"This year we explored the failure of democracy, where the social scientists brought our world to the brink of chaos. We talked about the veterans, how they took control & imposed the stability which has lasted for generations since."
Starship Troopers is a cheeky inversion of Star Trek's post-currency, post-scarcity universe, one where wartime becomes further obsolete and diplomats are valorized over generals, and where social castes are non-existent. Instead, it imagines a post-democratic universe, where war is the only industry, conquest is the only culture, where jingoism is the common language, and where basic human rights, whether it be the right to vote or the right to procreate, are gatekept behind castes defined by one's usefulness to the totalitarian state, where the entire population is divided into civilians and citizens, and the only viable way to gain citizenship is by throwing one's bodily autonomy to the behest of the state:
"Rasczak: why are only citizens allowed to vote.
Rico: It's a reward. Something the federation gives you for doing federal service.
Rasczak: No. Something given has no value. When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force my friends is violence. The supreme authority by which all other authorities are derived."
Another quote pulled from the beginning of the movie: "Dizzy: My mother always told me that violence doesn't solve anything.
Rasczak: Really? I wonder what the city founders of Hiroshima would have to say about that.
Carmen: They wouldn't say anything. Hiroshima was destroyed.
Rasczak: Correct. Naked force has resolved more conflicts throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion, that violence doesn't solve anything, is wishful thinking at its worst. People who forget that always die."
I have no idea why I felt the need to add this quote because I'm just now realizing I have no commentary to add to it. It really speaks for itself. Rasczak is the embodiment of every hyper-nationalistic, militaristically cavalier conservative, as I've heard that very argument verbatim about Hiroshima at least half a dozen times. Rasczak is only slightly exaggerated in that he's so brazenly honest in his love of violence and nation state imperialism. It just blows my mind how badly misread this movie was upon release, because it has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face.
Also cheekily inverted is the character development of any movie in the vein of Born on the Fourth of July, in which a character is rapturously taken with blind nationalism through wartime propaganda, only to begin questioning their nationalism when confronted by the reality and horror of war. Rico's questioning phase doesn't come after his first experience in battle, but in the very beginning. He doesn't necessarily buy into the jingoism shoved down his throat through his education:
"Rasczak: Rico. What is the moral difference, if any, between a civilian and a citizen?
Rico: A citizen accepts personal responsibility for the safety and the body politic defending it with his life. A civilian does not.
Rasczak: The exact words of the textbook. But do you understand it? Do you believe it?
Johnny Rico: I don't know.
Jean Rasczak: No, of course you don't. I doubt anyone here would recognize civic virtue even if it reached up and bit you in the a**!"
Rather than beginning the story as an obedient little fascist who comes to question the state, Rico begins questioning the state and is unsure whether he believes in their dichotomy between civilian and citizenship, only to become a hardened, obedient little fascist as soon as he first encounters the horrors of war, a firmer believer in the obviously evil cause he's fighting for, a character arc I can't say I've experienced depicted through a main character very often. The only example that comes to mind is Bill Hader's Barry, which still doesn't fit, because Barry doesn't exactly become a believer in the state so much as he just finds fulfillment in being good at something (killing people). So if anybody has any other solid examples of an inverted character arc quite like this, please let me know, because I genuinely don't know if this has been done with the same intentionality anywhere else before or since.
Starship Troopers is a cheeky inversion of Star Trek's post-currency, post-scarcity universe, one where wartime becomes further obsolete and diplomats are valorized over generals, and where social castes are non-existent. Instead, it imagines a post-democratic universe, where war is the only industry, conquest is the only culture, where jingoism is the common language, and where basic human rights, whether it be the right to vote or the right to procreate, are gatekept behind castes defined by one's usefulness to the totalitarian state, where the entire population is divided into civilians and citizens, and the only viable way to gain citizenship is by throwing one's bodily autonomy to the behest of the state:
"Rasczak: why are only citizens allowed to vote.
Rico: It's a reward. Something the federation gives you for doing federal service.
Rasczak: No. Something given has no value. When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force my friends is violence. The supreme authority by which all other authorities are derived."
Another quote pulled from the beginning of the movie: "Dizzy: My mother always told me that violence doesn't solve anything.
Rasczak: Really? I wonder what the city founders of Hiroshima would have to say about that.
Carmen: They wouldn't say anything. Hiroshima was destroyed.
Rasczak: Correct. Naked force has resolved more conflicts throughout history than any other factor. The contrary opinion, that violence doesn't solve anything, is wishful thinking at its worst. People who forget that always die."
I have no idea why I felt the need to add this quote because I'm just now realizing I have no commentary to add to it. It really speaks for itself. Rasczak is the embodiment of every hyper-nationalistic, militaristically cavalier conservative, as I've heard that very argument verbatim about Hiroshima at least half a dozen times. Rasczak is only slightly exaggerated in that he's so brazenly honest in his love of violence and nation state imperialism. It just blows my mind how badly misread this movie was upon release, because it has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face.
Also cheekily inverted is the character development of any movie in the vein of Born on the Fourth of July, in which a character is rapturously taken with blind nationalism through wartime propaganda, only to begin questioning their nationalism when confronted by the reality and horror of war. Rico's questioning phase doesn't come after his first experience in battle, but in the very beginning. He doesn't necessarily buy into the jingoism shoved down his throat through his education:
"Rasczak: Rico. What is the moral difference, if any, between a civilian and a citizen?
Rico: A citizen accepts personal responsibility for the safety and the body politic defending it with his life. A civilian does not.
Rasczak: The exact words of the textbook. But do you understand it? Do you believe it?
Johnny Rico: I don't know.
Jean Rasczak: No, of course you don't. I doubt anyone here would recognize civic virtue even if it reached up and bit you in the a**!"
Rather than beginning the story as an obedient little fascist who comes to question the state, Rico begins questioning the state and is unsure whether he believes in their dichotomy between civilian and citizenship, only to become a hardened, obedient little fascist as soon as he first encounters the horrors of war, a firmer believer in the obviously evil cause he's fighting for, a character arc I can't say I've experienced depicted through a main character very often. The only example that comes to mind is Bill Hader's Barry, which still doesn't fit, because Barry doesn't exactly become a believer in the state so much as he just finds fulfillment in being good at something (killing people). So if anybody has any other solid examples of an inverted character arc quite like this, please let me know, because I genuinely don't know if this has been done with the same intentionality anywhere else before or since.