Cancel culture IRL

[TurkeysGhost]

Running someone out of a job following a campaign of public shaming sounds exactly like cancel culture to me.

Ok, adding "political agitation stemming from unhinged conspiracy theories" to the big bucket of things that is "cancel culture".

Perhaps you can see my point when I say that this term has been broadened to the point of meaninglessness. It's basically just a pejorative term for anything occurring in the social sphere you don't like.

 

[d4m10n]

Perhaps you can see my point when I say that this term has been broadened to the point of meaninglessness.

Perhaps you can see how the Tommy Gong incident resembles every other incident of a maddened mob exacting revenge for a perceived breach of the mob's stated values.

Perhaps you can see how the usual definition applies here.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Perhaps you can see how the Tommy Gong incident resembles every other incident of a maddened mob exacting revenge for a perceived breach of the mob's stated values.

Was the Jan6 attack on the capitol "cancel culture"? It was an angry mob largely organized by online smears and agitation as well.

If you can't see how this definition is broad to the point of meaningless I don't know what to tell you. It's plainly obvious.

Pretty much every example of organized social interaction these days will involve the internet. The definition you seem to be operating under seems to encompass an absurdly large slice of all modern social interaction that occurs today.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Yeah but everything about society has taught me that the Proudly Wrong LOVE them some vague, open ended, pointlessly defined terms because it just them argue things at random.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Yeah but everything about society has taught me that the Proudly Wrong LOVE them some vague, open ended, pointlessly defined terms because it just them argue things at random.

Like all right wing moral panics, the term simply becomes a vague pejorative and cudgel for things they don't like.

Nice to see this moral panic and the moral panic about "critical race theory" converging at the same point, though seems some involved in both discussions are obtusely refusing to see it.

 

[d4m10n]

Was the Jan6 attack on the capitol "cancel culture"? It was an angry mob largely organized by online smears and agitation as well.

Did they show up in order to withdraw support from a specific public figure like Tommy Gong?

Were they engaging in group shaming of that individual?

Pretty much every example of organized social interaction these days will involve the internet.

Okay, but that isn't exactly the key element here.

Try breaking down the definition into a number of distinct elements.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Did they show up in order to withdraw support from a specific public figure? Were they engaging in group shaming of that individual?

Yeah, in fact they were so enthused about withdrawing support from some public figures they probably would have lynched them had they the opportunity to do so.

 

[d4m10n]

Here is my "cancel culture" checklist:

1. Publicly withdrawing support and/or encouraging others to do so
   
2. From a specific individual or corporation (e.g. Tommy Gong)
   
3. Due to perceived offenses against the values of the group performing the cancellation
   

Last I checked, most "organized social interaction" on the internet doesn't fit these criteria.

Yeah, in fact they were so enthused about withdrawing support from some public figures they probably would have lynched them had they the opportunity to do so.

Can you name one or two and describe what they allegedly did to violate the relevant group's norms?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Here is my checklist:

1) Publicly withdrawing support and/or encouraging others to do so

2) From a specific individual or corporation (e.g. Tommy Gong)

3) Due to perceived offenses against the values of the group performing the cancellation

Last I checked, most "organized social interaction" on the internet doesn't fit these criteria.

So does the Jan6 attack fit?

1) Publicly withdrew support
2) of Pence and Congress
3) for failing to stop the steal.

Cancel culture. It's trying to get someone fired from their job for doing a public racism, but it's also organized militia plots against the lawful transition of power. It's pretty much whatever you want it to be.

 

[d4m10n]

So does the Jan6 attack fit?

When the events went down, I had the sense that the crowd was far more interested in preventing the constitutional process from going forward (themselves, right then and there) than in cancelling Pence for failing to do so earlier that day. Perhaps I am mistaken about this, happy to be convinced otherwise.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

When the events went down, I had the sense that the crowd was far more interested in preventing the constitutional process from going forward (themselves, right then and there) than in cancelling Pence for failing to do so earlier that day. Perhaps I am mistaken about this, happy to be convinced otherwise.

So cancel culture can't chew gum and walk at the same time?

There was undoubtedly an element of public opprobrium directed towards those they felt had failed to do their duty.

Let me ask more broadly. Is a lynch mob cancel culture?

 

[dirtywick]

When the events went down, I had the sense that the crowd was far more interested in preventing the constitutional process from going forward (themselves, right then and there) than in cancelling Pence for failing to do so earlier that day. Perhaps I am mistaken about this, happy to be convinced otherwise.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/15/mike-pence-close-call-capitol-riot-foreman-vpx.cnn

some were there for mike

 

[d4m10n]

some were there for mike

So they wanted to "stop the steal" (which means Pence keeps his job) but also they were there to make sure Pence loses his job by other means? I suppose crazed mobs don't have to make sense.

Is a lynch mob cancel culture?

Only if you take "withdrawing support" a bit too literally.

Even though The Crucible made an analogy between McCarthyite inquisitions and actual witch hunts, the punishments meted out to Dalton Trumbo and Giles Corey were qualitatively different. Going after someone's livelihood isn't quite the same as taking their life.

 

[dirtywick]

So they wanted to "stop the steal" (which means Pence keeps his job) but also they were there to make sure Pence loses his job by other means? I suppose crazed mobs don't have to make sense.

Only if you take "withdrawing support" a bit too literally.

Even though The Crucible made an analogy between McCarthyite inquisitions and literal witch hunts, the punishments meted out to Dalton Trumbo and Giles Corey were qualitatively different.

well the whole incident didn't make a lot of sense. Mike Pence wasn't able to "stop the steal" at all, his role was ceremonial only. But, nobody was too happy with mike pence, he was one of the scapegoats. Most of the anger was incited by his running mate, he was being dragged through the mud for weeks leading up to the riot. If that crowd had gotten their way, there's not a scenario that Mike Pence continues to be VP, and many others in Congress wouldn't be keeping their jobs either, regardless of the means.

In any case, I wouldn't attribute a universal motive to the entire group. some people planned for months, others showed up that day and followed the crowd. Like all of these cancel culture incidents, you'll find people in agreement on some things but it doesn't mean they are in agreement on all things.

 

[dirtywick]

Although I'll say the capitol insurrection does, in many ways, fit the mold of how cancel culture operates and illustrates the dangers of it taken to the extreme. A group of manipulators presents a false accounting of the events to evoke anger from a mob using social media platforms. There was the anonymous death threats and flood of hate and negative messages to the targets.

Except they actually followed through on them.

 

[Joecool]

Because "CANCEL CULTURE OMG I CAN'T BE RACIST AND NOT GET FIRED ANYMORE!" IS UNSERIOUS, NON-SCHOLARLY, POLITCAL PUNDENTRY.

There's no serious discussion of it because it's not a serious topic, it's internet whining from people who have no idea what real oppression is.

Jimmy Kimmel did blackface on TV but somehow he escaped being cancelled.

 

[Carlotta]

So they wanted to "stop the steal" (which means Pence keeps his job) but also they were there to make sure Pence loses his job by other means? I suppose crazed mobs don't have to make sense.

Only if you take "withdrawing support" a bit too literally.

Even though The Crucible made an analogy between McCarthyite inquisitions and actual witch hunts, the punishments meted out to Dalton Trumbo and Giles Corey were qualitatively different. Going after someone's livelihood isn't quite the same as taking their life.

"Stop the steal" was only one of the chants. The other was "hang Mike Pence."

 

[Emily's Cat]

It should matter. It should also matter if the complaints are reasonable and whether or not they were coercive in nature. Right now this appears to be a few reasonable and calm complaints to an author that agreed and responded to them. We can call that cancel culture I suppose, but I would also call that a dialogue. Is being calming criticized a threat to creative freedom? I don’t think so.

It's the chilling effect.

In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction.[1] A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the decision of a court, or the threat of a lawsuit; any legal action that would cause people to hesitate to exercise a legitimate right (freedom of speech or otherwise) for fear of legal repercussions. When that fear is brought about by the threat of a libel lawsuit, it is called libel chill.[2] A lawsuit initiated specifically for the purpose of creating a chilling effect may be called a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation ("SLAPP").

"Chilling" in this context normally implies an undesirable slowing. Outside the legal context in common usage; any coercion or threat of coercion (or other unpleasantries) can have a chilling effect on a group of people regarding a specific behavior, and often can be statistically measured or be plainly observed. For example, the news headline "Flood insurance [price] spikes have chilling effect on some home sales,"[3] and the abstract title of a two‐part survey of 160 college students involved in dating relationships: "The chilling effect of aggressive potential on the expression of complaints in intimate relationships."

Think back to McCarthyism. It only took a handful of people being subjected to 'legal' action - being labeled commies, losing their jobs, being placed on watch lists, etc. Once those first round of people were 'made an example of', the 'example' hit home with everyone else. People were afraid to be even potentially viewed as having any beliefs that were within spitting distance of communism. It didn't matter if they were actual communists or not - if they said anything that even seemed like it could be interpreted as not being 100% opposed to communism, it could result in ostracism and social sanctions, including loss of livelihood.

The same thing is happening now, using predominantly social media as a venue for enforcement. People are afraid to even accidentally say something that can potentially be interpreted as falling into either racial or [the taboo topic]. People who are not racists, who have not actually done any racist things, have been ostracized, lost jobs, and been subjected to vicious harassment and threats... Thus, people are on edge for fear that it may happen to them. Enough so that harmless lines within a book get removed - not because there's anything wrong with those lines, but because the risk of someone deciding that this comment deserves punishment's is just too high.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

It's the chilling effect.



Think back to McCarthyism. It only took a handful of people being subjected to 'legal' action - being labeled commies, losing their jobs, being placed on watch lists, etc. Once those first round of people were 'made an example of', the 'example' hit home with everyone else. People were afraid to be even potentially viewed as having any beliefs that were within spitting distance of communism. It didn't matter if they were actual communists or not - if they said anything that even seemed like it could be interpreted as not being 100% opposed to communism, it could result in ostracism and social sanctions, including loss of livelihood.

The same thing is happening now, using predominantly social media as a venue for enforcement. People are afraid to even accidentally say something that can potentially be interpreted as falling into either racial or [the taboo topic]. People who are not racists, who have not actually done any racist things, have been ostracized, lost jobs, and been subjected to vicious harassment and threats... Thus, people are on edge for fear that it may happen to them. Enough so that harmless lines within a book get removed - not because there's anything wrong with those lines, but because the risk of someone deciding that this comment deserves punishment's is just too high.

If you think Twitter is the new Red Scare, I implore you, please log off and touch grass.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Not sure of the political leanings of the newspaper that reported this, but the story is going all over the right wing blogosphere at the moment...


https://www.independent.com/2021/04...dmin-put-on-leave-for-controversial-comments/

Honestly, I just don't understand the world anymore. Even just a couple of years ago, their "about time" would have been viewed as *support*, and I suspect that's exactly how it was intended.

The rest of their comments were at the absolute worst not overly polite and pandering. But to view them as victim blaming that causes "great harm" is so hyperbolic as to render the concept of harm meaningless.