|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 23, 2023 9:35:00 GMT -8
Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke 1953 Not being a SciFi fan, I had never heard of Clarke’s “Childhood’s End” until about 11 days ago. Intrigued by what I heard, I checked the book out last Saturday, or Sunday, and started reading. Let me immediately say that I wish I had heard of this book many years ago. It is an excellent exposition of leftist-globalist-humanism-materialist dreams, hates, desires, and lays out something of a blueprint as to how they want to change the world to fit within their desired parameters. Although I will write briefly about the story, my main stress will be to review, not so much the book, but what the book says about Arthur C. Clarke, a perverted-pedophile progressive and by extension others like him today. In doing this, I will freely quote from the book, and when necessary give some context to the quote. The book opens with preparations by both the Soviets and Americans to be the first in space. As was the actual case, both programs are dependent on German scientists. Before either countries are able to get a ship into space, a number of huge alien space ships turn up over the major cities across the world. The book then fast fowards a few years and it is clear these aliens, called Overlords, are in complete control of the world. They appear to be benign and do not interfere in the day-to-day affairs of the world. The only person they communicate with is Rikki Stromgren, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. He is wooshed up to the mother ship for regular meetings with the head Overlord, whose name was Karellen. Overlords is a not-too-subtle name to give these aliens and, failing alien rulers, one can imagine Clarke yearning for their analogue among humanity. We need Overlords to get us in line. One smells authoritarian in even the written presence of Clarke.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 23, 2023 19:51:49 GMT -8
In an early scene, a religious leader, Wainwright, questions the wisdom and rightness of a world Federation. Stromgren, self-regarding and self-righteous prig that he is, responds with the answer that the Overlords are simply finishing the work man had begun with things like the Federation of Europe. Wainwright says that Europe was a cultural entity and the world is not, a big difference. Stromgren responds
Wainwright doesn't necessarily disagree with the objective but says
Stromgren thought;
One sees here that Stromgren places his trust in aliens who he answers to and couldn't care less about what the plebs think. The elite are right and the rest must step in line. Does anyone doubt that today's progressives would be different?
Then the following interchange takes place.
In this short exchange one can see typical progressive projection. They accuse others of bringing everything down to religion, but it is in fact they that do this. Their religion in materialism, scientism, the worship of themselves. For someone else to think differently is crude. It is odd that the idea of a person wanting to be free, is a negative to Stromgren and is automatically associated with religion, which he clearly despises. Sounds like many leftists of today.
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 23, 2023 20:08:26 GMT -8
It is an excellent exposition of leftist-globalist-humanism-materialist dreams, hates, desires, and lays out something of a blueprint as to how they want to change the world to fit within their desired parameters. Clark is writing in the 1950s. yes, he is a typical liberal of the post war type. However, this should not exempt you from enjoying the story. Clark takes on a lot of modern and not so modern culture. His biggest is the concept of organized religion of all persuasions. Childhood's End speculates the coming of extra terrestrial life, and a higher civilization watching over the universe. For this book and many others of the same type, I suggest you suspend suspicion of political agenda and just enjoy a story that is well told. Like almost all of Clark's work there is a unique twist. The story for the 1950s is surprisingly up to date. Most of his novels and short stories have worn well over the last half century. |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 23, 2023 20:33:09 GMT -8
I enjoyed the book, although I did not find it top-notch. One thing I found interesting was the fact that Clarke was criticizing the world's religions, with Buddhism being the least objectionable, but he was clearly looking for religion himself. The whole paranormal thing, and the Overmind, are clear signs of this. Sometimes, I find progressives tiresomely self-contradicting.
I guess I am also at the age where I don't want to have leftist politics preached to me from a book of science fiction. In fact, regardless of age, I have never much wanted politics fed to me by some leftist scribbler of fiction. I certainly don't want to support such authors. But Clarke is long dead and I didn't pay for the book, so I was happy to read it.
