"Mike observes a medium sized monkey get beat up by a big monkey, and then turn around and beat up a smaller monkey. This poignant display of the cycle of abuse Mike laughs for the first time and realizes that comedy is built on pain." Sun Wukong: It isn't funny when it happens to me...
The fact that this sex cult book came out in the 60s, while Rasputin, who ran a sex cult, was born in the 1860s is an interesting coincidence. Also Rasputin did not bathe.
Red has gone on record stating that she hated reading this book and making this video. She may or may not be actively repressing the experience. Every time someone else brings it up she gives a pained whine. This has turned up in podcats, detail diatribes, and in game livestreams because of course her friends have to torment her about that one godawful book she read for a video that one time. Asimov is my preferred 20th century sci-fi author, by the way. I can tolerate the weak characters for the neat concepts he was playing with. My favorite is probably space colonies. They're just kind of neat.
100%. I absolutely love Asimov's work. Like you said, while the characters are often lacking, the concepts were revolutionary for the time and very well explored and realized.
What is worse wbout this book is that aside from the big stuff like misogyny, homophobia, and self-insert, the 1st half of the book has some interesting ideas. I would pay money to see an adaptation that rewrites this and gets rid of the weird views Heimline had. Because the original premise has some real potential, especially to explore themes that Heimline would roll in his grave to even consider.
@@Airier To be honest I don't think it's that at all- not just because Heinlein was a Vanilla Sex Enjoyer (tm) and very vocal about that, but because he's not trying to disguise anything. All his books are about how if everyone expresses themselves freely the best stuff will naturally become popular. Also, he did a lot of good work in battling racism in science fiction. This guy and Frank Herbert are half the reason sci-fi ever became known as a progressive medium (the other half is Star trek, which they also kinda inspired).
Also I know it's a sin to assume someone went to heaven or hell cause only God decides that, but I think we can all agree Heinline writing it so Mike was the Archangel Michael probably got him some stink eyes from the angels when he was being judged. Satan probably thought it was hilarious.
17:49 to be fair, the actual infrastructure involved would stop people from trying to forcibly colonize Mars like America. It takes *a lot* of resources just to send a few people to space intact. Sending enough people to both colonize and drive out the Martians would require an enormous amount of resources and manpower. Most corporations and smaller nations couldn't do it, and it would be incredibly costly for superpowers like the US, with relatively little profit. (Especially since water is a scarce resource there)
Not really it was more enjoying life. For example, taking an hour to savor a grape or enjoying the feel of a cool breeze on a hot day. It was less excess and more experience. I don't know when the meaning changed, but it DEFINITELY did.
Pretty much the opposite, actually. Hedonism is about maximising pleasure, yes, but the ancient philosophers took into account that you get used to your status quo. So the recommendation was actually to live a frugal and controlled lifestyle. Bread and water as your main fare, so that the few times when you do eat some really well made food, it is all the more special, while on the flip side, hard times dont hurt as much because you are already living that way. It is basically the flip side of stoicism, when you think about it.
10:15 honestly, this is like one of my favourite parts about old sci fi novels. Even now, but especially pre space exploration, there are so many mysteries about the universe that we don't fully understand. And a lot of early Sci Fi, even the well researched ones, just include elements that from todays perspective seem ridiculously far fetched, but where common theories at the time, like the possibility of an ancient planet that met some apocalyptic demise between Mars and Jupiter here or even the existence of Extra Terrestial life in the Solar System to begin with. One of my favourites are the Forests of Venus, the Idea that Venus must be covered in tropical Rainforests. It sounds ridiculous nowadays, but at the time the theory went that, it being closer to the sun must mean that Venus has a higher average temperature (true, altough people where wrong by about a factor of 1000% regarding how much warmer) and that the clearly observable clouds on venus's surface must mean it has an atmosphere rich in water vapor (turns out those clouds aren't made out of water but sulphuric acid). Not to mention it's atmosphere being so dense, it just straight up crushed the first few space probes sent to analyse it. But if you seek out Sci Fi stories of the early 20th century, they will just describe, what we now know to be one of, if not the least hospitable planets in our solar system, as a perfect lush paradise. On the other hand, some early theories, like the existence of black holes, have been confirmed since. It really makes me wonder just how we will look back at current sci fi stories in another hundred years and which of the current set of "unproofen scientific theories authors like to speculate about" will seem ridiculously funny to future readers (think things like wormholes or quantum physics)
I don't have problem whit a story including sex and/or nudism as part of it, but if the story is not meant to just be porn it has to be done in a respectfull, not fetichise way
I don't think it's fair to characterize the donations to Notre Dame thing as microtransactions given that their purpose was to rebuild the church after a fire.
