• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2

Like watch I'm going to show you something.

I have zero idea who Mr. Shapiro is. I have no idea what opinion he's being "cancelled" over is. But I already know it's going to be some version of bigotry because, as I keep pointing out, THAT'S LITERALLY THE ONLY CONTEXT THE INTERNET USES FREE SPEECH.

Let me go check... and I'm right.
 
what actually transpired

Darat said:
Yet the rest of the faculty does, so I really don't think your 2) passes the sniff test.
Click to expand...
I suggest that you get up to speed on the facts of incident, which establish that there was a double standard regarding what could and could not be tweeted. Regarding your smell test, it's not much of an argument to begin with. It suffers further when one reads Mr. Shapiro's hypotheticals laid out in his letter. Did you read it?
 
Last edited:
Let me guess the "double standard" is going to "They treated right people and wrong people differently."
 
The facts of the case are what they are

JoeMorgue said:
"You can criticize me, but only on my terms" IS saying you should not be criticized.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. He did not say anything close to that. He was being set up for a fall and chose not to play into that trap.
 
Last edited:
Chris_Halkides said:
The tweets predated Mr. Shapiro's appointment at Georgetown. Mr. Shapiro acknowledged that the tweets were poorly worded and deleted them. Other people kept the tweets alive. Mr. Shapiro never said that he should not be criticized.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree the whole thing is ludicrous, his tweets, the complaint, the actions not taken and then his resignation because of a "hostile workplace" but I wonder why stupid employers are now called "cancel culture"?
 
Chris_Halkides said:
I suggest that you get up to speed on the facts of incident, which establish that there was a double standard regarding what could and could not be tweeted. Regarding your smell test, it's not much of an argument to begin with. It suffers further when one reads Mr. Shapiro's hypotheticals laid out in his letter. Did you read it?
Click to expand...

I read the entire article that was linked to, including his letter of resignation. Is there something else that I should read that will change my mind about 1) the bad employers and 2) the snowflake?

And of course - why this is "cancel culture"?
 
I'm also loving the "Cancel Culture" stories where the person isn't fired but storms away in a huff of their own volition.
 
I simply will not abide by any system which holds my racists remarks against me. That sort of hostility can not be tolerated in a free society.
 
JoeMorgue said:
I'm also loving the "Cancel Culture" stories where the person isn't fired but storms away in a huff of their own volition.
Click to expand...

And are then given a platform on a hugely popular and influential cable news programs with millions of viewers.
 
bad IDEAA

SuburbanTurkey said:
The real scandal with Ilya is whoever was dumb enough to hire him in the first place. We're far enough down this "cancelled free-speech martyr" road that institutions should be able to clock these grandstanding idiots a mile away. Whoever responsible for extending a job offer to Ilya Shapiro should be having their job performance scrutinized.

An important part of any academia hiring process should be trying to sort out whether a candidate is seeking out sober academic work, or if they're just looking for a grandstanding opportunity to become a right wing media darling for standing up the woke liberal hivemind.

Shapiro is on Tucker Carlson whining about the "diversicrats". Truly a grave loss of a serious academic. The student body is surely worse off not being able to get lectures from someone who sounds like the comment section of the worst right wing rags come to life.
Click to expand...
On the one hand Georgetown suspends someone whose tweets (while ill-judged) were not racist, except by a willful misreading of them. On the other hand, Georgetown is OK with tweets calling for castration of corpses. That is astonishing.

The person who wrote the IDEAA report is the one whose job performance should be "scrutinized".
 
Chris_Halkides said:
On the one hand Georgetown suspends someone whose tweets (while ill-judged) were not racist, except by a willful misreading of them. On the other hand, Georgetown is OK with tweets calling for castration of corpses. That is astonishing.

The person who wrote the IDEAA report is the one whose job performance should be "scrutinized".
Click to expand...

It's sounds like you're trying to get someone "cancelled".
 
Chris_Halkides said:
On the one hand Georgetown suspends someone whose tweets (while ill-judged) were not racist, except by a willful misreading of them. On the other hand, Georgetown is OK with tweets calling for castration of corpses. That is astonishing.

The person who wrote the IDEAA report is the one whose job performance should be "scrutinized".
Click to expand...

Why do you not consider your comments as an example of “cancel culture”?
 
Chris_Halkides said:
On the one hand Georgetown suspends someone whose tweets (while ill-judged) were not racist, except by a willful misreading of them. On the other hand, Georgetown is OK with tweets calling for castration of corpses. That is astonishing.

The person who wrote the IDEAA report is the one whose job performance should be "scrutinized".
Click to expand...

I'm trying to figure out how the comments could be ill-judged but not racist. If you are willfully blind to the obvious racist smear of claiming a black judge is inherently less qualified, then what's ill judged about his comment?

This strikes me as a "splitting the baby" position that makes no sense.
 
Darat said:
Why do you not consider your comments as an example of “cancel culture”?
Click to expand...

Because the being a hypocrite IS THE POINT.

"You shouldn't get to cancel ME in the same way I can cancel you" has always been the point.
 
Reckless

SuburbanTurkey said:
I'm trying to figure out how the comments could be ill-judged but not racist. If you are willfully blind to the obvious racist smear of claiming a black judge is inherently less qualified, then what's ill judged about his comment?

This strikes me as a "splitting the baby" position that makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Mr. Shapiro's position was that Sri Srinivasan was the best pick for President Biden. It logically follows from this premise that any other pick is lesser, regardless of skin color, as Jonathan Chait noted in his article at The Intelligencer. However, it was ill-judged (or in Scott Greenfield's words "reckless") because it was liable to being misunderstood.
 
Last edited:
scrutiny for the goose and not the gander

johnny karate said:
It's sounds like you're trying to get someone "cancelled".
Click to expand...
Why not ask SuburbanTurkey the same question? ST wrote, "Whoever responsible for extending a job offer to Ilya Shapiro should be having their job performance scrutinized."
 
Chris_Halkides said:
Why not ask SuburbanTurkey the same question? ST wrote, "Whoever responsible for extending a job offer to Ilya Shapiro should be having their job performance scrutinized."
Click to expand...

Because Suburban Turkey understands how society works and isn't running through the streets screaming about Cancel Culture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom