ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, June 22, 2015

A necessary endorsement

In which I explain why Ed Trimnell should endorse the TOR boycott:
First of all: I am on record as disagreeing with the positions of Patrick Nielsen Hayden and John Scalzi. (I’ve taken Mr. Scalzi to task on this blog many times.) I’m not as familiar with Moshe Feder and Irene Gallo. But what I have seen of them so far, I don’t evaluate favorably.

That said, I think the boycott is a bad idea. And here’s why:

I dislike the Internet mob—whether it is a rightwing mob, or a leftwing mob. I dislike the Internet’s hive mindset, which says:

“If you say something we don’t like, we’re going to whip up all of our minions into a frenzy, and then destroy your livelihood, or harass you into silence at the very least. Oh—and we’re going to do all of this anonymously, hiding behind bogus screen names, avatars, and IP addresses! And aren’t we courageous!”

That is, of course, exactly what the SJW crowd does. But I’m not one of them—and I’m not a joiner, either. Just because I disagree with John Scalzi & Co. doesn't mean that I’m eager to flock to the banner of Vox Day and others on the far right.

(In fact, I think you’ll find that those on the far right and the far left of these Internet debates have actually achieved a sort of symbiosis—they are each dependent on the outlandish statements of the opposite group. But that’s another post.)
If Mr. Trimnell deplores the hive mindset and Internet mob tactics (and I see no reason not to take him at his word), then he should endorse the TOR boycott and join us. We are not a hive mind or a mob. We do not howl. We did not initiate the use of these mob tactics and we do not favor them as a first option. We prefer civil disagreement, dialectical discourse, and public debate, but as Mr. Trimnell knows very well, those are not credible options at the moment because the SJW crowd refuses to engage with us on such terms. They have left us literally no other choice except submitting to them, which will never happen.

Refusing to take a side and trying to remain above it all will no more bring an end to the tactics he dislikes than the League of Nations prevented World War II. Misbehaving bullies can only be stopped with superior force. To stop the lynch mobs, Mr. Trimnell should help us bring them to an end by multiplying our force. We will abandon the tactic as soon as the SJWs do... like Ronald Reagan with the Evil Empire, we will trust, but verify. But until the SJWs give up their rhetorical tactics of name-calling, marginalization, and disqualification, we will continue play by the Chicago Rules and exploit every mistake they make and every opening they give us. The TOR boycott is nothing more than holding TOR Books accountable for the wholly unprofessional behavior of its SJW employees, behavior that would have gotten a minimum-wage Walmart greeter fired on the spot.

Furthermore, there is no symbiosis. The SJWs are not dependent upon anyone's outlandish statements; if an opponent has not said something objectionable, they will simply lie and claim he did, then run their usual insult-isolate-disqualify routine. We, on the other hand, have a rich and continuously replenished pool of outlandish statements from which to choose to use against them.
The second issue I have with the entire Tor kerfuffle (and similar online kerfuffles) is its evidence of the general decline in civility nowadays, and the unwillingness to engage in civil debate with those on the other side of an issue. The pattern on the Internet is for people to self-select into ideological echo chambers, usually centered around some charismatic blogger (such as a John Scalzi on the left, or a Vox Day on the right.)

This, admittedly, began with the so-called SJW (“social justice warrior”) faction, which achieved a podium on the Internet long before there were highly trafficked rightwing blogs (at least in the field of science fiction). John Scalzi loved having open comment threads for years, until his blog began to attract substantial numbers of people who failed to accept his received wisdom. Then he opted for his “mallet”, deleting comments en masse on the flimsiest of pretexts.
Mr. Trimnell graciously offered to referee a debate between Mr. Scalzi and me. I accepted. Mr. Scalzi declined. So Mr. Trimnell knows that his favored option is simply not a viable one. What I am offering is a viable tactic intended to force the SJWs to abandon their incivility and return to the more civilized norms that he favors. Given that he has no other options, I encourage him to rethink his position, endorse the boycott, and hold us accountable to lay down our arms should the SJWs eventually realize that they cannot win this sort of conflict and lay down their own.

Labels: ,

70 Comments:

Anonymous Case June 22, 2015 2:17 PM  

The Tor boycott isn't a howling mob. It's a response to a howling mob.

Anonymous Roundtine June 22, 2015 2:24 PM  

You cannot have a debate a mob.

