SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Wired has a recent article about author Octavia Butler and how her work presaged the "Make America Great" again campaign.
Octavia Butler, who died in 2006, was the author of such visionary science fiction novels as Kindred, The Parable of the Sower, and Dawn. Gerry Canavan, who just published a book-length study of Butler, describes her as one of the greatest writers of her era.
"I think you'd put her up there with Philip K. Dick and Le Guin and Delany and these other people who really made an impact on the way that science fiction circulates," Canavan says in Episode 234 of the Geek's Guide to the Galaxy podcast. "Especially that mode of literary science fiction that's somewhere in the middle between genre fiction and prize-winning novels, she has to be top two, top three in that list."
Butler made headlines this year when fans noted that her 1998 novel The Parable of the Talents features a fascist politician who rises to power by promising to "make America great again." The comparisons to Donald Trump are obvious, but Canavan says the character was actually inspired by Ronald Reagan.
[...] Butler had a singularly dark imagination, and often had to do multiple rewrites in order to tell her stories in a way that readers would find palatable. But Canavan says that in the current political climate, Butler's dim view of humanity is starting to seem ever more relevant.
"She often thought about how easy it would be for everything to just kind of go back to the way it was," he says. "That the things that seemed like they were permanent progress were really just a kind of epiphenomenon of the wealth of the United States in the latter half of the 20th century, and that when that fell apart, all the bad days would come back again."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Francis on Sunday December 18 2016, @04:49PM
That's sort of the point. The Democrats have a history of ignoring what the common people want and a lot of the support the GOP gets comes from people that are voting against the arrogance and elitism of the Democratic party. They're folks that are OK, even if they don't really like, the anti-abortion rhethoric and warmongering. But, let's be fair, Obama and Clinton are just as warmongering as Trump is, the media just glosses over that.
Trump likely would have lost if Bernie had been allowed to win the primary. He was up double digits against trump in most states at the time and he had a message that was clearly resonating with people. Not to mention that if Bernie had been the candidate, he wouldn't have been cozying up to neoconservatives in order to pursue right wing voters that would never vote for him. He also wouldn't have left the campaign trail for weeks on end or shut the press out of regular conferences like Clinton did.
The Dems got what they deserve, unfortunately, it's the rest of us that are going to suffer. I've largely held back on worrying, but look at the cabinet picks, those are extremely disturbing picks and people should be concerned for what happens next. Most of the nominees are not qualified for their positions. For example, his pick for Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos' only qualification is giving him a ton of money and spending time and effort trying to dismantle our school system. She's not a teacher, she's not an administrator, she has no degrees relevant to the subject area.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by opinionated_science on Sunday December 18 2016, @07:04PM
agreed. Though I'm sort of waiting to see how Trump's picks work out. On the face of it I no longer trust the media as there is simply no objective analysis, just loads of opinion re-enforced by constant bickering.
I must say I was impressed by his State pick - though curious why he didn't go to Energy....I saw an interview with him back in 2011 (C.Rose) and he articulated some very logical and pragmatic opinions about energy futures.
In short, oil will run out , renewables are unreliable, we should build nuclear.
I think we should be reminded that all his picks can be fired - and they still need to be confirmed.
Perhaps if we learnt one thing from this election, is that dogmatic party boundaries are insufficient in the 21st century.
If your local representative doesn't think he/she can be voted out, they'll do what the hell they like...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday December 18 2016, @07:23PM
The Democrats have a history of ignoring what the common people want and a lot of the support the GOP gets comes from people that are voting against the arrogance and elitism of the Democratic party.
I'm not going to disagree with you, but I'd qualify this to say that politicians in general "have a history of ignoring what the common people want." Or, rather, they find ways to placate some portion of the masses, while ignoring the rest of the demands and going their own way on their private agendas. After all, the vast majority of politicians are upper-class, powerful folks to begin with. Should it surprise anyone that they're "elitist"?
Sure, I'll happily criticize the Democrats for their elitism. But the Republicans are just as elite and just as well-known for disguising their agendas that benefit the powerful in a thin veneer of populism. Fleeing from one party to another simply for that reason is silly. It's all a bunch of rich folks trying to pretend they're somebody you'd like to have a beer with. The Republicans are just slightly better at that sort of act. Or maybe Republican supporters are just more happy to live with inequality, whereas Democrats often make inequality an explicit target in their platform but then maintain the status quo.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Monday December 19 2016, @01:40AM
The Democrats have a history of ignoring what the common people want
Like ... welfare? Medicare? I guess the common people need social programs, but what they _want_ ... ?
First thing that springs to mind is 'Bread and Circuses'. Mostly circuses. Also military might, I guess?