Topic: Book Reviews
Review: The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. A review of Heinlein's classic.by Michael Stahl
(Libertarian)
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Robert A. Heinlein to my knowledge never claimed to be a libertarian, and to be honest I suspect that the term was placed on him rather than being self-imposed. I am to be honest, a newcomer to Heinlein's work, but I liked it. The man is, or more accurately was, deep. All good science fiction writers share this trait I suppose, but for the most part the politics of science fiction tend to lean toward the socialistic, or progressive. Heinlein is no exception, despite his reputation, or his obvious brilliance.
The last sentence above was no mistake, Heinlein was no libertarian, he was more of a laudable cynic. His work in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress traces the building of a revolutionary movement on the Moon against the distant authority on Earth. The few original revolutionaries find a crucial ally in an all knowing super-computer, and with this aid not only build a movement, by whatever means necessary, but devise a plan to place Earth under military threat. The Moon ships grain to the Earth through a gravity system, a system that would be quite horrific should solid rock come down rather than tame grain shipments, hence the, effective, military threat.
So the Moon, through the leadership a a small group and the super-computer gains independence. Here is where the cynicism, and the brilliance comes in. Gradually, after the super-computer goes dead, the government that's established on the Moon, a locally represented one, begins insults to individual freedom and imposes itself upon the Lunar society in a way that the former authoritarian, but distant, control never could. The last passage has the hero contemplating a relocation to the less crowded, and less controlled, asteroids. To an extent this could be called the general pessimism that winds its way through libertarian thought, or it could be seen as a veiled attack on a dead end philosophy. I rather think the Heinlein meant it as a repudiation of libertarianism rather than a celebration of it, and the death of the super computer proves this. By installing such an entity Heinlein shows a distrust of the individual, but also a sad truth. Even so, to assume that a government, or even no government, will always devolve into tyranny makes the pursuit of libertarianism, or indeed individualism, a pointless folly at best, and a deadly treason at worst. I disagree with that premise, but the point is well made and hard to dispute.
That being said, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is a truly good, and thought provoking, read. Heinlein introduces the phrase "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch" or TANSTAAFL in this book, and for that, if nothing else, deserves praise. If you have not read it, pick it up, it will be worth every penny.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 1 thumb so far
2008 Michael Stahl, all rights reserved.
Published: Saturday, May 17, 2008
Last modified: Sunday, May 18, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of Michael Stahl only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Michael Stahl is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I always thought that the authoritarianism of the new Moon government was meant as an allegory for the U.S. government - beginning in liberty, by kicking out the foreign tyrant, and then becoming a worse native tyrant - only speeded up. It also reminded me of what was happening in a lot of African and Asian countries in the 60s, when TMIAHM was written, within a few years. So I didn't see it as a comment on the freedom philosophy at all, but on historical events.
Sure, it's historical, but also philosophical-governments, all governments, ultimately devolve, its the name of the game-the hopelessness struck me, as well as the hop that there will always be a frontier for flight from government. But perhaps it just suits me, like Claire Wolfe, "I don't do optimism"
Either way, from his other writings, I think he liked to poke holes in convention, any convention, a good practice, frankly. It's a great book from a great writer.
At any rate, I thought it would be an interesting topic line to start.
I have as far as I know read pretty much everything that Robert Heinlein ever wrote, in most cases multiple times. "The Moon" is actually my all-time favorite work by Heinlein.
I respectfully disagree with your conclusions; judging primarily from all of his works of fiction I think RAH was perhaps the epitome of a libertarian, adamantly opposed to tyranny in all forms, utterly comitted to the self-reliance and autonomy of the individual and to the ideals of freedom.
By the way, I also wrote in reference to his book here:
After you've read more of his writings, see if you don't come to the same conclusion (watching "Starship Troopers" on video does not count because the screenwriters departed pretty severely from the novel!)
I'm a Heinlein fiend! I've heard him called a fascist and just about everything else under the sun, however he did call himself a libertarian, a hard headed one at that. My all time favorite is "Time Enough for Love" which may be one the most lib leaning books I've ever read. He had a clear hatred of slavery, big government, and laws that govern non-violent personal behavior. He's a hero in my mind!
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 Michael Stahl, all rights reserved.