Sci-Fi Gun Control

[CB900F]

Fella's;

I just ran a search on THR for both the title & author of this science-fiction gun control advocacy book. Nothing came up, so I'm presuming that although first publication was in 1999, the fact of its existance has remained unheard of by this forum.

I was frankly amazed when I realized that a book by a respected and major main-stream science fiction author was in apparant fact an open espousal of gun control. Usually, there is no stauncher forum than sci-fi for the right to protect oneself. But, I'm hoping that this is a case of the exception that proves the rule, rather than a harbinger of things to come.

The book: "The Trigger". Primary author: Arthur C. Clarke. Also noted as an author: Michael Kube-McDowell.

Clarke's career I know. I'm going to see what I find out about M. K-D.

Anybody else read this? I'm about 90 pages into it as of now. I suppose I could get fooled by the old switcheroo ending, but I think not. This seems to be the real deal. What sealed it for me was the scene where the financial backers of the revolutionary new scientific discovery have to enter the current political arena. They go to the senate office of a long-term politico who also heads an organization known as; Mind Over Madness. Instead of an American flag in this person's senate office, there's a poster of dead bodies. At the top of the poster is the caption: GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE. (Caps in text of book) At the bottom of the poster the caption continues with: "THINK ANYONE'S STILL BUYING THIS?" The text states that the lower caption is sardonic. To me, that was a clincher.

I'm now openly supposing that Mr. Clarke's mind is not what it once was.

900F

 

[Jim Watson]

I recall that one.
I don't know Kube-McDowell's politics but the book reads like he was the main author and Clarke just along for the elder statesman value.

As to Clarke, if you figure he made much contribution, there are two ways to look at it:
1. He is a limey and may well share British Labour views.
2. Robert Heinlein once said "Do not confuse the views of the characters with the position of the author."

 

[Jamie C.]

A suggestion:

Read Arthur C. Clarke's works and think.
It's what he'd want you to do.

As for his mind not being what it once was.... I'm sure it's not. However, I'm betting it's still better than most of ours is....

Then again, things change; it's entirely possible that his views aren't what they once were, for whatever reasons. *shrug*



J.C.

 

[Wes Janson]

It was an interesting book. That's about it.

 

[Tom Bri]

AC Clarke has just lost it, in my opinion. His early works were tremendous, ones I thought about and remembered and re-read. Childhood's End, Rendezvous With Rama, things like that.

Sadly, his later books were regurgitated socialist pap. The later Rama books were just sad. No way they could have been published if not for the Clarke name.

Clarke was a scientist once, but apparently he has no real knowledge of other fields. His societies are narrow stereotypes, capitalist evil, individualism evil...

 

[Thefabulousfink]

I generally prefer Heinlein, or Frank Herbert of Clark. I got the sam impression as Tom Bri. More recently I have started liking William Gibson's work, but I fell that the Sci-Fi field is dying (at least with most of the current authors).

 

[Steamship Trooper]

Not having read Mr Clarke's work for several years, I cannot comment on he start of this thread.

But as for our kind of SF dying off, may I mention S.M. Stirling, Michael Z. Williamson, and L. Neil Smith?

Cryptonomicon, by Neil Stephenson, had a good chunk of RKBA in it too.

 

[tanksoldier]

If you wanna read good modern Sci-Fi I recommend:

David Weber
David Drake
John Ringo

All published by Baen books... www.baen.com

 

[dfaugh]

but I feel that the Sci-Fi field is dying (at least with most of the current authors).

I used to be A die-hard Sci-FI fan, in fact read almost nothing else. However, I've tried to read some of the newer stuff (I read 3-4 books a week from the library---yeah I can read real fast)...and have been very dissapointed with most of the newer stuff.

And personally, I never thought Clarke was ever that great... GOOD, but not great. Asimov and Heinlein a bit better. But there were many lesser known, better authors.

 

[Boom-stick]

Quote:
but I feel that the Sci-Fi field is dying (at least with most of the current authors).


I used to be A die-hard Sci-FI fan, in fact read almost nothing else. However, I've tried to read some of the newer stuff (I read 3-4 books a week from the library---yeah I can read real fast)...and have been very dissapointed with most of the newer stuff.

And personally, I never thought Clarke was ever that great... GOOD, but not great. Asimov and Heinlein a bit better. But there were many lesser known, better authors.

+1,

I know what you mean, I'm a certified Sci-fi nut and the last few books I've tried I just couldn't get into, so much so that I've re-read some of my older books 3-4 times now.

 

[lee n. field]

Arthur C. Clarke is (or closely simulates) a socialist. He's an expartiate Brit who's lived in Sri Lanka longer than I've been alive.

