(1) TECH IMPROVED, ETHICS STAYED THE SAME. The Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne Jr., in “Yes, we should be outraged about Facebook” analyzes The 480, a 1964 near-future sf novel by Eugene Burdick (co-author of Fail-Safe) in which “people who work with slide rules and calculating machines which can remember an almost infinite bits of information” have divided the U.S. into 480 demographic groups in order to manipulate them into supporting a dark-horse Republican presidential candidate. Dionne brings up this novel in the context of the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica scandal and notes that Burdick based his novel on efforts by Simulatrics Corp. to support the Kennedy campaign in 1960.
(2) INVOLUNTARY EXPERIMENT. The Guardian says Kim Stanley Robinson told them — “Empty half the Earth of its humans. It’s the only way to save the planet”.
Cities are part of the system we’ve invented to keep people alive on Earth. People tend to like cities, and have been congregating in them ever since the invention of agriculture, 10,000 or so years ago. That’s why we call it civilisation. This origin story underlines how agriculture made cities possible, by providing enough food to feed a settled crowd on a regular basis. Cities can’t work without farms, nor without watersheds that provide their water. So as central as cities are to modern civilisation, they are only one aspect of a system.
There are nearly eight billion humans alive on the planet now, and that’s a big number: more than twice as many as were alive 50 years ago. It’s an accidental experiment with enormous stakes, as it isn’t clear that the Earth’s biosphere can supply that many people’s needs – or absorb that many wastes and poisons – on a renewable and sustainable basis over the long haul. We’ll only find out by trying it.
Right now we are not succeeding. The Global Footprint Network estimates that we use up our annual supply of renewable resources by August every year, after which we are cutting into non-renewable supplies – in effect stealing from future generations. Eating the seed corn, they used to call it. At the same time we’re pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at a rate that is changing the climate in dangerous ways and will certainly damage agriculture.
(3) TOLKIEN AND LEWIS AT WAR. As reported here in December, a five-part documentary film series A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War about “the transformative friendship between C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien forged amid the trauma of war,” is in production. A new trailer has been posted. The film’s release date is set for November 11, 2018, to coincide with the 100-year anniversary of the end of World War I.
The documentary film series, “A Hobbit, a Wardrobe, and a Great War,” explores how the experience of two world wars shaped the lives and literary imagination of two internationally famous authors and friends, J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. Based on Joseph Loconte’s New York Times bestseller, the film examines how Tolkien’s combat experience during the First World War—at the Battle of the Somme—launched him on his literary quest. The film reveals how the conflict reinforced Lewis’s youthful atheism—he was injured in combat—but also stirred his spiritual longings. The film traces the careers of both men at Oxford University, and their deepening friendship as they discover a mutual love of medieval, romantic literature. Facing the threat of another world war, Tolkien and Lewis reach back into their earlier experience of war as they compose their epic works of fantasy, The Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia.
(4) HOWARD AWARD. The eligibility list for the 2018 Robert E, Howard Foundation Awards has been posted.
This is full list of eligible candidates for the 2018 REH Foundation Awards. Legacy Circle Members will select the top three nominees in each category from this preliminary ballot. From those final nominees all Premium REHF members will vote for the winners. The awards will be given out at a special ceremony at Howard Days in Cross Plains on June 8.
(5) APOLLO STILLS PUT IN MOTION. Mark Hepworth sent a link to these “Very cool Apollo gifs” at Medium — “I looked through all 14,227 Apollo photos… and made GIFs.”
A few days ago Jared Kinsler compiled an excellent selection of the photos of the Apollo missions, which you should check out here…
(6) DINO LUST. They look like horns, but in reality they were babe magnets: “Triceratops may have had horns to attract mates”.
Dinosaurs like the Triceratops may have had horns and frills to attract a mate, a new study suggests.
Ceratopsian, or horned dinosaurs, were previously thought to have developed this ornamentation to distinguish between different species.
This has now been ruled out in a study published in a Royal Society journal.
Instead, the aggressive-looking armour may actually have evolved to signal an animal’s suitability as a partner, known as socio-sexual selection.
“Individuals are advertising their quality or genetic make-up,” explained Andrew Knapp, lead author of the research reported in Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
“We see that in peacocks too, with their tail feathers.”
(7) SF OBSCURE. Echo Ishii’s search through TV history leads to “Hard Time on Planet Earth”.
