Starship Troopers: How to be a Leader ft. Jocko Willink
In this video we explore the classic film Starship Troopers and how it relates to Jocko Willink and his concept of Extreme Ownership. // PATREON: / storytellers1
Business Inquiries: lvdpstorytellers@gmail.com
In this video essay, we're taking a closer look at Robert A. Heinlein's cult-classic STARSHIP TROOPERS, why it has been understood by director Paul Verhoeven as well as by subsequent critics and youtubers, and how the political discussion surrounding it has obscured the true archetypal core of the story. With the help of ex-Navy Seal Commander Jocko Willink, I will argue that Heinlein principally wrote his military adventure to reacquaint readers to several age-old principles of leadership and personal responsibility.
0:00 Introduction
04:37 Principle #1 Extreme Ownership
08:35 Principle #2 Stay Humble
11:28 Principle #3 Discipline = Freedom
14:43 Conclusion
Get a free trial of the best music for your videos: share.mscbd.fm/storytellersyou...
Sources:
Robert A. Heinlein -- Starship Troopers
Jocko Willink & Leif Babin -- Extreme Ownership: How Navy Seals Lead and Win
Discipline = Freedom ( • Discipline = Freedom |... )
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.
Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
Hi everyone! It's been while, but we're finally back with a new video on one of my favorite cult-classics. New videos will be coming out more regularly again, but please do leave a like and/or a comment on this one to get the algorithm on our side again. Much appreciated. - Thomas
I agree with you, that responsibility, humility and discipline are essential values of any good human being. But, the problem I see is moral; I really can’t take as an example of a good person a soldier, because essentially a soldier is a murder, whatever the excuse he uses to justifies the murders. And that is the problem with the fascist/authoritarian society (in the movie, in the book or in reality). They don’t have a morality base on goodness, ethics and reason, they have a morality of strength. And in a society of strength doesn't matter who is right or wrong morally, only matters who has the biggest stick and can (and will) impose his point of view upon all others. Please don’t mistake the glorified image of soldiers with justice and integrity, war is the opposite of justice; is death, lies and horror. Especially if you are from the USA, don’t fool yourself thinking your country is right imposing war and terror on other countries, stop your government on spreading war and violence around the world, please. That is why I think, we need to work for a world without soldiers, without war and without authoritarian governments.
It MAY be a fine fun movie, what it has to do with the book, other than the title, is another story. Some books should never be made into movies. This is one of them.
You know what's strange? *When viewed from the lens of "leadership", Ace Levy is an important character.* Recognizing competent leadership and being humble enough to follow rather than to fight for leadership is what the other 85% of us have to do for the leaders to matter at all.
Would you ever do videos on the TV series supernatural 🤔🤨
Starship Troopers will always be a great movie. The sequels however can stay in the trashcan.
Traitor of Mars is pretty sick ngl.
# flexxarnnn Read The Book!
What sequels?
@@krishivagarwal5189 Exactly
@@krishivagarwal5189 you're in for a treat lmao. Look em all up on KZhead.
I don't mind that I liked it in my youth for the wrong reasons. But, nowadays, I like it more for new reasons.
It sends a chill down my spine realizing that Heinlein’s words mirror our world. Art imitates life, I guess.
"I doubt anyone here would recognize civic virtue even if it reached up and bit you in the ass."
"The difference lies in the field of civic virtue. A soldier accepts personal responsibility for the safety of the body politic of which he is a member, defending it, if need be, with his life. The civilian does not."
@@anticommunist5851 you got the quote wrong, soldier.
Max Johnson Book > Movie
Still an interesting film when the director chose to parody the militarism after seeing the horrors of WWII firsthand.
What’s more interesting is how he managed to accidentally make a great film nonetheless despite misunderstanding it
@@edmonddantes563 I read the book before I saw the movie. I think they both have a good message. I never saw Heinlein as purely fascist as a lot of people seem to receive his work, having said that, he def. wasn't the flower picking kind either. Maybe that's the sign of great work that both sides can find their narrative in it and thus it says more about the reader / watcher than it does about the creators ideas.
@@edmonddantes563 misunderstanding what?
A tale of two books: The Forever War vs Starship Troopers. Both are an interesting take on the war novel, if I recall Heinlein was a WW2 vet and I feel like those experiences would influence his attitude towards war and service. In my opinion nits an overall positive one. When I read Starship Troopers I wanted to join up in the mobile infantry it sounded bad ass. While as Joe Haldeman served in Vietnam which his experience can be felt in tbe characters reluctance to fight and a sort of chaotic and often brutal reduction in warfare. Both are fantastic novels and i would love to see a comparison between both.
I think the difference between the two books can be explained well with "The Bet War Ever" a look at how WWII was / is ingrained in the American cultural narrative: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Best_War_Ever Vietnam on the other hand was not a "noble" war and it had nothing it could pretend it was, even to the casual observer. I think this mostly explains why both books appear to be polar opposites.
My man is finally back! YEA!!
Awesome video essay! People looking to take charge in situations would actually learn a lot from this. Great job dude
Discipline GUARANTEES freedom. Would you like to know more?
