Liberal SF

[chris_gerrib]

A friend of mine noted that the people who run science fiction conventions, called conrunners or semi-jokingly SMOFs (secret masters of fandom) are largely liberal. I tend to agree with him, and I think I know why. Science fiction may not be inherently liberal, but it is inherently not conservative.

I'm going to adapt a thought from Megan McArdle, a conservative economist. Imagine you're walking in a wood and come across a fence. The conservative mindset would be "this fence is here for a reason, leave it." But the science fictional mindset would be to wonder what function it served and could that function be done better by something different.

Now, that's a broad statement, and much science fiction doesn't reach that exulted level, if only because of Sturgeon's Law. But the definition of science fiction, which is "a story that, without a scientific foundation, can't be told" lends support to my theory. What is science but an investigation into why and how things happen?

And technology changes society. For example, the technology of cooking food changed our digestive tracts! If technology can change our bodies, it can certainly change our society, as evidenced by 1900 House. So, part of the science in our fiction really should be sociology, psychology and political science.

Now, story and entertainment matter, but if science fiction is inherently not conservative, I'm not surprised that the majority of people active in it aren't conservative either.

Comments

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Not only did I pick up on the "real men don't wear tiaras" thing, I didn't think it was particularly subtle. Nor was I impressed by his failure to realize that a Campbell tiara makes at least as much sense as a Hugo Nominee tie-tack.

Correia didn't get a Hugo nom in 2012--perhaps you're thinking of Torgersen?

Brad's next-to-latest post with him being dragged away to a gulag was... well, weird. Is that really how he sees the world?

I think Correia bailed on his most recent slate nomination because he didn't want to be associated with Vox Day. He's hoping if he doesn't remind us that he taught Vox the power of slates *and* gave Vox his first proof-of-concept demonstration we'll assume he had nothing to do with what Vox is up to.

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

The problem is, Corriea and Torgersen really want Hugos. If they didn't, none of this bullshit would be happening.

But yes, cuddling up to VD is like spooning with a porcupine, and three or four years of not handing out awards will greatly dent the value of a Hugo. (One or two years is survivable.) Torgersen's finally figured out that VD's goal is to torch the Hugos, and from reading his own comment threads some of Sad Puppies are bringing matches and gasoline.

Unfortunately, neither man can say "I was wrong." They just can't.

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Yes, I watched Tom Kratman descending to actual real-world threats and thought Brad was a bit out of his depth.

Of course they can't say "I was wrong." They come from a tradition where changing your mind is a visible sign that you are not fit to lead. Instead, when things to pear-shaped it will be "look what you made me do!"

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

Well, Brad's inability to even lightly moderate his own comment thread is amazing.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

Holy fuck... wow. That thread is special.

I'm still not sure Brad can be quite as clueless as he comes across...

[daveon.livejournal.com]

I must say your ability to take that crap so well astounds me Chris :)

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

The Navy hardened me ...

[daveon.livejournal.com]

Colour me surprised.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

I actually meant to say 'didn't' there - I'll fix it.