Hard Time on Planet Earth was an American series broadcast for 13 episodes in 1989 starring Martin Kove. An elite alien military officer is sentenced to earth as his penalty for rebellion. He is given human form-much weaker than his older form-and sent to Earth to improve his violent behavior. (Or maybe curb his violent instincts or learn about goodness, it all gets a bit murky.) Anyway, he’s banished to Earth with an AI system called Control to monitor him. He’s given the name Jesse. Control is a giant, floating mechanical eye. Jesse has to help people in need to get back into the Ruling Council’s favor.
(8) TODAY’S BIRTHDAY CAPTAIN
- Born March 22, 1931 – William Shatner
(9) HE’S FEELING BETTER. An ad was gaining clicks by falsely reporting Shatner’s death, and the actor teed off on Facebook: “William Shatner Rails at Facebook After Being Told That He’s Dead”.
“Hey @facebook isn’t this your messenger app? What’s up with you allowing this Acocet Retail Sales ad to pass your muster? Thought you were doing something about this?” Shatner wrote.
A Facebook employee later responded with the assurance that the ad and the page had been removed from Facebook. Still, news of Shatner’s demise couldn’t come at a worse time for the actor, as he is expected to turn 87 on Thursday.
It also couldn’t come at a worse time for Facebook, which has been reeling recently over news that 50 million Facebook users unknowingly had their information lifted by data firm Cambridge Analytica.
(10) MEMEWHILE. Elsewhere on the internet, #AddShatnerToAnything was the order of the day. For example…
Gorn with the Wind#AddShatnerToAnything pic.twitter.com/gxK02RNZDF
— Meanwhile in Canada (@MeanwhileinCana) March 22, 2018
(11) COMICS SECTION.
- John King Tarpinian tuned into Broomhilda just as she was about to take gas.
(12) CONS AS PUBLIC UTILITY. Will Shetterly considered himself to have nothing in common with Jon Del Arroz apart from also having been banned from a convention. Well, now that Shetterly has cast shade on Jim C. Hines’ post about JDA’s track record of harassment, in “Two privileges of attending science fiction conventions, and a little about Jon Del Arroz’s law suit”, they have that in common, too. However, this passage struck me as the most interesting part of the post:
Before conventions began banning people, the fundamental privilege of attending science conventions wasn’t discussed because, by capitalist standards, the privilege was fair: anyone who had money could go, and anyone who didn’t, well, capitalist fairness is never about people who don’t have money.
But now that conventions have begun banning people, it’s time to acknowledge the second privilege. Though the genre has grown enormously, it’s still a small community at the top. If you hope to become a professional, it can be enormously helpful to attend WorldCon, the World Fantasy Convention, and literary conventions like ReaderCon, WisCon, and Fourth Street Fantasy. Once your career has begun, you need to be able to attend the Nebulas Awards too. Obviously, only the very privileged can go to most of those conventions regularly, but anyone who wants to make a career in this field should, every year, pick one from from Column A (WorldCon, World Fantasy, Nebula Awards), one from Column B (ReaderCon, WisCon, Fourth Street Fantasy), and one from Column C (local convention, regional convention, major commercial convention like DragonCon).
Being banned from any convention is an enormous blow to a writer’s ability to be a writer, and especially to a new writer’s ability to last in the field. It keeps you from meeting fellow professionals and getting useful tips, and it keeps you from making new fans.
(13) HIMTOO. Shetterly’s post prompted this recollection from Bruce Arthurs:
Not "banned" from 1978 Worldcon, but I wasn't allowed to enter the registration area for my membership packet. I just had Hilde pick it up and bring it out to me. (I'd called out people, in print, for their reprehensible behavior, especially the forced firing of Rusty Hevelin.)
— Bruce Arthurs (@BruceArthursAZ) March 22, 2018
(14) BRANDED. The logical companion volume to Gene Wolfe’s The Death of Doctor Island and Other Stories and Other Stories, eh John?
I want to write a novel titled "Collected Short Stories" just to mess with everyone.
— John Scalzi (@scalzi) March 22, 2018
(15) NEVER TOO LATE. Kim Wilde is making a comeback, with added science fiction: “Kim Wilde says aliens inspired her pop comeback”.
As a keen sci-fi fan (Arrival and ET are her favourite films), Wilde is fully embracing the theme of her new album – from the sleeve’s terrific B-movie artwork, to the stage show for her upcoming tour.
“I’ve got this little wardrobe set up, of fantastic capes and cloaks,” says the singer, who previously bought her outfits at jumble sales.
