Complaint About Term “Neo-Nazi” Results in Foz Meadows Post Moving from Black Gate to Amazing Stories

Black Gate published Foz Meadows’ analytical essay “Unempathic Bipeds of Failure: The Relationship Between Stories and Politics” (archived version) on December 7.

As it originally appeared, the post included these lines  —

For the past few years, the Sad and Rabid Puppies – guided by an actual neo-Nazi – have campaigned against what they perceive as the recent politicization of SFF as a genre, as though it’s humanly possible to write a story involving people that doesn’t have a political dimension; as though “political narrative” means “I disagreed with the premise or content, which makes it Wrong” and not “a narrative which contains and was written by people.”

Vox Day, who was not named in Meadows’ piece but is the subject of the linked We Hunted the Mammoth article, immediately published an objection to her “neo-Nazi” characterization, and asked Black Gate to remove it.

I have written to John O’Neill, my former editor at Black Gate, asking him to remove this false, malicious, and materially damaging libel directed at me, and by extension, the Sad and Rabid Puppies. As I was a long-time contributor to Black Gate, Mr. O’Neill knows perfectly well that I am neither a neo-Nazi nor a National Socialist, I have never been a neo-Nazi or a National Socialist, I do not belong to, or subscribe to the tenets of, the German National Socialist Workers Party or any subsequent facsimile, and I do not appreciate the libelous attempts of Ms Meadows, to publicly and falsely assert that I am “an actual neo-Nazi”.

On December 11, Black Gate truncated its version of Meadows’ post. What remains now are two introductory paragraphs and a link indicating the rest can be read at Amazing Stories. (The link is not yet operative, for reasons outlined below.)

Foz Meadows explained for File 770 the steps that led to her essay originally appearing on Black Gate:

I pitched John a piece about the relationship between politics and SFF back on November 14th; he expressed an interest, and I turned it in to him on December 8th. He read, approved and posted it to the site himself.

The day after it appeared, O’Neill wrote to Meadows discussing reaction to the post.

Checking my email, I found two missives from John on the subject. The first warned me that there was some ugliness about insults and doxing me in VD’s comment thread; he said he’d been getting threats from VD’s readers, that VD himself had sent a lengthy email demanding a retraction, and to let him know if I started getting harassed.

The second email was longer: as VD lives in the EU where there are laws about Nazi affiliations, John said, he (VD) was concerned that being called a neo-Nazi could have adverse legal consequences for him, and though John expressed his agreement with and support of what I’d written, he nonetheless didn’t want to risk Black Gate being the source of an actual legal difficulty for someone else. As such, he asked if I’d consider changing my wording as a personal favour to him. I didn’t want to do that for a number of reasons, not least because we’re at a point in history where refusing to acknowledge the neo-Nazism of the alt-right, with which VD is openly affiliated, is a major contributing factor to its normalisation. To me, this was a statement worth defending. VD denies being a misogynist while saying that women shouldn’t have the right to vote, denies being racist while spouting white supremacist dogma, and denies being homophobic while defining queerness as a defect and a moral failing: that he would additionally deny being a neo-Nazi while defending anti-Semitism and espousing xenophobic, ableist and ultranationalist views, among others, fits the established pattern of his behaviour. His dislike of the label doesn’t moot its applicability, and as I pointed out to John, I’m hardly the first person to call him one, whether online or off. John agreed again, but reiterated his preference that Black Gate not risk responsibility for getting someone else in legal trouble, however hypothetically.

O’Neill proposed several ideas for removing the controversy from Black Gate.

Initially, it was suggested that I could either change my wording in the piece and write a footnote explaining why, or else move it to my own blog with a link remaining at Black Gate. However, John also mentioned that Steve Davidson of Amazing Stories had contacted him in support of what I’d written and was willing to back me up on it, and would I consider transferring the unaltered piece to his site? After a further back and forth with both Steve and John, I agreed to that. However, owing to various emails getting caught in spam filters, there was a miscommunication about timing between Steve and John: Steve wanted to research and write a footnote of his own before posting the piece to Amazing Stories, while John assumed it was good to go. Hence the current state of affairs where the truncated version is up at Black Gate, but linking to a URL that hasn’t yet posted the rest.

Essentially, then the issue is this: a man who happily uses feminazi as an insult, gives commenters who think Nazis are preferable to feminists a space on his blog, and who has publicly said that people have a right to be anti-Semitic, thinks my calling him a neo-Nazi is both inaccurate to the point of being libelous and concrete enough to potentially get him in trouble. Rather ironic, really.

Meadows’ expects the essay to reappear before long at Amazing Stories.

Black Gate’s O’Neill published the essay without having committed to keep it online when the inevitable objection came. That one would be coming could be predicted based on Vox Day’s success in extracting apologies from Tor Books’ Tom Doherty and Irene Gallo  after Gallo referenced the Rabid Puppies as a neo-nazi group on Facebook in 2015.

141 thoughts on “Complaint About Term “Neo-Nazi” Results in Foz Meadows Post Moving from Black Gate to Amazing Stories

  1. the Night of the long knives took care of the Socialist side of the Nazis. Not all state control is socialist.

  2. Has anyone else noticed that the latin vox dei translated into colloquial english would be “God’s talk”?

  3. My understanding of website law thus far even internationally is that in the cases where it has come up specifically as a defamation case, the rulings so far have been that no website is considered responsible for what another website says, even if they link to that website. Specifically I was thinking of this case up here a few years ago:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/internet-links-not-libel-top-court-rules-1.1064340

    Quoting from the article: In its unanimous decision to dismiss the case, the court said a hyperlink, by itself, should never be considered “publication” of the content to which it refers. But that doesn’t mean internet users shouldn’t be careful about how they present links. The court says that if someone presents content from the hyperlinked material in a way that repeats the defamatory content, they can be considered publishers and are therefore at risk of being sued for defamation.

    The court agreed with the arguments that applying the definition of publisher to someone who hyperlinks could have a chilling effect on internet use.

    “The internet cannot, in short, provide access to information without hyperlinks. Limiting their usefulness by subjecting them to the traditional publication rule would have the effect of seriously restricting the flow of information and, as a result, freedom of expression,” Madam Justice Rosalie Abella wrote.

    “The potential ‘chill’ in how the internet functions could be devastating, since primary article authors would unlikely want to risk liability for linking to another article over whose changeable content they have no control,” the ruling said.

    To me, the most relevant part is that websites can change at any time without notice, so the link in question may have very different content at any time, which furthers the idea that it would be impossible on even just a practical level to hold someone else accountable for that content just because they linked to it. If anyone knows of more recent definitive rulings specific to EU, I’d be interested to read about them.

    If VD truly wanted to change the linked article, he’d contact the source site and deal with them, but really his actions tend to be less about the practical and more about having yet another opportunity to silence and intimidate his critics. The dude who runs We Hunted The Mammoth is not so easily bullied or snowjobed, as this isn’t his first rodeo dealing with angry men who don’t want their own words discussed negatively, which I am pretty sure VD knows, hence why he’s targeting the people at the Black Gate, who are less inured to his tactics.

  4. Foz Meadows has a tweet thread reacting to the reactions, as it were.
    The bit where she relates some of what Beale’s minions have already said about her is exactly as unpleasant as you’d expect.

    I realise that I’ve spent quite a lot of time talking about Black Gate’s decision, and the technicalities of neo-nazi-dom, and not enough saying the following: Foz Meadows is a good person who wrote a good article and I support her.

  5. Madame Hardy: Godstalk (meant to be divided as god-stalk) is a running meme in File 770. We’re aware from whence Beale got his pseud.

  6. (I was afraid I was missing that!) I am also very fond of the novel by P.C. Hodgell, which is where I assume you got it?

  7. @Madame Hardy,

    Yes, absolutely. We recently had a Fantasy brackets and PC Hodgell didn’t fare nearly as well as some commenters had hoped. “God-stalk” became the catchcry but also a place-marker for those wishing to comment on a thread & simultaneously check the “Notify me of follow-up comments by email.” box.