Anonymous Rolf June 22, 2015 2:27 PM  

The options are open and honest debate or Alinski.

Debate declined?

Then the default response is..... not a mystery.

Anonymous Krul June 22, 2015 2:27 PM  

"I dislike the Internet mob—whether it is a rightwing mob, or a leftwing mob. I dislike the Internet’s hive mindset"

He dislikes it, eh? Well personally, I like it. I think it's a gas.

Remember, if the enemy is shooting at you with a gun, you must never even think about picking up a gun and shooting back, lest ye sink to his level. You don't want to feel a twinge of guilt during your triumphal parade, do you? No, better to take the high road and die, leaving the world for your enemies to bustle in.

Anonymous BGS June 22, 2015 2:38 PM  

If Ed Trimnell thinks this is mean there is a guy that put out a standing cash offer for the KGB file or kiddie porn evidence of a gay Connecticut gun grabber. He really rattled some cages. http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2014/02/an-open-letter-to-michael-lawlor-ct.html

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents June 22, 2015 2:41 PM  

Trimnell deplores open conflict, but offers no working alternative. I have sympathy for him, because for years all I wanted was to read some half way decent science fiction without the obligatory pro-SJW cause-of-the-moment jammed in like a shard of glass in a pastry. I did not want to take a side, I just wanted to read decent SF. When that was clearly not an option anymore, I chose to read other things. I found that all of literature was becoming increasingly infested with those shards of glass, because the SJW's cannot abide any independent thought.

The room for middle ground is shrinking by the day, because that's how the SJW's want it to be. Trimnell clearly needs to think about this more. But not too long, lest the SJW's decide he's to be the target of their latest 5 minute hate.

Anonymous FP June 22, 2015 2:44 PM  

"In fact, I think you’ll find that those on the far right and the far left of these Internet debates have actually achieved a sort of symbiosis—they are each dependent on the outlandish statements of the opposite group. But that’s another post."

Hogwash. I've seen this argument made all over our culture now for years. I used to buy into it or tolerate it. No more. You see it in the gun rights, men's rights, or gay rights debates. The gun rights supporters for years have compromised and its never enough. The anti-gunners have outright said multiple times, "we want to ultimately ban all guns" (see Dianne Finestein on 60 minutes). Oh, no they say. That is just their extremists, we can work with the reasonable ones. And yet gay marriage is now a serious thing before the courts in a mere 20 years while my state among others has made it a crime to lend or store your guns with a friend for safe keeping without a background check. Look at Hawaii, they just made all 18 year olds who smoke tobacco criminals. That is your result of the anti-smoking campaign. Soon they'll be looking for other sin taxes to feed themselves.

Get off the fence Mr. Trimmel or get the hell out of the way. Soon enough they'll come for you. These people do not believe in live and let live.

Blogger Mom June 22, 2015 3:06 PM  

what's with the "we'll do it all anonymously" comment. He's equating us with SJWs. I sure signed my own real name to my letters of protest.

Blogger Corvinus June 22, 2015 3:08 PM  

what's with the "we'll do it all anonymously" comment. He's equating us with SJWs. I sure signed my own real name to my letters of protest.

He's trying to shame us for taking proper precautions about having our employment opportunities sunk by the SJWs.

Anonymous Culture War Draftee #151 June 22, 2015 3:10 PM  

I may post under a handle here, but my name is very clearly affixed to my correspondence with Tor.

Blogger Joshua Dyal June 22, 2015 3:16 PM  

Hogwash. I've seen this argument made all over our culture now for years. I used to buy into it or tolerate it. No more. You see it in the gun rights, men's rights, or gay rights debates. The gun rights supporters for years have compromised and its never enough.

Indeed; the so-called "extremists" on the right were the mainstream a generation ago. The notion that right-wing extremists in any way whatsoever compare with left wing extremists is just false equivalency to disqualify. There's no substance to that claim.

Anonymous BGS June 22, 2015 3:16 PM  

He's trying to shame us for taking proper precautions about having our employment opportunities sunk by the SJWs.

Good thing I didn't put my name as BigGaySteve, every hospital with over 400 beds in it probably has at least one Steve that could fit that description if weight or height could be applicable.

Blogger Giraffe June 22, 2015 3:23 PM  

the so-called "extremists" on the right were the mainstream a generation ago.

