This is another Hugo finalist for Best Related Work, published by Castalia House. It’s a book-length work, coming in at 236 pages.
Day starts the narrative with his run for the presidency of SFWA, noting deficiencies in the way the organization was running at the time. One of the examples he gives is that in 2013 the organization supported particular publishers and refused to admit writers who published with smaller houses or who self-published; another was how voting was restricted to only particular elite members (some of these issues have since been corrected). Day then moves on to outline the practices of social justice extremists who act as thought police, attacking people as a means to further their agenda without regard to the “truth” of the accusation. His main thesis is that individuals should take a stand against these SJW extremists and provide a counter activism.
One of Day’s problems is that his tone can be annoying to some readers. Plus, he gets personal, attacking people he’s got issues with. However, he does make some good arguments here. He tends to be focused on the fate of white males (presumably because he looks like one), but fails to note that attacks by extremist SJWs (such as person-of-color Requires Hate, for example) often target people of color, as well. He’s explaining his own activism here, and it’s an interesting look into his philosophy. Three stars.
Lela E. Buis 
May 13, 2016 @ 14:43:16
Is he providing a “counter activism” or a counter extremism?
LikeLike
May 13, 2016 @ 23:26:40
Extremism is about political views and activism is about activity. I’m talking about Day’s activism here, which appears to be about providing an alternative to the recent direction he sees in SFF community and the major SFF awards. His methods may be heavy handed, but you can’t deny that he’s providing an effective response.
LikeLike
May 14, 2016 @ 19:56:41
Hi Ms. Buis. I must disagree with your definition: ‘extremism is about political views and activism is about activity.’ Extremists are so labelled because their actions are over the top and often quite destructive. I think extremism is about the methodology of one’s activism.
Vox Day’s monkey-wrenching the Hugo’s was extreme. Requires Hate’s stalking and trolling was extreme. Calling it counter activism is like saying Ghidra was merely presenting an alternate point of view when it destroyed half of Tokyo to fight Godzilla.
When did extremists ever solve anything? Blew things up, sure. Imposed an harsh regime, no doubt, but actually made things better?
Grumble.
LikeLike
May 13, 2016 @ 20:57:24
“…though I’ve called R. Scott Bakker a shit-eating roach (and will happily continue to!), you can be sure I won’t be calling any minority writer anything like that, and have never done so.” – RH
“… we consider buffaloes especially stupid as animals go. The perfect analogy for white men” – RH
RH never attacked non-whites FOR being non-whites and Mixon and her crew didn’t give a fig about RH’s attacks on whites and men until RH started trolling her own “allies.”
The same is true of “extremist SJWs”: they never use racial insults against non-whites. On the other hand, using racial and sexual slurs against whites and men is their bread and butter. This is RH’s last Tweet:
“Bee Sriduangkaew retweeted
SilenceoftheXmasHam @HamHambreen white feminists are like buses; full of racists and never any seats available.”
Sam Ambreen is a U.K. “feminist” who is vicious and obsessive in her paranoia of and attacks on whites. Her Twitter header says “Free speech is white privilege.” Unsurprisingly, she admits to mental illness.
LikeLike
May 14, 2016 @ 03:02:42
Read the first half, haven’t got around to the rest. I think it makes a lot of good points, and it’s very readable. I’d dock it half a star for the getting-personal part — which was interesting and informative, but dilutes the book’s message.
LikeLike