It is apparent that the silver screen, be it film or TV, is a way to influence public opinion. Some writers, however, reject subtlety for blatant messaging. When Andrew Cartmel was asked in an interview what he hoped to achieve as a script editor, he recalled, “My exact words were: I’d like to overthrow the government.” He got the job.

What show was this, you may ask? It was none other than the longest-running science fiction show in history, Doctor Who.

 Even with two generations Star Trek is beat out by the British alien with two hearts, and the show will be celebrating its 50^th anniversary in 2013. As the main character, the Doctor, is able to regenerate instead of dying, this has allowed for great longevity of the show and let 11 different actors bring their original take to the TARDIS, the Doctor’s time-traveling blue police box. Though it is a staple in Britain, Doctor Who attracts a strong cult following in the United States.

Throughout the show’s long history, it’s most political era was likely during the 7^th reincarnation, played by Sylvester McCoy. This was when the aforementioned Cartmel was editor, and he managed a crew concerned about the performance of the current Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. One member of the cast went so far as to tell The Sun Times that they considered her to be “far more terrifying than any monster the Doctor had encountered,” which in the face of such monsters as Daleks, Cybermen and the Loch Ness Monster, is quite a statement.

This era was dotted with plotlines which paralleled the miner’s strike, including a speech based on material from the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. They even wrote a semi-transparent parody on the PM as “Helen A,” a dictator who forces her citizens to be happy. Looking at the wider range of Doctor Who, however, one can clearly find evidence for the free market, limited government principals PM Thatcher stood for.

Though she may have exercised much of her governmental power creating a strong sense of nationalism, she also espoused the idea of limiting the government, restricting public expenditure, encouraging privatization and instating tax cuts. She described her intended society as a place “Where people are free to make choices, to make mistakes, to be generous and compassionate. This is what we mean by a moral society; not a society where the state is responsible for everything, and no one is responsible for the state.”

Whether he intended to or not, the 6th Doctor recognized the validity of her concerns about an unchecked government. Upon returning from many years abroad, he witnessed firsthand its effect on his people, the Time Lords, who became to him the worst evil he had ever faced, “In all my travelling throughout the universe, I have battled against evil, against power-mad conspirators. I should have stayed here. The oldest civilization: decadent, degenerate and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarens, Cybermen – they’re still in the nursery compared to us. Ten Million years of absolute power. That’s what it takes to be really corrupt.”

As the series continues, the too-powerful Time Lords show their true colors in denying the Doctor fair trial, in starting a genocidal Time War with the Daleks, and creating their own weapon to save themselves by warping the mind of one of their own to bring them back when the time is right. Wherever he goes, the Doctor stands up for the people he meets and is the image of liberty as he travels freely and unhindered throughout space and time in his TARDIS, doing good where he can even when it gets complicated. Though he takes Presidential control of Gallifrey once during his fourth regeneration to protect his race from an invasion, he has the moral fortitude to turn down the offer when he is again chosen during his fifth regeneration.

Though initially many of the writers of Doctor Who had leftist agendas, a second look at their work suggests that limiting government to avoid the corruption of power is in fact a good idea. Though not originally spoken to answer her critics in British science fiction, Thatcher’s quote rings true, “It pays to know the enemy – not least because at some time you may have the opportunity to turn him into a friend.” Looking at the plots of many episodes, were the producers and the former PM to meet as friends, they may find something they agree on. Desire for power is the motive behind the vast majority of the show’s villains, and if there are not governmental checks and balances enough to limit them, the Doctor will!

I am a sorry excuse for a Star Wars fan. Despite the fact that I have watched the movies, read many of the extended universe novels (which continue from where the last movie left off) and won my fair share of Star Wars edition Trivial Pursuit, many fans turn up their nose when they realize my dark secret; the first movie I watched of the series was “The Phantom Menace.”

That’s right, I started the movies in chronological order. Though the graphics threw me for a loop when I reached “A New Hope,” I could appreciate the first three movies as new and fascinating instead of complaining that Jar Jar Binks was a lesser character than Chewbacca. To fresh eyes, the political subplots of the prequels of the beloved trilogy are thought-provoking.

The Sith are clearly the enemies: Sidious, Maul, and Dooku wage battles with our heroes over visible, physical threats to the peace. However, beyond their lightsabers, the Jedi are less aware of the quieter work Sidious is doing weakening the infrastructure of galactic politics. It is the many interplanetary conflicts and confrontations within the Senate that pave the way for the republic to die with “thunderous applause.” 

The fall of the Galactic Republic and the rise of the Empire logically follow a pattern often seen in human history – in times of crisis, men are willing to give up their freedoms for safety. Instead of waiting for the Republic’s system to take its course, when quick action is necessary, the Galactic Senate feels safer appointing one man to be in charge. 

Here, Palpatine is for the Galaxy what Caesar was for Rome; a face for Galactic (or National) stability and power. Once gained, power like this is rarely relinquished. To both Anakin and Palpatine, power’s allure was intoxicating. As early as the first movie Palpatine was orchestrating the Trade Federation blockade of Naboo with the hopes of gaining sympathy and attention, showing the weaknesses of the current Chancellor and eventually paving the way for his installation as leader at the height of the Clone Wars. 

