Opinion Science Fiction is a Left Leaning genre

This is a thread about the political stance of a large body of works of fiction, so I feel that Whitehall is the place for this thread rather than Spacebattles Main.

One thing that I can say with reasonable certainty is that over the two centuries or so of it's existence Science Fiction has far more often come from a left leaning source or has adopted a position that was left leaning (at least by the standards of the time). Let's look at a sampling of Science Fiction Works and Authors that most people would consider significant and were financially successful.

  • Frankenstein: written by proto-Feminist Mary Shelly.
  • Jules Verne: wrote works critical of Imperialism (Captain Nemo, an Indian who'd lost his family to British Imperialism and who hates the strong who oppress the weak).
  • HG Wells: Socialist with a lot of Socialist Ideals manifesting themselves in his work (The Time Machine is the big obvious one, but also the Invisible Man and The Sleeper Awakes) and was critical of British Imperialism (The War of the Worlds).
  • Issac Asimov: Prolific SF writer, atheist, feminist, die hard new dealer, supporter of LGBT rights when it was unpopular.
  • Superman*: Lead Character is an Immigrant, was used against the KKK.
  • Captain America*: A comic created in 1940 designed to embody everything American who's villain were Nazis. Unpopular run as a Anti-Communist figure got retconned into being an imposter. Often pitted against US Nationalists.
  • Twilight Zone: a lot of episodes were highly critical of society, usually from a left wing perspective.
  • Star Trek: has as an idealized future a techno-socialist society which a vast number of peoples have set aside their differences and strive together in which in which diplomacy and science are positive traits.
  • XMEN: Allegory against Racism and Prejudice in General.
  • Ursula K. Le Guin: Acclaimed SF writer from a Feminist and Environmentalist Perspective.
  • Star Wars: A dictatorship arises due to militarization and strong man politics and it and it's runaway military/industrial complex needs to be resisted by a rag tag group of teenagers. The basics of this came out just after the Vietnam War.
  • Alien Franchise: Has women in traditionally male roles as well as a corporation willing to send people to their deaths to gain control of the xenomorphs.
  • Mobile Suit Gundam: Highly popular and influential anime which has a distinct anti-war message as a core theme.
  • Terminator: US military builds a superintelligent AI which proceeds to start a nuclear holocaust and plans on exterminating all of mankind on top of feminist themes.
  • The Matrix: Made by a pair of Transgender Women with Transgender Themes woven into it.
  • Avatar: Ferngully in Space.
This is not a comprehensive list, of course.

This is not to say that these works are all the products of Perfect Leftists (especially given the argument you'd get in trying to define what constitutes a "Perfect Leftist") or are 100% Left Leaning even considering that the world they came from. Nor are we saying that Conservative Science Fiction does not exist, but it is a lot less common and a lot less influential. The most Right Leaning form of science fiction out there would probably be military Sci-Fi, but even that is not a hard and fast rule. Leaving aside the occasional reactionary like Kratman most military Sci-Fi for a long time has been onboard with a feminist idea of women serving alongside men in the Space Navy or as Space Troopers which was something many IRL conservatives oppose. A lot of military SF has roots in Robert H. Heinlein's Starship Troopers and Heinlein and while Heinlein at that point did have a lot to say about military service as a positive thing and all that he was also not a conventional conservative by any means. Some of the Post Apocalyptic stuff has a Right Wing bias to it, but post-apocalyptia is a more contested field since the cause of said apocalypse is usually something such as climate change or nuclear war brought about by militarism. Not to say there are not exceptions elsewhere, but those exceptions are less common and more marginal.

As for why this is the case, I can't say for certain. One possible factor is is that science fiction had been a more niche product for much of the twentieth century which was other than the norm, either current or historical. In "The 50-Year Mission: The Complete, Uncensored, Unauthorized Oral History of Star Trek: The First 25 Years" there are some comment about how a writer in the 1960s should quit that weird childish new Trek show and write some Western, though this is more of a historic reason. Maybe it's because people on the left tend to think more about where society is going in a more proactive way where things might be good (UFP, The Culture) or bad (Polluted Cyberpunk Dystopia**) but either way they'll be different from the status quo while conservatives think about an idealized present or romanticized and often mythological view of the past. But I would posit that there is some reason for this either in the subject manner or the culture which is prone to consuming it which leans left.

Would you agree with this or not?

*While there is a whole lot of fantastic elements in both their worlds, Superman is an Alien and Captain America is the product of advanced drugging/genetic modification/something vaguely on that line that would qualify as SF beings. Wonder Woman for that matter has always been a Feminist character, but she's a fantasy being.
**Insert "that's today!" Joke Here.

