Politics Are there any "conservative" sci-fi shows?

sci-fi-dude

1963, 1899 called they want every thing back....
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Location
DFW
:D Yeah, there's a filter on some words that I put in long time ago just to have a little fun. I think I must've been watching too much BSG classic at the time since "felgercarb" is from the original series (the "re-imagined" reboot used "frack"). Just checked... there are 5 replacement words defined, two get replaced with "felgercarb", one gets replaced with "frack", one gets replaced with "frackin" and the final one gets replaced with "gorram" (from Firefly).

To date I think you and @Tom are the only people who have noticed.
Leave Frack, and Felgarcarb in its totally rules! I love it Kevin! It cracks me up!
 

sci-fi-dude

1963, 1899 called they want every thing back....
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Location
DFW
You know I got to thinking, I need to re-word this post to are there any non preachy, boring, bad guy always wins sci- fi, lol
 

tizl

Captain
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Depending on how you look at it you could claim most dystopian series are conservative or even reactionary. A prime example is the Empire in Star wars, we're never quite told why they're evil they just are. But then you consider the size of the galaxy and how much stuff they have to run they're pretty damn functional. It's all fun and games for the plucky rebels to take down the evil Empire but then you see the Empire was the only group keeping any sort of order in the galaxy and it's a free for all in the power vacuum. Usually stories end right before this happens and everyone is cheering and happy that the evil bad guy is gone, but have no system set up to replace the now screwed galaxy's daily management.

If you want to dip into the prequels you can point out how the Jedi gave up their ideals over time and became more loosey goosey with things. This lead to Anakin being put in a position of power he never should of been in which lead to them all being killed. Through that lens you could argue that the prequels are a moral lesson about keeping to your traditions and not letting new shiny things lead to your downfall.

One problem you have with politically correct sci fi is they try to write evil characters of an opposite political ideology. They end up writing characters that people come to really like because they're often speaking truths we're not allowed to say in such a climate. I believe it was Dreamfall chapters which included a guy supposed to be evil because he was anti immigration/had racial bias. He became the most popular character of the first episode and the writer was really pissed off about it. The same thing happened with Archie Bunker, Judge Dredd and many others. It turns out people like masculine personalities who will stand up for their ideals even when it's not something they're supposed to agree with in public.

Alternatively you could claim science fiction has never been conservative by it's nature of including women in hostile environments. Basic biological differences mean unless you're planning to populate an area then you don't want to take women over men. Their bodies aren't designed to handle harsh environments and trauma as well as mens are, if you're putting women in front line space combat or sending them to the science fiction version of the North pole's first exploration then you're already fudging biology massively. The only real exception to this is if you need a stronger immune system for some reason. It's one of my big pet hates in science fiction that leans towards the hard side of things. You have all these ideas it's wanting to explore and then you have a 5 foot nothing woman carrying a smart gun around because the author really likes Aliens. I don't know if it's ignorance of biology, just part of fiction so never considered or an active political stance but it spoils things for me. A prime example of this is Day after Tomorrow, Tom Cruise isn't even that big of a guy and yet his co star (who in the movie was supposedly his equal) found the action scene so difficult on her body she broke down and started crying. The reality of the physical differences are just hand waved away even as it's staring people right in the face.

You could go further with this and argue about the social make up of male only groups, female only groups and mixed groups within a military setting but it's hard to find good evidence for this. Talking to squadies you get a lot of stories about the problems it's caused them, but if you look at the media and people at the top they claim it's 100% the best thing ever and there isn't a single problem. I know my mates weren't happy when they had to find 4 more beds in their overcrowded housing because an entire house had to be given to just the 1 female team member to avoid any potential problems. All of this just gets hand waved away in most settings and they make men and women completely interchangeable. I've considered writing some stories with realistic biology in a science fiction setting but I'm concerned with the laws in my region I could suffer legal consequences for it. With "hate speech" type laws if someone was offended a woman was inferior to a man physically then I could face punishment for it. It doesn't matter that studies have shown after 14 years old every (non-disabled) male is stronger than any woman alive by 30-40% depending on the body part. It's simply too taboo and is it really worth risking punishment for a self published novel? Maybe this last sentence says a lot about the state of science fiction and how much we're really allowed to explore these days and why there's a lack of true conservative ideas in the genre.
Great write-up, and I agree with it. I think a big part of this, is because of reactionary elements in society that are trying so hard to do away with gender differences. But those differences are based in science and biology and it is reality.