7:56 Nancy Reagan famously had a personal astrologer, who allegedly had waaaay too much influence on the president's scheduling. I'd say the book is a direct reference to that, except that it's two decades older.
Is that a Robotech poster in the back? Also a lot of scifi writers of the 50s and 60s had very "interesting" ideas about sex. And by interesting I mean that they saw sexual liberation one way, to benefit straight males.
@@Airier Ah. I had the DvD collection myself (released by Harmony Gold, probably still do), somewhere around here. Then I moved on to Macross, but I sherish the memories from those days.
can't edit my first comment so... about Heinlein's connection to scientology; you're bang on. He and Hubbard were friends and supposedly had a bet on who could come up with the most popular religion (guess who won). Also, if you haven't read the book, there's stuff in it that frankly almost made me throw it in a shredder; I'm amazed Red managed to stick it out.
No. The movie director hated Heinlein and deliberately set out to parody the book without reading it. For example, he made the movie about a war, when in the book less than twenty pages are actually dedicated to fights. The book as a whole can best be described as Heinlein's Star Trek: his vision of what a perfect future society looks like. Heinlein was big on the idea that only someone who struggled for something could value it, and so made 'Service guarantees Citizenship' a core tenet of the book; you couldn't have power over your government unless you were willing to earn it. I'll note that this service did NOT have to be military- lawyers, accountants, cooks, you could serve as anything, but whatever it was had to be public service and it had to be difficult. The idea was to prevent anyone from being selfish with their votes, because anyone who could vote proved through service that they cared, not about race, or gender or class or age, but humanity as a whole. Also, there is a textbook for 'good citizens' and anyone who quotes it in interviews fails, because Heinlein wasn't interested in people who weren't willing to question their leaders and goals. Honestly, go read the book. You'd be surprised at how nuanced it is.
Yeah, I read a lot of Heinlein as a teen and I remember deciding that towards the end of his career Heinlein was popular enough that he could get a grocery list published. Those later books were … really off.
still can't edit my comments (um youtube, you're screwing up again) but wanted to clear up the "MIke had 8 parents" thing. In the book, he technically (actually legally) had 3; the ship's captain had an affair with the crew Doctor's wife. Mike was born by C-section, and the mom died on the table. Then the doctor offed the captain then himself. The "fabulously rich" part is cause the crew made out a contract that meant Mike inherited basically 8 people's estates, which included a lot of stocks and other stuff. I have read the book, so anybody who wants to challenge this better read it first.
inquisitor, as in, someone who operates in an inquisition. think "religious secret police", ie, they black-bag people who go against the tenents of the faith.
It's a very early Warhammer 40k novel that was basically just the writer using 40k to explore a bunch of bizarre k*nks. It kind of works like this book in the sense that it starts with one premise and then devolves into really uncomfortable and bizarre territory, except it had the decency to make itself a bit more clear about it by, like, chapter 2 or 3. Way more unhinged though, if you can believe that's possible. Just to be clear, I haven't read it, but I did have the "pleasure" of hearing a summary here on youtube by Bruva Alfabusa on his Emperor TTS Podcast series. Wouldn't be surprised if Airier reacted to it, he's done a lot of their other videos.
Heinlein might have been a fascist, he was definitely libertarian(the political view not the party). When interviewed about Starship Troopers, Heinlein said that the U.S. should operate the same way that his fictionalized one world government: Military service grants you citizenship along with all of the rights and privileges that comes with citizenship. That we should hate anyone who isn't us and launch massive campaigns of eradication, regardless if they're a threat or not. That the U.S. has a divine right to all the land and resources of the world, which is a very militarist view. Now being a militarist doesn't automatically make someone a fascist(almost the entire leadership of Imperial Japan in the 20's-40's were militarists and none of them were fascists). Heinlein did serve in the Navy in the 30's, but due to medical issues, did not fight in WWII. Early on he was very progressive, almost borderline socialist, and over time drifted further and further right. His drifting further and further right was reflected in his writing over time.
He *definitely* wasn’t a fascist. Fascism, like communism and socialism, is about the state having power. Libertinism is little government as we can get away with. Any idea he was fascist is people miss understanding Starship Troopers.