“We’re going to go a bit sci-fi and we’re going to a bit glam rock. It’ll be sexy and fun and something to put a big smile on people’s faces. I’m really excited about it.”
(16) A CLOCKWORK COD. Do Asimov’s Laws apply here? “Researchers create robotic fish that can swim underwater on its own”.
Observing fish in their natural ocean habitats goes a long way toward understanding their behaviors and interactions with the surrounding environment. But doing so isn’t easy. Using underwater vehicles to get a look at these species is one option, but they often come with a slew of limitations. Some are loud and use propellers or jet-propulsion that disturb fish and their surroundings. And many are designed in a way that doesn’t allow them to blend in with the marine environment. Controlling such vehicles is also a challenge and in many cases, they have to be tethered to a boat. But researchers at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) have come up with a potential solution — a soft robot that can swim on its own underwater.
(17) SEE FOOD. Apparently no fish were harmed in the making of this food? “3D-printed sushi looks like the perfect 8-bit meal” at Cnet.
At this year’s SXSW, Japanese technology company Open Meals revealed its Pixel Food Printer, which 3D-prints edible sushi, and other food, that looks like it was meant for a retro video game.
The pixelated food, including sushi and burgers, is printed first by using the Food Base digital platform that stores data on the exact flavor, shape, texture, color and nutrients of foods.
Then the actual Pixel Food Printer uses a robotic arm that prints out small pixel cubes made of edible gel with the corresponding flavors, colors and nutrients of the type of food being printed out.
(17) SEA PLASTIC. Printing seafood may be necessary at this rate: “Plastic patch in Pacific Ocean growing rapidly, study shows”.
Predictions suggest a build-up of about 80,000 tonnes of plastic in the “Great Pacific Garbage Patch” between California and Hawaii.
This figure is up to sixteen times higher than previously reported, say international researchers.
One trawl in the centre of the patch had the highest concentration of plastic ever recorded.
“Plastic concentration is increasing – I think the situation is getting worse,” said Laurent Lebreton of The Ocean Cleanup Foundation in Delft, Netherlands, which led the study.
“This really highlights the urgency to take action in stopping the in-flow of plastic into the ocean and also taking measures to clean up the existing mess.”
Waste accumulates in five ocean areas, the largest being the patch located between Hawaii and California.
(18) KGB. Ellen Datlow shared her photos taken at Fantastic Fiction at KGB on March 21.
Despite our blizzard, people did indeed show up for our reading. They were rewarded by hearing wonderful work by Kelly Robson and Chandler Klang Smith.
(19) SCI-FI SAVES DOG. David Gerrold’s “Jasmine and Friends Book Sale” at GoFundMe is raising money to pay a vet bill and assist a couple of friends. Donate to it and you get some of David’s books.
Our little Jasmine is sixteen years old. She specializes in naps and laps. A few weeks ago, she stopped eating and appeared to be in serious decline.
The vet determined that she had developed a serious abscess in her mouth and needed immediate surgery before she weakened further. She ended up having seven teeth extracted as well.
The good news is that she survived the operation, her mouth is healing, and she’s eating again. She’s out of pain and she’s acting like her old self.
The bad news is that the vet bill was high. Very high. We thought we’d be able to cover it, but despite the vet helping us with a payment plan, we’re still falling short.
Add to that, we have a couple friends who could use a serious financial infusion. Several people on Facebook asked if they could help, so we decided to do it this way.
We’re holding a book sale.
Any donation at all will get you a link to download a set of three stories: “The Bag Lady,” “The Great Milo,” and “Chester” (which was inspired by Jasmine’s best buddy of fifteen years.)
Any donation of $20 or more gets you a link to download a copy of “Jacob”, my vampire novel, plus all the previous.
Any donation of $40 or more gets you a link to download a copy of “thirteen, fourteen, fifteen o’clock” plus all the previous.
Any donation of $60 or more gets you a link to download a copy of “Entanglements and Terrors” (my short story collection) plus all the previous.
Any donation of $80 or more gets you a link to download a copy of “A Promise O f Stars” (another short story collection) plus all the previous.
Any donation of $100 or more gets you all of the above, plus a copy of the Megapack, a flash drive with a half million words of stories, scripts, and stuff. (You’ll have to include a shipping address.)
[Thanks to John King Tarpinian, Meredith, JJ, Chip Hitchcock, Andrew Porter, Martin Morse Wooster, Mike Kennedy, and Carl Slaughter for some of these stories. Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day Dann.]
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
@Kathodus —
Right.
