The Nebulas, The Hugos, The Sad Puppies, and the SJWs
One of the ongoing frustrations for every writer who is not also a politically correct, progressive true believer — and there sure are plenty of authors who are — is that in the online world where most of us ply our trade and promote our work, the depredations of “social justice” types are unavoidable. Social justice activists are forever offended about some benign comment. They’re always reading your mind and telling you what you believe; they’re always happy to tell you what is in your heart; they trade in code words and “dog whistles” and “micro-aggressions.” Whenever confronted with opinions they do not like, they become apoplectic. The typical progressive cannot stand dissent and will go to any length to silence conservatives, libertarians, Christians, and any other human being whose worldview does not fit within the rigidly fascist guidelines of progressive groupthink. And if you are a conservative, a libertarian, a Christian, or simply not politically correct, your work will be denigrated, your person insulted, and your character questioned by legions of progressive drones marching in lockstep to left-wing ideology.
A favorite tactic of the social-justice-obsessed left is shouting down, destroying, and otherwise marginalizing anyone whose opinion is not progressive enough to suit them. Are you a straight, white male? It doesn’t matter how well you write, then; you are a bad person because you are not a woman, a gay man, and any race but white. Your work is the result of “privilege” and not of talent. Your motives are questionable and your attitudes are presumed worthy of condemnation before they are expressed. In this environment, it is no surprise that a meaningful dialogue between the legions of progressive writers and the smaller but vocal minority of conservative authors is not possible. You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who is, by definition, irrational. When they’re not screaming “racism” or “homophobia” or otherwise accusing their ideological opponents of myriad crimes against humanity, social justice activists are waging war on the livelihoods of any and all who oppose them.
I’ve explained in other entries that barriers to entry in the world of publishing are lower than they’ve ever been. If you’re willing to spend the money to self-publish, you not only can do so relatively quickly, but you can reach the potential audience that is all of Amazon’s customers (even if brick-and-mortar booksellers refuse to stock paper books published directly through Amazon). What you should take away from this is that in a market glutted with the work of amateurs, the filtering process is that much more important. As the influence of the “Big Five” publishers wanes, it is essential that some method exist to screen the works of fiction vying for your attention. One of the ways one might do this is to select the work of acclaimed authors — that is, authors who have received awards.
In the universe of contemporary science fiction, this makes organizations like the Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA, which hands out the Nebulas) and the World Science Fiction Society (WSFS, which awards the Hugos) influential. The people who hold sway in these organizations have power and influence in the world of science fiction literature. If you can determine who wins awards, you determine whose work becomes known and therefore popular. Awarding organizations are therefore gatekeepers, at least of a sort. They can perform a very useful function in a market bloated with otherwise unworthy efforts.
Therein also lies a problem, for when these organizations are dominated by one political outlook, the result is the predictable marginalization of anyone who does not toe the line espoused by the gatekeepers. Take SFWA, for example. From 2010 to 2013, the president of the Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America was one John Scalzi. No more wretched a Social Justice Whiner (SJW, sometimes erroneously defined as “Social Justice Warrior”) are you likely to find. Scalzi, arguably a talented writer, is nonetheless a mewling, bedwetting progressive. His diatribe, “Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There is” sums up everything that makes Social Justice Whiners tick. In their hatred for white men, they fail to see the hypocrisy in branding others racist. In their attempt to exclude anyone who does not fall into a favored progressive demographic — minorities, homosexuals, women — they fail to see the absurdity in their demands for inclusion and tolerance. Among Scalzi’s fellow travelers are ogres like K.T. Bradford, an arrogant, finger-wagging Jabba the Hutt in a fright wig who thinks writing should be judged, not on how well it is written, but on the skin color and wedding tackle of the author.
Science fiction authors who refuse to live in politically correct prison camps have fought back by organizing to influence voting for relevant awards. The Hugo Awards, for example, recently saw tremendous gains for “right wing” authors, where “right wing” is “anything to the left of John Scalzi and K.T. Bradford.” Arthur Chu’s elaborate histrionics in Salon would be merely embarrassing if his mischaracterization of the voting process did not harm good people’s reputations. He described the Hugo award process as “right-wing backlash” and non-progressive authors, readers, and voters as a “small group of deranged trolls.” Meanwhile, respected and award-winning author Brad R. Torgersen, one of the prime movers behind the “Sad Puppies” campaign to bring political balance to the Hugo awards, was maligned in “Entertainment Weekly” as a racist misogynist. He promptly shut up his critics by posting a photo of his family, including his adorable daughter and the black woman who is his wife. This did little, however, to undo the lies told about him by EW’s Isabella Bidenharn [which EW “corrected” after the harm was wrought].
The damage done online by SJWs to the reputations of conservatives, libertarians, Christians, and other “right-wingers” is very real. They control many media outlets and can brand you an unperson — a homophobe, a racist, a hatemonger – as quickly as one of their bloggers can press “send.” The SJW cannot exist without the Internet. If not for social media, if not for the power of the virtual mob, individual SJWs would be laughed out of any room they entered. If a Social Justice Whiner approached you on the street and demanded that you “check your privilege,” you would scoff at such a person and perhaps even push them out of your way. Most SJW types are weaklings, both mentally and physically. Like all cowards, they only have power when there are a great many of them… or when they have the Internet to shield them from the physical consequences of endlessly confronting, insulting, and accusing decent human beings of thoughtcrime.
Our lives are both connected through and dominated by social media. If you are an author, it is not enough to hide your opinions, to express only the weakest of public sentiments, and to hope no one on the left discovers that you are a closeted “right-winger” whose work should be condemned regardless of its merits. You must also write only politically correct, boring drivel — the type of social-justice-approved pablum that makes for dreadful writing and even worse reading. It is no wonder, then, that authors whose political outlook is not aligned with the simpering leftists are stepping into the light in increasing numbers, making their opinions known and letting their work speak for itself. The online world, and the awards within our industry circles, represent ground that we dare not concede to the SJWs. If we let them hold sway, we will all live in that progressive gulag, that politically correct prison camp, in spirit if not in body. That is a dystopian future that rivals the bleakest work of any science fiction author.