Journal smittyoneeach's Journal: Guess I'm an Evil League of Evil sympathizer 30
On the one hand, you have a faction that is broadly left-wing in its politics and believes it has a mission to purge SF of authors who are reactionary, racist, sexist et weary cetera. This faction now includes the editors at every major SF publishing imprint except Baen and all of the magazines except Analog and controls the Science Fiction Writers of America (as demonstrated by their recent political purging of Theodore Beale, aka Vox Day). This group is generally frightened of and hostile to indie publishing. Notable figures include Patrick & Theresa Nielsen Hayden and John Scalzi. I'll call this faction the Rabbits, after Scalzi's "Gamma Rabbit" T-shirt and Vox Day's extended metaphor about rabbits and rabbit warrens.
On the other hand, you have a faction that is broadly conservative or libertarian in its politics. Its members deny, mostly truthfully, being the bad things the Rabbits accuse them of. It counteraccuses the Rabbits of being Gramscian-damaged cod-Marxists who are throwing away SF's future by churning out politically-correct message fiction that, judging by Amazon rankings and other sales measures, fans don't actually want to read. This group tends to either fort up around Baen Books or be gung-ho for indie- and self-publishing. Notable figures include Larry Correia, Sarah Hoyt, Tom Kratman, John C. Wright, and Vox Day. I'll call this group the Evil League of Evil, because Correia suggested it and other leading figures have adopted the label with snarky glee.
I'm mostly an ESR fan; he at least can argue rationally, and calls it like he sees it. This is a respectable style.
The only problem I have with the "Rabbit" characterization is that actual rabbits tend to reproduce, whereas these degenerate statist creeps tend toward confusion about the genitals in particular, beside life in general. When these intellectual dead heads have gone on, we can look back on the rubble of this day and (hopefully) communicate the Rabbit fallacies to the young, minimizing their idiotic impact.
Have to be read, first (Score:2)
I encourage sci-fi enthusiasts to pick one of those five names at random and read one of their books. You can usually find them at Amazon for less than a few bucks, sometimes 99 cents.
Then come back here and tell us what you think about this new wave of conservative sci-fi authors who liberals are preventing from writing books. Apparently, despite the best efforts of these liberal bunnies, their books are ubiquito
Re: (Score:1)
For fiction, the next book I may pick up will be the next George R.R.Martin installment.
Maybe in the next decade, when my little ones are in school, I'll have time to fanny about with fiction in a real way.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll take that challenge. I've wanted to read John C. Wright since I read his conversion story on line, he's one of those rare Atheist-to-Catholic-skip-the-Protestants converts.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Haven't read him either. I need to read more Catholic science fiction- it might give me some hope in this valley of despair I'm sinking into.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
True enough. But what I despair of is the temporal, not the eternal. I remain unconvinced that a Kingdom of God, Hold the God, as the AC puts it in the other reply, can succeed. Every time it has been tried, it has failed. And unlike the AC, I see the "Hold the God, give Power to Man" in every war of acquisition ever fought.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, given that Christendom lasted for 1000 years, and the United States of America is falling apart before her 250th birthday, I'd have to say consent of the governed, with checks and balances is pretty much a failure.
I guess those "very few exceptions" are the great Pagan Empires, all of which got around the God in Government thing in a slightly different fashion: They simply named the emperor a God (Japan, China, Egypt, Greece, Rome, France, Germany, Spain, the Maya, the Inca, the Aztecs, I'm probably
Re: (Score:2)
"Given that "Christendom" is not a country (if it's a group of countries, then you've already lost - you need a group of countries to compare to a single USA), your statement is simply nonsense."
Hint- the United States is a group of countries- that's why the word "States" is plural.
"And success is not only measured in longevity."
When it comes to political systems, it is the only measure that counts in the long run (see what I did there?).
"1000 years of oppression by a church that persecuted scientists, burn
Re: (Score:2)
"Hint- those "States" - a specific set of states (as in verifiable, unlike your Christendom) - agreed to a Constitution that defined the United States as a single Republic (again verifiable, unlike your vague group of doubleplusgood true Scotsman). Common parlance refers to that as single country."
Yes, just as the countries of Christendom were supposed to abide by Canon Law (when they didn't, it caused wars). Common parlance leads to common thinking, and is not fit for uncommon human beings.
"No, I don't se
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Returns? From where? The "King" never left. Tag, you're it...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I remain unconvinced that a Kingdom of God, Hold the God, as the AC puts it in the other reply, can succeed.
Good, because I firmly believe that's what we're supposed to learn. We got ourselves kicked out of the Garden because we thought we knew better than God, so God said fine, try it your way for a while. So He left us temporarily wandering through the desert (i.e. what post-Fall human existence is), to give us time to think about what we've done, and to come to the realization that, ultimately, we need God and can't manage on our own successfully.
So I would say don't despair too much about the temporal, as r
sci fi too, huh (Score:1)
I learned a new word a couple of months ago, coming across it believe it or not in a Wikipedia article, in a section on the early life of Julian Assange: agitprop. Your vocabulary level is lofty so I don't assume your not knowing it, but as a summary for anyone else, it's basically the long-known practice of insertion of communist values and messages and urgings (ergo "propaganda" and "agitation") into art and entertainment and other things.
This so-called intellectual dead headism will never "have gone on"
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
My go to phrase: "most people don't mind the bootheel of authority as long as it is on their foot, not on their neck".
For the topic of your journal: thanks for the list. I've read some excerpts from Vox Day, and liked it far more than the politically correct pap that is coming from the major publishers. Most of those novels, in addition to narrative flaws introduced by hewing to a message rather than the story and characters, make Star Wars look like hard science fiction.
Re: (Score:1)
If the love of money is the root of all evil, the love of power is the root of all tyranny.
Re: (Score:2)
If the love of money is the root of all evil, the love of power is the root of all tyranny.
Stealing that quote...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
It's not about power, it's about morality. For politicians it's partially about power, but they are less than 1% of us. For the average Slashdotter for example, it's not about ruling you and me just to rule us, it's about achieving certain outcomes.
Eve didn't tempt Adam with the apple because she wanted to herd him. She was duped. Lefties know not what they do, or who they serve. They and propagators of other types of anti-wisdom are merely the instruments through which the dedicated tormentor of manki
Re: (Score:1)
d_r really hates it when I summarize Marx as "the Kingdom of God, hold the God," but there it is. Satan is a broad-spectrum destroying, spinning lies to taste for each audience individually, tempting everyone to buy all manner of falsehoods.
Re: (Score:1)
Furthermore -- Vlad the Impaler was actually a hero, as he successfully defended his corner on Europe from the muslim hordes. The whole impaling stuff was the beginning of psychological warfare -- and it was VERY effective.
Re: (Score:1)
> Progress is the fruit
I hadn't taken it that far in my head at the time, but now that you have for me, yes. Progressivism is the promise of a perfect society, created by man. It includes the evolution of man, by man, into perfect beings. It's secular humanism taken to the extent of a religion.
I believe that things can be improved, but only to make them less sucky/to a certain extent. Progressivism is belief that we (i.e. man) can always make things better, that we should and can progress towards a man-m
Re: (Score:1)