• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Heinlein, fascinating article

Alien826

No religious beliefs
I'm putting this in "Politics" but it has its religious implications.

This is an article I just came across, there's so much of value in it that you're going to have to read it, sorry.

Heinlein’s Future History: Coming True Before Our Eyes

Basically it discusses some of Robert Heinlein's early work where he envisions a theocratic takeover of the USA. The parallels with the Trump cult are amazing. Anyway, read it and I'll look forward to your comments.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
It has been years since I read that, though I have read it several times. Now I need to do so again with Trump in mind. Hopefully Trump's attempt to be Nehemiah is almost over.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I'm putting this in "Politics" but it has its religious implications.

This is an article I just came across, there's so much of value in it that you're going to have to read it, sorry.

Heinlein’s Future History: Coming True Before Our Eyes

Basically it discusses some of Robert Heinlein's early work where he envisions a theocratic takeover of the USA. The parallels with the Trump cult are amazing. Anyway, read it and I'll look forward to your comments.
When I binged the classics, Lem, Clarke, Asimov, Silverman, etc,; Heinlein (and Hohlbein) stood out as right-wing (in hindsight, at that time they were simply strange). I haven't read "Future History" but from the description it fits in with his overall themes and style. He had a fascination with authoritarianism and military conflict. His "predictions" are just one variant of possible futures he imagined.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
When I binged the classics, Lem, Clarke, Asimov, Silverman, etc,; Heinlein (and Hohlbein) stood out as right-wing (in hindsight, at that time they were simply strange). I haven't read "Future History" but from the description it fits in with his overall themes and style. He had a fascination with authoritarianism and military conflict. His "predictions" are just one variant of possible futures he imagined.
Yeah, he was just a teeny tiny tad right wing. Not in all ideas, but his politics seemed to be so. Starship Troopers especially so. I hated the movie since it was largely an attempt to smear the book. Unfortunately people seemed to like even that over the top version of Heinlein's future. I can understand not liking Heinlein's version of the future, but a movie does not seem to have been the right venue.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Do you think he wants or opposes his versions of the future?

Are you talking about Heinlein or the director of Starship Troopers. I think that Heinlein supported his Starship Troopers future and opposed that in his Revolt in 2,100.


The director opposed the Starship Troopers future, but he apparently did not get his message over very well.
 

Alien826

No religious beliefs
Do you think he wants or opposes his versions of the future?

Good question.

Sometimes I think it's just "what if?". I read that he tried to make all kinds of taboo subjects acceptable, or at least constructed circumstances where they would be. For example in Stranger in a Strange Land it was cannibalism. His views, as reflected in his books, did change over the years. He was Libertarian rather than conservative certainly, and his characters obeyed rules as and when they wanted to.

Something I noticed throughout was that he seemed to have an obsession with reproduction, rather than sex. I'm currently rereading The Number of the Beast (a weird story where he introduces a concept where fiction becomes fact in other dimensions, which enables him to allow his characters from other books to meet). Anyway, two couples get married in the first few pages and immediately both women are pregnant. I have a personal theory that it's connected to the fact Heinlein himself never had any children.
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Good question.

Sometimes I think it's just "what if?". I read that he tried to make all kinds of taboo subjects acceptable, or at least construct4ed circumstances where they would be. For example in Stranger in a Strange Land it was cannibalism. His views, as reflected in his books, did change over the years. He was Libertarian rather than conservative certainly, and his characters obeyed rules as and when they wanted to.
Libertarian, eh.
Oh, they're (we're) the worst.
Widely despised here on RF, although less so in recent years.
 

Alien826

No religious beliefs
Yeah, he was just a teeny tiny tad right wing. Not in all ideas, but his politics seemed to be so. Starship Troopers especially so. I hated the movie since it was largely an attempt to smear the book. Unfortunately people seemed to like even that over the top version of Heinlein's future. I can understand not liking Heinlein's version of the future, but a movie does not seem to have been the right venue.

Starship Troopers is one of my favorites. It's really a tribute to the military life, with a "what if?" added, in this case what if people only get to vote if they perform some kind of public service. Note that it didn't have to be in the military. This is not the only book in which Heinlein shows his love of the military (he was invalided out of the Navy and probably regretted it a lot). Another example is Time Enough for Love where Lazarus Long goes back in time and fights in WW1 (and beds his mother!) even though he knows that the war is totally futile.

I actually enjoyed the movie, but only by treating it as separate from the book in my mind. Hey, Mobile Infantry without the powered suits??? The shower scene was great, and very different from the book, where men and women were kept strictly separate in the spaceships and only men were actually in combat.
 

Alien826

No religious beliefs
Libertarian, eh.
Oh, they're (we're) the worst.
Widely despised here on RF, although less so in recent years.

Nobody is beyond redemption. ;)

I would call myself socially libertarian (I support decriminalization of drugs for example) but tend socialist otherwise.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Nobody is beyond redemption. ;)

I would call myself socially libertarian (I support decriminalization of drugs for example) but tend socialist otherwise.
Economic authoritarianism (ie, socialism) isn't libertarian.
Liberals try to claim it is, but I spank them when they do.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Sure it is. Anything that disagrees with the GOP party platform is "Socialism!!":D:D:D
Conservatives & liberals...it seems that both
are unaware of socialism being the people
owning the means of production. Alas, they
both think it's having public schools & roads.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Conservatives & liberals...it seems that both
are unaware of socialism being the people
owning the means of production. Alas, they
both think it's having public schools & roads.
To be fair those on the left often use that argument when those on the right use the "socialism" claim improperly.
 

Dan From Smithville

For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky
Staff member
Premium Member
Good question.

Sometimes I think it's just "what if?". I read that he tried to make all kinds of taboo subjects acceptable, or at least constructed circumstances where they would be. For example in Stranger in a Strange Land it was cannibalism. His views, as reflected in his books, did change over the years. He was Libertarian rather than conservative certainly, and his characters obeyed rules as and when they wanted to.

Something I noticed throughout was that he seemed to have an obsession with reproduction, rather than sex. I'm currently rereading The Number of the Beast (a weird story where he introduces a concept where fiction becomes fact in other dimensions, which enables him to allow his characters from other books to meet). Anyway, two couples get married in the first few pages and immediately both women are pregnant. I have a personal theory that it's connected to the fact Heinlein himself never had any children.
Heinlein was a graduate of Annapolis with training in engineering. A lot of his fiction, as has been pointed out here by others, supported his opinion that service in the military was a valid and honorable career choice.

In some ways, I see Stranger in a Strange Land following Starship Troopers as a statement of "you don't know me" from Heinlein to those that labeled him militaristic and fascist as a result of the latter work. He did seem to tend to explore taboo subjects and sometimes in odd ways.

I think he was pretty liberal until just after WWII and then did an about face to some degree with strong libertarian influences.

I've been reading Heinlein's work since I was about 8. My father and mother had a couple of his novels in our home library that got me started off. He was from Missouri too.

I like David Brin as well. That was a good article.

It seems I have a fancy for hard science, science fiction authors, though not exclusively.
 

Dan From Smithville

For the World Is Hollow and I Have Touched the Sky
Staff member
Premium Member
I'm putting this in "Politics" but it has its religious implications.

This is an article I just came across, there's so much of value in it that you're going to have to read it, sorry.

Heinlein’s Future History: Coming True Before Our Eyes

Basically it discusses some of Robert Heinlein's early work where he envisions a theocratic takeover of the USA. The parallels with the Trump cult are amazing. Anyway, read it and I'll look forward to your comments.
For some people, I am not so certain there is must distinction between their religion and their politics.
 
Top