I agree that these organizations are essentially violent — in philosophy if not in practice, and usually in practice as well.
That doesn’t mean that initiating violence with them is either justified or productive.
So let them throw the first punch, and prove our point for us. When we initiate violence, we only play into their hands and hand them ammunition.
@Darren —
Very cooel! Congrats to Kurt and all involved!
Just a couple brief comments, if you’re going to disrupt fascist events, you need to recognize that there’s going to be an element of confrontation involved in that process. I’m not terribly concerned with the niceties of who hit first in those situations because I have a good idea who’s involved on the other side and how they organize. The nature of that confrontation often changes with numbers, and often overwhelming numbers themselves intimidate fascists without the need for explicit violence, but not necessarily. The fights for instance at the first Yiannopoulos were largely initiated by a small group of Proud Boys looking for a fight, something largely unacknowledged by the mainstream media.
In addition, I don’t think that organizing to combat fascists taking over spaces goes against democratic principles, even confrontational organizing. The principle is the defense of that space from those who would wish to take it away, which, yes, is the goal of fascists. There’s a long tradition of this kind of work going back to the Battle of Cable Street.
A final brief note on the ACLU, which is an organization that has contributed to the bettering of the United States in a lot of ways. I’m generally supportive of the organization, but there are moments in which I don’t agree with them such on their positions on commercial speech for instance and some of the particular ways they have defended fascist organizing, but they even recognized that they needed to change the way they approached events such as Charlottesville afterwards.
Er… not to reopen old wounds, but wasn’t Breen banned from 1964’s WorldCon? I mean, it isn’t that new a thing. The level of their harrassment wasn’t equal to what Breen did, I’m just pointing out that cons have banned people before and they will ban people again.
@Robert —
Absolutely. I have no qualms about confrontation so long as it is not physically violent. Confront away.
See above. As long as it is not physically violent, I’m with you 100%.
Initiating violence, though, is neither justified nor productive.
If there are going to be punches thrown, let them throw the first ones.
Me too.
And now I have to go “slop the hogs” (feed the livestock) before dark, so I’ll be away from the laptop for a while. Don’t everybody applaud at once. 😉
WRT to debate vs. punching Nazis, I think that a reference to the “Paradox of Tolerance” is in order.
IOW, if you tolerate Nazi-like behavior, you allow the Nazis to win, because they don’t care about such niceties. Remember that Hitler was freely elected. And then that was the last election held.
Try this article. Also Google ‘paradox of tolerance’
When you disrupt fascist organizing, there’s probably going to be violence, and also if you don’t disrupt fascist organizing, there’s probably going to be violence because fascists are violent. I’d suggest looking into the history of these struggles through the last century and into this one, rather than proposing a response that has little to do with the reality of this kind of situation.
Few of us are fortunate enough to live in a fictional universe written by an author who agrees with us.
This is a good article http://hugoclub.blogspot.com.au/2018/03/tomorrow-isnt-about-yesterday.html
Indeed. And why should one person who likes to behave badly get to spoil the weekend for lots of other people? Why shouldn’t, instead, the majority of people who know how to conduct themselves civilly in public enjoy the weekend, while the rare/occasional person who’s determined to behave badly is prohibited from attending the event?
Obviously, there will be controversy and flaws with the way banning is exercised (is it consistent? is it fair? is there a universally agreed-upon standard? (no) etc.). But I am all in favor of the notion that one person who’s going to ruin or who has ruined a private/paid event for numerous other people, by behaving badly, should be told s/he’s just not welcome and can’t attend.
That said, hey, an enormous number of people (and not just the ones in Alabama who voted for him) actively wanted Roy Moore to be elected to the US Senate. So, no, clearly, we will never all agree on what constitutes ban-worthy behavior, and banning someone will always be controversial. But I think anyone who objects to the very notion of banning is effectively saying that it’s completely acceptable for one badly behaved person to ruin a convention for all other attendees.
@Techgrrl —
I agree. However, there’s a huuuuuuuuuuuge gulf between tolerating Nazi-like behavior and throwing the first punch.
@Robert —
and
I agree. So let them throw the first punch, and thereby prove our point about them being the violent ones..
There’s lots of ways to disrupt fascist organizing without throwing the first punch. Refer back to that article Lenora cited.
