The Wanting Seed by Anthony Burgess

[Court]

I started reading this book, and it is morbidly fascinating. I'm not done with it, but it gives a rather chilling picture of the future if we embrace science and rationality while tossing out sentimental superstitions, mainly God. I'm not finished reading, though, and I wonder if that's really the message Burgess is trying to convey.
Anyhow, has anyone read this?

[iplaw]

Well.  I read it a long time ago...but if I remember correctly the basic overarching theme is that history is cyclical and that we always cycling between 3 general societal modes.  

Mode 1 man is considered inherently good with laissez faire governement, Mode 2 laissez faire government reacts when they see that people aren't that good, Mode 3 oppressive government sees it overreaches and a rebirth of Mode 1.

Basically the book is a condenmation of the idea that man is inherently good and perfectable and warning that the government must strike a balance between oppression and protection.

[Court]

It's pretty fabulous. I just finished it. It's main message is that time is cyclic and it has a set cycle of governments like you described. God and religion are a big part of it in the "Man is inherently evil and selfish" stage of the cycle. Of course, because Man is "bad," he needs grace from God. Pretty much all of the stages, liberal, conservative, and chaos, are seen in a negative light.

In the beginning of the novel, there is a liberal, rational government. But because of advances in science (outlaw wars, can prevent or predict natural disasters to avoid human deaths, combatting diseases, outlaw smoking, etc), no natural "checks" are in place to prevent overpopulation. So the government has "infertility" laws, and considers motherhood a thing for the lower classes. Homosexuality is promoted by the government and all of society, making it impossible for heterosexuals, especially married with a child, to be treated fairly (ie-the main character is denied a promotion because he's not gay). There is no religion. The government is best described as socialist. All enterprises are owned by the government, and capitalism is non-existent.
The people revolt and the government breaks down because of famine. When rations become dismally small, people become cannibalistic.
A more conservative government is born, touting religion and force. They create a "War Department," one that recruits the "dregs" of society and exterminates them in a faux battle. They think they are protecting their country, fighting a war, but it is an illusion created to fight overpopulation and provide food for the surviving population. They still practice cannibalism, but under a civilized front, packaging human meat in tins. My favorite quote is one of the men saying that it is more civilized to eat another man from a tin. They preach that all life is one life to justify the cannibalism. Really, they wouldn't survive without it, and morality is an elastic thing. This new government oppresses homosexuality, promotes capitalism and free enterprise, and "protects" its people through force.

So, there are two views of man: In the first part, man is good. He wants to be a cooperative member of society and is concerned with the good of all. In the last, he is bad. He is selfish, evil, and will only do what is best for himself, damned the consequences.

While the novel is a condemnation of the idea that man is inherently good, it is also a condemnation of the idea that he is inherently evil and selfish, as well. There is balance to be struck both in the ideas involving the nature of man and the behavior of the government.

Honestly, wonderful book. Everyone go read it.

[iplaw]

Maybe not so much negative but pragmatic.

[Court]

I don't know. It seems pretty damning, and graphically so, of the behaviors of the government in both of the extremes.