I will say this in Clarke's favor, he was very open and clear about his bias and wishes for the world. He laid out, in 1953, what had then already been in the mix for decades and has almost come to complete fruition today. He didn't hide it.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 24, 2023 7:25:50 GMT -8
But like today's dishonest leftists, he pulls out a group of Quisling religious leaders to claim that Karellen's policies are just find. He says:
Wainwright doesn't take the bait and replies.
Sounds like the Catholic Church under Pope Francis and other main-stream Protestant Churches today. Corrupt clerics have always been with us and always will be.
And when Wainwright points out that no human, including Stromgren, has ever seen Karellen thus it is not surprising that they doubt his motives, Stromgren replies:
Typical leftist. We are doing what's best for you. Don't question our motives. Sit down and shut up.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 24, 2023 7:52:49 GMT -8
When Karellen finally decides to address humanity, by radio, Clarke describes it as:
This is how our elites picture themselves. Geniuses with absolute mastery of human affairs, unlike the plebs.
At the conclusion of the speech Clarke states:
There you have it again. Sit down and shut up you clods.
Clarke is not without a sense of humor which is a poke in the eye for whites and Christians. One example is how he describes "poisonous" racial problems in South Africa. Karellen warns the South Africans to get their act together, and when they don't, he gives them a warning by cutting off the sun to South Africa. The South Africans got the message.
Maybe he just wanted to indicate that the tables could be turned on the race which ruled South Africa in 1953.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 24, 2023 19:15:59 GMT -8
I read this probably 40 years ago. I'll have to revisit it.
I sort of put him in with the Gene Roddenberry sort of "Big, Fluffy Dream" liberal. Their visions are positive. They don't deal (usually) with the inherent downsides of reaching for Utopia. In literature, you can make wishes come true easily though. And usually only in literature.
Those on the Left are divided between wanting a benign dictator and one who aren't too picky. But both desire total order and authoritarian rule.
You can see Greta Thunberg elbowing her way to the head of the line to talk to the Secular Savior, Mr. Head Alien.
Religion really bugs them because it is an impediment to their lofty, centrally-controlled plans. People giving a higher allegiance to something other than government is the worst sort of person, in their view. It's de facto mental illness, to their way of thinking.
Good point.
That's why I've come off science fiction since about the 80's.
Yep. Could an alien species run our affairs better than we do? Possibly. But unless those aliens are angels, all the dynamics of absolute power come into play.
The general Roddenberry/Clarke belief is that technology will cause man to rise above his savage self. To some extent, this has been true. But given that no single person is able to undertake these vast, forward-looking, highly technological projects presented in sci-fi, that leaves either government or big business in control to build the technological utopia. And from our own experience, we can see that Big Tech can be even worse than Big Government. An honest and detailed dealing with these devlish details might make for great sci-fi instead of just yet another utopian novel for fuzzy idealists.
Our Industrial Era is just a relative blink of the eye in the history of man. We can't possibly judge where things are going. And I hold no grudge regarding the what-ifs that sci-fi writers engage in (provided it isn't "woke" or based on "climate change").
But I think it's just better writing to deal with the devil in some of these utopian details. Most sci-fi is hyperbolic. It's either heaven or hell. Either it's a big technological utopia or it's the entire universe fighting each other. I enjoy stories with a much bigger infusion of common sense. A story is more interesting and real if you get the small things right...such as showing the pitfalls of any utopian scheme.
The first Star Trek series didn't wallpaper over the problems. But it did accept earth (a rarely visited subject) as having overcome its wars and being prosperous, at peace, and unified. Now all the problems were external. Klingons, etc.
But that's a lot to take as a given. Could the earth ever be at peace, prosperous, and unified unless it was some kind of glorified concentration camp with 4k TV? I'm not sure. I doubt it.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 24, 2023 20:16:07 GMT -8
In a perfect world, I could just roll my eyes and move on. And sometimes I do if the idiocies are an anomaly rather than the main course.
Childhood's End was (if memory serves...and judging from Mr. Flu's refresh) a much more political book. But many of Clarke's books, such as The Fountains of Paradise, were tech-oriented books with some skulduggery mixed in just to provide some kind of human story. But in that book, the human conflict is clearly just an add-on. The main star is the space elevator.