You keep saying that, and not much else. I’ve spent a fair amount of time talking to anti-fascist organizers and my positions largely come out of hearing from their experiences, especially from folks who live in towns where fascists have dominated spaces and subcultures. These sorts of confrontations are messy and are often long-term struggles where its difficult to say what the first punch is. It’s also worth noting that a lot of the tactics and strategies discussed in the article are enacted by the same people involved in direct confrontation. This isn’t an either or situation. I finally also note that your principle hasn’t stopped the mainstream media from presenting anti-fascist organizers as instigators even when they didn’t start the fight, which as the article notes is most often true.
@Robert —
Yup. It was true the first time I said it, and it’s still true now.
If you want Something a Little Different, maybe you could go back and answer the questions I asked several posts ago. Here they are again:
For those of you who believe in punching a Nazi: in what way do you believe that initiating violence has any sort of benefit that legal means of opposition do not? In what way do you believe that initiating violence benefits the fabric of our society? In what way does initiating violence not hand moral and strategic ammunition to our enemies? In what way do you believe that initiating violence makes us look like the good guys?
I agree. That does not mean that we should advocate throwing the first one.
Sure. And I’m with them up until the point where they throw that first punch. It isn’t necessary, it isn’t justified, and it’s counterproductive.
And remember: “direct confrontation” is not the same thing as “initiating physical violence”.
I never said it was. In fact, I’m the one who keeps pointing out that “if you’re not physically punching a Nazi then you’re tolerating them” (I’m paraphrasing) is a false dichotomy.
Resistance, confrontation, and disruption do not need to involve initiating violence.
I agree. That does not mean we should voluntarily hand them ammunition with which to **justifiably** condemn us.
RedWombat: Few of anybody are fortunate enough to practice Buddhism, as well.
For those of you who believe in punching a Nazi: in what way do you believe that initiating violence has any sort of benefit that legal means of opposition do not? In what way do you believe that initiating violence benefits the fabric of our society? In what way does initiating violence not hand moral and strategic ammunition to our enemies? In what way do you believe that initiating violence makes us look like the good guys?
Me: These are platitudes that really show a lack of understanding of social struggle in this country, which has historically often been very violent, and mostly illegal. Take a look at the labor movement, for instance, that has created the conditions for a safer workplace and any sense of a meaningful living wage. It’s the product of very violent struggles, from the fights in the mines in West Virginia to the sit down strikes in Michigan and the general strike in Minneapolis in 1934. (The list is much longer than this.) You can also turn to the self-organization of former African-American soldiers in support of the civil rights movement and the black freedom movement in general. (For a longer discussion, see Charles E. Cobb’s That Nonviolent Stuff’ll Get You Killed.) The large non-violent side of the civil rights movement was also not a legal form of struggle. It’s central tactics broke the law. It also can’t be separated from the uprisings that occurred at the time. So, no, I don’t think your claims really hold up.
I never said it was. In fact, I’m the one who keeps pointing out that “if you’re not physically punching a Nazi then you’re tolerating them” (I’m paraphrasing) is a false dichotomy.
Me: This is a straw man argument, and a really dishonest one.
@Camestros: Yes, that was a good piece. I have to admit I had zero interest in the book and none in the movie, either.
@Robert —
No, actually, they aren’t.
“Legal” was a poor choice of words. I should have said something more like “nonviolent” instead. But the fact that many struggles have been violent does not mean that initiating violence is a good idea.
You’re making a huge and unjustified logical leap here. You start with two basic premises:
1. the struggles for labor rights were often violent
2. the struggles for labor rights resulted in important labor protections
and you jump to:
3. initiating violence was necessary to the success of labor struggles.
You conclusion is not at all supported by your premises.
No, actually, it isn’t. Multiple filers have responded to my posts against initiating violence by saying that we can’t/shouldn’t tolerate Nazism. Well, of COURSE we can’t/shouldn’t tolerate Nazism — but that doesn’t mean we’re justified in initiating violence. It’s a false dichotomy.
Now, back to those questions. I’ll reword just a bit to avoid the illegality question, because I agree “legality” is not the salient point:
For those of you who believe in punching a Nazi: in what way do you believe that initiating violence has any sort of benefit that means of opposition which do not initiate violence do not? In what way do you believe that initiating violence benefits the fabric of our society? In what way does initiating violence not hand moral and strategic ammunition to our enemies? In what way do you believe that initiating violence makes us look like the good guys?
See the 1934 Minneapolis General Strike. See the history of the labor movement and most scholarship on the subject. This extends to most histories of riots and uprisings. Also, The Battle of Cable Street. And, yes, they’re platitudes, and ignore the complicated nature of these conflicts.
