Monday, February 10, 2014

On the latest SFWA brouhaha

I left this comment at Oh Dear: SFWA Bulletin Petition — The Radish.: "There are two kinds of writers: those who do not believe in censorship of any kind, and those who do not believe in censoring the things they believe. As for people’s black friends, there’s no way I would drag mine into this nonsense. Why should we expose them to charges by identitarians of being race traitors?"

Whether it'll be allowed out of moderation, I haven't a clue.

The reference to black friends is to the typical mockery by identitarians of the notion that their opponents might have black friends who think there are things more important than identitarianism.

ETA: I just left this comment at A Trick of Light:
I strongly recommend reading the ACLU’s “What is censorship?” Here’s a bit from it:

“Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are “offensive,” happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups. Censorship by the government is unconstitutional.

“In contrast, when private individuals or groups organize boycotts against stores that sell magazines of which they disapprove, their actions are protected by the First Amendment, although they can become dangerous in the extreme. Private pressure groups, not the government, promulgated and enforced the infamous Hollywood blacklists during the McCarthy period. But these private censorship campaigns are best countered by groups and individuals speaking out and organizing in defense of the threatened expression.”