Banana Empire

One can’t honestly call the USA a banana republic. It’s more of a banana empire:

Burisma Holdings, Ukraine’s largest private gas producer, has expand edits Board of Directors by bringing on Mr. R Hunter Biden as a new director. R. Hunter Biden will be in charge of the Holdings’ legal unit and will provide support for the Company among international organizations. On his new appointment, he commented: “Burisma’s track record of innovations and industry leadership in the field of natural gas means that it can be a strong driver of a strong economy in Ukraine. As a new member of the Board, I believe that my assistance in consulting the Company on matters of transparency, corporate governance and responsibility, international expansion and other priorities will contribute to the economy and benefit the people of Ukraine.”

Daddy helps arrange for overthrowing the elected government, and the grateful oligarchs put junior on the board of directors. Anyone remember when the Russians were the bad guys?

I’m sure “the people of Ukraine” are a major concern here to everyone involved.


We can play that game

Remember, any time you see someone pop off about Christianity or say anything negative about anyone on the Right who isn’t a straight white male, one has a duty to register a complaint with the appropriate speech police. Those are the new rules of the game, after all, and there is NO PLACE IN SOCIETY for anyone who expresses a negative opinion about God, or Christians, or the UK Independence Party.

An education official was visited by police because he had upset Ukip on Twitter. Officers knocked at Michael Abberton’s door to question him about a mocked-up poster he had placed online that criticised the Eurosceptic party’s policies.

They asked him about his ‘intentions toward Ukip’ and suggested he should tell no one that the visit had taken place.

Mr Abberton, a Green party member, said police had overstepped the mark. The Cambridgeshire force said it had acted over a possible breach of electoral law. But their heavy-handed actions were condemned by civil rights campaigners and politicians from across the political spectrum.

That sort of thing works much better on the r/selected anyhow, which makes it some QUALITY black-knighting. Because, remember, there is NO PLACE IN SOCIETY for people who do not believe the things that we believe.

If you seriously want to knock a feminist back, drop that line on her. They literally have no idea how to respond to being targeted that way. Not when there is NO PLACE IN SOCIETY for her.


The prosecution rests

John C. Wright reflects on the SF/F community’s response to his article in Intercollegiate Review, which appears to mark the first time that the SF/F community at large has ever indicated it is aware of the existence of Intercollegiate Review:

I am surprised, but should not be, that an obscure opinion in an obscure journal by an obscure author such as myself would provoke so many loud and hostile reactions. (Maybe it is a slow news day and there is nothing else to fret about.)

Why so vehement a reaction when so other published opinions of mine, much more controversial, go uncontroverted? I suspect that the witchhunters hate being identified for what they are. Truth is their kriptonite.

I won’t bother linking to them. Overhearing strangers talk about me either in praise or blame bores me, since I am not a fascinating subject to myself, and none of these people know my character or my character flaws.

But I will make one comment, which I hope is telling: Please note that these various articles critiquing my article do not say, “the witch hunt never happened; we, the socially-aware segment of the science fiction community, are completely forgiving of all personal flaws and differences of opinion, political and personal, between ourselves and Malzberg, Moon, Correia, Card, etc, and we judge their works only on the merit of the writing!”

Instead they say, “But those people he defends really are witches and pariahs! Right-thinking people must have nothing to do with them!”

Which would seem to prove, rather than refute, my point.

And that would be checkmate.

It is rather remarkable how obtuse the hissy-fitters of the Left repeatedly show themselves to be. My personal favorite was SFWA President Steven Gould publicly asserting that his organization doesn’t do what got the whole ball rolling in the first place, then noting with an asterisk that it actually does exactly what he had been denying.

They don’t seem to grasp that the moment you proclaim “there is no place for X in our community”, X can be, and will be, defined as anything those with sufficient power deem it to be. If it is acceptable to say there is no place for racists, then it is also acceptable to say there is no place for blacks. If it is acceptable to say there is no place for libertarians, it is acceptable to say that there is no place for socialists. If it is acceptable to say there is no place for the science-literate, it is acceptable to say there is no place for the half-savage.

Once thought policing is imposed, the situation has devolved into a straightforward power game. But, as the slack-jawed reaction to the Hugo nominations has shown, they’re not actually ready for the open conflict they created. They don’t even realize that we haven’t even begun to flex our muscles. They thought they’d won the game while the other team was still in the locker room. Now the first three or four players players have stepped onto the field and they are absolutely shocked to discover that we showed up.