I actually think we are making progress the other direction. A lot of people thought it was OK to ban assault weapons, just don't touch my deer rifle. Now black rifle disease has caught on and "assault rifles" are the most popular rifles around. The the AR15 has been around since the 70's but the popularity wasn't there till the last 15 years.

Anonymous Mudsack June 22, 2015 3:25 PM  

VFM 341 reporting.

Could someone who is talented in the arts generate a logo modeled on the Wolverines!! of 'Red Dawn'? A puppy with an AR-15, that would be the ticket. With Puppies!! over the top instead of wolverines.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 22, 2015 3:26 PM  

Has Ed ever had any political success?

Blogger Bro. Longtail June 22, 2015 3:39 PM  

What makes Vox a member of the Far Right, in their eyes? His economics? His science-based observations about race? His Christian moral framework? His adopted country of Italy? His ability to kick a soccer ball? We know the SJWs are Lefties, but they sure act like they know how to goose-step.

Anonymous Quartermaster June 22, 2015 3:50 PM  

"What makes Vox a member of the Far Right, in their eyes?"

Hate facts. Facts are full of hate and only the right is full of hate, so all facts are hate facts. I would think this self evident.

Blogger MidKnight (#138) June 22, 2015 4:06 PM  

@krul

Remember, if the enemy is shooting at you with a gun, you must never even think about picking up a gun and shooting back, lest ye sink to his level. You don't want to feel a twinge of guilt during your triumphal parade, do you? No, better to take the high road and die, leaving the world for your enemies to bustle in.


Well said

Blogger Blume June 22, 2015 4:08 PM  

Heck this is my name.

Anonymous Huckleberry (#87) -- est. 1977 June 22, 2015 4:22 PM  

Just as there are no trustworthy oaths between men and lions, there can be none between us and them.
One or the other must fall, and I'd prefer it to be them.

Blogger Dexter June 22, 2015 4:29 PM  

The second issue I have with the entire Tor kerfuffle (and similar online kerfuffles) is its evidence of the general decline in civility nowadays, and the unwillingness to engage in civil debate with those on the other side of an issue.

Old Rape Rape kept calling for "civility" and "civil debate" even as he abused us. Since the Left doesn't believe in it, there really isn't much point in calling for it.

Blogger Elocutioner0226 June 22, 2015 4:44 PM  

Gee I sure do miss those old days of Orwellian civility, back when I knew my place. You too, Ed?

Anonymous Minion #0172 June 22, 2015 4:58 PM  

I'm trying to understand the publishing business so I hope some of you can help me out here.

John Scalzi is considered a big Tor asset and famously got a $3 plus million dollar deal for 13 books over 10 years, yet his latest, released as ebook chapters 1 and 2 rank (as of today) at #61 and #62 on the Amazon SF best seller list, 909 and 912 as fiction book ranks.

Doesn't sound impressive to me esp. compared with Andy Weir's THE MARTIAN currently at No. 1 in SF and No. 5 for all fiction books, and has been for quite a while.

I realize Amazon is just one market but it's a big one. And are stand-alone ebook sales any predictor of hardcover sales?

Again, seems to me Scalzi's latest are not generating any kind of enthusiasm, or sales, and Tor should be worried.

Am I missing something?

Anonymous Nathan June 22, 2015 5:09 PM  

@172,

As long as Tor has Card, Jordan's estate, and Sanderson, they can afford to roll the dice on Scalzi and their pets.

Anonymous rienzi June 22, 2015 5:10 PM  

"Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle?"

Does this sound familiar Mr. Trimnell? Why stand you there idle? The time for choosing is at hand. Choose wisely.

Anonymous Peter #0231 June 22, 2015 5:23 PM  

Giraffe @13:

Actually, the popularity of the AR platform is largely due to the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994...so it's yet another (maybe the first) example of the SJW crowd's best laid plan backfiring on them.

Blogger JartStar June 22, 2015 5:25 PM  

What makes Vox a member of the Far Right, in their eyes?

He's to the right of Pol Pot who was right wing.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan June 22, 2015 5:29 PM  

Speaking of civility some HuffPo writer (black female loon) has basically called for the new, new days of rage except she specifically wrote that blacks should not harm other blacks.

How can Ed and other noble conservatives think that these people are our moral superiors?

