Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
On the contrary, very similar situations. Briefly, my point was that if you can justify buying an author’s work because there’s an infinitesimal royalty earned, by the same token there’s no point in voting, i.e., the individual has an imperceptible impact on the outcome in both cases. One can only make the right choice for themselves and act on it, in the knowledge that if others agree, they will prevail. A collective action, whether it be an election or a book purchase, is based on such individual decisions.
|
My position is that there is no need to justify buying an author's work whatsoever. Even if someone is aware that they are buying the work of, say, a convicted criminal, and they have qualms about benefiting that criminal, they should be aware that their individual contribution is usually de minimus if anything. In the remote scenario where the work is a best seller and the author does profit significantly, any small contribution they may have made individually is more than justified by them having read a worthwhile work. I respect someone's right to choose for themselves not to read a book because of some problematic aspect of the authors conduct or character. They should likewise respect my choice as to what I choose to read.