The amusing thing is that they think we’re crying about their harmless little attacks because that’s what they would feel like doing in our shoes. They still don’t realize that we are not like them. They still have no idea what is coming.


Thought Police: NFL style

It’s fascinating to see the sports media openly endorse corporate thought policing. I’m sure they will be similarly fine with being suspended and fined if they write positively of homogamy in public. Peter King writes on CNN/SI:

Good for the Dolphins for fining and suspending defensive back Don Jones for being an idiot on Twitter after Michael Sam got drafted.

I would love to see Fox News suspend and fine someone for expressing a critical attitude towards any religion. Just to prove the point, if nothing else. The fact that a self-professed journalist would openly endorse political speech-policing goes to show the dreadful state of journalism in America.


The inevitable

Hello My Dearest,

How are you today, with hope you are found in good condition of health?, Dear I have decided to contact you after much thought considering the fact that we have not meet before, but because of some circumstance oblige me, I decided to contact you due to the urgency of my present situation here in the refugee camp for your rescue. Meanwhile my Name is Miss Mercy Oscar Kamau Kingara, 16yrs old female and I from Kenya here in Africa. As you may have seen on Twitter hashtag #bringbackoutgirls I was brutally kidnapped from my school in Chibok by a criminal gang on the 14 April.

My dear, haven’t meet with you before I intend to disclose this to you with trust as a top secret which I believe you will never turn me down neither disclose it to anybody until everything is successfully done I will relocate over to your country. For only $10 per day, my kidnappers have promised that I can return from here, were I am forced to be a Wife to a man who will not love me or respect me or permission me to return to my studies which I so much love.

However my Dear, all am requesting from you is for your kind assistant in transferring this my ransom for investment assistance in your Country as my legal appointed trustee as the bank mentioned and it will be my intention to compensate you; note that immediately after the transfer i will relocate over to your country or position and further my education studies and spend the rest of my life while you will be acting as my brother and my sister. Please consider my request as my life is being hugely affected here in the camp of the kidnappers

Thanks a lot in your prompt positive response to help me out. I shall give you more details of the transfer in my next mail.

Yours Faithfully Mercy Oscar.


Assassinating the citizenry

Rand Paul opposes the appointment of a known defender of citizen assassinations to the federal judgeship, particularly since the Obama administration is hiding the man’s defenses of those assassinations from the Senate:

The Bill of Rights is clear. The Fifth Amendment provides that no one can be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The Sixth Amendment provides that “the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury,” as well as the right to be informed of all charges and have access to legal counsel. These are fundamental rights that cannot be waived with a presidential pen.

In battle, combatants engaged in war against America get no due process and may lawfully be killed. But citizens not in a battlefield, however despicable, are guaranteed a trial by our Constitution. No one argues that Americans who commit treason shouldn’t be punished. The maximum penalty for treason is death. But the Constitution specifies the process necessary to convict.

Anwar al-Awlaki was an American citizen who was subject to a kill order from Mr. Obama, and was killed in 2011 in Yemen by a missile fired from a drone. I don’t doubt that Mr. Awlaki committed treason and deserved the most severe punishment. Under our Constitution, he should have been tried — in absentia, if necessary — and allowed a legal defense. If he had been convicted and sentenced to death, then the execution of that sentence, whether by drone or by injection, would not have been an issue.

But this new legal standard does not apply merely to a despicable human being who wanted to harm the United States. The Obama administration has established a legal justification that applies to every American citizen, whether in Yemen, Germany or Canada.

Defending the rights of all American citizens to a trial by jury is a core value of our Constitution. Those who would make exceptions for killing accused American citizens without trial should give thought to the times in our history when either prejudice or fear allowed us to forget due process.

One would think that Jews in America, more than anyone, would understand the intrinsic danger of permitting a government to legally kill its own citizens at will. I find it astonishing that most of them in the media appear to be more interested in defending the Obama administration than ensuring that the U.S. government is prevented from hunting down and killing Americans without trial.


That was fast

Nicholas Wade, the author of the excellent A Troublesome Inheritance and science editor of the New York Times, is now still the FORMER science editor of the New York Times:

Nicholas Wade, a British-born science reporter and editor for more than 30 years with The New York Times, is no longer with the newspaper — just days after the release of his latest book, in which he depicts blacks with roots in sub-Saharan Africa as genetically less adapted to modern life than whites and Asians.

Was The New York Times uncomfortable with Wade’s science or his conclusions? It’s unclear. Neither Wade nor his former employer returned requests for comment.

