(We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)
I love and support Sarah Hoyt's work because it is not only sympatico to me ideologically, but entertaining. I don't have to agree with an author as long as he or she is entertaining or thought provoking.
Primary example: Canadian SF author Robert Sawyer, who writes stylistically much like vintage Heinlein, but who is far far FAR to the left of me. But he has great characters, good plot twists, and interesting science, so I love his books even when he preaches.
Or L E Modessitt Jr. who is economically very far from me, but the best at world-building I have read in some time, and who always responds to my questions and even criticisms in the spirit in which they were intended.
On the other hand, even guys I like to read, like John Scalzi and Orson Scott Card can be true a-holes about certain issues in real life. Who cares? Scott puts Mormon ideas in most of his work, but he's such a good writer that I don't care.
My theory is that it's the marginally publishable writers who have to make an issue of their politics because they have to believe that the reason you're not supporting them is something other than that their writing sucks.
I'm not familiar with Sarah Hoyt, but I really enjoy Larry Correia's work and I recently started following John C. Wright's blog, although I have yet to read any of his books. But Nate has a good point. I've also made it a point to look for Chuck Dixon's old comics (as one of the few conservatives in the comics industry)and the newer GI Joe comics he's written for IDW.
As for Scalzi, I will never read any of his books because he acts like a spoiled five year old whenever he deals with criticism and is one of the biggest politically correct loons out there.
Agreed about Scalzi, both to Carl and Steve.
But Steve: I begin "caring" when these "professionals" start, as you said, acting like a-holes and then crapping on their fans just because of a difference of [political] opinion. As I've always stated, if I was fortunate enough to be in a position like Scalzi, Card, or whomever, I would simply politely disagree with fans (or whomever else because they're potential fans) on social media in a debate, and even thank them for their opinions. That's just common (business) sense, and what's more it's the right thing to do.
That's what happens, Hube, with L E Modessitt. Unless somebody is just really nasty to him in personal terms, he restates his point politely and respectfully. He may attempt to destroy you with logic, and he has some pretty strong opinions about certain ideologies or groups, but I have yet to see him ever "go off" on somebody reading his blog in the year I have been doing so. And trust me (as all bloggers know) there is always somebody out there who makes you want to cut off their head and shit down their neck.
@Hube, that's a reason why I don't try talking about politics TOO much (even though I'm sure you wish I would lol).
Heck I'm not anywhere close to a professional yet but would rather see ALL fans (left, right and center) come together to enjoy a project like http://spnverse.wordpress.com/ *cough* than see us all splitting off into enclaves.
To quote a guest post on Hoyt's site:
"fandom... ought have nothing to do with greater world politics, but should concentrate on the thing we all love"
Oh AND, don't forget the smaller authors.
Like Furious D:
Who also wrote in this anthology: