this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
6 points (100.0% liked)

Fully Automated RPG

95 readers
4 users here now

This community is for discussing solarpunk tabletop gaming, organizing games, and sharing questions, new content, and memes.

For more info visit fullyautomatedrpg.com.

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
 

I just finished re-reading Harry Harrison's The Stainless Steel Rat Gets Drafted which was my favorite from the first time I read the books awhile back.

On this pass I was surprised to find that the the economy and system of Individual Mutualism briefly outlined in the second half of the book actually looks a bit (to my uninformed eyes) like the economy from FA! with a dash of Walkaway's philosophy thrown in. I don't think it's enough to reference it as a work in the genre or anything, I just thought it was neat. Harrison was quite progressive so I wonder if he pulled inspiration from anarchist works of the time.

I thought I'd post an excerpt of the text. To be clear, this isn't presented as a complete and actionable philosophy. In the story, the Rat is out to kill the guy who got his mentor killed, it turns out that guy is top general of an army. While infiltrating the fascist nation that that military rules, he accidentally gets himself drafted. That's all good with him - his target's in the army, he's in the army, he can make this work. Shenanigans ensue. During that time, he's part of an invasion of a society the book presents as bafflingly peaceful, which follows a largely incomprehensible philosophy called Individual Mutualism. This makes it both an excellent target for an invasion and an excellent resource for the Rat. Here's a scene of some locals trying to explain it to him (apologies for the quality of the photo):

Their emphasis on passive resistance and just leaving whenever possible reminds me a lot of parts of walkaway, but this section in particular reminds me of the economy section of FA!, where money is mostly used to track short term trades, and investment for a profit is banned.

top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Wow, that really does fit!

Also, you didn't mention the date it was published, but reading it I immediately thought of Kurt Vonnegut and assumed it was probably about fifty years ago. I just checked, and it was published in '87. So I was off by about a decade, but not too far.

I'm going to go find a copy. I'm excited to read this.