Anonymous Mr. Rational June 22, 2015 5:33 PM  

all I wanted was to read some half way decent science fiction without the obligatory pro-SJW cause-of-the-moment jammed in like a shard of glass in a pastry.

That is the perfect analogy I've been looking for.  Even in Card's recent books there are SIMBAs (Sweet Innocent Majestic Black Angels) and the like.  In the real world we have Trayvon Martin, Omar Thornton and Colin Ferguson.  I am so sick of the lies.

Blogger luagha June 22, 2015 5:50 PM  

#0172:

Tor has been described here and on many other sites as a set of editorial fiefdoms. It is not a 'company' with a 'manager' as one might ordinarily think of it.

An author's Tor Editor is their advocate and their owner. They make deals with upstream (to Macmillan and then to Holzbrink) for their favored ones. The association with profitability is tenuous. Many methods that we might think obvious to be used in maximizing profit - like modern use of advertising dollars in indie-style marketing and the cultivation of new novelists at low prices in order to help them find an audience - are not used.

If you hunt up the Phil Foglio experience with Tor whose link has been posted here, he signed with them to distribute his Girl Genius comic property which was doing great as an indie. And they did nothing with it and when he tried to help them make money and get to a win-win situation, they covered their ears and he was told, "When the people at Tor don't understand something, they just stick their heads in the sand and wait for it to go away."

John Scalzi got some good press from Instapundit for his early work (very Heinleinian) but then kind of degraded in many people's opinion with overly derivative rip-offs like Redshirts and his Fuzzy novel. He's midlist and has certain good and bad qualities...

And Tor signed him to a massive 13 book 10 year contract. It's been gone into here in a previous post, but it's a dumb deal. From Scalzi's side, he's betting he won't have a popular word-of-mouth breakout that gets to Hollywood level and makes him substantially more valuable. (Maybe from his experience with Stargate Universe.) From Tor's side they're betting that Scalzi can maintain midlist status selling 60-70 thousand books per title for ten years... and anyone betting anything in the publishing field ten years out is totally absurd.

Scalzi is betting that he'll stay mediocre or get worse. Tor is betting that Scalzi will stay mediocre AND that upheavals in publishing won't make him unprofitable over the next ten years in the shrinking field of SF&F while they're getting eaten alive by Amazon/Castalia.

These are not the smartest business decisions. (Unless you're Scalzi and aren't excited about the idea of improving at your work.)

The answer is that Scalzi's editor is a Social Justice Warrior and favors him as a member of the Warren together. That's all it takes.

#0199

Anonymous Minion #0172 June 22, 2015 6:09 PM  

Luagha, thanks for the insight.

Wow, a Leftist editor and an mid-wit hack writer both betting on, and being happy with, nothing better than SJW mediocrity.

But why am I not surprised? I have said before that John Scalzi is the Peter Keating of science fiction. Now I know who is the Ellsworth Toohey.

Anonymous Forrest Bishop VFM #0167 June 22, 2015 6:18 PM  

27. JartStar
What makes Vox a member of the Far Right, in their eyes?

He's to the right of Pol Pot who was right wing.
----------------

Have they, i.e. more than one Leftie, really claimed that Pol Pot was right wing? If I have the story right, Pol Pot studied in Paris under socialist professors who taught him about Rousseau and the social contract, among other such. PP then returned to Cambodia and carried out the most perfect realization of Rousseau's ideal- clearing out the cities, a return to the land, and death to any reactionary with eyeglasses. A true Social Justice Paradise.

Blogger Peter June 22, 2015 6:22 PM  

I've left a comment at Mr. Trimnell's blog, pointing out that I started my call for action from Tor (and a possible boycott) without any contact with or support from Sad, Rabid or any other form of Puppies. If he wants to take a stand, there's nothing wrong with doing so in his own right, as an individual.

(On the other hand, I've greatly enjoyed having so many of you drop in to visit over at my blog, and some of you are fast becoming friends as well. Thank you all very much - and thank you, Vox.)

Anonymous Bz June 22, 2015 6:55 PM  

I think it can crudely be illustrated like this

Bolshevik Ordinary people
x------x----------------------------------------------------------x----
National
socialist

As you can see, national socialists are, from a certain viewpoint, far to the right.

Blogger Minion777 June 22, 2015 7:39 PM  

I would call this pattern the "Kumbaya Conservative Response" (KCR for short). It entails an un-workable solution where parties at war should sit down around a camp fire to make S'mores and braid each other's hair and neckbeards.