Wade’s last Times article appeared April 24. His Penguin Press book “A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History” arrived in bookstores on Tuesday, May 6. In excerpts from his book posted by Time.com on Friday, he is identified as a “former science editor” of the Times. Until then, coverage of his book called him a current Times journalist.

Obviously he deserved it, as he undeniably implied black people are “differently evolved” when he wrote that only 45 of the 394 genes currently deemed to be under selection are the same genes in blacks and whites. In light of such an atrocity, he may as well have called someone a “half-savage”; clearly he must be lambasted and ritualistically assailed by every goodthinking individual. I wonder if it is still acceptable to the Left to describe the fine, upstanding gentlemen who belong to Boko Haram and are so eager to host teenage schoolgirls as “less than entirely civilized although otherwise totally equal to all individuals of both sexes of European descent in every way” or if that too is a purgeable offense?

The Left is more than uncomfortable with both science and the conclusions that logically follow from it. It is now openly and avowedly anti-science. What is fascinating is that most clueless Leftists still feverishly insist that they, and not the Right, are pro-science even as they reject it in favor of various nonexistent ideals. As I have repeatedly pointed out since last August, the time for tolerating the Left has passed. Your only choice now is to submit to them or to shatter them.

UPDATE: I’m not sure this proves that Wade was not “fired”, even if he had already stepped down as science editor. “Anyway, just heard from reliable source that Wade took a retirement
package a couple of years ago.  The deal was that he could continue to
make occasional contributions on a fee basis.”

If he continues to make occasional contributions, then we’ll know he wasn’t canned for his book. If his last contribution on a fee basis turns out to have been April 24th, well, that would not prove that he was fired, but it would tend to indicate that was the case.

UPDATE 2: Not so fast. Apparently the Daily Caller author let his imagination run away with him.

“I retired from the Times about two years ago. There’s a stupid story you may have seen in the blogosphere. It is completely untrue. The writer just made that up. The fact that he saw the words ‘former Science editor’ in the piece I did in Time. He assumed that I had been fired by the Times. There is nothing to the story at all. I myself wrote the word ‘former’ in because I saw that the Time editor in putting the tag line on had said that I was Science editor of the Times. Since that was some time in the past, and is no longer true, I inserted the word ‘former’ and the writer in the Daily Caller just made the story up out of thin air. He made absolutely no attempt to contact me and not a word of it is true.” 


The dramatic limits of Pink SF/F

I’ve been finding the reading of Scott Lynch’s first two “Gentlemen Bastard” books to be more than a little educational because they are such a strange combination of competent writing with flawed and shallow story-telling. As such, they provide a useful perspective on precisely where and how Pink SF/F goes awry as literature.

Take the following quote from Red Seas Under Red Skies, which shows how a desired concept could have been handled well while simultaneously fumbling the execution:

“When you go to sea, there’s two necessities, for luck. First, you’re courting an awful fate if you take a ship to sea without at least one woman officer. It’s the law of the Lord of the Grasping Waters. His mandate. He’s got a fixation for the daughters of the land; he’ll smash any ship that puts to sea without at least one aboard. Plus, it’s plain common sense. They’re good officers. Decent plain sailors, but finer officers than you or I. Just the way the gods made ’em.

“Second, it’s powerful bad luck to put out without cats on board. Not only as they kill the rats, but as they’re the proudest creatures anywhere, wet or dry. Iono admires the little fuckers. Got a ship with women and cats aboard, you’ll have the finest luck you can hope for. Now, our little boat’s so small I reckon we’re fine without no woman. Fishers and harbor boats go out all the time, no worries. But with the pair of you aboard, I’ll be damned if I’m not bringing a cat. A little one suits a little vessel.”

Now, this is a subversion of the urban legend that women were historically considered bad luck on sailing ships. Fair enough, although it doesn’t address the real reason women were not permitted to serve on ships in the past, the fact that they tend to destroy ship morale and provide a major distraction for the male crew in addition to getting pregnant and rendering themselves unfit for service.

Changing the superstition works. But simply declaring, contra literally everything shown in both books before or after the statement, that women are intrinsically better military officers than men, is absurd and indicates either PC preaching or catering to a specific market that enjoys that particular fantasy. The book would have been much more coherent had Lynch simply ended the first necessity before adding the four sentences about “plain common sense”. Instead of getting on with the story, we find ourselves wondering about the mystery of the general absence of these superior female officers. Indeed, how did it come to pass that the Stragos, the naval commander who is a central character in the plot of the second book, is a man?