    I use “ticky” myself.

    Also: welcome!

    On the original post: (as heard elseweb) if it looks like a duck, talks like a duck & steps like a goose…

  8. @Madame Hardy

    I may be missing the joke here. If not, here’s the origin of Vox Dei: “vox populus, vox dei“, or the voice of the people is the voice of God.

    It’s because his real name is “Theodore Beale” and he goes by “Theo” which means God in Greek. His blog is “Theo’s voice” hence “Vox Dei.” So he’s not technically claiming to be the voice of God.

    Or so I’ve been told.

  9. Just to build off of the comments about the ostensible ‘socialism’ in the Nazi Party, the Nazis far from being committed to some sort of socialist agenda, suppressed trade unions, and in practical terms, wages, and were the only government in the time period that engaged in privatization. Indeed, when the party gained its most votes, it was emphasizing its anti-communism over its traditional focus on Antisemitism.

  10. As I read Albert Speer, plenty of Nazis disagreed with Nazi economic policies, insofar as there were any. The Third Reich made any democratic economic planning look organized.

  11. Where it gets confusing is there was a wing of the National Socialists that had an economic policy on the socialist to communist spectrum. This was led by Gregor Strasser(?) and was bigger in Northern Germany whereas Hitler’s power base was in the South. As a sop to party unity Hitler froze the party platform to include these economic ideas. He never actually followed them once attaining power. In many cases he pursued the exact opposite. And of course Strasser and other leaders from that wing ended up in concentration camps (if they weren’t outright killed in the night of long knives). At least that’s my recollection of the history. Been awhile since I’ve read Rise and Fall and such but might be time for a revisit.

  12. The issue is not defamation. The issue is that in Italy, where Teddy lives, there is a crime called “reconstitution of the nationalist socialist party”. It is very unlikely that the Italian police is going to go and arrest him, and if I tried to shop him they’d probably laugh me out of the Questura, never mind that the Italian police is probably in ideological agreement with Teddy baby.

    In other words, he’s pulling the victim card to bully people.

  13. Hampus Eckerman on December 12, 2016 at 12:01 am said:
    “…as VD lives in the EU where there are laws about Nazi affiliations…

    In some countries yes, in some countries no. Beale lives in Italy. AFAIK, Italy does not have such laws (just as Sweden does not). There it is still legal to discriminate against people of different religion or ethnicity.

    Looks like O’Neill has been conned.

    Oh yes, praising the fascist ideology is indeed a felony in Italy, I am proud to say. Now the chances of Teddy being prosecuted for it are nil, but I am really tempted to officially bring the matter to the Digos, which is I think the appropriate body.

  14. @ Anna

    I’m shocked, shocked that VD is “In other words, he’s pulling the victim card to bully people.”

    It’s been all of, oh, a couple of months since the superman whined that anyone was being mean to him.

    Thanks to Steve for hosting the essay, which has some good points in addition to the bonus fun factor of making VD mad.

  15. Also Theo is in Italy as an American citizen, unless he’s managed to become naturalized. He might just be afraid of expulsion.

  16. Sigh. Ok I admit that I did think of notifying the anti terror police, which handles these issues. But it would involve sitting down in front of an official person and starting off with “Ok, this is a long story and it has mostly to do with science fiction. First let me explain about the Puppies…”

    I have a feeling it’s not going to end well. For anybody.

  17. Anna Feruglio: “Theo is in Italy as an American citizen, unless he’s managed to become naturalized. He might just be afraid of expulsion.”

    Ooooh. Rumor is he’s in Europe to evade US taxes. I’m sure US authorities would be delighted to see him.

