And yes, I know that Card has some fairly liberal views on certain issues. I just don’t find the overall package to be consistent. Regarding Card, I side with Voltaire, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” That people may have different views from me follows intrinsically from free will, as does my right to disagree.

Alas, we disagree again. I think the claim for almost anything can be made if you try hard enough.

There is a *fundimental* difference in the entire book. In Enders Game, Ender and the Human race are in a fight for what they believe to be the survival of the human race. They are positive that they will be destroyed if they do not destroy first.

Further on, Ender later on, does all he can to ensure that those creatures are allowed to once again become part of the galactic ecosystem.

Card’s a nice man. His political beliefs are a bit all over the place, but you know what? That’s his right, and he tends to be more of a liberal than most members I know.

I agree that Williams is off-base completely about his probably ironic assertion that Card’s books were written by a committee of the LDS Chruch, simply because it’s clear that any sufficiently dedicated member needs no impetus to produce Churchy writing. Cf. Glen Larson and Battlestar Galactica.

Radford’s more fundamental comparison is less easy to refute – knowingly vs. unknowingly is really a weak distinction, when in Hitler’s case, the killing was carried out by third parties. That layer of separation puts enough of an indirectness in to lessen the knowingness of his impact. (Which, BTW, I think is true of most genocidal maniacs, who themselves almost never have to do the killing.)

While I like a lot of Card’s writing (even excusing the Mormon angle), I have gripes with a lot of Card’s politics, including his support of the war on terror, the PATRIOT Act, media censorship in wartime, Israel, and institutionalized homophobia.