The ease with which a single throwaway dog-whistle can render the plot nonsensical points to an inevitable problem with SF/F that is both a) derivative of traditional genre works and b) politically correct. It is fractured by the intrinsic conflict of two contradictory logics, and thus forces the resolution of those contradictions by predictable and usually unsatisfactory means. For example, the preponderance of rape and child murder in modern SF/F is not the result of modern SF/F writers being particularly prone to either sexual assault or violence, indeed, the male writers are probably among the least likely men on the planet to have either had sex with a woman or raised a hand in violence to anyone.

But the ubiquity of rape and attempted rape is the result of the forced marriage of the traditional “rescue the woman’s virtue” trope with the PC “a woman has a right to rut like a mink in heat without being criticized for it” concept. When there is no virtue to be lost or saved, there is no shame or drama in it. All that is left is the lesser shame and drama of the potential violation of a woman’s consent.

In the same way, the relentless Herodianism of Pink SF/F is the result of the forced marriage of the traditional “protect the helpless” trope with the PC “women are equal to men” belief. This means that children now make up the entirety of the classes to be protected in Pink SF/F, thereby requiring them to become the only victims who are capable of generating any sympathy in the reader. Unless, of course, a character is victimized solely due to his race or sexual preference.

And those are the restrictions imposed upon the competent Pink SF/F writers, who attempt to intelligently resolve the logical contradictions. The incompetent ones, (and I note that the failed resolution above stuck out precisely because Lynch is an otherwise competent writer), simply lurch from one leap of illogic to the next, never realizing that they are contradicting themselves and presenting the reader with an incoherent imaginary world.

On a tangential note, it’s not hard at all to understand why Lynch’s books are popular among the Pink SF/F-reading crowd, and at least in the case of the first book, beyond. Despite the fact that the books are repetitively circular from a plot perspective, are subject to the aforementioned logical constraints, contain no drama or pathos, and go absolutely nowhere in any deeper sense, they do provide very well indeed for the wish fulfillment of a certain psychology that bastes itself in its belief in its own cleverness.


A woman surprised

This review of QUANTUM MORTIS A Man Disrupted is unusual, since it is written by an avowed anti-fan, (and not merely an anti-fan of me), who, unlike some, elected to read the book and review it instead of merely reacting to the name of one of the authors:

I went into this book fully expecting to hate it. I was in fact
gleefully awaiting it to turn into a giant pile of shit that I could
tear apart with glee. One of the co-writers of this book was Vox “Throw
acid in women’s faces for the greater good” Day and the only endorsement
in the back of the book was Tom Kratman.

I was not prepared to give this book even a single chance, but by the
end I was furiously swiping through pages with pure glee. Its basically
the anti-Oathbound for me, a book I went in expecting to love and hated
it.

The plot in the general sense is your standard Noir in Space setup:
Investigator starts work on a simple case that turns out to be much
bigger than it looks and spirals into one that could decide the fate of
the entire planet and the main character is a grizzled hardass bigot.
What makes it work is that the characters are actually fantastic and
Steve Rzasa’s writing saves Vox Day’s and turns the book into an
utterly enjoyable piece of pulp fiction that’s so stupid it wraps around
to utterly fucking brilliant….

The book also subverts the hell out of a lot of the usual cliches as
well. The villain is actually a gigantic threat to the point that they
confront them with a Kill Team, a regiment of Marines and a Battleship in orbit
and Tower puts their odds of survival at “low”. AIs are also treated as
actual beings capable of independent thought, emotion and sacrifice and the book laughs off the idea of “Kill all Humans” or “God Complex” AIs.

The book also treats people who can kill with glee while making one liners as being total psychopaths
who freak the main character the fuck out while treating the guy puking
his guts out and crying while mowing enemies down as being far more
normal and perfectly respectable.

The first draft of the second QUANTUM MORTIS novel is now complete, so there is a good chance it will be out in July. Tower and Baby are back, and they find themselves facing a threat that is even more gigantic and intergalactically dangerous than the one posed in QM:AMD. But Tower has a new gun….


Smirkings and quirkings

If I could only give a single piece of advice to a SF/F writer it would be this: excise the verbs “to smirk” and “to quirk” from your literary arsenal. At some point in the last 10-15 years, they mutually invaded the genre and have become all but ubiquitous.

