Author Topic: The Progressive Thread!  (Read 3682 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4342
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #330 on: February 18, 2021, 11:08:31 pm »
A "cancel culture" story in four parts...









 -k
Masked for your safety.
Sad Sad x 1 View List

Offline the_squid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4142
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #331 on: February 18, 2021, 11:17:55 pm »
Right and wrong are subjective.  After months of being yelled at by woketards on Twitter, I imagine Carano probably did feel like she was being persecuted.

 -k

No, right/wrong is not always a matter of opinion. 

She was definitely objectively wrong.  Republicans are not analogous to persecuted Jews.  She is a conspiratard ala Trump.

The problem is that she’s a crackpot who should’ve just not tweeted.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2021, 11:19:35 pm by the_squid »

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4342
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #332 on: February 19, 2021, 01:24:31 am »
If the allegations so far are true, this is probably the beginning.
To me the one that really jumps out is Michelle Trachtenberg's statement that "there was a rule saying that he's not allowed in a room alone with Michelle again."  She described his behavior as "Very. Not. Appropriate."

Trachtenberg was just about 15 years old when she started working at "Buffy". She was a few months past 18 when the series ended.  She was legally a minor for almost the entirety of the time she worked for Whedon.  One can only wonder what kind of situation led to him being not allowed to be alone with her.

 -k
Masked for your safety.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2915
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #333 on: February 19, 2021, 10:20:44 am »
Right and wrong are subjective.  After months of being yelled at by woketards on Twitter, I imagine Carano probably did feel like she was being persecuted.

 -k
Ohhh "woketards"

I see. You've thrown in with the lot who appends "tards" to things.

Best of luck to you.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2915
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #334 on: February 19, 2021, 10:21:32 am »
She is a conspiratard ala Trump.
You too, I see. **** hell, guys.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline MH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8788
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #335 on: February 19, 2021, 10:22:54 am »
Yeah, just because the level of discussion everywhere has declined, doesn't mean we need to follow suit.
Funny Funny x 1 View List

Offline Black Dog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
  • Location: Deathbridge
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #336 on: February 20, 2021, 11:32:02 pm »
A "cancel culture" story in four parts...
*snip*

 -k

But according to all your fave smooth brains, cancel culture is a left wing woke phenomenon. And Robinson himself points out his firing doesn't fit the popular cancel culture narrative in which a (left wing) social media mob acts to get someone fired or sanctioned for saying or doing something that violates the tenets of wokeness. Rather, this is a case of the interests of media and government converging to enforce idealogical conformity.

Maybe it would be helpful if we could arrive at a common working definition of "cancel culture," but I've seen nothing to suggest it actually exists except as a way for grifters like Bari Weiss to rack up subscribers and protect the interests of the powerful.

« Last Edit: February 21, 2021, 02:36:22 pm by Black Dog »
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline the_squid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4142
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #337 on: February 21, 2021, 10:24:14 pm »
I totally think we could come up with a definition...

Being booted off Twitter is not cancel culture

Having people not buy your albums is not cancel culture, however, being threatened is.

Not having a contract renewed because a company thinks it’ll lose money is not cancel culture.

Preventing people from seeing someone speak (non-hate speech) in public, or disrupting the speaker who has a right to speak and be heard is cancel culture. 

Accusing Petersen, Sam Harris, Rowling or that pompous bag-o-crap Ben Shapiro of hate speech and trying to prevent them from speaking is cancel culture.

Can we start there?  Do you agree with my list?
« Last Edit: February 21, 2021, 10:36:06 pm by the_squid »

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6206
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #338 on: February 22, 2021, 12:26:05 am »
I totally think we could come up with a definition...

I would think cancel culture is when people are cancelled due to moral outrage, regardless of the justness of it.  We can all agree to various degrees that there are just and unjust cancellations.
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1387
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #339 on: February 22, 2021, 12:54:29 am »
I think the ultimate cancel culture is calling election fraud and attempting insurrection, but that's just me... 

Offline the_squid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4142
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #340 on: February 22, 2021, 03:17:28 am »
I would think cancel culture is when people are cancelled due to moral outrage, regardless of the justness of it.  We can all agree to various degrees that there are just and unjust cancellations.

Too vague.  Your definition allows everything to be considered ‘cancel culture’.

Offline Black Dog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
  • Location: Deathbridge
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #341 on: February 22, 2021, 10:38:17 am »
I totally think we could come up with a definition...

Being booted off Twitter is not cancel culture

Having people not buy your albums is not cancel culture, however, being threatened is.

Not having a contract renewed because a company thinks it’ll lose money is not cancel culture.

Preventing people from seeing someone speak (non-hate speech) in public, or disrupting the speaker who has a right to speak and be heard is cancel culture. 

Accusing Petersen, Sam Harris, Rowling or that pompous bag-o-crap Ben Shapiro of hate speech and trying to prevent them from speaking is cancel culture.

Can we start there?  Do you agree with my list?

To the bolded, I see a profound difference between accusing someone of hate speech and physically preventing them from speaking and to blur the line between the two is itself a threat to free speech.

Also you tacitly acknowledge there are circumstances in which it is acceptable to prevent someone from speaking or take away their platforms, so how do you determine when that is ok and when it is not?

One thing proponents of the "cancel culture" narrative tend to elide is the drastic power imbalances that actually determine who has a voice or not. It's ridiculous to claim college students protesting some rich bigot's speaking engagement or the Twitter crowd roasting a sinecured moron's opinion piece in a major newspaper is a drastic threat to free speech and liberal values while ignoring-as most of these boneheads do-ongoing attacks on the free press by corporate interests or even the police. This omission, more than anything else, makes it clear that this narrative is not about protecting liberal values or free speech, but insulating the privileged and powerful from consequences in a time where anyone with a smartphone can call a sitting US senator a dipshit.