@@khylerbane4523 Debatable, Heinlein politicial journey went all over. For example, he help campaign for the president run of Upton fair, a well known socialist. Heinlein in interviews also said that some of his stories was about exploring concepts and or expressing ideas that he might or might not agree with later in his long life
@@khylerbane4523Fascism is about group think. Specifically the way Nono Germans and Italians do it is to blame other countries for their troubles then later the enemy within (Jews). They are all about us vs them, we are superior they are inferior, often employing double think (example:The Soviets are so backwards they're regressing into cave men, but they are a threat to us they'll destroy us if we don't destroy them). Communism and Socialism is about Government of the ppl, by the ppl, for the ppl. (I.e. food, water and shelter for everyone regardless of whatever) Tho specifically it's the ppl are in control of the place they work in, or the job instead of a CEO that really doesn't do much
@@khylerbane4523 Right-wing libertarianism is very compatible with fascism. Libertarians might fashion themselves anarchists but they're really about not being taxed or having their companies be regulated. But they can completely support a police state to repress other people not keen on being exploited by megacorporations, especially if the government is in their pocket. Socialism and communism are not about state power as the end goal; the end goal is the complete opposite: a classless, stateless society. Please read more than Elon Musk's definitions of these words.
...it hurts that I understand the reference to "Inquisitor". Interesting ideas but holy shit that series just ignored how stuff is in 40k. (Seriously I wonder why the foam-at-the-mouth 'traditionalist' fans haven't had an aneurysm about the content of that series.)
Idk what you mean by "walmart" but i've been in a walmart several times, and for longer than 5 minutes, i didn't see whatever you might be alluding to. Maybe my walmart is an outlier.
10:25 I'm pretty sure the VHS industry took a boom once people figured out. Hey we could film Our fun stuff at home, Or we could sell it?. Same goes for DVD and most pre-digital p orn
@cedricrobertson2893 Not Safe For Work animations, the "story" is that there were massive innovations because of BioShock Infinite. It's more complicated than that and was already making good progress before then
Sadly, I am not sure if this would be better or worse than a Christian version. Hmm, sex and you would actually get powers, but Martians have to be fought.
About notre dame de paris and microtransactions/donations… All sacral buildings in france belong to the state not the church So it’s the french government asking for donations to rebuild this cathedral, not the catholic church Just food for thought
35:54 Yeah I read questionable comics with the fair amount of moments but just listening to what this book is about is making me feel a little dirty about it there's always one author that's easily a horrible(questionable) person Yet the books are known for reason or another😅
I both want and dont want to read this Book. On the one Hand it is interesting to see how our views on society and personal opinions differs/ stayd the same from a phase in time less than 100 years apart from ours. On the other hand..It's his opinions are insufferable... i dont want to pay money for this..... he is dead right? Does his family still get shares from the profit?
He died in 1988. Almost all profits from modern sales go into a private trust he and his wife established. That said, it should be quite easy to find the majority of his books in a library or secondhand bookstore. Or just, you know, yar har.
yeah I felt the same when I first heard Red's summary. I finally got it and yes, it's as cringey as you think and then some. But if you scrape that stuff off, you're left with a decent plotline (sorta) and some interesting ideas about science, religion, culture the times the book was written in. Read it at least once.
@@DaPikaGTMDid you read the book? If so, remember the whole Fair Witness thing? A class of people whose word can be admitted in court as evidence instead of testimony because they would Never Ever Lie, because they are So Good, So Noble, So Whi-I mean Fair, that it's fair for them to be More Equal in the eyes of the law. One of many examples of Libertarianism slipping into Fascism.
@@DaPikaGTMOr it means there's a bunch of people walking around claiming to be one thing but are actually another, either because they're lying or because they don't know what their beliefs actually mean in a political context. See: people who claim to support "small government" but support having the government decide what bathroom people use, who they can and can't marry based on their genitals, etc.
Note that this is probably one of the worst videos OSP ever made, Red gets facts in the book wrong constantly and fails to note any of the highly prominent sarcasm and satire in pretty much every single thing she outlines in this presentation. I'm pretty certain she hasn't actually read the book, yes it's that bad. The whole thing about mike owning mars and being super rich is a satire of the strange legalisms of the modern world and how nations treat legal claims to land rights inheritance and the like. This whole book is a satire and Red does both herself and it a catastrophic disservice here which I think resulted from her reading a plot outline and then jumping strait into making a video.