Zor

Source (Members only)
 
....and the jedi essentially stole kids cause they were force sensitive and forced them to grow up in a religious cult. They also used what amounts to a slave army in the prequel trilogy
Aye, this was one thing Lucas wanted to show with the Prequels. Luke was in a FAR better and more grounded position thanks to living a normal childhood and not starting his Jedi journey till 20. This very intentionally gave him a better and more mature foundation compared to his father.

Training since birth was supposed to be one of those tragic flaws the Prequel Jedi had. It lead them to ivory towers and not being able to properly deal with Anakin.

A lot of people don't seem to realize that the Jedi Order from the end of the Republic was highly flawed and needed reform. Lucas very intentionally had their flaws apparent, but they never realized in universe what it was leading them to until it was too late. Disney squandered the idea of a reform with their sequels, but the old EU really showed Luke rebuilding things in a better and more healthy way.
 
Última edición:
False. The Wachoski freaks only said that after a lifetime of failed relationships and trooning out and taking their ball with them 20 years later.
The movie had none of that shit in it's development and filming.
Apparently Switch was supposed to be trans. Male in the real world, Female in the matrix. But it was scrapped because it was thought it would be too confusing in the late 90s. Probably gonna be retconned in Matrix 4 I bet.
 
Ellison was a bastard.
  • told a fan who sent him fanmail something to the effect of "If you wanted to thank me, you wouldn't have wasted my time by sending me this letter."
  • Groped a woman on stage at a convention
  • Got banned from the campus of Texas A&M for calling their ROTC cadet corps "the next generation of fascists"
  • Mailed a dead gopher to a publisher
  • Was more litigious than Russell Greer about perceived plagiarism
Based as fuck :cunningpepe:
 
Neal Asher is a conservative sci fi author. I really like his stuff.

His main series( that has about ten spin off books throughout the universe) is about a human secret agent that works for a benevolent(ish) Human empire controlled entirely by AIs and fighting terrorists trying to fuck that up.
 
"If You Give a Mouse a Cookie" is an objectivist criticism of charity. Giving the mouse one cookie, one single cookie, is the trigger to a cascade of demands and entitlement, and it becomes apparent that the "you" in the story would quickly become exasperated attempting to satiate the mouse's various requests. Both "you" and the mouse would be far better served if the mouse obtained his own damned cookie.
 
HG Wells was a Fabian socialist. Fabians were most famous for promoting eugenics. In fact their whole thing was basically national socialism modelled on Bismarckism.

Asimov is a typical male feminist. He claimed to support feminism but his actual work is a real manifestation of what are usually only feminist strawmen (i.e. fridging, Bechdel test, etc).

OP missed Vonnegut. Praised by the left for Slaughterhouse Five but then ignored for other stuff like Harrison Bergeron.
 
Última edición:
There are not enough "autistic" and "dumb" ratings in the whole galaxy to rate this stinking pile of faggotry of OP.
 
What about Harlan Ellison?

https://youtube.com/watch?v=hYQOslFoecg
I mean they say left leaning, but they're phrasing it as "THEIR VERSION" of left leaning. These people would have been torn to shreds as being hacks decades ago.
Harlan Ellison is one of the greatest science fiction writers of all time. Even his non- fiction stuff is great, his sentences are crisp and his word choice is second to none.

And he would spit on modern sci-fi writers if not worse.

I think science fiction is inherently “progressive” and many times optimistic of the future. But Leftist, no.
 
Either you don't know how to read, or you only watched the film and never read the book.
One could only vote, run for and hold public office after completing Federal Service(not exclusive to the military), as long as you were in active Federal Service you couldn't even vote much less hold office
So you'll admit to a class based society but not a militaristic one. But
I honestly don't recall them mentioning any non-military jobs beyond being a human experiment subject (probably for military purposes). There are definitely combat and non-combat roles but it's all military it.

But I guess google is a thing...

No having looked it up it seems evident that the novel itself seems to exclusively refer to federal service as either being combat or auxiliary in nature. This is seemingly a common interpretation of the work so much that Heinlein had to clarified this point (indicating that the novel itself did not clarify this) (src):
"Veteran' does not mean in English dictionaries or in this novel solely a person who has served in military forces. I concede that in commonest usage today it means a war veteran... but no one hesitates to speak of a veteran firefighter or veteran schoolteacher. In STARSHIP TROOPERS it is stated flatly and more than once that nineteen out of twenty veterans are not military veterans. Instead, 95% of voters are what we call today "former members of the federal civil service."

