Cancel culture IRL

[Mumbles]

And if it was found to have been under the Obama administration, would you also accept comparisons to Hitler for him? I know your opinion of Obama is relatively low, but still I assume such comparisons would be a stretch, no? If his rhetoric was much better but the results were worse, where does the blame lie?

Two problems you're facing:

First, Obama very obviously did no such thing, and actually tried to reform US immigration - he was blocked because the same people that love Dolt 45 for his intentional cruelty raved and screamed about it. Toupee Fiasco was far worse in rhetoric *and* intention.

Second, if he did such a thing (as opposed to holding for legal processing, or trying to deal with a flood of unaccompanied minors that immigration services was unprepared for - you know, the things that MAGAts and Bernie Stans falsely say are equal to Dolt 45/Sessions'/Miller's malicious treatment of refugees and immigrants), it would be a valid comparison regardless of what I said (which I would like to say I would oppose, and as someone who actually did oppose Obama's relatively benign immigration issues I think I can say I likely would, not that this was ever tested)

Third...you do understand why we've been distinguishing between "concentration camps" and "death camps" the throughout Dolt 45's presidency, right? When you don't address this sort of clear rhetoric and action, things can very easily get worse, as we've seen throughout world history - and the extra layer of for-profit prisons and garbage recordkeeping only gives leeway for "oopsies" like mass deaths due to disease outbreaks and the like, which can easily be covered up and actual help pad a corporation's bottom line.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Hollywood will perfectly cater to rational/profitable interests. If that means having a blacklist, then so be it. What could go wrong? Let it be a lesson to any flunky screenwriter who wants to criticize "human rights abuses" in China. Be brave: fatten your pocketbook. Capitalism is an amoral system... so let it be your guide.




If "cancellation" leads to greater fame and enrichment, then maybe that's reason to reconsider it? After their Bush remarks, the Dixie Chicks won the Grammy for Best Album of the Year and became media darlings, but that hardly makes up for the death threats and nonsense.*

As for Carano, who cares what some meathead actress has to say? Prove her claims wrong. Mock her for being an idiot. Answering speech with speech.

Isn't that what happened here? "Cancel culture" is little more than the intersection of free speech and free association. Carano said something stupid, and a large part of the population responded by saying "this lady is a jackass, we don't like her anymore" and Disney decided they didn't want to be embarrassed by her anymore and cut this turd loose. Reactionaries responded by saying "actually this is exactly the kind of stupid we like, gimme more" and now she's doing her tour through the right wing press, with promises of future work as some aggrieved cultural icon of the right.

Seems like the "marketplace of ideas" is working fine.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

For those of us who value Carano’s acting way more than her politics, why should we care that she believes stupid ******???

Who has said that you should?

 

[Mumbles]

The people who complain about "cancel culture" are basically complaining that other people's complaints are actually effective, unlike their own.

The more this goes on, the more obvious it becomes to me that the folks who quickly noted that this is more projection were right - "cancel culture" appears to be nothing more than an attempt to preempt the actual discussion by attempting to shift the subject from whether or not some social sanction is reasonable for speech, to defense of some imaginary and ill-defined "culture".

This may be an attempt to imitate their anger towards "rape culture", except the latter has specific examples, from cops who refuse to seriously investigate (looking at you Joe Arpaio), to judges who give lenient sentences to rapists because he doesn't want to ruin a promising future, to right wing grifters that attempt to sexually humiliate CNN reporters on a boat in an apparent Dennis Reynolds-esque scheme to avoid making actual threats (James O'Keefe, looking at you now).

Digging into "cancel culture" only leads to more nonsense, like "woke mobs" of "Social Justice warriors", and yet more people losing their jobs for, again, spewing bigotry while easily identifiable. If anything, it seems to be used too often to provide cover for actual physically violent mobs, like when Australia "cancelled" Gavin McGinnis, meaning they refused to let him tour the country, likely due to the violent white supremacist street gang he founded.

If you want to say what Carano posted, repeatedly, isn't that bad, then just make the case. I *might* agree, as many of us "woke ethnics" do when the anger is over something unimportant, or some teenager acting a fool. And maybe don't keep pushing for "at-will" employment laws.

Although if her contract was up, and they simply refused to renew...that's how show biz actually works, and frankly, I'd feel worse for the various behind-the-scenes workers that would lose a job if she somehow managed to sink the entire Mando franchise with the clearly made-for-toy-sales puppet. This was unlikely, I'll grant, but even so, a minor character's not really worth the effort.

Finally, I'm not an expert on antisemitic tropes and iconography, but when the person in question also posts something like this to their own Twitter timeline...I mean, isn't this a bit obvious?

 

[Darat]

The more this goes on, the more obvious it becomes to me that the folks who quickly noted that this is more projection were right - "cancel culture" appears to be nothing more than an attempt to preempt the actual discussion by attempting to shift the subject from whether or not some social sanction is reasonable for speech, to defense of some imaginary and ill-defined "culture".

..snip…

I’ve said before it’s an attempted replacement for the old “political correct” strawman that the right had huge success with for decades. As you say it is an attempt to move discussion away from whatever was said or done and to dismiss all criticisms.

 

[d4m10n]

vote with your wallet wasn’t invented in 2021

Noted. Still don't see why we should care about the political opinions of people paid to read lines someone else wrote while pretending to have feelings.

 

[Darat]

Noted. Still don't see why we should care about the political opinions of people paid to read lines someone else wrote while pretending to have feelings.

If you don’t then don’t.

 

[Matthew Best]

The ones who scream cancel culture the loudest have a cancel culture of their own.

 

[Max_mang]

Yes, but is comparing the road that leads to atrocious acts denigrating to Jews in the holocaust? Terrible analogy sure, but actually offensive? Intentionally so? If it is, why is comparing/calling GOP law makers Nazis/Hitler not as denigrating to the experience? Children held by ICE and separated from their families for a time vs Jewish children literally rounded up and systematically murdered by the Nazi state?

How many Jews did Josh Hawley round up? What people did he target with similar actions/laws as them? As bad as Trump might be in people's eyes, he in no way is comparable, on any level, with Hitler. But that expression when shared by left leaning artists is celebrated.

I've seen Trumps run as president referred to as "Fascist-lite" much more than "Fascist". For the last 4 years, most folks I've seen have been comparing Trump to the early parts of Hitler's timeline, not the end part. The goal being to use hindsight to get ahead of the situation. His run also shares a lot in common w/ the rise of Mussolini.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Noted. Still don't see why we should care about the political opinions of people paid to read lines someone else wrote while pretending to have feelings.

Again, who is saying you should?

 

[HansMustermann]

You know, I was really just being sarcastic about all the dumb things people get offended over. Literally anything could be offensive to someone.

So far we're very much in agreement. Wholeheartedly even.

Where we seem to differ (well, maybe or maybe not not from you, but at least from some of the more butthurt participants in this thread) is the notion that just some random nutcase getting butthurt is actually a cancellation. Spoiler alert: mind control (via Twitter, or otherwise) isn't actually real. Some young 'un being on Twitter doesn't, in fact, give him mind-control powers. Judging by past precedents, just trying to cancel someone because you're dead set on distorting what he actually said, not only isn't actually going to get them "cancelled", but might backfire and get you cancelling yourself instead.

So, can someone get offended by something innocent you said? Wholeheartedly YES. Is it not nice? Wholeheartedly YES. Can they cancel you by pushing that disingenuous mis-interpretation? Ehhh, overwhelmingly NOT LIKELY? Is it going to massively backfire? Ovewhelmingly LIKELY.

I don't really care that someone actually gets "cancelled". It's the intent that matters. If I shoot you and you survive is the same intent as if I shoot you and you live. Only difference is my aim.

No.

1. There is a crucial difference: freedom of speech. You do not have a similar freedom to shoot at someone. So any restrictions will have to be balanced against that right for the former, but not for the latter.

As is the potential damage (you can recover from being fired, but not from being shot in the head), potential benefits for a civilized society (we recognize the value of being able to speak against the local conservative candidate, but not so much about shooting said candidate and thus bypassing democratic election entirely), etc.

And crucially an analogy only holds as much water as the key attributes are shared between the two situations/entities/whatever. (And even then it might fail anyway. Such is the problem with analogies: they're only a fallible thumb-rule kinda heuristic.) Here, the analogy isn't even an analogy, since the key attributes for why one is tolerated and the other isn't aren't actually shared between the two.

So on the whole, the argument from analogy fails epically. Shaka, when the walls fell. So epic a fail, that future bards will sing a national epic fail about it.


2. In the western rule-of-law concept of justice, the evil intent ("mens rea" = literally, "evil mind") is worthless without an accompanying evil deed ("actus reus" = literally, "evil act"). We do NOT, in fact, treat A. premeditate murder of your annoying neighbour Ned Flanders and B. premeditate competing for the same job as him, as the same kind of crime, just because there was the same kind of intent to harm the guy. In fact, the exact same intent as a Class A felony can be in fact ok ok, if the act it resulted in is not in fact illegal.

The very notion that you could decide that two acts are the same by virtue of sharing just the "mens rea", is nonsense. You have to show that the actual "actus reus" is similarly illegal or (if it should be as illegal or immoral) as damaging.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Noted. Still don't see why we should care about the political opinions of people paid to read lines someone else wrote while pretending to have feelings.

Then don't. Capitalism allows you to pick your products based on your own personal values, no matter how irrational or morally reprehensible they may be.

 

[dann]

... if you have the money to pay for them.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Then don't. Capitalism allows you to pick your products based on your own personal values, no matter how irrational or morally reprehensible they may be.

Yeah...unless the products are not being sold because the sellers perceive they would not make sufficient profit to overcome public animosity. I have no moral objections to eating horse meat but I cannot purchase it because nobody sells it here, because in this culture horses are not food animals and the public would create outcry against anybody who tried to sell it.

Which is the whole point of the "cancel culture" debate: is it good or bad that certain things can be stopped by the barrier of public disdain?

It adds little value to point out that theoretically we can buy whatever we choose if the item we would choose is not for sale.

 

[johnny karate]

For those of us who value Carano’s acting way more than her politics, why should we care that she believes stupid ******???

First of all, allow me to laugh hysterically at the idea that anyone values Gina Carano for her acting.

Second of all, I’ve got good news for you.

Gina Carano remains uncancelled.

 

[johnny karate]

As for Carano, who cares what some meathead actress has to say? Prove her claims wrong. Mock her for being an idiot. Answering speech with speech.

Disney did. They said “You’re fired”.

 

[johnny karate]

You know, I was really just being sarcastic about all the dumb things people get offended over. Literally anything could be offensive to someone. I have not read the thread and only saw the last post so perhaps just put my post in relation to TM's.

I'm also not on social media sites. This is the only place I post. Have never tweeted. nor do I want to. Just reading tidbits now and again here and in news reminds me I made the right choice. Delusional is a good word. Hooligans might be a better one.

I don't really care that someone actually gets "cancelled". It's the intent that matters. If I shoot you and you survive is the same intent as if I shoot you and you live. Only difference is my aim.

/probable off topic. I'll show myself out now.

I like when wokescolds play the “snowflake” card after getting offended over an MMA fighter losing her job pretending to shoot laser guns in outer space.

 

[johnny karate]

Yeah...unless the products are not being sold because the sellers perceive they would not make sufficient profit to overcome public animosity. I have no moral objections to eating horse meat but I cannot purchase it because nobody sells it here, because in this culture horses are not food animals and the public would create outcry against anybody who tried to sell it.

Which is the whole point of the "cancel culture" debate: is it good or bad that certain things can be stopped by the barrier of public disdain?

It adds little value to point out that theoretically we can buy whatever we choose if the item we would choose is not for sale.

So basically, Gina Carano is the horse meat of the Star Wars universe.

 

[Sherkeu]

I like when wokescolds play the “snowflake” card after getting offended over an MMA fighter losing her job pretending to shoot laser guns in outer space.

Haha.... Am I now in a drama I know nothing about? Maybe I'll ride this wave for a a bit. Life isnt very exciting these days.
Outer space guns sound cool.

(I almost read the thread to see what you were speaking about but I'm going to refrain on this one...like a diet)

 

[I Am The Scum]

Which is the whole point of the "cancel culture" debate: is it good or bad that certain things can be stopped by the barrier of public disdain?

This really highlights the lack of nuance in cancel culture concern. Nobody is saying that a large group of people is always right, but many will hint at the idea that a large group of people is always wrong. You'll hear weasel words that attempt to establish a weird power dynamic, like, "Hollywood elites bow down to the woke mob." It's not in any way an analysis of what happened. It's just a method of establishing good guys and bad guys. Don't think about it too hard.