Anonymous Not-So-Merry zen0 June 22, 2015 9:39 PM  

From Holtzbrinck values page:

Individuality

Our intellectually and culturally diverse company is driven by independent thought and actions. We think in terms of the individual and collaborative networks, not in terms of hierarchy.


I would like to know how that translates in terms of actual financial arrangements. Is Tor completely on its own to rise or fall on its decisions, or does Holtzbrinck actually have a financial stake in it's performance. If so , how much?

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler June 22, 2015 9:51 PM  

Bz, national socialists are leftists. Look at "socialist" part. All socialists are leftists.

A rightist is a Monarchist. A rightist is for the Old Order.

Anonymous eric ashley June 22, 2015 10:30 PM  

To put Scalzi's Three Million!!!!!! in perspective, Rush got 400 million, I think.

Blogger CM June 22, 2015 10:44 PM  

Forrest Bishop...

I think that's the point...

Right of PP IS too far to the right...

Anonymous Jon Bromfield June 22, 2015 10:53 PM  

Eric, no one begrudges Scalzi his deal money, except perhaps those women, POCs and GLBT writers who Tor might have supported instead of yet another already established straight white male.

Anonymous Jack Amok June 22, 2015 11:11 PM  

What makes Vox a member of the Far Right, in their eyes?

He disagrees with them (that makes him "Right wing") and isn't afraid to say so (that makes him an "extremist").

"Moderates" are people who apologize for disagreeing with them. Actual political beliefs are irrelevant.

Oh, wait, there's one other group of "Far Right Extremists" according to Leftists, and that's dead Leftists who are thought badly of for murdering millions of people. E.g. Pol Pot and Hitler.

Blogger HickoryHammer #0211 June 22, 2015 11:30 PM  

Kumbaya, how many roads must a man walk down, before they call him a man and all that.... I've heard this song before and I don't like the beat. Meanwhile SJWs are building blacklists and glomming on to power positions in corporations to make them stick. Congrats on being "above the fray" Ed, hope they pat you on the head when they give you your food stamps and your pauper's blanket.

Anonymous The SJW June 23, 2015 12:04 AM  

The problem with the far right talking here and elsewhere isn't that you haven't adopted the tactics of the left. It's that there simply are so few of you and no matter how hard hitting you want to get, your numbers are so small compared to those who seek social justice that you'll never win.

South Carolina is a perfect example. In a state that has historically been one of the bastions of "southern heritage", those seeking social justice were able to get the confederate flag removed from the state grounds in just a couple days. Just like that.

The only way that could possibly happen is by the representatives of the people recognizing who he people were. In that case, it was the people who opposed the racist history the confederate flag represents to them. There was literally nothing those on the right, be in the racist right or the southern heritage right could do about it because, well, they are a very small minority.

And that's why you lose all the time and will continue to lose: Your arguments have no strength with the vast majority of people.

Gay marriage is and will be a right for a simple reason: The arguments for gay marriage hold sway now with more people that those that oppose it. Because that contingent is small.

The pro-amnesty/social justice Left has grown much larger than the "deport them" Right because the Left has offered more convincing arguments.

Your children will nearly all wonder how there could have been opposition to gay rights, how anyone could have ever wanted the confederate flag flown over a state capital, how anyone could ever want deportation.

OpenID eidolon1109 June 23, 2015 12:14 AM  

Oh yes, all those super-convincing arguments for gay marriage. All those ways our understanding of homosexuality is different than every other society throughout history. Oh right, there is no new understanding, no new facts, no ideas that weren't already known. It's all marketing.

It's easy to sell things when you don't let your competitors advertise. The left wins by constant propaganda and by controlling all the means by which the right might advertise.

Do you really, honestly believe that there are any new arguments in favor of homosexuality? Do you really think people 100 years ago didn't understand it the way you do? What new facts have come to light? There isn't even any new science. It may or may not be genetic. Amazing. That doesn't even have any bearing on the question anyway.

It's the same for all these issues; the left hasn't won the debate, it simply prevented the average person from hearing the other side's case, and created the impression that disagreement is out of bounds. That has nothing to do with being right. You may as well say that Saddam Hussein won the debate because he got 100% of the vote.