@Robert —
You’re making that huge leap again. The fact that struggles have often been violent does not mean that initiating violence was justified, and it doesn’t mean that initiating violence was a necessary part of their success.
Here’s a brief history of the 1934 strike
You can look at the scholarship, which largely disagrees with you.
@Robert —
I’ve read the links you’ve posted so far, and nowhere do they say that initiation of violence was either justified or a necessary part of the struggles’ successes.
I listened to Enter Player One on a cross country trip and I really disliked it. I tend to contrast it with Stranger Things, the latter used nostalgia to create an interesting and compelling narrative, the other turned into a series of lists for boy to compete with each other in the story. It’s a side of the culture I really don’t like and drains the enjoyment out of what should be enjoyable.
The strike would have been crushed without the willingness to fight. The fascists in Britain got shut down for the same reasons.
Agreed. Not volunteering either. Though the Google search by site is handy. You do a search in the format:
site:file770.com [INSERT SEARCH PHRASE HERE]
I discovered that that clever Scroll title riffing off Tolkien I just thought of had already been suggested a while back.
By me.
Last year…
@Robert —
You’re making a huge leap again.
“Don’t initiate violence” is not at all the same thing as “don’t be willing to fight”.
As I’ve said multiple times already, I have no qualms about violence in defense of self or others who are being physically attacked.
But you have still shown no justification for throwing the first punch.
I’m not making a huge leap, really. I’m just a lot less invested in the distinction you have set up. Fascist organizing is always already a threat. I’m also aware that there have been a lot of times that my safety has depended on anti-fascists driving fascists out of subcultures that I have been a part of and that driving out wasn’t always done on the principles that you’ve laid out. Neither were the Battle of Cable Street or the 1934 strike, I suspect.
@Robert —
Which still begs the questions that you continue to avoid answering, starting with: how do you justify initiating violence, especially given that you have yet to show any evidence that initiating violence is a necessary part of success?
Of course it is. Fortunately, there are many ways to fight it without initiating violence. Again, refer back to the article Lenora cited.
Of course it wasn’t. But again: the fact that violence has been initiated by anti-fascists in the past does not mean that success depended on initiating violence.
I agree with Contrarius on this one. A lot of my friends disagree with me.
ETA: I forgot to say welcome to Susan Triceratops. Nice to see you posting here!
Soon Lee:
I sometimes look up titles, some of the times because I think I remember seeing them, other times because I think I remember submitting them. It gets tricky when you try to remember the exact permutation of a given phrase. I did some variant on “It’s crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide” some time back, but if I tried to look it up, I could say “It’s crackers to scroll a pixel the dropsy in file” or “It’s pixels to file a scroller the dropsy in gorn” or any of a mathematically obnoxious number of possibles. Some phrases are easier to search than others, fortunately, and some have enough of a boilerplate bit (eg, “Now is the time…”) that they can be quickly searched.
I keep seeing suggestions and thinking I’ve seen them before. Sometimes I look it up (particularly when I think it’s something I suggested before that wasn’t used), but I regard the fact that I just let it go more and more nowadays as a sort of progress, or perhaps an indication of advancing age.
Ha —
I just discovered that the Fascist party was founded by Mussolini on this date in 1919. Maybe his spirit is reaching out to us from the grave to inspire this discussion today. 😉
You’re moving the goalposts with this discussion, moving the question from has something helped positively change the country to the more nebulous, was it necessary, which is an impossible question to answer and has the quality of the amount of angels on a pinhead. I can imagine a lot of ways for the labor movement to have formed in this country, but frankly, they’re mostly fantasy and don’t really deal with reality of the terrain of struggle. This isn’t the first time in the conversation that you have done that. But in addition to that, I’ve been questioning the premise of the ‘throwing the first punch’ argument throughout within the context of a group of organizations who political principles are founded on violence.
I went to a comic store to buy the second Astro City collection a few weeks ago and it was out of print. The comic store owner thought that there might be larger collection volumes coming out now when the series is finished.
I hope a TV series makes this true.
@Robert —
Poppycock.
The discussion started with “punch a Nazi” — in other words, it started with claiming that the initiation of violence against Nazis was somehow justified.
It started with the question of initiating violence, and that’s where it still is. No goalposts have been moved.
For what it’s worth, I agree with Robert Wood. A stance of pacifism or non-violence can work but has been shown to not work against fascism. Insisting on a non-violent response to fascism results in too much physical harm on those around them.