  18. that he would additionally deny being a neo-Nazi while defending anti-Semitism and espousing xenophobic, ableist and ultranationalist views, among others, fits the established pattern of his behaviour.

    a – to a Marxist, anything to the Right of the Internationale and the wholesale murder of the Bourgeoisie ( which is an openly stated goal in the Communist Manifesto, and which is why Communist societies so regularly degenerate into Killing Fields worse than anything Hitler did ) is “ultranational”

    b – anti-Semitism is not a unique defining characteristic of Nazism. lots of others, who existed centuries before Mussolini ( founder of Fascism, the non-racialist progenitor of National Socialism ), have been rather unhappy with the Jews. current socially acceptable ( that is to say, also not Nazi in any way ) anti-Semites ( not actually the correct term, as Arabs are also Semites ) are the Muslims, who regularly fantasize about wiping Israel off the map and murdering every Jew ( and often Christian, see Cairo ) they can get their hands on.

    let me know when Foz directs 1/10th the opprobrium towards homicidal Muslims that she directs towards Vox who, so far as we know, has never yet murdered anyone.

    c – Vox publishes books by written a leading Jewish intellectual. because he hates Jews?

    d – Vox advocates that Israel should exist and has a right to exist and has said so many times. because he hates Jews?

    e – ‘nationalism’ is another concept which predated Mussolini by many centuries. which, in fact, predates the Jewish tribe ( and Abraham himself ), as recounted in the Torah history. of course, the fact that Jews are nationalists par excellence ( they did start a war against their own English benefactors in order to force the creation of the state of Israel, after all ) logically requires that, if you’re going to idiotically conflate “nationalism” as meaning neo-Nazi, that the Israeli state is the primary neo-Nazi state on the planet today.

    they do have a wall, after all.

    dur hur.

    this whole essay is as intellectually stunted and ludicrous as her rape essay.

  19. Supposedly, from comments on Vox Populi, Steve Davidson and Foz Meadows will be receiving letters (from lawyers) for Christmas.

    Steve/Foz, if this actually happens and you need help with legal fees, please let us know.

  20. @Bob K Mando

    et me know when Foz directs 1/10th the opprobrium towards homicidal Muslims that she directs towards Vox who, so far as we know, has never yet murdered anyone.

    Gee, let’s bring up the usual unrelated goalpost-moving strawperson when the actual subject is whether or not Mr Beale shares beliefs with white supremecists!!

    Re: point 14 of his “Alt-Right Manifesto.”

    The Alt Right believes we must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children.

    Wonder where he could’ve gotten this wonderful idea? (Hint: Its initials start with K.)

  21. Re: issue of legal fees.

    From reading the atheist blogs, I have learned about Popehat which is a site run by a lawyer/lawyers who often take on pro bono cases (not just themselves, but by putting out calls for volunteers). They have defended some of the atheist bloggers, I think.

    Here’s a link to Popehat’s posts tagged with “pro bono”:

    https://popehat.com/?s=pro+bono+lawyers

  22. @Bonnie

    I’m sure he’ll get on that right after he replaces Wikipedia, finishes all the games he’s been “releasing”, and has his vanity press supplant Tor. Oh, and destroys the Hugos.

    Steve and Foz may have a wee bit of a wait ahead of them.

    @bob k. mando – hee hee. Nice to see that even as time goes on, your highly-focused poor understanding of words and terms remain ever reliable.

  23. Anna Feruglio on December 12, 2016 at 4:56 pm said:
    First let me explain about the Puppies…”

    what an utter coward. the Puppies have nothing to do with this.

    either Beale is a neo-Nazi or he is not.

    either Beale has made anti-Semitic comments or he has not.

    you all assert the prior stipulations in the affirmative. make your case to the authorities and he will be convicted of an Italian felony.

    and there would be great rejoicing at File770.

    the source of the statements is immaterial. the sci-fi community is immaterial ( despite your delusions of grandeur ). the Puppies and the Hugos are immaterial.

    the problem, of course, is that
    IF you actualize the legal prosecution for neoNazi / antiSemitism
    THEN you immediately prove without doubt that Beale has been materially harmed by the accusation

    what’s the matter? are you afraid you’ll lose? i mean, this is so obviously a slam dunk, right?

