Why are so many sci-fi writers Libertarian minded?

[Devonai]

I think that a lot of libertarian sci-fi writers are attracted to the genre for the similarities to a libertarian lifestyle.  You can go anywhere you want, do anything you want with like-minded people, have an infinite amount of space to explore/exist in, and it may be difficult for anyone to police you (depending on the limitations of technology).

[Balog]

I think it's more interesting that so many of the most popular scifi series are socialist. Star Trek etc

[AJ Dual]

I think it's more interesting that so many of the most popular scifi series are socialist. Star Trek etc

I don't think it's so much as socialist, as capitalism is partially obsolete in the face of high technology, and the basics of life being unlimited and free. Instead of capital, people strive for self-improvement to gain influence and power in society, they become artists, scientists, athletes, explorers, Starfleet officers etc. It's a meritocracy instead, which is sort of a system we do have in parallel with capitalism today, where the most famous and influential are not necessarily the most wealthy, and vice-versa. Although there is a significant correlation, it's far from absolute.

Despite the Feringi (spelling?, You know, the "ear guys"), and other smugglers and whatnot as an example of "bad" laissez-faire capitalism, there is still "good" capitalism in Star Trek, it's just focused on what technology can't provide, original artworks, "authentic" hand-cooked gourmet food, real booze, antiquities etc. Business is also just largely in the background as it's not very interesting

[Silver Bullet]

guy named Saberhagen (sp?) wrote a short series about Berserkers trying to destroy all life.

I really liked the Berserker stories.

[Sergeant Bob]

guy named Saberhagen (sp?) wrote a short series about Berserkers trying to destroy all life.

I really liked the Berserker stories.

Thats Fred Saberhagen, goodlife.

[jselvy]

I think that the innate freedom of movement attracts many writers to the libertarian mindset.
A highly restrictive government may hamper your plot development later and internal inconsistency is the bans of SciFi.

Jefferson

[Firethorn]

I think that the innate freedom of movement attracts many writers to the libertarian mindset.
A highly restrictive government may hamper your plot development later and internal inconsistency is the bans of SciFi.

Jefferson

There's a lot of sci-fi that feature said restrictive governments; it promptly becomes one of the main adversaries in most cases.  Firefly/Serenity, the Dorsai series, the People's Repubic of Haven in the Honorverse, etc...

[roo_ster]

I think it's more interesting that so many of the most popular scifi series are socialist. Star Trek etc

I don't think it's so much as socialist, as capitalism is partially obsolete in the face of high technology, and the basics of life being unlimited and free. Instead of capital, people strive for self-improvement to gain influence and power in society, they become artists, scientists, athletes, explorers, Starfleet officers etc. It's a meritocracy instead, which is sort of a system we do have in parallel with capitalism today, where the most famous and influential are not necessarily the most wealthy, and vice-versa. Although there is a significant correlation, it's far from absolute.

AJ:

Sorry, I don't buy that for one minute.

Take a look at America's "underclass."  They have more leisure time, better healthcare, more food, and thousands of amenities that did not exist among the richest humans on the planet 100 years in the past.  Yet, the market economy is still with us and it provides us with all we need and most of what we want.

Because it is not the nature of the market economy that is the central issue, but human nature.  "A luxury once tasted soon becomes a necessity."  Truly, it doesn't have to be tasted or seen.  It only has to be known to exist for someone without it to covet it and resent those who have the means to obtain it.

Until we become gods and change the fundamental nature of humans, the market economy will best serve humanity to motivate useful activity, distribute what is produced, and foster innovation.

[Silver Bullet]

It only has to be known to exist for someone without it to covet it and resent those who have the means to obtain it.

That's why I never mention how many DVD sets of Firefly I own.

(Wait ... did I say that out loud ?  On the Internet ?)   

[MechAg94]

Yes, basic human nature is that man has a tendency to be soft and lazy if he has no needs to fill.  Not everyone is a self starter or interested in self improvement.  If they have no money on Star Trek, why would someone want work as a bartender or steward? 

[AJ Dual]

AJ:

Sorry, I don't buy that for one minute.

Take a look at America's "underclass."  They have more leisure time, better healthcare, more food, and thousands of amenities that did not exist among the richest humans on the planet 100 years in the past.  Yet, the market economy is still with us and it provides us with all we need and most of what we want.

Because it is not the nature of the market economy that is the central issue, but human nature.  "A luxury once tasted soon becomes a necessity."  Truly, it doesn't have to be tasted or seen.  It only has to be known to exist for someone without it to covet it and resent those who have the means to obtain it.

Until we become gods and change the fundamental nature of humans, the market economy will best serve humanity to motivate useful activity, distribute what is produced, and foster innovation.

I don't dispute that for a minute. If anything, an even higher tech future will make more and more of the world a  "luxury" ghetto, more like Neal Stephenson, or Frederick Pohl's works... I was just relating what the writers of Star Trek thought. Human nature being what it is, I don't see the influential, creative, hard-working, "mover and shaker" percentages changing much, if not getting worse.