Hardly a year goes by, if not a fortnight, that some new miraculous piece of tech is launched in the world. I'm not sure the tech-oriented what-if sci-fi novels can hold a modern audience the way they used to. Real, not imagined, tech miracles are moving so fast.
None of them yet give us light speed, anti-gravity, or a myriad of other things. But regarding computers and automation, none of the sci-fi readers ever hit the nail on the head. Consider that Bill Gate's famous book didn't even foretell the internet.
Any what-if thinking is further constrained by the mainstreaming of idiocy. Writers now pick the low-hanging fruit of environmental disasters more often than not. I do wish someone was writing good sci-fi. But those indoctrinated into Leftism have lost two primary ingredients needed for good fiction: Imagination and objectivity.
All art is suffering right now because of Leftism. Going back and reading the old books is the only way to go. But as Mr. Kung has found out (not really news to him, surely), is how far back this Leftist garbage reaches. And the definition of that reach would be "When wished-for political ideas become such necessities that the real world gets pushed aside."
Clarke was obviously guilty of this in at least one of his book. But I don't think most of his books pushed the political necessities of Utopian Leftism to the expense of other aspects, including realism. His type was generally called "hard science fiction" for a reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 25, 2023 11:00:42 GMT -8
Your memory serves you well. It is an extremely political book and it lays out the progressive program in a concise format for all to see.
This program goes back to, at the very latest, to the French Revolution. During that period, at one time or another, all the scum, filth, excreta and perversions of mankind escaped from their crevices, dark corners and sewers, floating on a wave of human madness, thus bringing multiple calamities upon mankind. Clarke just tries to make this sound nicer than it is.
This being the case, I will continue posting various quotes from "Childhood's End" and commenting thereon.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 25, 2023 12:25:55 GMT -8
Only mass murder has even the thinnest chance to eradicate all the humans who will spoil the cherished dreams of the Utopianists.
We can argue about the dumbest thing ever spoken by a Progressive but probably the dumbest is: I believe people are basically good.
I believe that about 15% of the people are basically good. 60% will be good enough if society places some guardrails on behavior. The other 25% are incorrigible and only kept from ransacking society by those guardrails.
And those percentages are probably generous. The problem with Utopia is that embedded in human nature is the propensity to cheat, steal, lie, and have someone else do your work for you. That is, instead of producing, most people will easily and quickly become moochers if that route is open to them.
Capitalism isn't good because it's productive. It's good because it provides the main mechanism to reward productive behavior and punish sloth (or at least not reward it).
You can draw up all kinds of plans for your Perfect Society. But you'll end up killing a significant percentage of your population in order to try to eradicate the "subversives." Aside from saints, nearly all humans are subversive to Utopian plans for the reasons stated above as well as because of the desire by the generally good people to be left alone to run their own lives and profit from their labors.
I would respect a novelist if he or she honestly dealt with these issues instead of side-stepping them with lofty talk and naive, non-specific idealism.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 25, 2023 13:13:11 GMT -8
The only other Clarke book I have read is "Rendezvous with Rama," and it was almost completely built around tech. I do not recall anything political about it.
Another maxim from Kung:
In other words, the people who become CEO, President, Senator and such are those who are the most immoral, greedy and power hungry. They are bad people and those of us with good sense should never raise them as aspirational examples. Unfortunately, it is a fact of life that these people do reach the top and we must negotiate the minefield of life with them in power.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 25, 2023 14:35:29 GMT -8
Maybe they aren't all bad. But most of them are untrustworthy.
One of the most difficult traits to develop is sniffing out the bullshit artists. But, usually, if the bullshit aligns with our worldview, or the bullshitter hates all the things we do, that detector goes on the fritz.
If people would just apply a modicum of skepticism to leaders in all areas, we'd be better off. But like I said once, I was flabbergasted several years ago when making this point about our political leaders on Facebook. And some idiot chick (it almost always is) was offended by the idea that we shouldn't trust our leaders.