  24. @Bob K Mando

    Why should we care if Mr Beale is harmed by the truth? All he would’ve had to do to avoid this is, you know, not espouse neo-Nazi beliefs.

    But if he really believes what he’s saying, it seems to me he should be willing to stand his ground and suffer the consequences.

  25. Re: point 14 of his “Alt-Right Manifesto.”

    for people who claim to enjoy reading, your language comprehension is rather poor.

    #14 is not an any way a statement of racial supremacy

  26. Bonnie McDaniel on December 12, 2016 at 7:28 pm said:
    Why should we care if Mr Beale is harmed by the truth? All he would’ve had to do to avoid this is, you know, not espouse neo-Nazi beliefs.

    But if he really believes what he’s saying, it seems to me he should be willing to stand his ground and suffer the consequences.

    i never asked you to “care” for Beale, you dumbass.

    i informed you that
    IF the accusation is formally charged before an officer of the court
    THEN you have actualized any purported harm to his reputation and profession

    the question then becomes, “Who will prove their case?” you prove your case and Beale is adjudged guilty of a felony. Theo proves his case and somebody be on the hook for some moolah. and it’s going to one or t’other, there is no middle ground here.

    and Beale is ALREADY standing his ground, *he* is the one forcing you pansies to court.

    consequences may never be the same.

    frankly, all you brave Rabbits are so confident that he’s an obvious neoNazi, i can’t understand why you aren’t eagerly trying to get him into court yourselves.

    why are YOU waiting around? YOU have perfectly good felony charges you could have brought him up on any time in the last five years, surely, and then you wouldn’t have had any Rabid Puppies to deal with.

    you’re the ones lollygagging around. and you have only yourselves and your own cowardice to blame for allowing him to fuck up the Hugos and WorldCon.

  27. @Bob

    Yes, and I have some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you too.

    Come on. If you secure a future for “white children” at the expense of all others, that says you think the pale people are better. Which is arrant bigotry. It’s also arrant nonsense, seeing as we’re all from Africa and pale skin is actually a mutation from the original dark tones.

    Also, stop changing the subject. You know, duck, quack, et cetera.

  28. @Bob

    frankly, all you brave Rabbits are so confident that he’s an obvious neoNazi, i can’t understand why you aren’t eagerly trying to get him into court yourselves.

    Because I don’t live in Italy? And he’s evidently not going to return to the US, for various reasons (eg. purported tax evasion).

    you’re the ones lollygagging around. and you have only yourselves and your own cowardice to blame for allowing him to fuck up the Hugos and WorldCon.

    Bullshit. Mr Beale and the Dead Elk took advantage of a well-known flaw in the nominating process. That flaw was never fixed because it was just assumed that some people wouldn’t want to be “that asshole.” Well, now “that asshole” has come along, and we’ve taken measures to fix the flaw (even if the original proposal turned out to be not as effective as hoped. But we will keep at it).

    And you’re turning to the Gish Gallop, it seems, which is saying anything to distract from the original point. Which is: If Mr Beale didn’t want to be called a neo-Nazi, he shouldn’t have published his “Alt-Right Manifesto” and all the other vile comments he has spouted through the years. I’ve visited his blog from time to time over the last year, and with the election of his “God-Emperor,” he has really cast off all restraint. As I said before, the duck, it is to quack.

  29. Why would anyone here care if Teddy is charged with thought crimes? I would find it funny if he were (and adorable if he were booted from Italy and sent home to be forced to take responsibility for whatever crimes he’s run to Italy to escape), but I don’t particularly care. I just don’t get why he expends so much effort trying to dog whistle his Neo Nazi beliefs. Why not just own them? And, c’mon Bob, you’re either in need of some education regarding the white supremacist movement, or you are not being entirely honest with us here. The 14 words is explicitly white supremacist, both in implication and in historical context. Poor Ted is trying to dog whistle with a foghorn and wondering how he hasn’t fooled anyone.