As someone who is very familiar with his work...no, this isn't satire. Much like Star Troopers, a lot of what's explicitly discussed by the characters are Heinlein's actual beliefs of what would make society more into a utopia. What bits you could argue are satirical are hard to parse from his true beliefs, which is a failing of the author. Don Quixote I feel is a stronger satire. You can clearly tell what the author's actual thoughts are on stories of "chivalry" and "knighthood" through the humor, but also see it as a backdrop for the various plots we see throughout. I still think it's not as strong nowadays, but it's a better constructed satire than what Heinlein might've been going for, if that was his intent.
boy you weren't paying ANY attention were you? She DEFINITELY read the book. Do yourself a favor and look closely at the artwork, especially where she gets to the carnival and Patty. If YOU had read the book, you'd know what I mean. Don't criticize Red for not doing her homework, pal; you will lose the argument EVERY. TIME.
@DDlambchop43 "doing her homework" is exactly what it feels like she did, it doesn't feel like she 'groked' the book to steal a term she's got the outline not the meaning. I can get why she doesn't like a lot of the discourse in it, it's dated to say the least, but it feels like she didn't get that a lot of it is Heinlein either exploring moral fallacies that people assume due to their upbringing or just outright making fun of them. For instance the whole cannibal thing, if you actually read that part of the book, it goes to great pains to explain that a person isn't automatically a monster for participating in that cultural practice, and that no one should claim to be inherently better than someone else for not having the same cultural practices and that all humans have cannibals in their ancestry somewhere, red chooses to leave all that information out and focus on the one off color comment about Duke's native American ancestry, which the narrative itself treats as something he should be proud of and also points out that any practice of cannibalism that might imply isn't actually special because all human lineages contain it. Maybe she left out all the relevant information in that whole section of the book for the sake of brevity but frankly I'm being charitable here because she did take the time to point out the one part of it she didn't like and that looks bad while leaving out all the nuance and discussion around it which means she either saw one thing she didn't like, checked out and noted that down for later, or she did read and comprehend it all and then intentionally left out the nuance in order to slant the narrative in a direction she proffered because she doesn't like the book which is strait up disingenuous. It's fine if she doesn't like the book, it's fine if she hates it, what I don't like is lying and half truths, which the video is full of.
"Mike observes a medium sized monkey get beat up by a big monkey, and then turn around and beat up a smaller monkey. This poignant display of the cycle of abuse Mike laughs for the first time and realizes that comedy is built on pain."
Sun Wukong: It isn't funny when it happens to me...
The fact that this sex cult book came out in the 60s, while Rasputin, who ran a sex cult, was born in the 1860s is an interesting coincidence. Also Rasputin did not bathe.
Red has gone on record stating that she hated reading this book and making this video. She may or may not be actively repressing the experience. Every time someone else brings it up she gives a pained whine. This has turned up in podcats, detail diatribes, and in game livestreams because of course her friends have to torment her about that one godawful book she read for a video that one time.
Asimov is my preferred 20th century sci-fi author, by the way. I can tolerate the weak characters for the neat concepts he was playing with. My favorite is probably space colonies. They're just kind of neat.
100%. I absolutely love Asimov's work. Like you said, while the characters are often lacking, the concepts were revolutionary for the time and very well explored and realized.
What is worse wbout this book is that aside from the big stuff like misogyny, homophobia, and self-insert, the 1st half of the book has some interesting ideas.
I would pay money to see an adaptation that rewrites this and gets rid of the weird views Heimline had.
Because the original premise has some real potential, especially to explore themes that Heimline would roll in his grave to even consider.
Heinlien was known for his interesting ideas for books.
Tonight's Episode: The Writer's Barely Disguised Kink
Half tempted to use that as the thumbnail. 😅
@@Airier To be honest I don't think it's that at all- not just because Heinlein was a Vanilla Sex Enjoyer (tm) and very vocal about that, but because he's not trying to disguise anything. All his books are about how if everyone expresses themselves freely the best stuff will naturally become popular. Also, he did a lot of good work in battling racism in science fiction. This guy and Frank Herbert are half the reason sci-fi ever became known as a progressive medium (the other half is Star trek, which they also kinda inspired).
Disguised? Where?
This was the book that made Red stop doing patron requests for book summaries. She hated it soooo much.
I didn't know that! poor thing. So I guess a summary of Cat's Cradle will never happen.
