By Colby Cosh on 2.10.04 @ 12:06AM
A new look at the early Robert Heinlein: genre bender, Cold Warrior, monarchist -- and fellow traveler.
If you wish to trace the sources of the libertarian strain in
20th-century American thought, you must include the science fiction
author Robert A. Heinlein in your accounting of Hayeks, Menckens,
Rands, and Rothbards. He deserves no less, yet is not always found
in the ledger. Millions have been influenced by his anarchic
fantasies, his military and Second Amendment enthusiasms, and his
vision of a world ever oscillating between chaos and progress.
Called everything from fascist to pornographer in his time,
Heinlein is now recognizable as a particular sort of conservative,
one who would get along well with Thomas Jefferson, Mark Twain, and
Barry Goldwater. He was a man's man; a religious skeptic; an
agrarian sentimentalist heavily influenced by the frontier, or the
idea thereof; and a keen exponent of armed politeness, particularly
in foreign affairs. You can recognize this sort of fellow by asking
which side he would have taken in the Whiskey
Rebellion of 1794. RAH, certainly, would have picked up a
musket and joined the moonshiners.
Heinlein may be best known for the pulp novel (1959) that served
as the basis of Paul Verhoeven's movie Starship Troopers
(1997). This book was one of the great genre-benders of the
century. Throughout the 1950s Heinlein had been writing subversive,
experimental ruminations on politics disguised cleverly as
mass-market novels for young people.
Starship Troopers very visibly went Too Far. An
allegorical love letter to the U.S. Marines, it was a
blood-and-guts actioner envisioning a single world democracy in
which only military veterans and certain similar public servants
had the franchise. (Heinlein loved postulating alternatives to
universal suffrage, which he considered to be a dictatorship of
imbecility.) The novels that followed included some fine
quasi-Randian tracts, practically revolutionary handbooks. Later,
Heinlein's reach lengthened beyond his grasp, as he explored sex,
metaphysics, and time travel.
Throughout it all, the Navy veteran was publishing political
non-fiction too. There may have been fiercer Cold Warriors, but I
don't know of another one who had the sheer bottle to learn
conversational Russian, travel to the USSR, and come back with tales of
dead-eyed Intourist agents and squalid Moscow eateries.
SO IT IS OF some interest that Heinlein's first novel, For Us,
the Living: A Comedy of Customs, has now come to light.
Written in 1938-39, it has just been published by Heinlein's
estate. Its appearance raises a fascinating question: What was the
ultimate anti-government conservative thinking about during the
ultimate crisis of classical-liberal principles? The slightly
astonishing answer is: Social Credit.
For a citizen of the province of Alberta, like myself, this is
almost a cosmic joke. Social Credit was a monetary heresy devised in the 1920s by a
Scottish engineer named C.H. Douglas, who was vexed by the eternal
mystery of "poverty in the midst of plenty", and apparently deluded
by certain analogies between the money economy and an electrical
circuit.
Douglas theorized that capitalist societies suffered from a
constant leakage of wealth that left consumers perpetually short of
purchasing power and caused chronic and worsening "overproduction."
The villains were fractional-reserve banks. Douglas did not see why
private lenders should have the power to create money by, as he saw
it, mere fiat. He proposed to nationalize credit -- create a
savings account for every citizen, inject fresh money into it every
month or so, and offer loans to business willy-nilly at some low
rate tied to econometric statistics.
This madness found a rapt audience amidst certain parts of
Western society. Any economic sector deep in hock to the banks
could see the genius in nationalizing them. To anti-Semites,
Douglas's dislike for shadowy "financiers" was catnip. And
engineers were easily swayed by one who spoke their language --
which seems to have been Heinlein's vulnerability.
In For Us, The Living, Heinlein transports a young
naval officer Rip Van Winkle-fashion into the world of 2086, in
which the United States has gone SoCred. Everyone gets a share of
the new money created continually (but without inflation) by the
government, and no one works if he doesn't want to. Needless to
say, most citizens in this future are humble artisans living in a
continual creative rapture.
In the real world, advocates of Social Credit attained political
power in only one place: Alberta. This was thanks to a rotund,
bombastic radio evangelist and schoolteacher named William Aberhart, who popularized Douglas's
theories in the early 1930s using playlets and jokes. Alberta
farmers, suffering the torments of the Depression, caught Social
Credit like a fever. Aberhart was swept to power in 1935, and
clearly Heinlein had read some of the worldwide headlines that
followed.
ALAS, ABERHART DIDN'T really understand the nuances of Social
Credit, and as a provincial premier he had no constitutional
authority to coin money or found a bank. He invited Douglas to
Alberta to advise the new government, but Douglas informed the
cabinet-table yokels that they hadn't understood his books or a
damn thing else, and flew off in a Scotch pique.
Aberhart desperately tried several nostrums, including
the issuing of "Prosperity Certificates" -- inflationary scrip. The
Crown, the judiciary, and Ottawa disallowed this and most
everything else he attempted. Yet he left a long shadow: After he
died (1943), his party shucked the monetarist tomfoolery, became an
early-model conservative movement, and held power in the province
until 1971.
Social Credit had other celebrity adherents, notably Ezra Pound.
Until now, it was little suspected that Heinlein had been one. It
is impossible to imagine now how little confidence intellectual men
had in the future of the free market during the Depression. The
ultimate attraction of Social Credit was that it was a softer
answer than Marxism to the suicide of capitalism, which everyone
believed he was witnessing in the 1930s. One had no need to believe
in such hideous Red principles as factory-floor warfare and
collective farming. We just have to go after the banks -- and who
loves a bank? Heinlein must eventually have cottoned to the true
nature of credit creation (although, to be fair, it isn't just
cranks who find something sinister about fractional banking).
Heinlein fans will want to know how For Us, The Living
actually is as a novel. Answer: It's Heinlein -- preachy, prurient,
structurally clumsy, and still charming despite these flaws.
Reading it, at times I almost felt the adolescent thrill of
perusing a "new" Heinlein that foreshadows many of his later
obsessions. Most impressive, perhaps, is his conviction that rocket
power and a lunar expedition were in humanity's future. Remember
that R.H. Goddard was still a controversial figure in 1938,
and the first practical demonstration of long-range rocketry -- in
the form of Hitler's gruesome "revenge weapons" -- was years
away.
Yet prescient as he was, Heinlein's crystal ball had smudges. He
foresaw a European Union, but conceived it as a constitutional
monarchy, headed by the dethroned Duke of Windsor. His vision of
the Internet circa 2086 was a network of pneumatic tubes,
criss-crossing the continent, by which paper documents could be
sent quickly. This sort of thing is perhaps the real fun of For
Us, The Living: watching a great futurist explore a tomorrow
from which yesterday has already diverged.
topics:
Business, Sports, Books, Constitution, Law, Military, Russia, European Union