The "extreme ownership" idea reminds me of Rule .303 (or at least Beau of the Fifth Column's interpretation of it...), that if you have the capability, you have the responsibility
As often as I come across comments referencing BOTFC I'd think he would have more subs.
Good to see you guys making videos again. I like how you appreciate the thumbnail more after you've seen the video 😆
My man! Good to see you again too
Back in 2018 I read the book, and the movie is merely a shadow of the book. The book as if it's peeking in the future, spoke on a whole new level to me. From now on, it's one of the top books in my library.
This was interesting! Looking forward for the upcoming content!
A fun mashup of story and Jocko. Love it!
Great to have you guys back!
Would you like to know more?
Let them rain boyo let them rain.
_How about a nice cup of Liberty!_
We get it u like jocko
Yo mate hope you are well. Just watched your essay on the movie prisoners. It was one of the best video essays I've ever seen.
Never read the book saw the movie later on but was first introduced to it by the show Rico's Roughnecks. ;)
The only thing the book and movie had in common was the title
And some characters' names
No. Several key scenes were quoted verbatim from the book. It's clear the writers loved the book and verhoven had no clue they were doing it. The lectures in high school presented Heinliens view of a constitutional republic with limited franchise based on service fairly.
That speaker is deeply unsettling when I hear him. That anger in the voice. That accusatory tone. That unflinching certainty. Yes. I do agree with a lot of the sentiments and arguments. That is beside my reaction to the delivery. And I think it is part of why Verhoeven were so appalled by the book. Why he hated it. The thing is, that at it's core. Starship Troopers depicts a fascist totalitarian government... that works. It's not a dystopia with rebels seeking to tear down the boot keeping people down. If anything. It's a Rodenberry level Utopia. For everyone in the system. It is a system where everyone has a shoe to fill and efforts are rewarded and security is enforced top down. That is the problem. It is too alluring. And you are meant to forget the alternatives. I remember listening to the first chapters of the book. That first drop. Where these ultraunits of soldiers level a city. Smashing through structures as alien civilians flee in terror. As they are not in the system. They are acceptable expenditures. And it's that blindness to alternatives that I think Paul rejects so vehimently. You get results by devoting yourself. Yes. But what are those results? He lived through Europe during WW2. He's seen both Nazi and Allied forces that inspired the book. And I'm not sure he prefers either of them. To me, Starship Troopers is a fascinating tale of a human becoming a soldier ant. I love the metalevel parody of Verhoeven's version. But I also want a non-parodic version. With the mech-suits, wanton genocide and all. I want essentially Band if Brothers in space, yes. We follow these true believers. But also are confronted with the horrors that these unstoppable marines have become. A great adaptation of the Heinlein book still needs that kind of distance. Because even if the characters don't question the lessons. The viewer should.
Verhoven want appalled at the book. He didn't read it. That's why the writers (who did read it and did like it) were able to quote *verbatim* several long segments from the book. Verhoven used fascist costumes but didn't portray a fascist society. Non citizens like Johnny's parents had wealth and freedom.
well done!
This is a crossover I did not see coming.
CAN'T. STOP. LIKING. VIDEO!!!!
I remember seeing this with friends and one of them not liking it because he didn't realize it was actually parody.
I low key thought Jocko was gonna be a guest narrator
Lmao, I wish
@@storytellers1 he probably would have done it
I think that calling it "Heinlein's ideal society" is a mistake. Heinlein didn't present it as ideal, but simply as one that - so far - worked better than its predecessors.
Damn, didn't know it was Heinlein, thanks.
It is, it's good. And it won't take that much of your time either.
Can you please do a review of some episodes of 101 Dalmation street, it highlights a lot about coming of age, leadership, and different personalities with in a family and how all that works. I would Love to see you do a video on the show please
Can't wait for this comment section to devolve into a shitshow about whether it's fascistic or not. You seem to have done a good job of a neutral overview of the conversation around it so props on that.
Yup lol. I blame Verhoeven
who cares if its fascist or not? an author was robbed of his creative vision and story by hollywood executives/directors. why isn't this the topic of criticism. how can the 'its fascist!' boogeyman have the spotlight without highlighting this more?
@@storytellers1 That's what happens when you don't read the damn book and there are this many definitions of fascism en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism. You could ask 24 different people and get 24 different definitions that may include all authoritarianism, all capitalist countries, the PRC and the USSR or may not include Italy and Spain.
@@storytellers1 Verhoeven was right to make fun of it
@@Diogenerate wah wah cry us a river. Heinlein was a loser
On the bounce Soldier
One of the best books I’ve ever read
Amen. Heinlein was correct.
This is fun :)
I'm not sure if it is, Derek. Not sure if it is, lol
Funny thing, is I like both the book and the movie.
same - it's like seeing two sides of the same story - both have something real to say
The movie, if for the wrong reasons, *is* decent satire of how fascism can be easy to swallow if presented well.
Cool
It’s about fucking time. 💎🙌🚀
What if there's a rebel in on of my troops? What should I do?
What a great way to come back! Great video and great message
Thanks a bunch person who named their taco!