The helpless goofball dad is funny and the tough, career/military woman is great to cheer for when both are done well, but it seems like the frequency of both is extreme. When was the last time you saw a movie celebrating the accomplishments of a woman as a mother? Honestly I couldn't think of one off the top of my head, and I had to search for it. The first link that came up had a list of 15 movies about remarkable women, and only one of them had a character that was even a mother, but the movie less about that than about other things she accomplished. When did it become such a negative thing in society to want to be a stay at home mom? And it's portrayed like woman are forced to do that all time. I'm sure that's happened, and it's terrible when it does, but my mom LOVED being at home with my siblings and I, and I loved her for it, and I have a different relationship with her than my dad, who was working all the time. Not that I love her more than him, because when he got time with us he would make it quality time, but it's different because of the time she was able to spend with me. And my wife, she has to work now because of our financial situation, and at first she was kind of excited, but now she hates it and wishes she could just be there for more of our children's school things.

I think the root of almost all problems in society can be linked to the breakdown of the family unit, and to me the attack on gender differences is not only anti-science, but it's also anti-family.
 

sci-fi-dude

1963, 1899 called they want every thing back....
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Location
DFW
How to defeat a strong God fearing country. Lets see, strong military, powerful defenses, nope. Ah, attack families and religion and beliefs. <That's the ticket! A man is a man, a woman is a woman. Period. If some one in between, leave the be. But if one thinks in their distorted mind that they will try to change genders through the media< wink, wink, it will truly fail.;)So that's what holly weird is up to, to take down a country you eat it from the inside like cancer, also collapse the monetary institutions. They are clever, but not smart.....
 
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
When did it become such a negative thing in society to want to be a stay at home mom?
When it became a negative thing for the Mom. That’s why stay-at-home mothers are disappearing. For the average woman in the U.S.A., from middle class to poverty line, staying home would be a luxury they can’t afford. For these same women, having a child and working pushes them further down the economic ladder.
Bosses don’t like pregnancies, they rarely hire pregnant women. There’s an actual website for these women, advice on hiding a pregnancy is offered there.
If you want college or even a secure life for your child, both parents work.
And btw, birth rates are dropping in the USA.
(Planet wide too, women view motherhood as a direct line to poverty)


US birth rates drop to lowest since 1987
Births in the US have dropped to their lowest rate in 30 years, marking a cultural shift as women delay motherhood, experts say.
Some 3.85 million babies were born in the US in 2017, the fewest since 1987, as births among women in their teens and 20s decreased.
Both the birth rate - the number of births per thousand - and fertility - a lifetime average forecast - fell.
Declining birth rates are common as countries become more developed.
The US fertility rate is lower than the UK's but the US still has a higher fertility rate than many other countries.
While births decreased among younger women in the US last year, it rose in women aged between 40 and 44.
 

tizl

Captain
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
When it became a negative thing for the Mom. That’s why stay-at-home mothers are disappearing. For the average woman in the U.S.A., from middle class to poverty line, staying home would be a luxury they can’t afford. For these same women, having a child and working pushes them further down the economic ladder.
Bosses don’t like pregnancies, they rarely hire pregnant women. There’s an actual website for these women, advice on hiding a pregnancy is offered there.
If you want college or even a secure life for your child, both parents work.
And btw, birth rates are dropping in the USA.
(Planet wide too, women view motherhood as a direct line to poverty)


US birth rates drop to lowest since 1987
Births in the US have dropped to their lowest rate in 30 years, marking a cultural shift as women delay motherhood, experts say.
Some 3.85 million babies were born in the US in 2017, the fewest since 1987, as births among women in their teens and 20s decreased.
Both the birth rate - the number of births per thousand - and fertility - a lifetime average forecast - fell.
Declining birth rates are common as countries become more developed.
The US fertility rate is lower than the UK's but the US still has a higher fertility rate than many other countries.
While births decreased among younger women in the US last year, it rose in women aged between 40 and 44.
Negative for the mom? Or negative for the family? You are generalizing to a massive degree if your point is that birth rates are falling due to a two-parent working household. I'm sure that is one of the causes, but one among many. Even the article you link can only speculate, and it lists a number of other possible causes, the first of which mentioned is simply that women are becoming more educated and deciding to pursue careers instead. Which, let me make clear, I have no problem with.

It also appears to be a worldwide trend, according to that colored graph, and as economies differ everywhere I'm sure there are many different societal factors involved.

My issue, which is actually not directly related to what you brought up, is the societal scorn towards women who decide to be stay-at-home moms. They have been looked at in an increasingly negative light, as though they are wasting their true potential.
 

sci-fi-dude

1963, 1899 called they want every thing back....
Joined
Jul 20, 2017
Location
DFW
Lets see, kids loose their moms to baby sitters and the streets, kids are raised wrong and not in a family unit, kids grow up to be crooked, the majority, unless the family is rich where the kid could be raised in a flashy education system, the little ankle biter is sol. Oh well, never piss on the stay at home mom, they are great!
 