OpenID eidolon1109 June 23, 2015 12:19 AM  

The Republicans in South Carolina got rid of the Confederate flag because they knew the left would irrationally pretend it had something to do with the shooting (despite having been there for ages and never causing any shootings before). It was honestly a foolish move to cave to insanity in that way. It implies that there was any connection between the two things when there clearly wasn't. It's an absurd reaction; they may as well have outlawed trans fats.

They did it because they know the left will use its propaganda to lay the shooting on the right which had nothing to do with the shooter. The last several times the leftist media dumped it on the right when the shooter was a declared leftist, or when he was simply insane. It's basically like preemptively apologizing to a crazy person who thinks everything you say or do is a racist action towards himself; it's not rational, it's just done in the hopes that the crazy person won't make a scene.

Anonymous The other robot June 23, 2015 12:35 AM  

Meanwhile, there is no evidence that could convince some people.

Blogger maniacprovost June 23, 2015 12:37 AM  

Your children will nearly all wonder how there could have been opposition to gay rights, how anyone could have ever wanted the confederate flag flown over a state capital, how anyone could ever want deportation.

No, the few offspring per capita produced by Ann Arbor hipsters and L-Train SWPLs may wonder those things, if they're lucky, but my children will likely be fighting for their lives in the 3rd world hell created by our current policies. Deportation will be a fairy tale for children, to shield them from the harsh reality of roving gangs killing each other based on skin color.

Anonymous Jack Amok June 23, 2015 12:38 AM  

Your children will nearly all wonder...

Heheheheh. Children.

Leftists aren't having many.

Anonymous the bandit June 23, 2015 12:47 AM  

Stolen just now from an SJW emotion-fest:

"Calls for civility are a tool solely of the privileged."

We're not creating the weapons of civil destruction, we're just using them against those who are creating them.

Anonymous Jake June 23, 2015 12:55 AM  

You got to hand it to Scalzi. It's been a long, long time since a more talentless hack got as much press as he has. I begrudge him that money. It could be going to a real writer, rather than the political mouthpiece of his editor.

Anonymous Beau June 23, 2015 1:02 AM  

And that's why you lose all the time and will continue to lose: Your arguments have no strength with the vast majority of people.

And yet, you post here.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza June 23, 2015 1:14 AM  

Speaking of children, I am patient with vapid immaturity but the SJW/McScaRaRa, TOR and MACmIL is an affront to rational discourse and debate.

We offer open public debate and be objective, these people cannot turn off their emotions AT-ALL.

Blogger Cail Corishev June 23, 2015 1:17 AM  

The answer is that Scalzi's editor is a Social Justice Warrior and favors him as a member of the Warren together. That's all it takes.

There's also a phenomenon in many industries where, to be considered big-time, you have to spend big-time money. It's the same thing that makes many a loan officer prefer making a single million-dollar loan to 20 100K loans, even though the latter would bring in twice as much money. People are impressed by the big number. If you want to be a big-time publisher, you have to have authors signed to big-time contracts. To some extent, you make the author big-time by giving him the contract with a big number on the front. It's not critical that his books make a profit directly, because you're giving him the contract for the bump it'll give your rep in the industry. So it doesn't really matter which author it is, so you might as well pick the one you like for his politics.

Blogger MidKnight (#138) June 23, 2015 1:37 AM  

@Peter

Glad to have met you too, and to have a chance to get to know your work.

@Jack - "Children" - heh - that was harsh

As to the flag and everything else - I personally want that argument, if it HAS to be had yet again, done at a different time. I'd be more inclined to grant some points to some people SEEING it as a symbol of hate if they could at least grant that some others may legitimately see it as a point of (non-ironic) pride.

In either case, what the hell does that have to do with seeking justice for a mass murder? Screw everyone trying to make hay about this to grind their pet axes over racism, the flag, and guns... ("about time we finally had a conversation about")

It is a bit odd, it may be because they finally got their dream racist murderer (though between shooting up a church and burning an american flag, he hardly fits the pro-american, religious racist narrative), but Charleston proper is a lot quieter than I expected. Unlike what we saw with Ferguson, etc., many of the locals are getting on the news, barring a few idiots the first night, and in distinct contrast to the race baiters elsewhere and useful idiots (*koff* Jon Stewart) elsewhere, are actually calling for calm.

