Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2

[Chris_Halkides]

don't want to interact?

Spare me your moral high ground speech about what's civil.

You demonize people who don't want to interact with people who treat them like crap via the made up term "Cancel Culture" that you couldn't couldn't even come up with on your own.

You choice of words "people who don't want to interact" is highly misleading. The people who are doing the canceling are claiming the right not just to make the decisions for themselves, but they are also claiming the right to decide for other people. If the petition concerning the Emmett Till opera had been successful, the audience would have been denied the chance to see it. Why their rights don't count is something that pro-cancel culture apologists do not address (in my experience).

Your phrase "people who treat them like crap" is even further off the mark. How did the creators of the opera treat anyone like crap?

If you want to avoid using the phrase "cancel culture," then saying instead that the phenomenon is people who are so convinced of their own moral and intellectual superiority, that they claim the right to tell other people which operas they are not allowed to hear, and which teachers they are not allowed to listen to. That would have been more accurate than what you wrote.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

FIRE is worth supporting

Does FIRE call this 'cancel culture'?

I am not sure what you are asking. Did you read the link that I provided? They had an extensive discussion, and they are non-partisan.

 

[tyr_13]

I am not sure what you are asking. Did you read the link that I provided? They had an extensive discussion, and they are non-partisan.

I am asking if you are conflating 'censorship' and 'cancel culture' in a way your source does not. 'I oppose censorship so I oppose cancel culture' does not seem to be a valid line of reasoning.


EDIT: Further, 'non-partisan' does not mean 'non-biased' or 'correct'. 'Non-biased' doesn't even mean 'correct'.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

not for the first time

I am asking if you are conflating 'censorship' and 'cancel culture' in a way your source does not. 'I oppose censorship so I oppose cancel culture' does not seem to be a valid line of reasoning.


EDIT: Further, 'non-partisan' does not mean 'non-biased' or 'correct'. 'Non-biased' doesn't even mean 'correct'.

I did not say "I oppose censorship so I oppose cancel culture," nor did I intend to imply it. The fact that FIRE is non-partisan is further evidence that JoeMorgue's definition of cancel culture is a poor one.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I hate you.

My ship isn’t coming and I just can’t pretend

 

[Chris_Halkides]

asking for clarification

One group is using it as it has come to be commonly used (anti-modern, anti-woke, pro-racist) while insisting they're using a different more neutral usage which isn't consistent with their actions.

Your view is that one group is using a pro-racist meaning of the term cancel culture and being deceptive about it, correct? Is it also your position that this group is racist?

 

[Checkmite]

Given that both "cancel culture" and "woke" both have their roots in Black culture denying their valid usage has a very racist energy about it.

That's a rather cynically disingenuous argument. These terms as they are currently used have very little in common with their original usage. "Woke" as originally used by a handful of Black social media users for instance started off referring to the personal realization that a law or policy or statement was implicitly racist. As currently used by White conservative pundits, "woke" just means literally anything vaguely liberal-ish. Liberal or even centrist stances and statements on issues like abortion, LGBT rights, gun control, climate change, and COVID vaccines are all labeled "woke" by these pundits. So no; you don't really get to spin the rejection of these terms as popularized by White conservatives as some kind of censorship of the Black voices they were originally stolen from.

 

[ponderingturtle]

In a victory against cancel culture and holding people accountable in general, Lois C.K. won a grammy. So we can see that about 5 years is all you should be held accountable for sexually harassing women.

 

[gnome]

In a victory against cancel culture and holding people accountable in general, Lois C.K. won a grammy. So we can see that about 5 years is all you should be held accountable for sexually harassing women.

I think if there is an ideal consequence, it's probably not one-size-fits-all.

 

[dann]

Hold the phone, new right wing freak in danger of getting "cancelled" just dropped:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/07/24/penn-law-condemns-amy-waxs-recent-comments-race-and-immigration-others-call-her

https://twitter.com/NathanJRobinson/status/1477763965308620805

Don't be a wokescold, calling an overt white nationalist a racist is cancel culture!

Cancel her, please! She's dumb as ******
Amy Wax Tells Tucker Carlson 'Blacks' Resent Western Achievements (Newsweek, April 12, 2022)

 

[tyr_13]

Your view is that one group is using a pro-racist meaning of the term cancel culture and being deceptive about it, correct? Is it also your position that this group is racist?

Ops, sorry I missed this!