  30. Bonnie McDaniel on December 12, 2016 at 7:03 pm said:
    Supposedly, from comments on Vox Populi, Steve Davidson and Foz Meadows will be receiving letters (from lawyers) for Christmas.

    Steve/Foz, if this actually happens and you need help with legal fees, please let us know.

    Seconded wholeheartedly.

  31. MODERATOR’S ANNOUNCEMENT: I’m going to turn off comments here overnight. They’ll be switched back on in the morning.

  32. @Mike

    I wonder if you’ll regret not staying in bed…

    +1 to those above re legal costs – if VD proceeds past bluster (hardly a given) then I feel sure that crowd funding will be very successful.

    Robin Reid mentions Popehat. VD took some pops at Ken White of Popehat earlier this year, so he is aware of VD, and he does worthy work connecting people with good lawyers in speech-related cases.

  33. @bob k. mando, if A does something illegal in full view of the entire Internet, and B brings A’s behavior to the attention of competent legal authorities, A does not have grounds for a lawsuit against B.

  34. and Beale is ALREADY standing his ground, *he* is the one forcing you pansies to court.

    Sure. By the way, how is his lawsuit against the SFWA for kicking him out going?

  35. These things take time, Aaron! If you were a lawyer or something, you’d know that! Just wait, Beale’s gonna win so bigly against the SFWA, they won’t be able to afford to put on Hugocon any more. And, liberals are the real fascists.

  36. The reason Beale won’t sue is simple: He might lose, and if he loses there will be a court ruling stating that characterizing him as a Nazi is a fair assessment.

  37. I sure hope those cards say “Happy Hanukah”….or at least Happy Holidays.

    Thanks all for the support notes. Legally, at this juncture, I’m doing what I’m supposed to be doing.
    If support is needed, I will be sure to make it known here.

  38. “d – Vox advocates that Israel should exist and has a right to exist and has said so many times. because he hates Jews?”

    Now, now. Even the real nazis collaborated with the zionists. Not because anyone of them really wanted it, but because it was politicaly advantageous during a the time.

    Steve, lets for the moment laugh at Beales bluster, but I will absolutely do what I can to help you financially if needed.

  39. bob k. mando on December 12, 2016 at 7:03 pm said:

    d – Vox advocates that Israel should exist and has a right to exist and has said so many times. because he hates Jews?

    Vox believe Jewish people, regardless of their nationality, should live in Isreal and not the USA and that the presence of Jewish people in the USA is harmful to the USA. That is manifestly anti-Semitic.

    You are using the but-thats-only-ethnic-cleansing-not-genocide defence. Also not inconsistent with how Nazis* behaved https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haavara_Agreement

    *[for the record I don’t think Vox is a neo-Nazi. A misogynistic crypto-Fascist who pushes anti-Semitic propaganda and who likes to celebrate violent extremist murderers and supports men sexually assaulting members of their family but maybe not a neo-Nazi]

  40. @Aaron

    I believe his argument is currently that the SFWA haven’t actually expelled him (via some sophistry about their constitution) so he doesn’t need to sue them.
    It’s really on the level of “I’m not fired because I quit!” isn’t it.

  41. bob k. mando on December 12, 2016 at 7:03 pm said:

    let me know when Foz directs 1/10th the opprobrium towards homicidal Muslims that she directs towards Vox who, so far as we know, has never yet murdered anyone.

    …wait, that line seems very familiar…

    “For example, on the one hand rugged manly men are criticised for “man spreading” – a medically necessary way of sitting for manly men who must keep their men-parts well ventilated – while on the other hand the so called “social justice warriors” spend zero time criticising the sack of Rome in 410 A.D. by the Visigoths. Indeed many of these so called “social justice warriors” are, in fact, actual Goths (or their degenerate cousins Emos). Are we seriously to believe that a manly man simply taking due care and attention of his most precious seed is somehow far, far worse than the destruction of the cradle of civilisation by a horde of Robert Smith lookalikes???” Timothy the Talking Cat: Walrus Mindset October 2016

Comments are closed.