« Last Edit: February 22, 2021, 10:47:49 am by Black Dog »

Offline the_squid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4142
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #342 on: February 22, 2021, 12:41:50 pm »
To the bolded, I see a profound difference between accusing someone of hate speech and physically preventing them from speaking and to blur the line between the two is itself a threat to free speech.

Yes, accusing someone isn’t cancel culture...  but preventing them from speaking just because they have been accused would be.

Quote

Also you tacitly acknowledge there are circumstances in which it is acceptable to prevent someone from speaking or take away their platforms, so how do you determine when that is ok and when it is not?

It’s OK when a court has determined that they have spread hate speech.

It’s not up to a mob to determine who can or can’t speak. 

Personally, I think nearly everyone should be allowed to say pretty close to anything they wish, short of being illegal.  If it’s not illegal speech, then a mob has no valid right to prevent it.

Quote
One thing proponents of the "cancel culture" narrative tend to elide is the drastic power imbalances that actually determine who has a voice or not.

This sounds like it’s leading into a justification for a mob to prevent someone from speaking because “they hold the power”.

Quote
It's ridiculous to claim college students protesting some rich bigot's speaking engagement or the Twitter crowd roasting a sinecured moron's opinion piece in a major newspaper is a drastic threat to free speech and liberal values while ignoring-as most of these boneheads do-ongoing attacks on the free press by corporate interests or even the police.

Protesting is fine.  I never said anything about protests being part of cancel culture.  Now you’re shifting the goalposts.

Quote
This omission, more than anything else, makes it clear that this narrative is not about protecting liberal values or free speech, but insulating the privileged and powerful from consequences in a time where anyone with a smartphone can call a sitting US senator a dipshit.

This argument doesn’t make much sense...  it’s a bit convoluted and seems to be shifting the goalposts once again for what we were discussing;  defining what ‘cancel culture’ is.

My narrative is exactly about protecting the liberal value of free speech.  Short of being illegal, anyone can say anything. 

Offline Black Dog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
  • Location: Deathbridge
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #343 on: February 22, 2021, 12:53:23 pm »
Yes, accusing someone isn’t cancel culture...  but preventing them from speaking just because they have been accused would be.

It’s OK when a court has determined that they have spread hate speech.

It’s not up to a mob to determine who can or can’t speak. 

Personally, I think nearly everyone should be allowed to say pretty close to anything they wish, short of being illegal.  If it’s not illegal speech, then a mob has no valid right to prevent it.

So you're fine with the state restricting speech but not members of the community? That seems like a far more dangerous concession.

Quote
This sounds like it’s leading into a justification for a mob to prevent someone from speaking because “they hold the power”.

Here's a scenario: Jerkoff McGee is going to give a speech at the local university, students organize a protest and boycott and pressure the university to cancel the event. Is that ok? After all, the students are just using their own speech to get their point across and aren't physically preventing anyone from speaking.

Quote
Protesting is fine.  I never said anything about protests being part of cancel culture.  Now you’re shifting the goalposts.

I didn't say you did.

Quote
This argument doesn’t make much sense...  it’s a bit convoluted and seems to be shifting the goalposts once again for what we were discussing;  defining what ‘cancel culture’ is.

It's not that complicated: many of those who complain about cancel culture have a, shall we say, selective notion of free speech. Bari Weiss, for example, is running a whole grift highlighting examples of cancel culture, but has a history of trying to ruin the careers of Arab and Muslim professors who criticize Israel. If that doesn't apply to you, personally, fine.

Quote
My narrative is exactly about protecting the liberal value of free speech.  Short of being illegal, anyone can say anything.

no one is saying speech should be restricted, only that people should not be free from consequences. The question is where that line is.

Offline the_squid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4142
Re: The Progressive Thread!
« Reply #344 on: February 22, 2021, 02:48:17 pm »
So you're fine with the state restricting speech but not members of the community? That seems like a far more dangerous concession.

That’s the way it has worked so far.   How is it more dangerous to have laws and a court decide rather than a mob?

Quote

Here's a scenario: Jerkoff McGee is going to give a speech at the local university, students organize a protest and boycott and pressure the university to cancel the event. Is that ok? After all, the students are just using their own speech to get their point across and aren't physically preventing anyone from speaking.

Yes, that’s fine, depending on the school’s policies and government policies dictating who can speak on campuses.  They can be open to things like human rights violations if they cancel someone because people just don’t like what they say. 

But, if it was canceled because of security concerns, threats of violence, then it’s no different than right-wing Nazi groups scaring people from speaking about anti-racism.  I would call that ‘cancel culture’.

Quote
It's not that complicated: many of those who complain about cancel culture have a, shall we say, selective notion of free speech. Bari Weiss, for example, is running a whole grift highlighting examples of cancel culture, but has a history of trying to ruin the careers of Arab and Muslim professors who criticize Israel. If that doesn't apply to you, personally, fine.

Criticism of Israel is fair game.  Why should anyone’s career be ruined for criticizing policies?  Are there jackasses who are whiny hypocrites?   Yup.

Quote
no one is saying speech should be restricted, only that people should not be free from consequences. The question is where that line is.

Forcing people with a different opinion than you not to speak is how I define ‘cancel culture’.

I’ve never said that speech should be free of consequences.  But if the consequence is a punch in the face, then, no.  That’s not a legitimate form of protest or consequences.  If it is physically blocking or intimidating people from a venue, then that is also not a valid form of protest or consequence.