@@storytellers1 they're lying, this video only proved that you're a simplistic dipshit who sources Jocko fucking Willink and Heinlein as supposed sources to build an "outlook" around. Literal r*tard type shit.
Band of Brothers also did this really well
I find it a bit odd that you mention Red Letter Media @2:20 for "attempting to correct the record by highlighting the movies intended but flawed critique of Heinlein's world view, and how and why this was originally misunderstood" when at no point in their _Starship Troopers_ Re:View episode did they argue or even mention this standpoint. They largely only discussed the film's parodization and satire of Fascism and fascist propaganda in general, compared the film to a _Star Trek_ episode, and discussed it's casting choice; set design; and special effects. They don't discuss the book or how the movie relates to it at all, nor do they comment if it successfully critiqued Heinlein's world view. The closest they get to this specific topic is mentioning that some critics panned the movie upon release after misinterpreting it as actual Fascist-propaganda. They however never in the video argued or discussed exactly _why_ this happened, nor did they argue or highlight that the film was a "flawed critique of Heinlein's world view". If anything, they seemed to support the notion that the film was a successful parody of Fascism in general, but they don't discuss if it successfully criticizes the book. I don't think that video really supported the point you were making at all, unless you were referring instead to some other RLM content outside that video and only used it as a backdrop. This isn't to say this necessarily contradicts your argument that Heinlein's novel has a leadership subtext underneath the more commonly discussed political ones, but I don't think anything in that particular video supports it.
I think I may have mixed RLM's review up a bit with Wiscrack's video!? In all honesty, I watched the RLM vid a long time ago, and thought that they talked about how it was misunderstood. Went back to rewatch it a bit and noticed that they do mention how Verhoeven tries to mock militarism/fascism etc. But you're right, they technically don't talk about how it was misunderstood. My bad
@@storytellers1 It's all good, just wanted to clarify things. Don't want to present a source inaccurately, even if it's used more as a passing example. Thanks for acknowledging the slip up.
There’s an RTS game of starship troopers soon to be released.
S O Y ?
Can You Talk About Kaitou Joker?
You should really do flags of our fathers Great War movie
Jocko’s type AAAAAAAAAAAAAA personality scares me.
I loved how the rifles had no sight system. Also l dont see how the book pushed fascism.
Why didn’t I get a notification of this????
jocko rocks
While Verhoeven ridiculed at war and warmongering, I always looked at Starship Troopers as an appreciation of the warrior. To me the political dimension of the film was secondary. I always liked it because it's a classic heroes journey.
I always thought that the film was ridiculing this journey. At the end, the gullible heroes chose to not question that they are in fact the invading force and embrace being Nazis.
@@jtorr2997 They may have been lead to believe in something that they wouldn't have otherwise. But right or wrong is only determined by whoever wins the moral argument in the end. And they believed what they where doing is right and they succeeded in their mission. That's where Verhoeven failed. As a storyteller, if you want to show that the heroes initial values are wrong, a inner shift in beliefs must occur somewhere at the end of the second act, or beginning of the third. The heroes actions must reflect the moral of the story. But the Troopers always believe bugs are bad fighting and is good. They never change that believe. Then they win. The end. So whatever ideals they abide by are good from a story perspective. Satire or not, if the storyteller wants to say that fascism is bad, then the hero must fail at fascism. Or at the very least fascism must lead to something bad. So the film poked fun at some Nazi ideology. But Verhoeven ultimately failed at showing us why fascism is bad.
@@clarkparker4860 There are many examples of films where evil wins. There are clues sprinkled throughout the film that point out that the bugs home planet was invaded by humans, and they were unable to orchestrate the destruction of Rico's home. It isn't a failure of writing that makes people cheer genocide. It's a failure to pay attention to nuances beyond the intentionally vapid surface. He uses the expectations of the hero's journey to make us reexamine who our heroes really are. Is the beautiful clean cut protagonist a bad guy? No way. Bug ugly, must be the bad guy? Whoever wins the moral argument is a lame way to defend closing your eyes to evil if evil wins. I think that's the point. Beautiful teens right out of Beverly Hills 90210 could never be evil if they've already deemed themselves moral.
@@jtorr2997 Well of course; you can absolutely draw parallels to the Hitler-Jugend. And the part where Doogie Howser proclaims that the brain bug is afraid and everybody cheers in excitement always left me with a uneasy feeling and empathy for the alien. I always appreciate a filmmaker being subtle rather than preachy. But I do disagree on Rico, Dizzy an Carmen, being absolute pawns. I was invested in their development as people. I think the movie shines most when it depicts the positive attributes of it's characters; having self discipline, courage in the face of danger, compassion for their brothers and sisters in arms. And Rico perseveres in the end because he applies the lessons, he learned the hard way throughout the film. I differentiate between what people like you and me deem as evil and what a storyteller can depict as evil through visual storytelling. I think Verhoeven makes a good case. But while I love the film, I don't think it's a satirical masterpiece by any stretch. After watching it I felt more like, taking charge, taking responsibility, being courageous is something that I aspire to do. I didn't feel like, "Nazis are really bad people." or "Damn! I need to do something about fascism asap." I don't think, as a storyteller, you have to be preachy and on the nose, but you should somewhat be capable of directing the viewers attention, on what is dear to your heart. But the movies reception was a clear indicator that he wasn't as precise in his storytelling as he'd wished. I think a shift in Rico's attitude somewhere down the line or a complete negative character arc would have been a better way to convey the underlining message.