Everything he's written since about 1975 or so has been at least partly a travelogue through the Wonderful Socialist Paradise of the Future(R) -- you know, the world where everyone is a rational athiest/diest who's evolved beyond being a jerk.

It would not surprise me at all if he supports disarming everyone but the UN blue helmets. "Back to your rice paddy, you!"

 

[G36-UK]

If you count games, the game Deus Ex has an interesting section:

Know Your Enemy -- NSF

The National Secessionist Forces (NSF) remain a very real and increasingly
widespread terrorist threat. Ten years ago, in response to the Sporting
Weapons Act of 2042, splinter groups from nearly every state militia refused
to surrender their rifles, grenades, land mines, and other "collectibles"
prohibited by the Act. Unified under the charismatic leadership of Leon Woods,
these isolated fanatics eventually formed the NSF with Woods assuming the rank
of General. Their intended goal: the "liberation" of Washington, Montana,
Oregon, and Northern California.
While Woods died during his infamous "last stand" in 2045, his war machine
continues what can only be termed an occupation of the United States, aided by
an encrypted network designed by dissident computer scientists from San
Francisco and Seattle. Currently, the UNATCO Cryptography Division has had
minimal success in cracking their communications, requiring more direct
intelligence gathering techniques to be utilized.
The U.N. has declared war on the NSF.

 

[orangelo]

Give me Heinlein or Frank Herbert or even Douglas Adams any day over clarke. 2001 was a good book but 2010, 2061 and 3001 were plain rubbish.

Any way who needs guns, when aliens have the power to make your sun go supernova?

The basic philosophy of Frank Herbert and clarke are polar opposites. In Dune every man makes a difference. Life on a desert planet is harsh. Combat is in your face and personal with hand to hand weapons because shields make projectile and beam weapons useless. Each character has control of their own destiny. Every main character's actions makes ripples through the universe. Leto Atreides II 's main goal in the later books was to genetically engineer humans so that they could have free will and not be bound by any preset fate or prophecy.

Then you got clarke. Humanity doesn't matter, the alien overlords have a plan. If humanity doesn't follow the plan, then the aliens will sterilize the solar system and start over. There is no free will, no choice, no control over your own destiny. The aliens will give and take things away from you for the 'common good'. Yup, sounds pretty socialist/communist to me.

 

[AJ Dual]

I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Most Sci-Fi is so overwhelmingly conservative or libertarian, it’s a drop in the ocean.

As others have mentioned, his actual output these days is quite low, he "collaborates" which probably entails passing a few e-mails about story outlines, giving his OK, then getting paid for putting his name on the book.

In the works that are purely his, the only outstanding liberal sentiment I've ever seen was in "Childhood's End" where the Benign Overlord aliens put a stop to animal cruelty by making an entire Spanish stadium at a bullfight experience the bull's pain telepathically.

In other works, guns have been nothing but tools, used either for good or evil, and portrayed neutraly.

One of his collaboration series "Venus Prime" about an artificaly enhanced female secret agent who travels the colonized solar system of the near future, a hotel on Mars had a gun range for the enjoyment of it's guests.

For all I know, the anti-gun sentiment came up in the later collaborations well after his input has ended.

If he does lean to the left, I can imagine that living more of his life as an ex-pat in Sri Lanka (Ceylon) and it's marginal third-world status, and political and terrorism troubles has probably colored his thinking.

 

[mp510]

In the movie, Minority Report, the NRA or a similar named organization presented an S&W .22 pistol from the 1860's to the head of the Future Crimes police toacknowledge the good work the program had done.

 

[Zundfolge]

Star Trek ruined Sci-Fi.


Prior to Star Trek, most Sci-Fi was of an individualist/libertarian nature, but Star Trek introduced The People's Federation of Planets and the notion that the next step in societal evolution is a Utopian future where Capitalism is gone (or relegated to "evil" races like the Ferengi) and we all lived happily under the soft boot of a UN like organization of planets.

Most Sci-Fi now is leftist/"Progressive"/One World UN propaganda.

Thank God (and Joss Wheton) for Firefly.

 

[AJ Dual]

Which is funny, Joss Whedon is somewhat of a lefty and anti gun...

Fortunately his talent for storytelling belies it.

I do see where you're coming from over Star Trek, however, with automation, nanotechnology, or the "replicator", and limitless amounts of energy from fusion and anti-matter, it only seems natural when "Capitalisim as we know it" takes one on the chin. The scarcity side of the supply and demand equation is completely turned on it's ear. Infinite supply of any material good has reduced it's market value to zero.

As much as I consider myself a Capitalist, when I look at it coldly, Capitalisim is only "good" insofar that it's the best we've got, and it's easy to prove that the alternatives such as Socialisim and Communisim are inferior. If something demonstrably better can be created, I'd be willing to try it.