And so we have Biden. And I know one big reason why. And as we all know here, the main problem with Utopianism isn't chasing some nice vision of the future. The problem is that at least half the people who get involved with these authoritarian projects have payback in mind and they simply use this as a vehicle to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 25, 2023 19:25:13 GMT -8
After some years, many people are growing more suspicious of Karellen's lack of openess. Stromgren points this out fairly emphatically to Karellen who replies thus:
Perhaps Clarke is simply being a smartass and rubbing European noses in their sins of colonialism. Regardless, those on trial in Nuremberg used a similar excuse-I was just following orders.
During the same meeting, Stromgren stresses that Wainwright, and his supporters lack of trust in Karellen, is not surprising given Karellen's lack of transparency. To this Karellen states:
Once again, the rubes are afraid of "reason and science," but the Overlords apparently have full faith in them. Note the word, faith.
Karellen's point about nobody disproving the existence of Zeus and Thor is disingenuous. It wasn't the disbelief in their existence which brought about the decline in the number of their followers. It was belief in a new faith, i.e. Christianity.
Karellen's point "all the world's religions cannot be right, and they know it" is a strange argument as this is exactly what believers in various religions also believe. Many Christians believe other religions are false. The same goes for Islam. Hinduism also holds other religions as a misunderstanding. Orthodox Judaism certainly holds Christianity to be false.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 25, 2023 20:12:50 GMT -8
Clarke writes:
Wow! Mankind didn't have to fear each other, because a power significantly more powerful than all of those on earth kept them in order. It doesn't seem to occur to Clarke that mankind had a lot more to fear from the Overlords than each other, simply due to the difference in the levels of power. Is Clarke obtuse or dishonest here?
After a few years of Overlord rule, Stromgren muses:
Cattle in a feedlot are, no doubt, pleased that they are being regularly fed and cared for. Would they like to be released into the wild after being raised in a pen? Clarke's again being dishonest or obtuse.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 26, 2023 9:21:20 GMT -8
I have talked with Christians who believe the earth is six thousand years old. Always the critiques by the atheists on the religious involve picking the low-hanging fruit. Worse, they betray their supposed scientific, reason-based principles by judging all by the one.
Most religious folk are well aware of the age of the earth. And it was not "science" that brought this to us like Moses from the mountain. It was the slow accumulation of evidence. And as the evidence accumulates, the astonishing likelihood becomes apparent that we are living inside a carefully balanced and crafted universe.
Oh, yes, many of the beliefs in this or that miracle are probably untrue. And there is a dynamic of blind belief that I can't apologize for. But this same blind belief exists among atheists. And at least in the case of the religious, the belief in God is justified while the belief that everything is just a random accident is not.
I have yet – including Arthur C. Clarke – met an honest atheist who rationally deals with these aspects. But I have met many religious people who do.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 26, 2023 9:34:34 GMT -8
There's no other way of saying this: This is science fiction written by a rube for the rubes. Clarke seems to carry theories-of-society that are no less quack-ish than those of Marx.
Oh...so there's the problem of world peace. We fear each other. And for those with the belief that "all people are basically good," there is no other way to make the formula work out. If people are basically good, but are endlessly engaged in violent conflict, it is because they irrationally "fear the other." It's because of narrow parochialism...not the desire of, say, some evil dictator like Putin to extend his power over other people. Or, simply, the propensity of the male of the species (egged on by resource-hording women) to engage in wars of plunder.
Oh, if only we were all as sophisticated as The Enlightened Class of the Golden Children like Clarke for whom "reason" is that magic talisman that can dispense with all hard realities. And that's not to say that you can't look around and find absolute legions of people living in grimy filth and decadence. And this is precisely why we need some kind of ruling class. We need people with goals for society larger than getting fat, drunk, and stupid.