So you're not technically wrong (and Dumbledore is gay btw), but I literally have a digital copy of the novel open and the relevant part seems to be:
"You realize that you aren't allowed to pick your service?"

Carl said, "I thought we could state our preferences?"

"Certainly. And that's the last choice you'll make until the end of your term. The placement officer pays attention to your choice, too. First thing he does is to check whether there's any demand for left-handed glass blowers this week -- that being what you think would make you happy. Having reluctantly conceded that there is a need for your choice -- probably at the bottom of the Pacific -- he then tests you for innate ability and preparation. About once in twenty times he is forced to admit that everything matches and you get the job . . . until some practical joker gives you dispatch orders to do something very different. But the other nineteen times he turns you down and decides that you are just what they have been needing to field-test survival equipment on Titan." He added meditatively, "It's chilly on Titan. And it's amazing how often experimental equipment fails to work. Have to have real field tests, though --laboratories just never get all the answers.

So when Heinlein says "military" (giving him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't go JK Rowling) what it seems to refer to is exclusively combat, he seems to exclude auxiliary roles from being "military". That's the only conclusion I can reach since in the novel we also have:
And you have forgotten that in peacetime most veterans come from non-combatant auxiliary services and have not been subjected to the full rigors of military discipline; they have merely been harried, overworked, and endangered — yet their votes count.

So I am fully willing to accept that (particularly if the author says so) that Federal Service includes Civil Service, I'll just argue that this is never explicitly made clear in the novel, and in fact the novel is filled with vastly more references to Federal Service being military service.

Also there's a article here https://www.nitrosyncretic.com/pdfs/nature_of_fedsvc_1996.pdf it gives few in-text references supporting the military meaning of "Federal Service".
 
So you'll admit to a class based society but not a militaristic one. But
I honestly don't recall them mentioning any non-military jobs beyond being a human experiment subject (probably for military purposes). There are definitely combat and non-combat roles but it's all military it.

But I guess google is a thing...

No having looked it up it seems evident that the novel itself seems to exclusively refer to federal service as either being combat or auxiliary in nature. This is seemingly a common interpretation of the work so much that Heinlein had to clarified this point (indicating that the novel itself did not clarify this) (src):


So you're not technically wrong (and Dumbledore is gay btw), but I literally have a digital copy of the novel open and the relevant part seems to be:


So when Heinlein says "military" (giving him the benefit of the doubt that he didn't go JK Rowling) what it seems to refer to is exclusively combat, he seems to exclude auxiliary roles from being "military". That's the only conclusion I can reach since in the novel we also have:


So I am fully willing to accept that (particularly if the author says so) that Federal Service includes Civil Service, I'll just argue that this is never explicitly made clear in the novel, and in fact the novel is filled with vastly more references to Federal Service being military service.

Also there's a article here https://www.nitrosyncretic.com/pdfs/nature_of_fedsvc_1996.pdf it gives few in-text references supporting the military meaning of "Federal Service".
That's a lot of words to say "You're correct Not".
I only ever read the novel, and I knew by the time I was 16 that Heinlein was talking about all form of service to the state, retards focus on the military aspect because the bugs rolled up in their ships and started waxing colonies just before the novel opens.
 
That's a lot of words to say "You're correct Not".
I find it better to provide evidence for my position when in disagreement with someone on a topic.
Otherwise it just becomes a matter of your opinion vs mine, which isn't even worth starting up to begin with since it leads nowhere.
Besides I've seen your position laid out several times, and having read the novel I did not recall the novel ever using Service to imply Civil Service as well. So this was a good (enough) opportunity for me to investigate it a bit deeper, lay out my reasoning and evidence and see if someone else can either point out flaws in my reasoning or provide better contrary evidence.
 
I assumed, for no reason, that "Service" meant "military service" therefore I needed an autistic level of evidence to disprove my assumption.
FIFY.

Very few people born before 2001 would assume "veteran" was only used for military veterans, based on this evidence I'm going to assume you were either born after 2001 or read the book for the first time after the mid-2000's.
 
Either way, science fiction is still “fiction”. It was never meant to be taken as a substitute for real life politics. I’m surprised you didn’t do Catch-22, Brave New World or 1984.
 
OP missed Vonnegut. Praised by the left for Slaughterhouse Five but then ignored for other stuff like Harrison Bergeron.

This would imply that OP has actually read any of these books and didn't just read the rundown on Wiki and TVTropes.

Slaughterhouse Five isn't even leftist imo. It's certainly anti-war but I'm not even sure why anti-war is considered left or right at this point. They really do think US Conservatives just wanna nuke the world for some reason.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo