You might want to read Alan's POV before reading this note.
Alan's POV was, honestly, a kind of creepy experience for me. I've personally got friends on both sides of the political spectrum, and I've noticed that there's often this strange fear of having one's offensive beliefs found out. If they're your beliefs, that's fine, but if you're honestly too ashamed to stand up in the public forum and declare them, why do you hold them? I understand that sometimes people are persecuted, but honestly, in the modern world, at least in America, I've never felt actually threatened by voicing my beliefs, even when they were, in hindsight, some of the more regrettable ones I've subscribed to. (That is, however, another story.)
Alan's a horrible person. He'd personally commit genocide against entire species if given the chance. But the thing is that the Republic denies him his chance to voice them, and, although they're horrible views, and the United Terran Republic isn't absolutely horrible-relatively few people are starving, and it's got some pronounced meritocratic stances-it's unjust in that it exhibits much censorship such as this. Don't get me wrong, Alan Kalkus is an absolutely horrible person. So are his real-world analogues. I'm not advocating any particular viewpiont by writing this. (Neither is whoever writes Warhammer 40K-I don't think anyone thinks the Space Marines are necessarily Nazi analogues while playing them, but they sort of are.) But I am trying to provoke some thought.
This has turned into something almost more relevant to the real world than Warbler, but, well, isn't the ultimate point of fiction to better inform us about the real world? And perhaps, both in real life and in the fictional United Terran Republic, some more people should be saying that 'I hate what you're saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'
Alan's POV was, honestly, a kind of creepy experience for me. I've personally got friends on both sides of the political spectrum, and I've noticed that there's often this strange fear of having one's offensive beliefs found out. If they're your beliefs, that's fine, but if you're honestly too ashamed to stand up in the public forum and declare them, why do you hold them? I understand that sometimes people are persecuted, but honestly, in the modern world, at least in America, I've never felt actually threatened by voicing my beliefs, even when they were, in hindsight, some of the more regrettable ones I've subscribed to. (That is, however, another story.)
Alan's a horrible person. He'd personally commit genocide against entire species if given the chance. But the thing is that the Republic denies him his chance to voice them, and, although they're horrible views, and the United Terran Republic isn't absolutely horrible-relatively few people are starving, and it's got some pronounced meritocratic stances-it's unjust in that it exhibits much censorship such as this. Don't get me wrong, Alan Kalkus is an absolutely horrible person. So are his real-world analogues. I'm not advocating any particular viewpiont by writing this. (Neither is whoever writes Warhammer 40K-I don't think anyone thinks the Space Marines are necessarily Nazi analogues while playing them, but they sort of are.) But I am trying to provoke some thought.
This has turned into something almost more relevant to the real world than Warbler, but, well, isn't the ultimate point of fiction to better inform us about the real world? And perhaps, both in real life and in the fictional United Terran Republic, some more people should be saying that 'I hate what you're saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'
Stories
UTF Dossier