[Rich]

Sounds like the history of every third-world country during the Cold War. When the aliens do finally arrive, we'll probably be Laos during the Vietnam War.

What you mean like authentic Theravadan Tai nationalists, trapped between the forces of Vietnamese Papists and their American backers on the one hand and racist, imperialist, ethnic-Mahayanan, Austro-Asiatic Marxist theocrats on the other?

[Sivad]

trapped between the forces of Vietnamese Papists and their American backers on the one hand and racist, imperialist, ethnic-Mahayanan, Austro-Asiatic Marxist theocrats on the other?

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right.

[Rugoz]

It was just a weird rock most likely, but we should appreciate Rugoz mounted his Pegasus and came down to us kids to make things straight again.

Bow before me, Hungarian peasant!

Maybe he should do Harvard the favour too before he returns to the gods on his high horse.

Your appeal to authority misses the point. The authors of that paper simply point out that the observations about Oumuamua are compatible with it being a light sail, they don't claim it to be one. Can't scientists have fun? Naturally the mainstream press ignores the more serious papers because that would be boring for 99% of the audience.

Spaceflight communities/blogs on the net (which I often visit) don't take the "Aliens!" claim seriously.

[Beren]

Bow before me, Hungarian peasant!

Only if you blow your horn!

[Rich]

Isn't the peculiar acceleration suggestive of the fact that it isn't alien. As aliens would surly be able to write smart enough code to not give away the object's non natural nature.

[Potemkin]

Isn't the peculiar acceleration suggestive of the fact that it isn't alien. As aliens would surly be able to write smart enough code to not give away the object's non natural nature.

No Rich; that's what they want us to think....

[Rich]

Thinking seriously, what do I believe. Aliens are not here. That suggests to me that there are very probably no advanced aliens within a hundred million light years of us. That's giving them a billion years exploring / expanding at a tenth the speed of light.

Note the hundred million light year figure is based on space time as it was then, when the light departed that we are seeing now. The expansion of space time means that those galaxies are now even further away.

[SolarCross]

That movie was a satire of your political mentality.

It is lucky really that the leftist director was a lazy idiot who never read the book, he got someone else to do the reading. The result was a decent if not perfect movie adaption. The "satire" was mostly extremely superficial.

[Rugoz]

Only if you blow your horn!

Thanks to you I'm now familiar with "contemporary" Alphorn music (the name of the song is "Dance of the Cows").

[Beren]

There are great blowers in Switzerland!

[Pants-of-dog]

I think the book was also a satire of fascism and other military authoritarian societies. This is most clearly seen in the repeated comparison between the troopers and the insect aliens.

[Sivad]

There are great blowers in Switzerland!

I think you mean blowhards.

[Victoribus Spolia]

I think the book was also a satire of fascism and other military authoritarian societies.

The movie was an attempt at such by the director (thought the screenplay doesn't even support the director's vision). Likewise, Heinlein was clearly a type of Libertarian who believed that voting rights should be earned.

This is evident from the book. The analysis given by Sargon was spot on (which included extensive quotations from the book), and anyone familiar with Heinlein knows that he was trying to make an argument for an ideal society, not an argument against a fascist society.

Interspersed with the primary plot are classroom scenes in which Rico and others discuss philosophical and moral issues, including aspects of suffrage, civic virtue, juvenile delinquency, and war; these discussions have been described as expounding Heinlein's own political views.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers

Heinlein considered himself a libertarian; in a letter to Judith Merril in 1967 (never sent) he said, "As for libertarian, I've been one all my life, a radical one. You might use the term "philosophical anarchist" or "autarchist" about me, but "libertarian" is easier to define and fits well enough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A. ... n#Politics

Heinlein denied that Starship Troopers was fascist contra the allegations of such.

On that controversy (from the same article on the book):

Allegations of fascism


The society within the book has frequently been described as fascist.[15][17][18] According to the 2009 Science Fiction Handbook, it had the effect of giving Heinlein a reputation as a "fanatical warmongering fascist".[6] Scholar Jeffrey Cass has referred to the setting of the book as "unremittingly grim fascism". He has stated that the novel made an analogy between its military conflict and those of the U.S. after World War II, and that it justified U.S. imperialism in the name of fighting another form of imperialism.[89] Jasper Goss has referred to it as "crypto-fascist".[18] Suvin compares Heinlein's suggestion that "all wars arise from population pressure" to the Nazi concept of Lebensraum or "living space" for a superior society that was used to justify territorial expansion.[90]

