The heisting of the Hugo Awards by a group of right-wing reactionaries has made the mainstream news. Here's the Salon article.
Many things are being said about this and about the people that ruined the integrity of the Hugo Awards this time around. But once the judgment and the finger pointing and the name calling has stopped, who personally are these people? They are obviously people who feel they are being left behind, neglected, misunderstood, and finally demonized.
Obviously, these guys are acting like cretins. But, does anyone actually care about them, or wonder what's making them so bitter and spiteful? I think we're too quick to villainize and ostracize people who go against popular cultural opinion and who represent unsavory opinions. When we do this, those people are strengthened in their belief that they are victimized outsiders. And then they draw others on the fringes, people who might have been on the fence, to their cause. A strong reaction always creates an opposite energy.
If we actually sought to understand their concerns and show some interest in them as people on a personal level, half of the people in their "cause" would drop out and most of the rest would feel ridiculous. To clarify, I'm talking about showing a personal interest in people, not approving certain behaviors. That "love the sinner, not the sin" actually makes sense, even if it is only given lip service by fundamentalists. Jesus said, "Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you" for a reason. And it wasn't because he was a wimp. He understood how reality works.
The vast majority of people want to belong to the human community. If they can't find it with the majority, they will turn to a minority, whether that minority represents a good cause, or, as in this case, a really shitty one. There will always be a few bitter people that just want to ruin everything for everyone else. But those people are a tiny minority, and they can only ruin our party if we let them.