Also I know it's a sin to assume someone went to heaven or hell cause only God decides that, but I think we can all agree Heinline writing it so Mike was the Archangel Michael probably got him some stink eyes from the angels when he was being judged. Satan probably thought it was hilarious.
I just want to know what the archangle Gabriel thought of Mike's shananigans in the book.
I had to do an essay about this book and the original video Genuinely helped massively
17:49 to be fair, the actual infrastructure involved would stop people from trying to forcibly colonize Mars like America. It takes *a lot* of resources just to send a few people to space intact. Sending enough people to both colonize and drive out the Martians would require an enormous amount of resources and manpower.
Most corporations and smaller nations couldn't do it, and it would be incredibly costly for superpowers like the US, with relatively little profit.
(Especially since water is a scarce resource there)
24:30 so the original meaning of hedonism was essentially "acting on impulses"?
Not really it was more enjoying life. For example, taking an hour to savor a grape or enjoying the feel of a cool breeze on a hot day. It was less excess and more experience.
I don't know when the meaning changed, but it DEFINITELY did.
Pretty much the opposite, actually. Hedonism is about maximising pleasure, yes, but the ancient philosophers took into account that you get used to your status quo. So the recommendation was actually to live a frugal and controlled lifestyle. Bread and water as your main fare, so that the few times when you do eat some really well made food, it is all the more special, while on the flip side, hard times dont hurt as much because you are already living that way.
It is basically the flip side of stoicism, when you think about it.
This is my favorite episode of OSP by far. I laugh my ass off every time.
10:15 honestly, this is like one of my favourite parts about old sci fi novels.
Even now, but especially pre space exploration, there are so many mysteries about the universe that we don't fully understand. And a lot of early Sci Fi, even the well researched ones, just include elements that from todays perspective seem ridiculously far fetched, but where common theories at the time, like the possibility of an ancient planet that met some apocalyptic demise between Mars and Jupiter here or even the existence of Extra Terrestial life in the Solar System to begin with.
One of my favourites are the Forests of Venus, the Idea that Venus must be covered in tropical Rainforests. It sounds ridiculous nowadays, but at the time the theory went that, it being closer to the sun must mean that Venus has a higher average temperature (true, altough people where wrong by about a factor of 1000% regarding how much warmer) and that the clearly observable clouds on venus's surface must mean it has an atmosphere rich in water vapor (turns out those clouds aren't made out of water but sulphuric acid). Not to mention it's atmosphere being so dense, it just straight up crushed the first few space probes sent to analyse it.
But if you seek out Sci Fi stories of the early 20th century, they will just describe, what we now know to be one of, if not the least hospitable planets in our solar system, as a perfect lush paradise.
On the other hand, some early theories, like the existence of black holes, have been confirmed since.
It really makes me wonder just how we will look back at current sci fi stories in another hundred years and which of the current set of "unproofen scientific theories authors like to speculate about" will seem ridiculously funny to future readers (think things like wormholes or quantum physics)
From what I heard, the Starship Trooper movie was good because they were commentary on propaganda movies
I don't have problem whit a story including sex and/or nudism as part of it, but if the story is not meant to just be porn it has to be done in a respectfull, not fetichise way
I don't think it's fair to characterize the donations to Notre Dame thing as microtransactions given that their purpose was to rebuild the church after a fire.
4:26 What part of "main character creates a sex cult" made you think otherwise?
7:56 Nancy Reagan famously had a personal astrologer, who allegedly had waaaay too much influence on the president's scheduling.
I'd say the book is a direct reference to that, except that it's two decades older.
11:40 Ritual cannibalism is also a thing among humans actually.
It’s stories like this that make me want the aliens to win in the end.
Is that a Robotech poster in the back?
Also a lot of scifi writers of the 50s and 60s had very "interesting" ideas about sex. And by interesting I mean that they saw sexual liberation one way, to benefit straight males.
Its a wooden box collection for the entire series I got off eBay in the early 2000s. Entire menu was in Chinese, so it was difficult to use. 😅
@@Airier Ah. I had the DvD collection myself (released by Harmony Gold, probably still do), somewhere around here. Then I moved on to Macross, but I sherish the memories from those days.
Welph time for some HEAVY drinking
can't edit my first comment so...
about Heinlein's connection to scientology; you're bang on. He and Hubbard were friends and supposedly had a bet on who could come up with the most popular religion (guess who won). Also, if you haven't read the book, there's stuff in it that frankly almost made me throw it in a shredder; I'm amazed Red managed to stick it out.
Yeah, like the one time Gill (the main female lead) says that 9/10 the victims of r*pe are at fault. Not even kidding you.
13:40 Now Elon stole this term and used it for his AI bs
Yes
Did Elon name the twitter ai grok because of this
This is where the word "grok" comes from, so yes, but he may not realize it. I seriously doubt Musk reads books.
@@Frostbite08yeah, you’re probably right
I never read starship troopers, I only watched it, Was the book not a parody?
Nope. That was a movie decision.
As far as I could tell, it was completely sincere.
No. The movie director hated Heinlein and deliberately set out to parody the book without reading it. For example, he made the movie about a war, when in the book less than twenty pages are actually dedicated to fights.
The book as a whole can best be described as Heinlein's Star Trek: his vision of what a perfect future society looks like. Heinlein was big on the idea that only someone who struggled for something could value it, and so made 'Service guarantees Citizenship' a core tenet of the book; you couldn't have power over your government unless you were willing to earn it. I'll note that this service did NOT have to be military- lawyers, accountants, cooks, you could serve as anything, but whatever it was had to be public service and it had to be difficult. The idea was to prevent anyone from being selfish with their votes, because anyone who could vote proved through service that they cared, not about race, or gender or class or age, but humanity as a whole. Also, there is a textbook for 'good citizens' and anyone who quotes it in interviews fails, because Heinlein wasn't interested in people who weren't willing to question their leaders and goals.
Honestly, go read the book. You'd be surprised at how nuanced it is.
Want a weirder book? Check Heinlein's Time Enough for Love. And To Sail Beyond the Sunset.
Yeah, I read a lot of Heinlein as a teen and I remember deciding that towards the end of his career Heinlein was popular enough that he could get a grocery list published. Those later books were … really off.
still can't edit my comments (um youtube, you're screwing up again) but wanted to clear up the "MIke had 8 parents" thing. In the book, he technically (actually legally) had 3; the ship's captain had an affair with the crew Doctor's wife. Mike was born by C-section, and the mom died on the table. Then the doctor offed the captain then himself. The "fabulously rich" part is cause the crew made out a contract that meant Mike inherited basically 8 people's estates, which included a lot of stocks and other stuff. I have read the book, so anybody who wants to challenge this better read it first.
Actually there is a man who owns and sells land in moon and other planets in real life with permission of court.
Boy, I wonder if anyone ever told him about John Norman's Gor?
22:27: would someone mind telling me what he means. I've never heard of Inquisitor, and considering what he says, I'm afraid to look it up.
inquisitor, as in, someone who operates in an inquisition.
think "religious secret police", ie, they black-bag people who go against the tenents of the faith.
The simplest way to define it is Warhammer 40k smut. The T.T.S. series had a podcast episode going over it if you want more details.
It's a very early Warhammer 40k novel that was basically just the writer using 40k to explore a bunch of bizarre k*nks. It kind of works like this book in the sense that it starts with one premise and then devolves into really uncomfortable and bizarre territory, except it had the decency to make itself a bit more clear about it by, like, chapter 2 or 3. Way more unhinged though, if you can believe that's possible.
Just to be clear, I haven't read it, but I did have the "pleasure" of hearing a summary here on youtube by Bruva Alfabusa on his Emperor TTS Podcast series. Wouldn't be surprised if Airier reacted to it, he's done a lot of their other videos.
@BerserkerLuke Ahh. Thanks, definitely sounds like something from early 40k lol.
Heinlein might have been a fascist, he was definitely libertarian(the political view not the party). When interviewed about Starship Troopers, Heinlein said that the U.S. should operate the same way that his fictionalized one world government: Military service grants you citizenship along with all of the rights and privileges that comes with citizenship. That we should hate anyone who isn't us and launch massive campaigns of eradication, regardless if they're a threat or not. That the U.S. has a divine right to all the land and resources of the world, which is a very militarist view. Now being a militarist doesn't automatically make someone a fascist(almost the entire leadership of Imperial Japan in the 20's-40's were militarists and none of them were fascists).
Heinlein did serve in the Navy in the 30's, but due to medical issues, did not fight in WWII. Early on he was very progressive, almost borderline socialist, and over time drifted further and further right. His drifting further and further right was reflected in his writing over time.
He *definitely* wasn’t a fascist. Fascism, like communism and socialism, is about the state having power. Libertinism is little government as we can get away with. Any idea he was fascist is people miss understanding Starship Troopers.
@@khylerbane4523 Debatable, Heinlein politicial journey went all over. For example, he help campaign for the president run of Upton fair, a well known socialist.
Heinlein in interviews also said that some of his stories was about exploring concepts and or expressing ideas that he might or might not agree with later in his long life
Heinlein did clarify that their other ways to gain citizenship in the statteooper universe, it was just the military was the most quickest
@@khylerbane4523Fascism is about group think. Specifically the way Nono Germans and Italians do it is to blame other countries for their troubles then later the enemy within (Jews). They are all about us vs them, we are superior they are inferior, often employing double think (example:The Soviets are so backwards they're regressing into cave men, but they are a threat to us they'll destroy us if we don't destroy them).
Communism and Socialism is about Government of the ppl, by the ppl, for the ppl. (I.e. food, water and shelter for everyone regardless of whatever)
Tho specifically it's the ppl are in control of the place they work in, or the job instead of a CEO that really doesn't do much
@@khylerbane4523 Right-wing libertarianism is very compatible with fascism. Libertarians might fashion themselves anarchists but they're really about not being taxed or having their companies be regulated. But they can completely support a police state to repress other people not keen on being exploited by megacorporations, especially if the government is in their pocket.
Socialism and communism are not about state power as the end goal; the end goal is the complete opposite: a classless, stateless society.
Please read more than Elon Musk's definitions of these words.
oh no
OH YES!
...it hurts that I understand the reference to "Inquisitor".
Interesting ideas but holy shit that series just ignored how stuff is in 40k. (Seriously I wonder why the foam-at-the-mouth 'traditionalist' fans haven't had an aneurysm about the content of that series.)
Idk what you mean by "walmart" but i've been in a walmart several times, and for longer than 5 minutes, i didn't see whatever you might be alluding to.
Maybe my walmart is an outlier.
9:37 …okay I need context
Bioshock Infinity. I literally cannot go into much more detail without UA-cam bringing out the bat.
@@Airier It’s enough to start investigating, thanks XD
10:25 I'm pretty sure the VHS industry took a boom once people figured out. Hey we could film Our fun stuff at home, Or we could sell it?.
Same goes for DVD and most pre-digital p orn
9:50 there's a video disproving that, the real story is more interesting
What is he even talking about?
@cedricrobertson2893 Not Safe For Work animations, the "story" is that there were massive innovations because of BioShock Infinite. It's more complicated than that and was already making good progress before then
speaking of Walmart i got fired from there monday so yea btw that place is bs just order with amazon. is about the same.
Man that sucks. I'm' sorry
still waiting for him to react to Ithaca saga or am I dumb and I can’t find it. He still hasn’t no rush, but I’m just wondering.:3
I hope this story gets turned into a movie but it’s made by a director who doesn’t support Heinline
Like battlefield earth
7:48 Wasn't Reagan or Nixon one of those?
Sadly, I am not sure if this would be better or worse than a Christian version.
Hmm, sex and you would actually get powers, but Martians have to be fought.
Oh, I've been waiting for this
About notre dame de paris and microtransactions/donations…
All sacral buildings in france belong to the state not the church
So it’s the french government asking for donations to rebuild this cathedral, not the catholic church
Just food for thought
Oh gods this book XD
Ive been waiting for months now for you to react to the new helluva boss episode, when is it coming?😭
35:54
Yeah I read questionable comics with the fair amount of moments but just listening to what this book is about is making me feel a little dirty about it there's always one author that's easily a horrible(questionable) person Yet the books are known for reason or another😅
Does anybody know what Heinleins opinion on Charles Manson was???!
I am asexuell.... i wonder what he would say about that....
He’d probably just say ace people don’t “grok” sex and need to experience it from those who “grok” the universe.
I both want and dont want to read this Book.
On the one Hand it is interesting to see how our views on society and personal opinions differs/ stayd the same from a phase in time less than 100 years apart from ours.
On the other hand..It's his opinions are insufferable... i dont want to pay money for this..... he is dead right? Does his family still get shares from the profit?
He died in 1988. Almost all profits from modern sales go into a private trust he and his wife established.
That said, it should be quite easy to find the majority of his books in a library or secondhand bookstore. Or just, you know, yar har.
yeah I felt the same when I first heard Red's summary. I finally got it and yes, it's as cringey as you think and then some. But if you scrape that stuff off, you're left with a decent plotline (sorta) and some interesting ideas about science, religion, culture the times the book was written in. Read it at least once.
there's this new dougdoug video about geoguesser...
hey airier
are you going react to Helluva Boss season 2 episode 12?
can you reacts to How Do You KILL A Time Traveler next
Ah yes grok the elon ai
Heinlein, some great ideas, but also self insert writer and libertarian fascist. If you ask how: lack of self awareness.
By definition of both words, 'libertarian fascist' is an oxymoron and proves that you don't know what either of those ideologies actually are.
@@DaPikaGTM That is my point, he was a mess and clearly didn’t see the conflict in the values he endorsed , possibly due to a lack of self awareness.
@@DaPikaGTMDid you read the book? If so, remember the whole Fair Witness thing? A class of people whose word can be admitted in court as evidence instead of testimony because they would Never Ever Lie, because they are So Good, So Noble, So Whi-I mean Fair, that it's fair for them to be More Equal in the eyes of the law.
One of many examples of Libertarianism slipping into Fascism.
@@DaPikaGTMOr it means there's a bunch of people walking around claiming to be one thing but are actually another, either because they're lying or because they don't know what their beliefs actually mean in a political context. See: people who claim to support "small government" but support having the government decide what bathroom people use, who they can and can't marry based on their genitals, etc.
When sao abridged new episode reaction
This Guy react to Helluva boss the ultimate episode?? Sinmans out to 2 weekend ago and i want see your reaction
: -D
this Heinlein guy is almost lovecraft lvls of unlikable.
Note that this is probably one of the worst videos OSP ever made, Red gets facts in the book wrong constantly and fails to note any of the highly prominent sarcasm and satire in pretty much every single thing she outlines in this presentation. I'm pretty certain she hasn't actually read the book, yes it's that bad. The whole thing about mike owning mars and being super rich is a satire of the strange legalisms of the modern world and how nations treat legal claims to land rights inheritance and the like. This whole book is a satire and Red does both herself and it a catastrophic disservice here which I think resulted from her reading a plot outline and then jumping strait into making a video.
As someone who is very familiar with his work...no, this isn't satire. Much like Star Troopers, a lot of what's explicitly discussed by the characters are Heinlein's actual beliefs of what would make society more into a utopia. What bits you could argue are satirical are hard to parse from his true beliefs, which is a failing of the author.
Don Quixote I feel is a stronger satire. You can clearly tell what the author's actual thoughts are on stories of "chivalry" and "knighthood" through the humor, but also see it as a backdrop for the various plots we see throughout. I still think it's not as strong nowadays, but it's a better constructed satire than what Heinlein might've been going for, if that was his intent.
boy you weren't paying ANY attention were you? She DEFINITELY read the book. Do yourself a favor and look closely at the artwork, especially where she gets to the carnival and Patty. If YOU had read the book, you'd know what I mean. Don't criticize Red for not doing her homework, pal; you will lose the argument EVERY. TIME.
@DDlambchop43 "doing her homework" is exactly what it feels like she did, it doesn't feel like she 'groked' the book to steal a term she's got the outline not the meaning. I can get why she doesn't like a lot of the discourse in it, it's dated to say the least, but it feels like she didn't get that a lot of it is Heinlein either exploring moral fallacies that people assume due to their upbringing or just outright making fun of them.
For instance the whole cannibal thing, if you actually read that part of the book, it goes to great pains to explain that a person isn't automatically a monster for participating in that cultural practice, and that no one should claim to be inherently better than someone else for not having the same cultural practices and that all humans have cannibals in their ancestry somewhere, red chooses to leave all that information out and focus on the one off color comment about Duke's native American ancestry, which the narrative itself treats as something he should be proud of and also points out that any practice of cannibalism that might imply isn't actually special because all human lineages contain it.
Maybe she left out all the relevant information in that whole section of the book for the sake of brevity but frankly I'm being charitable here because she did take the time to point out the one part of it she didn't like and that looks bad while leaving out all the nuance and discussion around it which means she either saw one thing she didn't like, checked out and noted that down for later, or she did read and comprehend it all and then intentionally left out the nuance in order to slant the narrative in a direction she proffered because she doesn't like the book which is strait up disingenuous.
It's fine if she doesn't like the book, it's fine if she hates it, what I don't like is lying and half truths, which the video is full of.
I thought Heinlein was the father of satellite technology.