@@clarkparker4860 The reason Rico didn't have a change of heart is that the film is a fictional propaganda piece produced by the fascist government in the film. Meta, huh? That's what's up with all the in-universe commercials.
i was waiting for the twist the entire runtime of the video...
I really like Jocko Willinck's idea of taking ownership over everything. I think it's important to do that and that helps you change what you actually can control. However, I think that sort of idea can also promote victim-blaming and that, to me, isn't a step forward. The reality is, certain circumstances do make life harder for people but that doesn't mean we should allow the victim mindset to affect our lives.
Well said. I imagine that is why Prager U had him on as well
Some of these comments are proving the point of the video if people actually read the starship Troopers book they would understand is not exactly a fasicist story
Lol favourite movie as a kid
seeing this movie back when i was kid didn't know what it is was about just watching it because soilder shooting bugs is cool XD, but this video give me a new perspective about how important discipline is, pretty nicely done dude
Come back :(
Damn 330k subscribers and less than 10k views. That ain't right.
thanks for clearing up some misconceptions about the book
I think he was accurate about the book, and Verhoeven was right to make fun of it.
@@jtorr2997 I support everyone who wants to make fun of stuff, the movie is great as its own separate thing, without it; I would have never tracked down the book
Nazis had also a very complex system of values, methods and views. Some of them may have even been beneficial. But it doesn’t even start to make it acceptable at its core. The point that Heinlein’s book has only 2 chapters dedicated to the politically tyrannical nature of this dystopia doesn’t change the fact that it’s tyrannical and unacceptable.
It's a constitutional republic (aka a democracy) with limited vote franchise available to all citizens. Many real world constitutional republics in the last 200 years have let fewer people vote.
My guy’s from Sveden, ya
This video was made on the path.
Jocko is not the most famous contemporary authority on leadership. Have you checked the academic texts? Or business texts?
It's not really your thing but breaking down Story by NF would be awesome.
Inspirational, timeless, and *based* on facts and supportive source material. You could do a couple more videos on the various different topics Heinlein touches on in his books, the man was basically a less mellow-dramatic Nostradamus, except his predictions are accurate. “Service men are not brighter than civilians. In many cases civilians are much more intelligent. That was the sliver of justification underlying the attempted coup d' etat just before the Treaty of New Delhi, the so-called 'Revolt of the Scientists': let the intelligent elite run things and you'll have utopia. It fell flat on its foolish face of course. Because the pursuit of science, despite its social benefits, is itself not a social virtue; its practitioners can be men so self-centered as to be lacking in social responsibility.” “This was the tragic fallacy which brought on the decadence and collapse of the democracies of the twentieth century; those noble experiments failed because the people had been led to believe that they could simply vote for whatever they wanted . . . and get it, without toil, without sweat, without tears.” "Ah yes, [life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness]... Life? What 'right' to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What 'right' to life has a man who must die to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of 'right'? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man's right is 'unalienable'? And is it 'right'? As to liberty, the heroes who signed the great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost. The third 'right'?-the 'pursuit of happiness'? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can 'pursue happiness' as long as my brain lives-but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can ensure that I will catch it."
I don't know what upsets me more; That the film is so badly misunderstood, or the book. Thank you for making an effort.
Verhoven tried to satire the book and he failed miserably. That's what's so great about it. He tried to claim fascism where there was none in the novel, and his movie ended up just being a good action movie that was truer to the book than he intended.
When I found out the truth behind Heinlein's Starship Troopers, I started disliking the movie because Verhoeven did such a disservice to Heinlein. Heinlein fought in WWII and hated fascism. His pro-military stance in the book was in response to the anti-militarism of the 1960s. Heinlein saw that military personnel returning from Vietnam were being horribly mistreated and spat on by the civilian populace, none of whom had any idea what the returning service members had gone through. Heinlein wanted to show the positive aspects of the military in Starship Troopers: discipline, courage, selflessness, honor, esprite de corps, etc.
If we're going to praise the concept of ownership as exemplified in the military, then we cannot place a soldier fighting a war outside of the context of the war they are fighting. If they are on the side of the aggressor, invading and seeking to dehumanize and humiliate an opposing force, then they must take ownership of that too. Too many war films focus on the individual heroics and camaraderie of fellow soldiers within the stance of 'isn't war hell'. Soldiers are in part victims of war, but narratives which focus on the virtues of discipline and ownership tend to shield soldiers from their own complicity. Misguided people are fed these narratives and fantasize about their own capacity for heroics. Even if the concept of extreme ownership is valuable, and can be demonstrated through inspiring instances in war, by divesting the themes of fascism from your arguments over ownership you have played into militaristic jingoism. The soldiers take ownership for each other's actions and welfare, but channel hate towards an outside force. Willing to use any means to defend their virtues, they forsake virtue. They seek to follow the examples of dead heroes without reflecting on their reasons, relying instead on emotion and slogans. Sure they take extreme ownership in some cases, but in others they are entirely willing to let other people do their thinking. Of course extreme ownership can be separated from fascism, and can help people grow, but not within the context of Starship Troopers. To me, that is the central error of this video.