Anonymous Scintan June 23, 2015 1:48 AM  

South Carolina is a perfect example. In a state that has historically been one of the bastions of "southern heritage", those seeking social justice were able to get the confederate flag removed from the state grounds in just a couple days. Just like that.

What an impressively foolish argument. Let's see if I can play the same game:

Tougher crime penalties, very much a right wing cause, passed in California soon after the rape and murder of Chelsea King.

See how easy this game is?

Blogger Cail Corishev June 23, 2015 2:11 AM  

those seeking social justice were able to get the confederate flag removed from the state grounds in just a couple days.

So SJWs in SC didn't want to get rid of the Confederate flag until a couple days ago? What a bunch of racists.

Anonymous Androsynth June 23, 2015 2:17 AM  

Your children will nearly all wonder how there could have been opposition to gay rights, how anyone could have ever wanted the confederate flag flown over a state capital, how anyone could ever want deportation.

You're the future in precisely the same way that the Prohibition movement fundamentally transformed US society in the 20th century. Once they got their Constitutional amendment, there was no stopping them, after all.

Blogger luagha June 23, 2015 2:25 AM  

Good point, Cail Corishev.

It reminds me of the story I heard about Wizard's First Rule, and how Jim Frenkel was both the agent for the book, as well as a Contributing Editor at 4 different SF houses including Tor. He told each house that he worked for as an editor that the book was hot, and pushed them to up their bid until they got into a bidding war. When it was done, Tor had bought the book for $275,000 in 1993... then they looked down, and read it and discovered that they bought a middling-ish first novel for a massive quantity.

They proceeded to advertise the hell out of it; buying book displays in all the bookstore chains, magazine and newspaper advertisements; in a desperate attempt to make back their money. And all the other authors got their advertising budgets slashed for the year to make up for it.

Blogger rho June 23, 2015 3:08 AM  

I don't have access to Tor's accounting spreadsheets, but I suspect that they still make considerable bank on some old franchises from old authors. The worst outcome of a boycott of Tor (for Tor Books) would be for the next "Tom Sawyer in Space" to find a publisher elsewhere.

A hundred dozen of disgruntled Tor customers won't make much of a dent in their bottom line. But that 1200 is out of their pool of potential writers, which is a lot smaller than their pool of customers. Ender's Game is pretty good, but it's 30 years old. Publishers now--and in the near future--will rely on faster churn of generational gestalt. Losing a broad base means limiting your available options for future returns.

Irene Gallo is, from what I can find, a fine artist. Unfortunately for her, I can make three calls and get eight artists equally as talented. The artistically and authorial arts aren't uniquely unique--we find new authorities every 15-25 years or so, and cheap-to-free publishing just accelerates the trend.

Boycott Tor, or don't boycott Tor. It doesn't matter. If Tor cannot move with the times, the imprint will disappear into history.

Blogger Brad Andrews June 23, 2015 3:54 AM  

Hasn't he argued in favor many different wars and such? How would that be different for him?

Blogger Brad Andrews June 23, 2015 3:54 AM  

Hasn't he argued in favor many different wars and such? How would that be different for him?

Anonymous Bz June 23, 2015 3:57 AM  

"Gay marriage is and will be a right for a simple reason: The arguments for gay marriage hold sway now with more people that those that oppose it. Because that contingent is small."

As I recall, this was an issue that lost every plebiscite it ever tried to contest and ultimately had to be rammed through by the elites. Let the memory rewriting begin.

Anonymous Bz June 23, 2015 4:01 AM  

rho, perhaps this is a good time for the SJWs to revive their campaign against Orson Scott Card and Ender's Game. I hope Irene Gallo, for one, does not by her silence support that sort of thing.

Anonymous Andrew Spooner Jr June 23, 2015 4:26 AM  

I have never made any bones about making my online personality public, not once ever. In the past, when I was younger this has been a source of great embarrassment for me; as I'm sure some of the dread ilk may recall from my past antics in years gone by; but that has never deterred me from not being a coward. What kind of lothesome creature seeks to separate the self from their own ideas?

Anonymous Andrew Spooner Jr June 23, 2015 4:36 AM  

Somewhere around 94 or 95 when I was reading the "Year's Best Science Fiction" a certain cognitive dissonance started to set in. It wasn't "I don't like this science fiction story." It was "This is in no way a science fiction story, is the editor smoking crack?" Honestly, I would forget about all of this SHW shit in a heartbeat if someone would publish a single mainstream science fiction collection that wasn't 2 thirds utter fucking garbage.