I was using the comma loosely, as 'or' and not 'and'. I don't argue everyone in the set using the term as it has come to be commonly used is racist, but racists are part of that set.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

reconsidering the concerts

I have reexamined some of the concert incidents. Quoting from The Guardian: The move was discussed with musicians, she [Ms. Robinson] said, adding: “The people who said anything said: ‘This would be my preference but whatever you do I fully support you.’" My interpretation of the entire paragraph is that the musicians themselves did not push strongly for removing Tchaikovsky; it sounds like a decision by the management for reasons that were not particularly well explained. However, I do not see unambiguous evidence of outside pressure; therefore, I would like to withdraw the Cardiff orchestra's decision as an example of cancel culture, pending additional information perhaps becoming available in the future. I would also like to withdraw the treatment of soprano Anna Netrebko and a Russian cellist whose name escapes me at the moment. I did see that there was dismay at the decision to not to perform the Tchaikovsky works, but that opposition did not take the form of an attempt to cancel the Cardiff orchestra, which was Darat's claim and is his to withdraw, if he so chooses.

On the other hand pianist Alexander Malofeev was cancelled in Vancouver and again in Montreal. Outside pressure was applied, as can be seen in the information I provided upthread. It is far from the most egregious example of cancel culture in this thread; awarding a top prize in that category, however, would be difficult, owing to the fierceness of the competition.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

a dissonant chord

OK, so I think I got it.

Cancel culture: when public does it, and it is bad, but only when done by the woke crowd.
Censorship: when the government does it, and it's ok, but only if it is against the woke crowd. For example, removing books about Rosa Parks from the library. But it also applies to social media companies enforcing terms of agreement, where it is not ok, if it is woke.

Useful thread. We are getting some clairificaiton.

The cancel culture denialists claimed that cancel culture was an invention of conservatives. When presented with evidence to the contrary, the denialists resolved this cognitive dissonance by making false claims about what happened (Jason Kilborn), making claims that had little evidentiary basis (the teacher who was fired over mixing up names), going off on a tangent (discussing why a fictional character in an opera should not be the main character), or simply ignoring an event altogether (the rock being moved in Madison, WI). One denialist claimed to be consistent in his definition of cancel culture. That is true in the same sense that a man with his fingers firmly in his ears saying, "I can't hear you," is speaking the truth.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

a bad bill, yes

. The use of 'cancel culture' is claimed to be one thing, when if it were that one thing the examples johnny cites would be the core of the discussion.

It means people aren't using the term as they claim. This isn't a tu quoque or simply hypocrisy; it's the falsifying of assertions.

One of Johnny's links is behind a paywall; therefore, I cannot easily address it. However, the other link (the one from The Hill about an Oklahoma bill) is one that I can see. Some time ago I wrote, "I am inclined to put the criminal and civil justice system outside of cancel cultural on that basis." To take a simple (perhaps too simple) example, if I see a burglar robbing my neighbor's house and call the police leading to the burglar's being arrested, that is not cancelling the burglar. Cancel culture is about social pressure. I don't see any evidence of social pressure Johnny's example of a ridiculous and really bad bill; for all we know, this bill originated in Representative Standridge's head.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Another example of cancel culture:

https://jalopnik.com/texas-tuner-shop-boycotted-after-owner-posts-video-roll-1848824937

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Chicago teacher fired regarding n-word

The Chicago Tribune editorial board wrote, "The Kilborn case is, on its face, ridiculous. In arguments about speech, intent must matter. It’s one thing to use an offensive term in ordinary or even pedagogical conversation. It’s another to use such a word to teach students how to deal with its use in a professional situation. Any reasonable person can see this. No healthy society should be banning words based on their abstract linguistic property."

A Chicago teacher was fired for using the n-word in full. "A student asked why the former name was offensive, and DeVoto said she was “trying to emphasize that that is as abhorrent (to Native Americans) as the N-word, which I used in full,” she said Thursday.

“I can’t believe it came out of my mouth,” she said."

Granted using the word in full was a mistake, but firing her for it is a considerably greater penalty than is warranted for using a word in a didactic context vs. uttering it as a slur.

 

[cullennz]

Was just wondering how tediously boring US history lessons must be for US students these days, given half the actual historical fact is being slowly deleted.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Was just wondering how tediously boring US history lessons must be for US students these days, given half the actual historical fact is being slowly deleted.

George Washington farted in the general direction of the British, which sent them packing.

America is awesome and doesn't care what you think.

The test is on Friday.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

rolling coal is not speech

Another example of cancel culture:

https://jalopnik.com/texas-tuner-shop-boycotted-after-owner-posts-video-roll-1848824937

I respectfully disagree; cancel culture generally concerns speech including artistic performance. Rolling coal is not speech; it put the cyclists into a dangerous situation.

 

[cullennz]

George Washington farted in the general direction of the British, which sent them packing.

America is awesome and doesn't care what you think.

The test is on Friday.

Did he do it himself, or get one of his 123 slaves, he personally owned do it?