The biggest problem with making media like that is that it puts a bad taste in the peoples’ mouth. I will first off say, you are absolutely correct, as a combat veteran it took seeing innocents burned alive in front of their children to fully understand it. The reality of war is horrible, but the idealization of “the fight worth fighting” is a mental propaganda that we have willingly took part in for centuries regardless of which side. That’s why WWII is idealized and memorialized in so many ways, it’s the closest we as people have come to fighting “true evil.” Nobody cares about the soldiers or their willingness to fight with the Nazi’s, they just care about what their flag idealized. A bigger group of people now are disenfranchised with the idea of war now that we have spent the last few decades playing wack-a-mole in the Middle East, but I really wish more people would really understand what you just said.
Hahaha Like the Film. Do get it wrong or is it actually that Bad? Is Prager U ment as a joke or seriously? I dont know!
There are a lot of intersting discussions to be had about discipline, leadership and motivation but Jocko seems to be really reductive. And using PragerU clips unironically and uncritically is laughable and a bad influence on people who don't know what PragerU is. Rule #1. If you want to be taken serious, don't use PragerU
This totalizing statement is the real irony.
Prageru is garbage on almost everything. However a video like this shows they can produce not useless content. Unfortunately it’s a video produced by a bunch of people completely incapable holding themselves to a most basic standard of journalism and political theory. My problem with guys like jocko and many more conservative service members. They hold a traditional idea of Society that they think would be best. Their ideas are almost always blinded by nostalgia for something that was never real. Conservatives love talking about personal responsibility but in reality they don’t care about it. When you talk about race relations in America, the US knowingly disabling governments for profits, and straight up genocides committed by they US. These people ignore shit like this. They aren’t patriots they are nationalists
@@oopsiepoopsie2898 You're essentially calling them hypocrites, but hypocrisy doesn't mean they're wrong, it means they lack virtue. You're implicitly agreeing with them (assuming YOUR totalizing statement is true).
It was nothing like the book.
Cool Another for my list! Second thought - hyper Individualism Piley Benton - choice reductionism Lucky black cat - radical responsibility
I think a better character for these lessons is commander Erwin
Not sure who that is!?
@@storytellers1 Attack on Titan. He's the only person that has ever made me feel patriotic about anything
@@LucasDimoveo Haven't watched it. I've only ever watched Studio Ghibli when it comes to anime. Suppose that's a recommendation then?
@@storytellers1 dear gods you have to! Go in without watching videos essays about it. No memes either. This is infinite video essay material
@@LucasDimoveo Roger that. Getting after it.
oh yeah, PragerU clips, those were the best parodies you showed.
Hello, How are you? I am under the water, please help me, here too much raining. huuuuuu...
Indian guy meme lol
Hmmm... I dunno if I can take the advice seriously of anyone who appears on praeger u.
This is great movie it shows how easy someone can use their on bias to see what the message of a creative art is... Is subjective sure but is important no than less.
is that a prageru video lmao
Jocko is almost as bad as Pager U.
Marty Moose 🙈🙉🤡
PragerU and Sargon, damn
@@anticommunist5851 What are you some 12 year old kid with racist parents that doesn't know any better?
Marty Moose 🙉🙈🙊
Why on earth would i want to integrate thoose principles in anyones lifes? What is this...
If you haven’t read the book, how can you form an opinion on the source material? Dutch Verhooven is a smoothbrain.
Nah, sorry, but you're way off the map on this. Not only has there been several academic discussions of the fascist themes and imagery of the book, but your counter-arguments to that are really bad. Anybody seriously citing Carl Benjamin on any topic just can't be taken seriously.