The problem is, our "betters" these days are fat, drunk, and stupid an ideas (Marxism) that have lead to the death of over 100 million people in the last hundred years. And still they think of themselves as the smartest people on the planet.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 26, 2023 9:35:52 GMT -8
Brad, have you ever heard of such thing as wide parochialism? Just asking.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 26, 2023 9:44:13 GMT -8
One would have to actually sit down with Clarke to find out what he was thinking...and hope to get an honest answer. But this blind trust in the Overlord is no different than blind trust in Allah. It is the wish of nearly all human beings to be taken care of. And that is why socialism is attractive to many, if not most. People just want to be taken care of.
What Clarke doesn't honestly deal with is that such sheep tend to be sheared. I don't think there is a sequel to this book. But you can see Clarke's ruling-class better-than-thou fantasy playing out. If only a "strong man" could take charge, all our problems would be solved.
Yes, indeed...if that strong man was completely wise and benevolent. But even Jesus Christ didn't attempt to rule men (which is why the Jews don't accept him as a Messiah...the Messiah is supposed to be an ass-kicking strong man, from what I understand).
And maybe that's why the stories of both the Old and New Testament make some basic sense. God does not impose himself on people, even though he certainly must have the power to do so. He leaves us to live with our choices, good and bad, while offering a framework for us so that we don't make too big of a mess of everything.
The Overlord concept is a completely Utopian wet dream by naive and always destructive atheists.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 26, 2023 12:48:39 GMT -8
Stromgren was kidnapped by a group who opposed the Overlord's rule over the earth. In discussions with the leaders of this group, Stromgren uses the following example as proof of the goodness of the Overlords.
Stromgren goes on about how he had discussions with Karellen about the order and the following paragraph followed.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 26, 2023 13:57:52 GMT -8
This high regard for animal life, putting it on the same level, or higher than human life, is common among leftist.
Later on in his discussions with his kidnappers, Stromgren states:
This is the leftists'/globalists' Hegelian wet dream.
Karellen frees Stromgrem and tells him that he won't punish the kidnappers because:
We are very close to this point today.
Fifty years in the future, with Stromgren long dead, the Overlords will finally reveal themselves to mankind. Due to machinations, which I will not go into, Stromgren had found this out before retiring and kept it to himself. On the day this happens, Karellen steps out of his space ship and presents himself.
To my mind, this is Clarke spitting in the eye of Western religions.
Clarke writes:
A good summation of how types such as Klaus Schwab view the rest of us. Humans are infinitely malleable and only need the correct coercion from above to be happy.
In an interesting conversation with Stromgren, Karellen had once said:
He goes on to give an example of this by explaining how to bring into line, a nation which revolted against the Overlords. He explains that the use of atomic bombs would be very inefficient. When Stromgren asks for an example of "efficient" use of power, Karellen gives this example.
The use of Hitler aside, dishonest people often use extreme examples to make their case, this type of thinking indicates a complete ruthlessness. It is similar to those who say waterboarding is not torture. To such minds, it is absolutely acceptable to torture people into agreeing with them, or at least to submit to their tyranny as long as the torture isn't very apparent at a later date.
And here are Clarke's thoughts on how things develop under such Overlords
A more complete misunderstanding of humans would be hard to find, but that is how progressives seem to view the world. I have little doubt that, in the case of Clarke, a pervert pedophile who raped boys, the last comment would be at the root of much of his philosophy. As we have long discussed at R&T and ST, criminals want their criminality to be mainstreamed.
Clarke also goes on about the demise of religion. Another pet peeve of the progressive left. He clearly wants it eradicated. He writes:
More wishful thinking and lack of understanding of mankind.
At this point, we are about a third of the way through the book and another narrative starts. Clarke has set aside his anti-religion scenario and moves on to another scenario, which ends up touching on religion in an oblique manner. In the end, this has to do with a major evolutionary development within mankind and its connection, although not exactly clear, with the Overmind, which seems to be pretty close to God.
I find Clarke to have been nothing more than another Utopian who held great faith in science to destroy all religious belief and future technology to take over all production of goods and services, thus leaving each individual to pursue whatever path he wanted without hindrance. In other words, to treat each person as a child and to shield each individual from the consequences of his own actions.
|
|
