[chickenfries]

> The vast majority arguing like the author are not ok with this

Your critique isn't very strong when it hinges on supposing something that is not supported by the text, merely by hyperbolic "whatabouts" that you assume the answer you wan't to critique. You're putting the author in a box rather than engaging with the words that they wrote.

[realityking]

I’d agree if this was an active discussion between the author and me. But I’m posing a question to an author of a piece written 17 years ago...

Allow me to reframe the question: if you’re fine with the book as-written, would you still be fine with it if it expressed the opposite political views?

[chickenfries]

I don't think all political views are equivalent. Of course I'm supportive of opinions that I agree with, like you point out. Opinions I disagree with or espouse a world-view that is different than mine? Of course I'm fine with that. I read and own many authors I disagree with because I value the knowledge gained by reading them and understanding their words, even if I disagree.

Your example though? > Let’s say for advocating for arming every American or against gay marriage.

Arming them for what? To shoot gays? Yeah I would probably be pretty upset about that. Advocating ethnic cleansing? "Alternative facts" about vaccines?

If I were on Twitter or something I might tweet, or write a blog post about it trying to convince the publishers to change their mind or encouraging others to support different publishers. I don't think that makes me a book burner.

In reality though unless it was something truly vile or dangerous that crosses some sort of hard to define personal line I would probably not do anything at all... I'm not a despotic ruler who cannot abide the existence of mere words I disagree with...

[realityking]

Then you’re more open minded than most.

The point I was trying to get at is that when discussing a topic like “it is ok to use obviously political examples in a book about programming”, then it’s more interesting to consider what your response will be when they’re political positions different from yours. Nobody minds being “confronted” with opinions they already hold.

Note I explicitly didn’t give an example like ethnic cleansing or shooting gays. Advocating for murder isn’t political opinion in my book.

[smacktoward]

Your commitment to arguing hypotheticals instead of engaging with anything the author actually wrote is impressive.