Letters

L. Neil Smith's comments on the current state of science fiction and fantasy (Prometheus, Vol. 14, No. 3) show an unfortunate tendency to class as out-right enemies of liberty writers who had significant libertarian tendencies with some flaws or inconsistencies. His dismissal of E. E. Smith as a "right-wing socialist", conservative, or "even out-right fascist" is a major example. (In what follows, I will refer to EES and LNS to avoid confusion due to their shared surname).

EES's overall philosophy is best illustrated by his major work, The Lensman series. In that series, the ultimate villains, the Eddorians, are characterized as motivated solely by a desire for power. In contrast, their opponents, the Arisians, seek to encourage the growth of Civilization through the smallest possible interventions, not only for altruistic reasons but because they fear that too much help would prevent the races of Civilization from developing their own strength.

Civilization has democratic mechanisms combined with safeguards to individual freedom—the traditional American pattern—while Boskone is a dictatorship wholly devoted to war.

In a discussion in Gray Lensman, Port Admiral Haynes tells the hero, Kimball Kinnison, that "… with the restriction of government into its proper sphere—wealth-producing enterprise and interstellar commerce have expanded, permitting the Galactic Patrol to be supported by unprecedentedly low taxes—3.592 percent in the highest income tax bracket!—and in fact the Galactic Patrol has to reduce tax rates regularly to avoid having its surplus funds tie up too much capital and bring on a depression. The reference to ‘wealth-producing enterprise’ is typical of EES strongly pro-capitalist outlook. In fact, EES was basically an old-style pre-New Deal Republican, an outlook ancestral to libertarianism as we know it now.

This economic outlook shows up even more strongly in a later novel, Subspace Explorers, whose heroes are as strongly drawn entrepreneurs and business managers as any of Ayn Rand's characters—in fact, EES conveys the aggressive and competitive drives of such people even more forthrightly than Rand does, though his characterization is certainly less subtle. Set in a future where an Earth controlled half by outright communism and half by welfare-state socialism confronts colonial planets that favor free enterprise and individual initiative, this novel offers some very interesting political and economic ideas, including a private interstellar navy with its own court system. Moreover, EES offers a Principle of Enlightened Self-Interest as the basis for his colonial planets' societies.

Both in this novel and in the Lensman series, EES accepts private ownership and use of weapons, one of LNS's own most strongly held views. Kimball Kinnison, playing the part of William Williams, ex-meteor miner, can wear his sidearms throughout his stay at a planet's highest-class hotel, and while his choice is regarded as being in questionable taste, the hotel doesn't call the police or even ask him to leave. EES's characters regularly use deadly force in self-defense.

The worst flaw in EES's often admirable views is his intolerance of drugs. In fact, I count it as a major inconsistency in the Lensman novels that the Lensman spend so much time hunting down drug dealers. I can only say that on this point EES's views were those of his time, which he failed to question. But I'm not prepared to condemn him outright on this basis, any more than I'm prepared to condemn Thomas Jefferson outright for his lifelong ownership of slaves. LNS's remarks suggest that he should denounce Jefferson as an enemy of freedom unworthy of libertarian admiration—but I don't think he's likely to do so.

Virtually no writer, not even Heinlein or Rand, was an absolutely consistent advocate of libertarianism; what matters is the main tendency of a writer's thought. EES's outlook was largely congruent with Heinlein's, as Heinlein made clear in his own essay on EES—above all, both believed in the value of individual competence and of societies free enough to let it be exercised, and both looked to the exploration of space to let such societies be established. If Heinlein deserves LNS's outspoken admiration, then EES deserves at least his respect and sympathy.

William H. Stoddard
July 29, 1996