Anonymous Forrest Bishop VFM #0167 June 23, 2015 4:43 AM  

49. the bandit

Stolen just now from an SJW emotion-fest:

"Calls for civility are a tool solely of the privileged."
------------------

Nice heist there, bandit! It sounded too insane to be true, but no such luck.

Searching on "Calls for civility are a tool solely of the privileged." turned up http://metatalk.metafilter.com/22891/Can-calls-for-civility-be-a-barrier-to-civil-discourse
My, what a boatload of SJW fever. Sample specimen, and please wear appropriate protective gear while viewing-

“…That pattern involves complaints that comments made by more marginalized individuals are shrill, harsh, and/or overemotional. … I think it is possible that tone arguments sometimes function as a sort of ad hominem derailing practice out on the blue. Is this something we should be discouraging?

“… In previous MeTas on the topic of respect for trans* people, it’s been made clear that, while some people would like to have MeFi be a safe space, the MeTa consensus is that a lower bar will be enforced—one of civil discourse. (With respect to trans* people, this means that commenters are expected to use the name and pronoun another states they wished used when referring to them.)

“The Manning thread involved a substantive debate about whether Wikipedia’s editorial process should be viewed primarily through the lens of unacceptable transphobia,…

“Posters complaining of a problem with others' tone said they were advocating for civil discourse, and that uncivil sniping at one’s allies dooms the left (something also raised in the recent Macklemore and Scazi threads linked above)…”

Anonymous Anonymous June 23, 2015 5:29 AM  

Who here actually thought they were being courageous by sending e-mails to advertisers, or boycotting a publisher?

My guess is no one.

When I heard the concept of using their own tactics against them, it was like a light bulb going off in my head. "You mean we don't just have to try engaging in debate with a side that does not care to debate? We don't just have to stand back and do nothing?"

Trimmel might as well have written that his favorite tactic to engage the SJWs is baking apple snacks. It would be just as effective as his current one.

Blogger James Dixon June 23, 2015 8:49 AM  

> ...your numbers are so small compared to those who seek social justice that you'll never win....

Then why are you so angry and frightened?

> ... it was the people who opposed the racist history the confederate flag represents to them.

So the history will be forgotten, and thus repeated. Yeah, that's really bright of you.

> And that's why you lose all the time and will continue to lose: Your arguments have no strength with the vast majority of people.

Then why are you so angry and frightened?

> Because that contingent is small.

Proposition 8 passed in California.

> Your children will nearly all wonder how there could have been opposition to gay rights, how anyone could have ever wanted the confederate flag flown over a state capital, how anyone could ever want deportation.

How will they wonder that, when if your side wins no one will ever know those things happened? And again, why are you so angry and frightened?

Anonymous BigGaySteve June 23, 2015 11:38 AM  

Your children will nearly all wonder how there could have been opposition to gay rights, how anyone could have ever wanted the confederate flag flown over a state capital, how anyone could ever want deportation.

Being around non-Asian minorities without someone telling you Not All _____ Are Like That makes people realize reality. If they react to reality to fast you get someone like the Charleston shooter that made the lamestream news (but not of the black crimes) that has 1/4 of is facebook friends black but is shooting a black politician. Gays are going to regret gay marriage especially if they lose domestic partner benefits because of it. Domestic partner benefits are free money while marriage carries the risk of divorce asset splitting & alimony.

People want deportation because there are not enough productive Asians and whites to support all the 3rd worlders now here in a 1st world lifestyle. The first world life style comes from peoples individual contributions, so in a way Mexican President Calderon was right when he said "Where there are Mexicans there is Mexico" because where they are has litter, corruption, rule by drug dealers, and people acting like the age of consent is 12yo just like their homeland.

Blogger SciVo June 24, 2015 6:13 PM  

@ The SJW: And that's why you lose all the time and will continue to lose: Your arguments have no strength with the vast majority of people.

Huh. That's odd. I could've sworn that we controlled the House, the Senate, a majority of state legislatures, and a majority of state governorships. I also thought that gay marriage was being imposed by judicial fiat because they couldn't get it passed the democratic way. Could've sworn! Why, it's almost like you're full of shit.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts