All Episodes
Previous Next
March 29, 2024 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
09:48
Helldivers 2 vs Starship Troopers

These political systems are actually not the same. My Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/sargon_of_akkad100

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I am really enjoying Helldivers 2.
The gameplay, the aesthetic, and the attitude of the developers towards their own property are all just superb.
I literally have no criticisms.
What's interesting is that a lot of people, presumably inspired by the nature of Helldivers, decided to watch or re-watch my video, The Politics of Starship Troopers, and it got me thinking about the difference between the two political systems in each universe.
On the surface, these universes seem pretty similar and appear to have the same political message, but underneath the apparently convergent styles, there is a divergent interpretation of key philosophical values, which underpins a significant difference in outcome.
As you may recall, the Citizens Federation of Starship Troopers is a libertarian paradise.
It has a highly restricted franchise which must be earned over a period of two years, from which point one earns their citizenship and is free to take part in the democratic process.
There is no suggestion of any kind of political interference in Heinlein's or Verhoeven's presentation of the Federation.
In fact, it almost seems to be excessively open.
The propaganda regularly presents live footage of war zones and public executions are broadcast.
It seems that the Federation has a transparent culture, in which the public is able to access almost any information that it wants.
We are never shown that the Federation engages in deceit, nor does it shy away from owning up to its own mistakes.
If a Sky Marshal makes a terrible blunder, they are forced to resign.
This allows a prosperous civil society to exist through what Austrian economist and probable vampire Joseph Schumpeter would have called creative destruction.
The state has virtually no interference in what private business does outside of essential regulation and law enforcement and civil society is essentially left to its own devices to pursue a rather Protestant interpretation of happiness through hard work.
This is an idealized view in which the democratic franchise is extended only to those who have shown dedication in service, on the understanding that this will be a self-selecting process which will raise up the responsible and law-abiding through perseverance and grit to appropriate positions of power.
It is broadly utopian in that it assumes solutions to the problems that would arise from such an arrangement and we are never shown the downsides to it.
They must of course exist and Heinlein concedes this, but the restricted system of the Federation would, he concludes, still be the best system that we would have available to guarantee this stripped down, negative version of freedom.
In this interpretation, freedom means freedom from state coercion.
Heinlein's Federation doesn't appear to be expansionist.
When the Mormon colonists wish to settle in the exclusion zone, the Federation warns against it but doesn't have the authority to stop them.
It doesn't seem to actively seek to gain territory.
This is not, however, the kind of democracy or interpretation of freedom that is presented to us in the Helldivers universe.
Theirs is a decidedly positive interpretation of freedom and democracy, which means, in many cases, unfreedom and undemocracy, and therefore they caveat this to explain the difference.
This is managed democracy.
The encyclopedia for the first Helldivers game explains why this is.
Mankind has improved upon the old concept of democracy.
Utilizing computer-aided voting software, citizens are asked to answer several questions and the outcome of the vote is decided upon by the computer.
This removes the uncertainty that existed in the old systems, where voters didn't understand fully what they were voting for, giving us managed democracy.
Moreover, we are told in Helldivers 2 that algorithms determine the candidates who are chosen.
We are not shown the process of who gets to be a prospective candidate.
We certainly don't get the impression that any of the candidates will be instrumental in forming policy.
We certainly know nothing of the labyrinthine bureaucracy that lurks behind the democratic facade.
There is a drive that underpins this, of bringing into being a certain way of life that ought to be created, that ought to be upheld, and that ought to be expanded through the universe.
And so we see Super Earth colonizing new planets and conquering rival civilizations on their crusade to spread managed democracy.
And we do see many instances of the managed democracy putting hard limits on the liberty of the citizens themselves to ensure the constancy of this political order.
Narrative control is a primary concern of whoever runs the managed democracy.
One mission the players may undertake is to shut down dissident broadcasts, and the player is regularly informed by the NPCs that speaking against managed democracy is some kind of heretical wrongthink, and they can be punished in many ways, such as having various liberties restricted, such as the ability to marry, have children, or even have sex.
There are dissident broadcasts that imply that a kind of super-earth truther movement exists in Helldivers, something that is notably absent in Starship Troopers, and the game itself seems to legitimate these concerns, as we are given multiple indications that, in fact, there are things that are omitted from the official narrative of events, where that is, they are not simply replaced outright with lies.
It is not that prosperity cannot be achieved under managed democracy.
Indeed, we are shown lovely suburbs in which the citizens live, but this is achieved in a different way to the prosperity of the Federation.
It requires censorship, rationing of goods, and strict controls on personal behaviour.
This kind of freedom is of a very narrow and fragile kind, in which the controllers of Super Earth, the Democratic Council, whoever they are, must watch the actions of the citizenry with extreme diligence, unlike the robustness of Heinlein's Federation, which doesn't resort to such measures, because moral authority is invested in the citizens themselves rather than with the state.
As I said, Heinlein's Federation would doubtless have many problems that we aren't shown.
We don't know what happens to people who are poor or infirm or have fallen on hard times.
We are only shown the prosperous society, and so in this way it is an optimistic and utopian interpretation.
And this is in sharp contrast to the more gritty dystopia we are shown in Helldivers, where people are actually not free in many different ways, and armed soldiers casually march through the streets.
Heinlein's Federation and Helldivers Managed Democracy are two opposite approaches to the same materialistic goal.
It is desirable to have security and prosperity, and one attempts to achieve this by exclusivity and the other by inclusivity.
The Federation is explicitly exclusive and does all it can to keep people outside of the power structure and in civilian life.
By contrast, Super Earth is highly inclusive, and all of its actions are an attempt to homogenize the vast population within the bounds of its imperium.
The key difference is how each deals with dissent.
The Federation appears to have unlimited free speech, whereas Super Earth operates a Ministry of Truth which kills dissidents for the crime of merely disagreeing with the dictates of the Democratic Council.
Put simply, in Starship Troopers, you are fighting for Space America.
In Helldivers 2, you are fighting for the Space European Union.
Practically, I would say that Helldivers is probably a more realistic portrayal of what we are actually likely to receive.
I'm obviously personally drawn to the negative view of freedom that is displayed in Starship Troopers, but it seems to me that too much moral fortitude would be required to uphold it.
And I think it's actually a lot more realistic to expect the creeping triumph of a vast and slimy managerial bureaucracy which propagandizes its citizenry, silences its critics, and perpetuates a web of lies to be more in keeping with what our future holds.
But I want to make it clear that none of these points are a criticism of Helldivers 2.
I think it represents a brilliantly realized futuristic dystopia, and the game itself is just fantastic.
And if you'd like to come and join me while I play it, I'll leave a link to my Twitch channel in the description here, where I often play Helldivers 2 and various other games, and sometimes my mum joins me, which is always great.
I didn't expect her to really enjoy this as well, but she loves it.
Anyway, I'll see you over there.
I love the special effects in this game.
Thanks.
Oh, it's brilliant.
Killed by Bernard.
Dang!
As much as I love the flame promo, it is so easy to get killed by Bernie.
It is.
▲
Export Selection