For centuries, the Jedi were the keepers of justice in the galaxy. Though the government allotted the funds for building the temple, the Jedi maintained their own internal affairs, responding to requests by the government to mediate peace negotiations or neutralize dangerous adversaries to the republic, but also choosing to take on private affairs when assistance was necessary. As matters escalate, suddenly the public faith in the independent Jedi is not enough. The legislators further narrowed the services of the Jedi by coupling them with the compliant Clone Army as the galactic “military” expanded. The makers of the Clone Army, it turns out, are the Sith. 

As the Republic continues to weaken, faith in the system wanes and order takes precedence over freedom. Even before this (though few fans will have perused enough histories in Wookiepedia to know it) much of the Galactic Government was run on non-binding constitutional conventions, which were more often ignored and undermined by corrupt and power-hungry politicians than heeded. Such a Republic was ripe for the fall. When the people cried out for leadership, Darth Sidious was there. 

In the end, Darth Maul with the horns and painted face was no phantom, but the real force for evil was the destructive abuse of law and representation in the Galactic Senate. If only there had been a Galactic Think Tank that could not only sense the disturbance in the force, but could warn the people of the dangers of appointing an Emperor, even for an emergency! Though it is unlikely our planet will ever be troubled by conspiring Sith, it is always vital to keep an eye on how the decisions made today can affect not only the Republic’s current stability, but the lives of future generations.

After the death of Ray Bradbury, the Mackinac Center featured an article which mentioned the mythopoeic aspects of his futuristic literature that inspired at least one nerdy intern to further explore the themes of liberty and free market ideals in science fiction. Mythopoeia is a term coined by men like C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkein, who had a great appreciation for the power of a fantasy. The concept is that, though a myth or story may not be real, there can be real, deep truths within that are better grasped through the illustration than they would be by a direct explanation.

Human rights and freedoms are so fundamental that they are almost inseparable from a good plot. Would Casablanca have lasted this long if Lazslo was evading his taxes instead of the Nazis? Though his taxes may have been unfair, this situation will not give a feeling of gravity as effectively as an army of Nazis will. Still, it is the idea of fighting against an injustice that draws the audience in, because though they are not facing an army, there are situations in their own lives to which it relates and lends lasting inspiration. When it comes to the themes in Science Fiction, there are far too many empires, republics, and anarchies to cover in one article, so grab your blaster and prepare for hyperspace – it’s going to be a long summer of stellar posts!            

Cowboys, explosions, space ships, honor, romance … An unprecedented clashing of genres seamlessly weaves together a celebrated statement of independence in the cult classic TV show Firefly. More than just a single-season pretty face, Captain Mal Reynolds and his crew members embody many of the central tenants of men searching for a free society.

Many businesses earth-side consider moving states to avoid business-crippling regulations, but Captain Reynolds left the earth altogether! After a costly defeat in the Browncoated Rebels’ war of independence, Mal took to the sky without his love, land, or property rights, escaping into space to preserve what little freedom he had left. If this seems extreme, take a look at the policies employed by the Alliance. If every government is arguably coercive, the Alliance is unmistakably so. As he pursues the profitable trading business he used to enjoy on the outskirts of regulation, Mal comes face to face with many underworld ruffians looking to go back on a deal, but the looming danger is always coming meeting with the ever vigilant forms of the Alliance; assassins, bounty hunters and Reavers; aggressive genetic mutations of a government-funded project which has gone horribly wrong.

Though the idea of government is to protect, The Alliance becomes damaging when it refuses to admit the existence of Reavers and resolve that deadly problem they created. It also hurts in smaller ways, such as when it fails to supply medicine to a town that needs it. Mal and his crew, originally hired to steal this precious cargo, change their minds when they realize what it is and give it to the people that need it, with the Captain’s powerful assertion that there “ain’t nothing dishonest about getting’ goods to folk that need ‘em” whether or not it is against the law. 

Looking at the world of Firefly, the places where Serenity’s crew frequent and the deals they make aren’t always safe. In fact, some places are chaotic and downright lawless. Amidst these dangers, the crew always bears their arms, but only for self-defense. Their arms more often come to the aid of those in need, a testament to the ability of a principled man to police himself. Now, this is not to say that the ’verse wouldn’t be better off with some well-chosen and responsibly enforced rules. The problem comes when the Alliance is as violent and corrupt as the thieves, a central issue in Firefly.

This is the environment which prompted the statement, “That’s what the government’s for, to get in a man’s way,” spoken by a disillusioned Mal Reynolds early in the series. Even the more optimistic Shepherd Book, a passenger on the ship, noted the dangers of absolute power, remarking that a government is “a body of people usually-notably-ungoverned.” As Mal begins to regain his faith in mankind and realize that the ‘verse is bigger than him and his crew, he begins to think more about what he can do to limit the power of government vowing that there would be “no more runnin’, I aim to misbehave!”

