So I read that critique of Ender's Game Tam linked to, and there are two major flaws in the genocide argument.
1) The repeated insistence that this isn't how genocide works in reality seems not to understand that Card isn't talking about real-world genocide. Seriously, I know bigotry is a hot topic, but if Card were remotely sympathetic to Slobodan Milosevic or something, it would at least be a close #2 to his stance on gay marriage on the list of things that piss people off about him.
2) Granted that I haven't read past the first book of the Speaker for the Dead series, but it seems at least highly likely that a central pillar of the narrative is about atoning for said genocide. "Sorry" does not, in fact, cut it.
However, the essay also failed to include a major support for its thesis, that being that nobody appears to give a damn about the genocide until the Speaker's books come out. I don't believe the Ender's Shadow books mention the word "Xenocide" once, and it's clear that Bean is purely cold and analytical about the whole affair. (Though I don't remember what Sister Carlotta thought, to be honest. If she didn't have reservations, then we're seriously screwed.)
Hail Martin Septim!
Yes, and how is that bad in any way...
If they're by people who don't support "bad" causes, then by all means get those other two, save that first seven dollars, and find the "bad" book in the library instead.
Problem solved and nobody has to profit at all from you buying a tainted book.
Besides, a visit to a proper used book store can often yield books at a dollar or two apiece, not seven.
edited 30th May '12 5:43:53 AM by Journeyman

I mostly learned to live with OSC's views conflicting with my own, but somewhere in the back of my mind it just kind of bugs me. I know it's a little ridiculous. It's not like Ender's Game is some big author tract or anything, if it were then I wouldn't have read it. I just can't really help having some level of discomfort knowing his position.