There is one thing no head of a country can know, and that is: how good is his intelligence system? He finds out only by having it fail him.
Robert A. Heinlein, The Puppet Masters (1951), Chapter 1 (p. 7, Signet (#W7339)).
The many Hundreds of Thousands, that are now in Slavery, were they at Liberty, as we are, had the same Education, Learning, Conversation, Books, sweet Communion in our Religious Assemblies; I believe many of them would exceed many of their Tyrant Masters in Piety, Virtue and Godliness; and their bright Genius, which I know they have, would be inlivened; for I have converst with many of them, for Liberty is Life, and Slavery is Death, nay the very thoughts of it to the right thinking Animal, as Man or Woman.
Benjamin Lay, All Slave-Keepers That keep the Innocent in Bondage, Apostates, page 56, published by its author in Philadelphia in 1737, printed by Benjamin Franklin.
The depiction of Lay, above, is as painted by William Williams in 1750. Lay was short, standing at just over four feet.
Robert A. Heinlein, Guest of Honor Speech at the 29th World Science Fiction Convention, Seattle, Washington (1961).
I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don’t think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can’t save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let the damned thing go down the drain!
Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate; now what’s going to happen to us with both a Senate and a House?
I foresaw political correctness 43 years ago. . . . whereas back then I wrote about the tyranny of the majority, today I’d combine that with the tyranny of the minorities. These days, you have to be careful of both. They both want to control you. . . . I say to both bunches, Whether you’re a majority or minority, bug off! To hell with anybody who wants to tell me what to write. Their society breaks down into subsections of minorities who then, in effect, burn books by banning them. All this political correctness that’s rampant on campuses is B.S. You can’t fool around with the dangerous notion of telling a university what to teach and what not to.
Ray Bradbury, referring to his 1953 novel of book-burning, Fahrenheit 451 in a Playboy interview (May 1996).
I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and incur my own abhorrence. From my earliest recollection, I date the entertainment of a deep conviction that slavery would not always be able to hold me within its foul embrace; and in the darkest hours of my career in slavery, this living word of faith and spirit of hope departed not from me, but remained like ministering angels to cheer me through the gloom. This good spirit was from God, and to him I offer thanksgiving and praise.
The capacity of the human mind for swallowing nonsense and spewing it forth in violent and repressive action has never yet been plumbed.
Robert A. Heinlein, Revolt in 2100 (1953), postscript.
Bigger the population, the more minorities. Don’t step on the toes of the dog lovers, the cat lovers, doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists, Unitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians, Germans, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people from Oregon or Mexico. The people in this book, this play, this TV serial are not meant to represent any actual painters, cartographers, mechanics anywhere. The bigger your market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, remember that!
Authors, full of evil thoughts, lock up your typewriters. They did.
Ray Bradbury, in his novel of book-burning, Fahrenheit 451 (1953), p. 54, in which a character explains why society decided to prohibit the creation, reading, and owning of books. N.B. Paper burns at the temperature indicated in the title.
“We can group socialists and protectionists under the name of restrictionists, whilst those who want to base the distribution of wealth solely on free competition can be called liberationists…
“Thus restrictionists are divided into two types: socialists, who through the intervention of the state, wish to change the distribution of wealth in favour of the less rich; and the others, who, even if they are sometimes not completely conscious of what they are doing, favour the rich — these are the supporters of commercial protectionism and social organisation of a military type.”
Vilfredo Pareto, “Socialism and Freedom,” 1891.
It is incumbent upon us to take action if we do not wish to become the subjects of a new Inca empire.