Although, there seems to be a constant undercurrent of legitamate (non Ferengi) capitalisim in Star Trek, "genuine" items, or unique ones with some sort of cultural or historical cachet seem to still hold great value. Things like antiques, or resturaunts with "real" food and alcohol and the skill of the chef is key, etc. So in reality, whenever someone from the past makes an appearance on Star Trek and asks about "money", and gets the little holier-than-thou speech about how "personal improvment" is valued instead, what they're really saying is that "We're still Capitalists, but the replicator has vanquished it to the fringes..." LOL...

So while I'll conceede part of the anti-capitalist sentiment in ST was based in preachy 60's socialisim, it was also equaly just a nod to the technological realites of life 4-500 years from now.

Also to play devils advocate for the United Federation of Planets, they seem to allow for a very large amount of local autonomy in both legal and cultural matters. (Episodes where people had to go back to their planet to die for crimes or "old age" etc.) Nor is any race or world forced to join if they don't wish to do so. This probably has to be the case for it to function at all, as I see no other way to align vastly different speices that have fundamentaly different kinds of social orginization that are inherent to their biology.

For instance, I doubt the UPF would try to force "democracy" on an insectoid speices that naturaly has a "queen" and "workers" etc. The "Prime Directive" (which they actualy started to take seriously in the Next Generation) also comes into play.

So, at least on the surface, the UPF sounds like it works the way the UN ought to, providing for the common defense, moderating issues between nations, providing a framework of common transporation and trade standards, and meddling as little as possible in internal politics of it's memebers, if at all.

 

[Devonai]

I'm doing my best with the genre. In a galaxy filled with all manners of space pirates and generally bellicose aliens, one wouldn't get too far without serious firepower.

The atmosphere (or lack of it!) is libertarian, but only because of the sheer size of the galaxy and the logistical problems of trying to enforce laws outside of your own star system. One must be aware of the laws of the locality, but if you can get out of there before the local cops pick you up there are hundreds of other planets (naturally life-supporting or terraformed colonies) for you to try next. If you are really, really bad they might put out an intergalactic APB on you, but unless nearby star systems have treaties with each other there is not much incentive for anybody else to look for you and pick you up. This gave rise to a thriving bounty hunting industry, as you might imagine.

The biggest logistical problem is due to the effects of time dilation. The fastest ships in the galaxy can cross the entire thing in a matter of weeks, but not without decades passing on the planet they left. Anyone not motivated by profit wouldn't bother, which is my excuse for why Earth has been left alone so far. Earth has nothing to offer that can't be had much closer nearby; you're not going to fly to the antarctic for ice cubes.

I have not read Clarke. I have never found the subjects of his books to be interesting enough to bother. I would have to conclude that any kind of sci-fi socialism would have to occur on a local level. As AJ pointed out, as the Star Trek universe expanded there were many more planets revealed to be outside of the Federation that were not interested in joining and didn't appreciate Starfleet nosing around in their business. In Star Trek: Voyager, the entire show took place outside of Federation space.

 

[karlsgunbunker]

If you wanna read good modern Sci-Fi I recommend:

David Weber
David Drake
John Ringo

All published by Baen books... www.baen.com

AMEN! No gun control when you're facing Posleen!

 

[Dave Markowitz]

Jerry Pournelle is another pro-gun, conservative SF author. He even wrote the forward for Tappan on Survival.

 

[Firethorn]

I find it interesting that even in star trek civilians never seem to be far from some sort of phaser equivalent.

 

[JesseL]

Jerry Pournelle is another pro-gun, conservative SF author. He even wrote the forward for Tappan on Survival.

This is especialy interesting because he is a reformed communist. I salute anyone who can objectively examine their beliefs, come to the conclusion that they were wrong, and change their mind.

 

[V.Oller]

Along the same vein is Steve Perry (not the rock star) he is an author who is also a shooter and martial artist as is Steven Barnes another sci-fi sriter, shooter, martial artist.

 

[Jim K]

I don't recall that Clarke ever was anything politically but a rather wooly headed intellectual who believed in some kind of socialist paradise where science brought love and peace. Of course, there had to be some nice, wonderful, peace loving types to eliminate those who weren't loving and peaceful enough.

I note his biographies call him an "inventor", but I don't know what he "invented." Supposedly the geostationary satellite was his idea, but he really only publicized it. Others knew the principle, but the real thing had to wait, not on Clarke, but on the nuts and bolts engineering which Clarke certainly had no hand in.

Jim

 

[nelson133]

Add to the good guys list Eric Flint and S.M. Stirling