The concept of violence is being defined too narrowly where being literally surrounded by armed people shouting at you, calling for your death while brandishing weapons somehow isn’t violence but trying to get out of that situation is. The Charleston police even said they were intimidated by how well armed the Nazis were down there -that leads to the deaths and physical harm of other people.
I don’t see a slippery slope here either. Nazis aren’t advocating for difference of ideas; they’re openly advocating for the death of people who look just like me and my children.
I find it quite ironic that Nazis, armed and advocating for genocide, complain about antifa being violent.
Two links from Charlottesville:
Meet the clergy
My “non-violent” stance was met with heavily armed men.
And Richard Spencer won’t do anymore college tours.
Finally, tolerance is a peace treaty; it is not a suicide pact.
“For those of you who believe in punching a Nazi: in what way do you believe that initiating violence has any sort of benefit that legal means of opposition do not? In what way do you believe that initiating violence benefits the fabric of our society? In what way does initiating violence not hand moral and strategic ammunition to our enemies? In what way do you believe that initiating violence makes us look like the good guys?”
Let me answer this from a variety of perspectives, with a few stories.
1) I was bullied in high school. Repeatedly attacked by the same small group of people, even though I *won* the fights that we got into, and which I never started.
The bullying did not stop until the day when, having lost my temper at their verbal abuse, I lashed out and decked one (technically, clotheslined him while he was sitting in a wheeled chair, knocking him onto his back, out of the chair, and the wind right out of him.)
After that, it stopped.
When someone is only willing to listen and respect the language of violence, and honestly believes that they get to call the shots on when it happens and when it doesn’t, then only the language of striking first will dispel these illusions for them.
That’s my answer to the first question.
To the second: I have watched harassers threaten — not actually strike, but threaten — members of communities I am part of, but who looked far more vulnerable than I look. And the thing that stopped it was the demonstration of willingness, on my part, to escalate from their *implied* threats of violence to my *direct* threat of violence. I would have punched those drag-queen-taunting assholes first.
Sometimes, the fabric of society needs to be held together with ugly stitches until it can be properly repaired.
To the third: That’s a tactical question. Part of the reason the question is “Is it OK to punch Nazis” is that Nazis have a terrible reputation. Punching a right-winger? Different thing. One has to be able to explain afterwards that there appeared to be a credible threat. There is also the fact that if you are an actual Nazi, or anything close, your dogma already insists that the use of force carries its own moral weight; to argue otherwise if you are that sort is to undercut your *own* “moral authority”.
” In what way do you believe that initiating violence makes us look like the good guys?”
Again, tactics. Someone throwing a Nazi salute at me, knowing my name is Schwartz (or even my being able to explain afterwards that my name was Schwartz) is explicity saying he believes in my extermination. Decking the son of a bitch to teach him to be more afraid and that we will not go gently is something that the majority of Americans will understand, I believe — indeed, I think most people in the world.
These are just my personal answers to the questions; on the matter of tactics, I do not condemn those who do not punch Nazis, nor do I condone those who punch lightly, or for the sake of punching. But I am not removing the physical option* from my toolbox.
*No, not *that* physical option, you Iain M. Banks fans.
You moved the goalposts.
@Contrarius
This is the source of the disagreement. I say that someone armed with the intent to intimidate and publicly calling for my death has already initiated the violence.
For what it’s worth, the ACLU has also agreed to not support armed protesters.
I’m not a proponent of “punch Nazis” and the expression irritated me. Not because I don’t think that nazist should be punched, buy because of the danger of it. Fights are dangerous, you will break bones, knock out teeth, cause permanent damage, maim people.
People saying “punch Nazis” are usually not themselves punching Nazis, they are encouraging others to put their lives and health at risk. And then walk away when it is no longer politically expedient. I have seen it happen with friends who was in the AFA during the 80s. The number of hospital visits.
I will not complain if someone here punches a Nazi. I might even be silently be happy that the Nazi was punched. And I will not argue against those who actually do go out to punch Nazis. But I will be pissed out at people encouraging others to punch Nazis without doing it themselves.
With regard to “first punch”. A few years ago, my mother was at a rally against racism. She was there with her friends, all in their 70s. This demonstration was attacked by Nazis with knives. Several people were seriously hurt.
For me, this was “the first punch” for every Nazi demonstration that will ever occur in Sweden. I do not accept the premise that you at all occasions have to wait until one of the Nazis, often convicted for violence several times, should choose to use violence at that time.
