It's been an interesting weekend, watching and reading the comments flowing from both sides of the debate over the Tor boycott. I'm no longer surprised by it, having seen so much of it, but I'm nevertheless at a loss to explain the sheer, unbridled lack of sanity and common sense exhibited by so many of the so-called 'social justice warriors'. Their navel-gazing naiveté is mind-boggling. A few examples:
- Twitter user Adam F. Smith apparently believes not only that Vox Day had something to do with the church shooting in South Carolina, but that the tragedy is somehow connected to both the Sad Puppies and the Hugo Awards.
- Speaking of Vox, he's taken note of speculation from SJW's and their ilk that the individuals at Tor who've been named in connection with the boycott may be at risk of violence. Since I've seen not a single reference to that - even the vaguest hint - from our side of the fence, I, like him, can only put it down to paranoia, or an utterly warped, twisted sense of reality (or the lack thereof), or deliberate lying. It's absolutely insane . . . yet they're hyping it up. (Edited to add: James Sullivan absolutely nailed the process in a comment at Vox's place.)
- This isn't exactly a new tactic. SJW's are usually the ones screaming in manufactured outrage about the non-existent 'rape epidemic' on US college campuses, or tackling problems of discrimination. Trouble is, almost every time they rally around a cause like campus rape, it has a habit of falling apart when tested for actual, forensic, verifiable, legally defensible evidence. That says far more about them than the purported problems about which they protest.
- I was particularly amused by an article in online magazine Starburst dated Saturday, June 20th, 2015. It appeared less than 24 hours after I called for a boycott of Tor (which was immediately endorsed by a number of others), yet it claimed: "An attempted boycott of publisher Tor Books by right-wing online activists has spectacularly backfired as booklovers across the world have responded by purchasing books from Tor to show their support." For heaven's sake, the boycott had only just begun, so how was it even remotely possible to conclude that it had backfired? Wishful thinking to the max! It'll take months before any results are apparent. We're in this for the long term.
It's no wonder many complain about being 'burnt out by the social justice outrage machine'. They're doing it so often, in so many spheres, that they're destroying their own credibility. I can see the same thing happening in the case of the Tor employees about whom I've complained. The evidence, in their own words, of their bias, distortion and lies is overwhelming . . . yet the SJW's are still trying to manufacture outrage that they've been called on it. What's more, when we do call them on it, all too often their response is to delete what they've said, as if to pretend that it never happened. For example, Moshe Feder's Facebook post to which I linked yesterday has since vanished from view, along with all comments from readers. Fortunately, I saved a couple of versions of it first, as did many others, so that won't help him.
Lies, fantasies, projection, delusion and deception. That just about sums up the SJW approach to this entire matter. It's rather tiresome. How refreshing it would be if one of them would actually have the honesty to admit that the named individuals at Tor have, indeed, said what I've proved they've said, and did, in fact, at least imply (and probably meant literally) what I (and many others) understood them to mean. That's objectively not open to debate. The evidence is conclusive. With that admission, we could get a really useful debate going by asking what can be done to resolve the problem. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened, and I see little likelihood of it in the short term. Hence . . . the boycott.