Bmat

Ensign
Joined
Sep 18, 2018
The thread for The Orville got a little sidetracked about it being "politically correct" or not but that notion has been stuck in my mind now thinking about the topic in general.

Can anybody think of a sci-fi show after Star Wars, or the late 70's in general, that would be considered to be "conservative" and, more interestingly, why do you think it's conservative? :coffee:
How about the original The Day the Earth Stood Still- all about peace on Earth?
 

Fifth

Cadet
Joined
May 10, 2020
I think the premise of the thread is a bit off. You don't really need any "Conservative shows", sci-fi or otherwise. It would turn out as extremely boring and end up killed off by the market forces.
No, all you really need is true neutral. Just life as it is, free flow of creativity and imagination, without pushing some political propaganda down your throat.
Unfortunately, good 90% of movies/TV series today are doing exactly that.
It's been going on fro decades now. As a result most people aren't even aware they're constantly swimming in PC soup. The classical "Fish & Water" problem. You're born in water, spent your whole life in the water, how could you possibly see it?

Yet, some people have escaped the mind-Plantation. The Matrix. The Animal Farm. You must have unusually powerful and flexible mind if you're one of them. So there's that.

I have no solution to offer. I try to ignore the propaganda as much as I can and concentrate on the positive aspects of things... until the gag reflex forces me to flee and take refuge in older series, and books. That's the best I can think of.

The confusion in the title is one of the reasons we can't have normal TV series any more. Any Conservative media project is destined to fail because this fundamental mistake. Don't try to cure preachy with the opposite preachy. You will fail.
 

tizl

Captain
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
I think the premise of the thread is a bit off. You don't really need any "Conservative shows", sci-fi or otherwise. It would turn out as extremely boring and end up killed off by the market forces.
No, all you really need is true neutral. Just life as it is, free flow of creativity and imagination, without pushing some political propaganda down your throat.
Unfortunately, good 90% of movies/TV series today are doing exactly that.
It's been going on fro decades now. As a result most people aren't even aware they're constantly swimming in PC soup. The classical "Fish & Water" problem. You're born in water, spent your whole life in the water, how could you possibly see it?

Yet, some people have escaped the mind-Plantation. The Matrix. The Animal Farm. You must have unusually powerful and flexible mind if you're one of them. So there's that.

I have no solution to offer. I try to ignore the propaganda as much as I can and concentrate on the positive aspects of things... until the gag reflex forces me to flee and take refuge in older series, and books. That's the best I can think of.

The confusion in the title is one of the reasons we can't have normal TV series any more. Any Conservative media project is destined to fail because this fundamental mistake. Don't try to cure preachy with the opposite preachy. You will fail.
Yeah I agree with this take. Especially when it comes to sci-fi, I can't stand to see politics of our day and time, shoe-horned into a story about the future where it doesn't make sense.

I would prefer no political agenda at all. I can understand if there are characters who are political, or if it serves the story, but trying to preach an agenda, whether from the left or right, is annoying and almost always makes it worse.
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
An article that may be of interest....

Instead of listing conservative movies they instead list, what they believe, to be conservative characters. For the genre movies, the list includes the below.
  • Batman (Christian Bale's version)
    There is no better encapsulation of America’s impossible position as post-Cold War hegemon as the “this city needs a villain” monologue which closes the best of the modern Batman films. In order to maintain order and prevent his city from sinking into chaos, Bale will fight crime and be branded a villain for it; so, too, must our country serve as beacon of order and control for a dangerous world — only to be resented, hounded out and burned in effigy across the world. I’ll still take American superiority over China, Iran or Russia.
  • Dash Incredible (the middle child with super-speed of the Incredibles family)
    This superb Disney animated film, highlighting the plight of the “Supers” after their shine has caused envy and backlash, is ultimately a protest against forced conformity and collectivism. “Everybody is special,” says Mrs. Incredible, urging her son to keep his head down and not run ahead of the pack — “which means nobody is,” replies Dash. If it sounds soviet, just visit a local elementary school class and see if that’s the message our kids are hearing.
  • Capt. Steve Hiller (Will Smith's character in Independence Day)
    Nice liberal President attempts to pursue meaningful dialogue with the invading hordes of aliens, only to discover that they are ruthless killers who must be taken out if humankind is not to be decimated entirely. It takes Capt. Hiller’s realism to fight the underdog battle and save the U.S. and the world. Independence Day is a perennial reminder: coddling people who have shown they want to kill you makes you less safe, not more.
 

ralfy

Cadet
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Survivors (1975):

After several adventures on the road, they find a property called The Grange which they can use as a base and, joined by other survivors, they form a potted community of disparate individuals all united by a shared purpose; to relearn the old skills of farming and tool-making, and to try to live in this new world.
The broadcast started in the mid-'70s, but it continued through the latter half of the decade.
 
Top Bottom