0:25 Elite?! Hardly! Their standard-issue weapon, the Morita, doesn't even have sights, and M.I. troopers are typically seen shooting from the hip even though it's a bullpup! Also, why do they use intermediate-caliber small arms against an enemy whose forces are made up of essentially biomechanoids? What they need is anti-material weaponry, which they only use when the plot calls for it. It should be standard-issue. 1:17 See? No sights. Utterly incompetent design. It's a Ruger AC556 (or Mini-14 converted to full-auto) in bullpup configuration spliced together with an underslung short-barrel Ithaca 37. Obviously, they were trying to outdo the M41A pulse rifle (itself inspired by the M-16/M-203 over-and-under combo) which was a Thompson M-1A1 spliced together with an underslung subcompact Remington 870 with a SPAS-12 forearm, the whole thing encased in an outer shell. It had a collapsible stock, but none of the actors actually used it (because movie people don't "get" firearms). 1:20 Verhoeven is a socialist. Heinlein was a nationalist. So of course, Verhoeven doesn't "get" Heinlein. Heinlein's ideals were both nationalist and libertarian. In other words, he was all about CIVIC nationalism. From his point of view, that was the best way to PREVENT totalitarianism. You know, because it gave The People the means to fight it. 6:38 Why would they say "oh" instead of "zero" or "aught?" 7:14 That sounds like collectivism to me. I thought Heinlein was against collectivism. Not in the way Ayn Rand was, though. 9:51 Notice how he gives that spiel while wearing a suit and tie, an outfit that you wouldn't wear while working in, say, a mattress factory or the sterile lab of an orthopedics plant. What irks me about people who think the way he does is that his ilk doesn't have a problem with the lowly peon being overworked and underpaid, forced to do the work of five people while getting paid less than $12 an hour (yes, even in an orthopedics plant). But you can bet he has friends and/or family members who have orthopedic implants that were likely made in a plant where the workers who make those things can't afford those implants. 10:29 Short period of time? Is 20 years a short period of time? That's how much of my life I wasted working high-stress, dead-end, poverty-wage jobs. Never got me anywhere. Not a single one of them was "cushy." They were all miserable and one of them even ruined my health in the form of brown lung. Something else that irks me about his ilk is that they assume that everyone else's experiences are the same, or should be the same, as theirs. *Note:* No one salutes with their left hand. 10:34 How far down does an individual have to be beaten, though? When is enough finally enough? How do we reconcile humility with dignity? The collectivist will always glorify humility while chastising dignity. The individualist will always exalt dignity while regarding humility with skepticism. Heinlein was somehow able to reconcile these concepts, though from his own perspective, he leaned more in the direction of anti-collectivism. *Note:* Assuming that humility is the negation of dignity, then how much of our dignity must be sacrifice in the name of "order" and "civilization?" Freedom takes priority over "order" in a free society, right? And is a civilization truly civilized if it strips the individual of dignity? 12:15 What purpose does a necktie serve in combat? The necktie is functionally useless and is purely symbolic. It symbolizes slavery. 12:57 Why not train them primarily in the use of weaponry that would actually be useful against the adversary they face? Like grenade launchers and payload rifles. 13:10 Except they never actually do that in the movies. They NEVER adapt! They continue to use their pissant intermediate-caliber rifles throughout all the movies! 13:24 That's one of the biggest gripes against the movie, and rightly so. Notice how they're all shooting from the hip with BULLPUP rifles that don't even have sights! 13:30 Poorly designed helmet. Ridiculous hoss of a combination gun. Incompetent weapon handling. 13:52 "The Marine Corps does not want robots. The Marine Corps wants killers. The Marine Corps wants to build indestructible men...men without fear." ~Private Joker 13:54 If it takes that many shots from that many rifles just to down one bug, then you need to rethink the logistics (and ergonomics) of your equipment. 14:12 If they'd had payload rifles or anti-material rifles handy, that stunt wouldn't have been necessary. Cool stunt, though. Kinda Wookiee-like. Jump on "the big tally-ho" and take it out with a mighty bang. That's good for cinematic effect, but makes no sense in terms of combat logistics. They should have at least one weapon per squad (I keep reiterating the payload rifle as an example) that can deal with that sort of thing. Or just replace ineffectual pissant assault rifles with payload rifles. Assault rifles in this world, and against this type of enemy, would only be useful as backup weapons (if that). 14:36 What about problems that are habitually created by OTHERS to the point that they become systemic? I'll give a simplistic, minor, and common example: clogging and plunging a toilet. If the same individual is constantly clogging a toilet and leaving it for some other individual to plunge, and it's always being plunged by the same person, then what you have is an unsustainable system (and possibly also a situation of enabling on the part of the toilet-plunging individual and barbaric parasitism on the part of the habitual toilet-clogger). No matter how much discipline the toilet-plunging person exhibits, it doesn't do anything to make the toilet-clogger more conscientious to fix the problem they habitually create. So why preach discipline to the one already showing it? Why not preach it where it's deficient? Most jobs are miserable, but they're made even more miserable when people are arbitrarily forced to do extra unpaid work because of problems created by others and always left for the same grunts to deal with. Dung rolls downhill. What do the high and mighty plan to do after they've drowned all of us expendable peons in their infectious waste? *Note:* What I'm getting at is basically this: Be wary of those who blame the individual for problems that are clearly systemic. They're most likely looking to use you as a scapegoat. Also, collectivism is the bane of humankind.
Ft. Jocko Willink? GOOD
people arguing over it having fascists neo conservatism, while sleeping on the fact the book is set in a universe riddled with Easter eggs that it is infact set in a universe where e nazis made it to Argentina and established an empire
What? Where in the book does it suggest that?
Did you just try to say Starship Troopers isn't fascist...and then explain fascism?!?
Ft. WHO??!!
Sees Jocko is a guest today *roger that*
The book and movie are so unique. In a way people calling it fascism are very wrong. In a way its considered the opposite. Instead of blaming others it inspires responsibility and in a world where everyone is united under one flag, it can be dream and good thing, whether it be under a militaristic society or not. That idea or uniting under one cause, one society, one world can be considered to be the future of even today's world. It is critical thinking and something worth talking about.