Some reviewers have suggested that Heinlein was simply discussing the merits of a selective versus a nonselective franchise.[19] Heinlein made a similar claim, over two decades after Starship Troopers's publication, in his Expanded Universe and further claimed that 95 percent of "veterans" were not military personnel but members of the civil service.[91] Heinlein's own description has been disputed, even among the book's defenders. Heinlein scholar James Gifford has argued that a number of quotes within the novel suggest that the characters within the book assume that the Federal Service is largely military. For instance, when Rico tells his father that he is interested in Federal Service, his father immediately explains his belief that Federal Service is a bad idea because there is no war in progress, indicating that he sees Federal Service as military in nature. Gifford states that although Heinlein's intentions may have been that Federal Service be 95 percent non-military, in relation to the actual contents of the book, Heinlein "is wrong on this point. Flatly so."[5]

Dennis Showalter, writing in 1975, defended Starship Troopers, stating that the society depicted in it did not contain many elements of fascism. He argues that the novel does not include outright opposition to bolshevism and liberalism that would be expected in a fascist society.[89] Others have responded by saying Showalter's argument is based on a literal reading of the novel, and that the story glorifies militarism to a large extent.[89] Ken Macleod argues that the book does not actually advocate fascism because anybody capable of understanding the oath of Federal Service is able to enlist and thereby obtain political power.[13] Macleod states that Heinlein's books are consistently liberal, but cover a spectrum from democratic to elitist forms of liberalism, Starship Troopers being on the latter end of the spectrum.[2] It has been argued that Heinlein's militarism is more libertarian than fascist, and that this trend is also present in Heinlein's other popular books of the period, such as Stranger in a Strange Land (1961) and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (1966). This period of Heinlein's writing has received more critical attention than any other, though he continued to write into the 1980s.

[Pants-of-dog]

Sure, whatever.

It reads like a satire of fascism and militarism to me. But it is a kid’s book, and not realky worth debate.

[Sivad]

Sure, whatever.

It reads like a satire of fascism and militarism to me. But it is a kid’s book, and not realky worth debate.

All fascism comes off as satire because it's just that over the top ridiculous.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Sure, whatever.

Yes, you were wrong. Glad we agree.

It reads like a satire of fascism and militarism to me. But it is a kid’s book, and not realky worth debate.

Heinlein was political theorist, and political theory is worthy of debate.

Its a good thing you are not the arbiter of what is or is not a worthy concept of debate. If that were the case, i'm guessing PoFo would be a pretty boring place.

[Pants-of-dog]

Yes, were wrong. Glad we agree.

Heinlein was political theorist, and political theory is worthy of debate.

Its a good thing you are not the arbiter of what is or is not a worthy concept of debate. If that were the case, i'm guessing PoFo would be a pretty boring place.

This post is devoid of argument.

If you really want to pat yourself on the back for copying and pasting someone else’s interpretation of a kids book, go ahead.

To me, it seems obvious that Heinlein was comparing the troopers to the bugs, especially as the troopers become more and more like the bugs as the book progresses.

[Victoribus Spolia]

This post is devoid of argument.

Kinda like your previous post where you basically just said whatever and dismissed the work as a worthless kid's book? Sure.

I suppose animal farm is meaningless too and is politically irrelevant because it has talking horses and is assigned to seventh graders?

If you really want to pat yourself on the back for copying and pasting someone else’s interpretation of a kids book, go ahead.

Will do, thanks.

To me, it seems obvious that Heinlein was comparing the troopers to the bugs, especially as the troopers become more and more like the bugs as the book progresses.

Your opinion is irrelevant: scholarship, authorial intent, authorial claims, and the clear context of the speeches and society in the book ALL express a variant of meritocratic (albeit militarist) libertarianism, not fascism.

societal comparisons between foes does not imply identity and insect colonies aren't really fascist anyway, they are merely hive-mind ultra collectivist animals. They are not political.

[Pants-of-dog]

Kinda like your previous post where you basically just said whatever and dismissed the work as a worthless kid's book? Sure.

I suppose animal farm is meaningless too and is politically irrelevant because it has talking horses and is assigned to seventh graders?

Will do, thanks.

Your opinion is irrelevant, scholarship, authorial intent, authorial claims, and the clear context of the speeches and society in the book ALL express a variant of meritocratic (albeit militarist) libertarianism, not fascism.

societal comparisons between foes does not imply identity and insect colonies aren't really fascist anyway, they are merely hive-mind ultra collectivist animals. They are not political.

Again, this is not worthy of debate, nor is it on topic.

If you really want to discuss politics, there is this:
viewtopic.php?f=45&t=175146&start=40#p14961995

[Victoribus Spolia]

Again, this is not worthy of debate, nor is it on topic.

Once again, that is not up to you to decide and you are free to leave the thread if you feel this topic is so beneath you.

That might be a good idea before you embarrass yourself further.

If you really want to discuss politics, there is this:

Nah. If I wanted to discuss that further, I would have.

Besides, you already stated, on record, that you believe as a consistent leftist that the working class should be armed with military grade weapons contra gun control.

So we are on the same team.