you would be better off without it? "
Thanks. I’m not a huge Verhoeven fan, but I’ll keep it in mind.
I don’t think it’s right to call the government fascist, at least in the book, that’s a Verhoeven thing.
The movie’s great, IMHO, it just has little to do with the book.
Verhoeven told one interviewer he didn’t even read the book. He got two chapters in and decided it was boring and set it aside. He decided the society depicted was fascistic and explicitly made it so in the movie. He deliberately decided to trash the novel in his film.
Whatever the merits of the film, using the same title was a spectacularly idiotic decision from a marketing point of view. The name wouldn’t attract any new viewers who hadn’t read of the book, and fans of the book would be guaranteed to be outraged by it. And the satire aspect wasn’t even clear: some reviewers recognized it as a satire of fascism, while others saw it as a celebration. Whatever his message was intended to be, Verhoeven wasn’t very successful in communicating it.
Some of Verhoeven’s other movies, such as Showgirls, suffered from the same problem. Is this a satire of a stupid movie, or just a stupid movie?
Verhoeven’s Law: the film making equivalent of Poe’s Law.
It should be mentioned that even Professor de la Paz (the character who offered those suggestions) didn’t actually think they were good ideas. What he actually wanted was no government at all, and was trying to stall the ad-hoc committees by analysis paralysis to prevent them from creating one.
The version of the book I remember reading had one of the students suggest that veterans got the vote because they had demonstrated that commitment, to be explicitly shot down by the teacher, who stated that the real reason was arbitrary: veterans had established the current government structure after some not-well-specified prior-governmental collapse, they had limited the vote to veterans, and things stayed that way because the system was stable.
Along the lines of de la Paz’s suggestions in TMIAHM, I personally am a big fan of the idea of having a legislative body that can only remove laws (though 1/3 is probably not a sufficient threshold). There is so much institutional pressure the other way.
True - though I got the impression that he was telling the truth in some sense (he thought that if the committees adopted some of those ideas, it would be closer to the “no government” he was looking for).
Bolding mine.
This is true for the Verhoeven movie, but is not the case in the book (no matter how hard some people wish it to be).
I’m of the opinion that Verhoeven is the Dutch Michael Bay, with an added thin veneer of European faux sophistication that people mistake for intelligence. Admittedly, he’s a decent action movie director, and it was earlier in his American career, when he had less creative control, that he created his best films (RoboCop, Total Recall), probably because he himself didn’t really understand their scripts, and didn’t really try.
I also believe that satire is the last resort of the incompetent, mainly because it’s impossible to prove that something *isn’t *satire.
The “military service gives you specific citizenship rights and is required to hold office” is taken directly from the Roman Republic; it certainly has fuckall to do with any actual fascist governments.
I wouldn’t put it quite that way, because there’s such a thing as good satire (which can be recognized to be satire). But yeah, if you can’t tell if something is bad in itself or just a satire of bad things, the smart money is that it’s just bad.
ISTR that the term was “Federal Service”, and that the vast majority of people did NOT join the MI, but worked in other jobs, like his buddy who did R&D on Pluto and was killed by the Bugs.
I always understood it to mean that you had to serve some sort of term in a Federal Service of some kind, not necessarily strictly military in the sense of combat-related, but something somewhat unpleasant and/or spartan. The point was to prove that you put the well being of the group ahead of your own comfort and well being.
Once you had that, I got the impression that having the right to vote was THE big bonus involved in being a citizen. Which makes a lot of sense- if the percentage in the US was as low as the 3% mentioned above, then that’s roughly 9 million potential voters instead of 157 million registered voters in today’s world.
Your vote just shot WAY up in its relative power.
Yeah, it’s the “But I was only joking!” defense.
Certainly not all of the service is MI, but the military is a lot more than just mobile infantry. There are military research labs. And there were a lot of options that were less unpleasant than MI. Rico just didn’t qualify for any of those options.