Amen.
Inspiring? Go into the military or you don’t get fundamental rights sounds more like blackmail. And they clearly blame the bugs for the war, while earthlings were the ones that invaded the bug planet in the first place. Uniting using the other as a scapegoat and making the annihilation of that other the common cause huh? Sounds familiar.
Ralph Lindsen Silence, movie watcher. It’s about parental/societal/cultural nurture vs human nature, you would know this if you read the book. “Service men are not brighter than civilians. In many cases civilians are much more intelligent. That was the sliver of justification underlying the attempted coup d' etat just before the Treaty of New Delhi, the so-called 'Revolt of the Scientists': let the intelligent elite run things and you'll have utopia. It fell flat on its foolish face of course. Because the pursuit of science, despite its social benefits, is itself not a social virtue; its practitioners can be men so self-centered as to be lacking in social responsibility.” "But if you want to serve and I can't talk you out of it, then we have to take you, because that's your constitutional right. It says that everybody, male or female, should have his born right to pay his service and assume full citizenship - but the facts are that we are getting hard pushed to find things for all the volunteers to do that aren't just glorified KP. You can't all be real military men; we don't need that many and most of the volunteers aren't number-one soldier material anyhow...[W]e've had to think up a whole list of dirty, nasty, dangerous jobs that will ... at the very least make them remember for the rest of their lives that their citizenship is valuable to them because they've paid a high price for it ... A term of service is ... either real military service, rough and dangerous even in peacetime ... or a most unreasonable facsimile thereof." Fleet SGT Ho, Pages 29-30, attempting to dissuade Juan Rico and Carl from enlisting.
Ralph Lindsen The ‘Bug Apologist’ defense was also deboonked by Sargon in his video titled “The Politics of Starship Troopers”. A video that youtube took down for their platform, you can find it elsewhere though. “Every time we killed a thousand Bugs at a cost of one M.I. it was a net victory for the Bugs. We were learning, expensively, just how efficient a total communism can be when used by a people actually adapted to it by evolution; the Bug commisars didn't care any more about expending soldiers than we cared about expending ammo. Perhaps we could have figured this out about the Bugs by noting the grief the Chinese Hegemony gave the Russo-Anglo-American Alliance; however the trouble with 'lessons from history' is that we usually read them best after falling flat on our chins.”
@@anticommunist5851 how is that not still blackmail? It is still the only way to citizenship. It’s ensuring that everyone who’s allowed by the military to vote, will be people they deem worthy of being allowed to vote. That is still their system. You don’t see a problem in that? Also i literally said my comment was based on the movie. Your book quote didn’t make change my mind, it made the world depicted seem even worse.
I see Ft. Jocko willink. I click the video. this book goes to reading list.
I love the movie but the book is way better
The book sucks.
@@nope5657 What chapter didn't you like?
"fascism făsh′ĭz″əm noun A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. Oppressive, dictatorial control. " No.. it was not fascist.
you're literally showing clips from prageru? I'm not sure how many layers of misunderstanding of fascist intent are going on here?
excellent excellent video, Starship Troopers the book is an example of a society with much to learn from on the low level. Although the top end is far too hawkish and bull-headed. But that's my highly opinionated take on it. When you notice the habits of people calling the movie fascist propaganda, completely missing the tinge of satire laden throughout the movie; their words speak of fear of standards. Not a fear of goose stepping.
I second your take. I think Verhoeven intuited the propagandistic element in Heinlein's story, but failed to really understand it and defaulted to a rather lazy verdict. I might make another video about the danger of identity/excessive masculinity sometime soon.
The greatest crossover.
Claims Verhoeven misunderstood Heinlein's book for being fascist - and then explains in detail and with glowing praise how the original story teaches fascism! (And for extra points repeatedly quotes Prager U to support his point that it is _not_ jingoistic, militaristic or fascist and most of all _not_ to view only through a political lense.) After years of subscriptions this is a hard unsubscribe.
I'm sorry to hear that, Martin. As I explain, this video is not intended as some sort of endorsement of Heinlein's Federation, and most certainly not as a political endorsement of Prager U (I could have picked other videos which explain some of Jocko's principles, but this one just happened to fit best with my video because it touched on the right principles in a concise manner). In fact, I think there are some serious blindspots in Heinlein's worldview, and he proposes some silly ideas in the book. Again, I'm not interested here in the whole debate about whether Verhoeven's movie and/or the book are fascist or not. It's been done to death already. All I am trying to argue here is that the book (not really the movie) is valuable in the way it introduces readers to certain tried and tested leadership principles, and that people seem to overlook that aspect. I'm not sure what is inherently fascistic about taking extreme ownership, staying humble, and realizing that discipline can help give you more freedom in life? Seems pretty uncontroversial and milquetoast to me. Lastly, I'd want to emphasize that I am not a fascist in the slightest, nor do I wish to promote in any way. I'm sorry if you felt like it came across that way. - Thomas
@@storytellers1 You say you didn't intend to promote fascism, but you failed to concern yourself withe the ways the film sought to condemn it. You chose to ignore the propaganda, the gullible nature of the protagonists, the mangled limbs of the authority. When you say "I'm not interested here in the whole debate about whether Verhoeven's movie and/or the book are fascist or not." Believe me, that's obvious. Very obvious and loud and clear.