First, note that quirk is not even a verb! It is a bloody NOUN. Seriously. It even says so in the dictionary and everything!

QUIRK noun
1. a peculiarity of action, behavior, or personality; mannerism: He is full of strange quirks.
2. a shift, subterfuge, or evasion; quibble.
3. a sudden twist or turn: He lost his money by a quirk of fate.
4.a flourish or showy stroke, as in writing.
5.Architecture.
a.an acute angle or channel, as one dividing two parts of a molding or one dividing a flush bead from the adjoining surfaces.
b.an area taken from a larger area, as a room or a plot of ground.
c.an enclosure for this area.

How, pray tell, does one “quirk a smile”. How is a sentence “quirked” rather than “said”? I’m not sure who is responsible, but I have the vague sense that David Weber may be the chiefly culpable party. In any event, quirking is the twerking of science fiction and fantasy genre; it is annoying, vulgar, and fundamentally stupid.

Weber’s On Basilisk Station contains 4 quirks.

  1. Honor stood motionless, watching through the armorplast, feeling Nimitz rise straight and tall on her shoulder to join her perusal, and an eyebrow quirked.
  2.  The numeral on her maneuvering display changed to “1,” and she turned to Webster and quirked an eyebrow, waiting out the seconds until he nodded.
  3. Her lips quirked at the thought, and she worked her way more briskly through the traffic.
  4. She paused, eyebrow quirked as if to ask if Honor was with her, and Honor nodded.

Now, at least the smirk addicts use an actual verb as a verb. But they still, for the most part, use it ineptly, even when it isn’t being used improperly. Let’s go to the definition again:

SMIRK verb
1. to smile in an affected, smug, or offensively familiar way.
2. to smile in a manner expressing expressing scorn, smugness, etc, rather than pleasure

Like “quirked”, “smirked” is frequently used as a said-bookism, and an improper said-bookism at that. It is a manner of smiling, not a manner of speaking.

Scott Lynch serves as a good example. He’s considered one of the better “new” writers, and as a pure wordsmith, he’s quite competent. In his first book, The Lies of Locke Lamora, while there are no quirks, there are no less than 11 smirks.

  1. Calo had dark liquor-colored skin and hair like an inky slice of night; the tautness of the flesh around his dark eyes was broken only by a fine network of laugh-lines (though anyone who knew the Sanza twins would more readily describe them as smirk-lines)
  2. “Incomparable.” He coughed, and then, with quick jerky motions, he loosened his black neck-cloths just the slightest bit; the Salvaras smirked charmingly together. “I’m reminded again why I have such success selling gentler liquors to you people.”
  3. Capa Barsavi reached out with his right hand and turned Locke’s head slightly upward by the chin, staring down into Locke’s eyes as he spoke. “How old are you, Locke Lamora? Six? Seven? Already responsible for a breach of the Peace, a burnt-down tavern, and six or seven deaths.” The Capa smirked. “I have assassins five times your age who should be so bold. Has Chains told you the way it is, with my city and my laws?”
  4.  “Consider it my challenge to you, to go hand in hand with my blessing.” Barsavi smirked.
  5.  “The threat of an empty stomach soon rekindles wisdom.” Chains smirked.
  6.  “I shall return very shortly,” said Locke, and he spun on his heel and made for the door. As he left the receiving room, he allowed himself a brief smirk of pleasure; the guards pinning Benjavier now looked almost as frightened of him as the waiter did.
  7.  The sun was pouring down light and heat with its usual intensity, and Locke was sweating hard inside his fine new clothes, but for a few moments he let a satisfied smirk creep onto his face.
  8.  “She is knitting, my lady,” said Reynart, with a smirk that told of some private joke.
  9.  “Now,” said Doña Sofia with a smirk, “it will either be Doña Vorchenza, or it will be a pair of young people doing something they should not….”
  10.  The Falconer stood in the center of the little room, smirking at Locke, his hand folded before him.
  11. “Oh no, Master Lamora.” Now the sorcerer positively smirked.

The disease apparently progresses with time. Red Seas Under Red Skies contains 14 smirks, while The Republic of Thieves features 19 for the reader’s edification and enjoyment.

I have a theory about why pinkshirts are so prone to having their characters not only smirking often, but smirking improperly. The former because it serves as a signpost to the reader that a cleverness has been committed, and the latter because it is the writer speaking through the character, communicating his sense of self-satisfaction with the character’s behavior in the scene.

It should surprise no one to discover there are no smirkings and quirkings to be found in Tolkien.