As citizens of a republic, Michiganders have a political voice in the way Mal never did in our rights to vote, to go to court over injustices, to legally protest and chose who represents us. Therefore we can likely lay our blasters aside in favor of these less hazardous methods. But that does not mean that citizens of this planet shouldn’t always be looking out for the continuation and extension of freedom, and remain informed on the issues which pass through the wilds of the legislature. Hopefully if dedicated citizens each do their duty and keep their ships in order, our government will never become the Alliance – Firefly has already shown us how that would end!

As a student, I have taken my turn reading through the sappy, statist pages of “The Jungle,” as well as the contrasting pages of “Animal Farm.” These books are powerful because they portray important ideas in an entertaining, understandable way. Properties like these make literature a powerful tool in any intellectual movement, and although some would claim that free-market literature lacks the emotional appeal of that which promotes more government intervention, there is still compassion and power in many novels which promote liberty.

I received much of my personal inspiration and knowledge of the workings of the free market and alternate economic systems from books like “1984” and “Atlas Shrugged,” and can testify firsthand to the effect they had on me. However, looking beyond the usual suspects for “liberty literature,” it is interesting to note that some literature which at first glance appears to be sympathetic to big government actually has some free-market leanings. One example is found in Charles Dickens.

In “A Christmas Carol,” Scrooge refuses to give money to the sweet and needy Crachit family in a classic example of the heartless actions of big business owners… or does he? When the men first come to his door with a collection for the poor, he turns them away, grumbling that there are jailhouses, union workhouses and poor laws to take care of the problem that he already pays his taxes to. It is only when the ghosts make him aware of the needs in his own neighborhood, his personal experiences and knowledge of the needs of his neighbors enables him to give generously in a way that makes the maximum positive impact on all involved.

When one starts looking with a close eye at every media one is presented with, many hidden philosophies will emerge. For instance, while watching “Jaws” with my fellow interns, we noted the surprising role the mayor played in insisting the beach be kept open despite the dangers it posed. The police chief had no power to overturn this decision for the safety of the people. In the end, it is the privately contracted boat and the help of a scientist (who buys all his own equipment with no federal help, by the way) and freelance shark killer that get the police chief where he needs to be to protect the people of the town.

Following free-market ideals does not mean ignoring the plight of the poor or endangered. Instead it encourages personal responsibility in reacting to these situations. Sometimes when there is trouble in the town, the cloud which has covered the hopeful rays of help is in the shape of “Big Government.”

I have been a fan of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy for a long time, but it was not official until I decided to friend them on facebook! Facebook has millions of users and has changed the way people communicate, advertise and share their thoughts.

Facebook is the dominant social network in most countries, but what you may not know is that there are several exceptions. These are mainly autocratic states.  Though facebook is not officially blocked in any country, there are measures put in place in many stricter countries like Iran and China, who offer alternative social networks which are more censored. This caution is because facebook is more than just a place to write about what you had for dinner or see pictures of a friend’s new puppy. It is a place where you can link to breaking news, have discussions and freely state your opinion on issues. The traffic of friends reading and referencing their friends’ facebook pages can cause stories, good or bad, to spread quickly. Governments fear when they cannot control the story, and Facebook is a forum of freedom.

Though free countries have this valuable forum, only the slightest fraction of a percent of what goes on facebook is related to policy or politics. True, it was designed to connect with friends and not to discuss the value of free market ideas, but there are many opportunities it provides that we can all make an effort to take advantage of. Some have already been realized. The U.S. government has its own page where it posts things like videos of President Obama’s speeches. The state of Michigan has a page on which to share information as well. The Mackinac Center itself has a page where it posts new articles to raise awareness of what is happening in Michigan policy and share new ideas of how to improve the state. The market itself can find uses for facebook. Not only can businesses take out ads, they can create free pages to keep customers informed of specials and upcoming events.  As private citizens looking to promote freedom, posting links to important news, having debates, or writing thought provoking statuses can be a way of informing friends who may not think of such things themselves.

Though many of its uses are not fully realized, there are steps being taken as businesses and organizations learn how to use facebook to their advantage. We too should use this aspect of American freedom to spread the truth to our friends at home and around the world.  If you want to try liberty, maybe you should try facebook!

The idea should be simple. Yes, schools need reform. One solution that would both improve the budget and give incentive to improved teaching practices is merit pay. What is difficult about this solution is how to implement it, as determining merit is not simple.

The standard answer is to determine a teacher’s merit by their experience or degree level, but these have not been proven to increase student performance in every case. Basing merit upon only test data and academic student performance diminishes the importance and scope of the teaching profession. A more well-rounded option for judging would be adding feedback from the students and parents themselves through valid and reliable teacher evaluations.

If changing the base pay seems too much to give for such varied ways of determining merit, reform-oriented school boards may want to give teachers bonuses for their effectiveness instead as a smaller, but still valuable incentive. Though state spending on public schools is high and still rising, student achievement in Michigan is not. Perhaps one of the best options is giving the money back to the parents who originally earned it so that they can decide for themselves what teacher at what school has the merit to best educate their child.

Though most teachers are in the profession because they care about the growth of the students and are driven by the intrinsic reward of doing a good job, all people are also encouraged by financial rewards and recognition for a job well done. Rewarding the key people financially who can improve the state education system is a logical way to use the budget to encourage positive growth in schools.