Hampus, I agree with you about the danger of the tactic and fighting fascists has put a lot of people in the hospital and I know of a few cases where people have been killed because of their commitment to anti-fascism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lin_Newborn and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greensboro_massacre. I wouldn’t encourage the tactic, but with a few exceptions, and there are exceptions, I’m going to defend activists who use those tactics to challenge fascist organizing.
I’ll even agree with Contrarius that its preferable when fascists can be intimidated through mass action, that translates into a lack of need for direct fighting, but its still intimidation.
continuing @Kip W’s verse
(I had to memorize the first 3 verses in 5th grade; did you know Elgar set all 9?)
I thought I had turned of autocorrect, but my comments above says not. Sigh.
@Robert —
Nope. Saying it doesn’t make it so.
@Mallory —
Fortunately, I am not advocating for a stance of pacifism. I am advocating for a stance of not throwing the FIRST punch.
Why is throwing the first punch a necessary part of “trying to get out of that situation”?
A slope does not go away when a person doesn’t see it.
“Punch a Nazi” depends on the principle that preemptive violence is justified. That principle — that preemptive violence is okay — is the same principle behind preemptive nuclear strikes and “Stand Your Ground” laws. Very slippery slope.
Yup. They are horrible, horrible people. Throw the legal book at them, protest, disrupt their organizations and their demonstrations. None of this requires throwing the first punch.
Except that they haven’t. See “preemptive strike” above. By your argument, Trump would be justified in bombing North Korea because they have armed themselves with the intent to intimidate and they have publicly called for the death of America.
To punch or not to punch a scroll, that is the question.
For what it’s worth I’m against punching first. I
@Lenora: I’ve only attended 4th Street once, and I’m not an author, but my guess is the appeal of this convention for authors is not for the ability to attract new fans, but the give and take of the discussions with other authors, especially if one is also attending the day of writer workshops preceding the convention.
Contrarius, Yes. Once again, you did move the goalposts, specifically with the questions that you asked. I brought up ways that violence has a been a part of successfully and positively changing the country and then you changed the premises of the questions. You also initially demanded that actions be taken legally, which you moved away from and seem to have returned to in your latest missive. I should note that I’m not the only person who has challenged the premise of your ‘first punch’ platitude. You’ve just ignored it.
It would be the last pixel in the world that scrolled by Molly Grue.
@Robert —
Nope.
And remember, I initially asked those questions very early in the discussion. I brought the same questions up again later because nobody had even tried to answer them.
Again —
1. “Punch a Nazi” depends on the principle that initiating violence is justified.
2. And I hope we can all agree that violence is only justified when it is a necessary part of achieving one’s goals. (If you believe that unnecessary violence is somehow okay, then we’ve got big problems.)
If we can agree on 1. and 2., then in order to support your claim that initiating violence against a Nazi is okay, you must prove that it is a necessary part of achieving your goal.
Yup. Again, the fact that movements have been violent does nothing to prove that initiating violence was necessary — or even beneficial or contributory — to their success.
Yup, I admitted the word “legal” was inappropriate. Admitting to and fixing a mistake is not moving a goalpost. Jeez, you should be happy that I openly acknowledged and fixed a problem with my questions that you yourself pointed out.
LOL. I have spent paragraphs and paragraphs NOT ignoring your challenges, Robert.
Going back to my word “necessary”, though, we could get really really nit-picky and pedantic about its definition if you want. Does “necessary” actually mean “maximizes the cost/benefit ratio”? Or does it mean “without which success is completely impossible”? Or does it mean something else?
That in itself could take forever to hammer out — and I doubt anyone here has either the interest or patience for it.
@Vicki Rosenzweig: I discover new professionals (writers and artists) at conventions and explore their work because they’re interesting on panels, readings, etc. Whether I become a fan depends on me liking their work, of course. So yes, it happens. I’ve even picked up a book in the Dealer Room after hearing someone at a panel (if the book also sounds interesting to me, of course – not solely based on the name on the cover).
I don’t want to over-state this. It’s not the main reason I go to cons, and it’s not the main way I discover new writers (these days; perhaps not ever). But it’s a joy of going to panels and going to readings by authors I don’t know, and it is a way I discover new creators of interest to me. But I really, really doubt me not seeing someone at a con I don’t go to will affect their livelihood. 😛
@Darren Garrison: I would love to watch an “Astro City” live action show, wow! Yay Kurt, et al. – I hope this really does happen!
@Jeff Jones: I fear that even Buddhists have been known to advocate for violence. We lived in a complicated world.