@@storytellers1 I'm sorry to hear that, Thomas. I neither want to ascribe fascism or bad faith arguments to you you, nor call Heinlein personally a fascist. But it is the very fact that you call your video essay "uncontroversial" and "milquetoast" that only reinforces my initial reaction. It is the same claim as that of a privileged racist to be "colorblind". I believe you that you believe that - but that doesn't make it true. Your attempt to gloss over all of the deeply antidemocratic, militaristic, sexist and imperialistic ideas baked into the core of Heinlein's novel, and then use an author who built his carreer on imperialism and jingoism and a channel paid by - to be perfectly clear - people who are willing to sacrifice the future of humanity to further their own profit, to give it a presumably non-political spin and dress it up with some Peterson clean up your room lobster theory hogwash is both ignorant and disgusting. And yes, I do believe you did so _unaware_. But I am afraid, anyone _unaware_ of these facts at this point in history is either grossly negligent or at the very least does not want to look at reality because it is uncomfortable and he has the privilege to ignore it. If you want to see someone do this topic actually justice, maybe check out very much the less polished but infinitely more honest Kyle Kallgren's kzhead.info/sun/rJmbeLCqfnSLfqc/bejne.html
Came for the comments lol. Amazing video and great points. My favorite part is the neutrality and nuance which many people don't have in modern discourse.
being on the us military reading list just adds to the fact of it being jingoistic fashy nonsense. The pragerU and sargon inclusions were baffling for me as well.
Yeah. I mean, there good books on the military reading lists, like enders game, but Heinlein was a bit of a nutter.
Have you read it? There are definitely some controversial things in it and I some silly notions that I do not agree with, but as a coming of age story mixed with some timeless lessons on leadership and personal responsibility, it's quite good. Not sure why the pragerU and sargon inclusions were 'baffling'? There are many videos of Jocko explaining some of his principles, including the Tedtalk that I used. The PragerU video just so happened to encapsulate to three most important lessons from the book in a concise manner. This video is not meant as some sort of endorsement of whatever politics PragerU pushes. As for Sargon, his video is among the most watched videos on Starship Troopers. To omit it from my overview of the discussion would be to fail at my job. You're absolutely allowed to not like Starship Troopers, but I hope you understand that your criticism of what I decided to include in the video seems unwarranted
Oh yeah, can't include people you disagree with to show counter points. "Jingoisitic fashy nonsense". You sound like you have your own political biases anyway. I highly doubt you know what facism even is.
You are sadly a conditioned brainwashed sheep npc person if you think Sargon of Akkad is actually right wing. He’s more liberal than most self-described liberals, but you’re not going to agree with that statement if the extent of your political understanding only goes as far as those 4-grid ‘political compass’ charts.
They're only baffling if you think Sargon and PragerU are pro-fascist. They aren't. They frequently speak against the unchecked power of the State.
Unpopular opinion but the book was an utter bore. It was a treatise on why everyone should be in the military, and why the military knows better. It's hilariously off the deep end. In before all of the "you just didn't understand it" comments. You can understand something and still disagree with it, shocking idea for a lot of you.
Fair enough. I would similarly advice against embracing Starship Trooper's proposed worldview wholeheartedly as well. There is a certain propagandistic element to the story which Verhoeven might have intuited, but which he imo failed to fully grasp. I might make another video about that sometime soon. Regardless, I did enjoy the book quite a bit as a sci-fi military adventure tale and for its coming of age story. But yeah, you do need to take it with a grain of salt I'd say
You still don't understand it, though. It wasn't about the military. It was about how authority should never be divorced from responsibility. The military was just an easy way to illustrate that. I do agree that the novel wasn't the most engaging at times if you're just in it for the main story.
Just accept that there is only ONE Starship troopers movie. If you really need more content, play Starcraft.
Well done higher moral authority? From God?
To vote is an exercise of force. Force and violence have been the sources of authority since the first tribes picked up clubs and rocks to wage war. “To vote is to wield authority; it is the supreme authority from which all other authority derives-such as mine to make your lives miserable once a day. Force if you will!-the franchise is force, naked and raw, the Power of the Rods and the Ax. Whether it is exerted by ten men or by ten billion, political authority is force” Authority and power lie in the same part of your brain where people place their fears.
@@anticommunist5851 how does one man direct the direction on the individual votes
Just Click It And Watch Short answer: Propaganda and conditioning
@@anticommunist5851 makes sense
@@anticommunist5851 what do you stand for as a human?
Good book, good movie, good PragerU, good video!
Deep sigh at the dislikes, maybe it's cause I'm so soon 🤷🏻♂️. I have seen the weird people believing the actual parody, but you can't stop that kind of fragmentation. Not heinlein's fault, maybe V-hoovens fault.
Whatever Sargon of Akkad says, assume the opposite is true.