cancel "culture", as portrayed by the right, doesn't exist. they sure TRIED to make it a thing (by both constantly crying that the left engages in it, while simultaneously trying to cancel what their snowflake egos couldn't handle), but it does not have the significance that some people pretend it has. i understand (and agree) with the concerns around it, when it comes to free speech, opposing political and philosophical views, and threatens to limit the scope of public discourse it's absolutely worth addressing - but like so many things these days, it's blown out of proportion, and only ever mentioned by the right in order to protect and defend some of the most shitty things imaginable.




the 'what's your excuse?' part was about you replying to someone pointing out how your statment resembles the right's misrepresentation of cancel culture, and your reply was that 'the left' does not want to tolerate intolerance. so if we assume that to be true, you'd either have to change your argument, or at least have an 'excuse' for it in order not to be a hypocrite. but you don't, which is the point, a textbook example for the right's approach to 'cancel culture': crying about it in order to defend the most shitty things, while at the same time engaging in it when their egos get hurt.

I'm in cincinnati and that just isn't news here. We have protests and the cops have gased a few people but that's it.

People at work were complaining about their kids getting tear gased at a protest that nothing was going on at so much that it was kid safe.

This is really the crux of what makes 'cancelling' dangerous in the first place. Boycotting the NBA because they unapologetically kowtow to their Chinese overlords is innocent enough, but in the last decade we've seen radicals promote a more and more loose definition of harm. Dedicating resources to a particular cause (e.g. women shelters) is not harming trans unless your definition of harm is "not actively helping". There's a difference between actively diverting state resources to the wealthy, which is theft, and having wealthy people in society, which is not theft.

The fact that this is a letter primarily signed by leftists and academics should be pretty telling. Censorship isn't some right-wing conspiracy, and it isn't even being targeted at the right-wing. It's targeting relatively mainstream figures for ideological nonconformity.

Most of us aren't in a position where what we say matters. I'm sure most Soviets could say the same. The purges primarily targeted the ruling intellectual class of Bolsheviks, but academics and thinkers are exactly the people freedom of expression exists to protect. Stifling the opinion of one man is a personal crime with limited impact. Stifling the range of acceptable thought in a culture is a collective crime against society.

the real danger with cancel culture isn't the reactive apologies, it's the proactive self censorship. this is starting to happen with actors leaving voice roles of biracial characters and/or LGBTQA+ roles.

what's the difference?

reactive: Jimmy Kimmel apologizes for decades old black face, recognizing that while it was tepidly acceptable (but still "funny" due to it's controversy in the prevailing meta of the time) it no longer is. he pledges he's changed, to continue to change, and that he recognizes he was wrong.

proactive: voice actor leaves a role of a biracial character even tho vocal disagreement with this act in the current climate is not strong, it's simply a heated pot of water with a few bubbles but not yet boiling. they performed the role this calendar year, took the role last year or this year, didn't see an issue with it, etc. they're simply gauging the direction and assuming this behavior in 5-10 years could be a far more serious problem.

this type of behavior is new, just beginning, and will get far worse. the cancel culture's affect on creative expression has surpassed simply it's vocal minority's disagreement power, its now causing people to flinch before the blow comes. for those upset that vanilla feel good movies like the Marvel franchise blow up while gritty historical dramas get criticized and not recognized by award shows, prepare for a taste that will leave you wanting for vanilla. Take Lin Manuel Mirada's Hamilton, recently criticized for glorifying a slave owner. with hindsight Lin would have likely never made Hamilton, he'd never have engaged youth on a figure who escapes most founding father discussions, etc. A wave of pseudo-history, minority empowering, white shaming, bland feel good nonsense movies and TV are headed our way. Entertainment has left the counter culture, or the counter culture is leaving the realm of controversial. Look at it how you please.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jul 8 2020 07:28am

yep this is pretty accurate. and the kancel kulture krew that is “interacting” like this is more an act of voyeurism by this group. watching what other people are doing from far away and then getting off on talking about it and commenting on it and going on about what they think should happen next.

it truly is a sort of sickness

If you're not actively helping a person who should be receiving resources due to prejudices, which is how this is viewed. It sounds like having a whites only domestic violence shelter, which we have decided is a problem.

The crux is whether transgenderism is a valid identity.

And it gets weird. I work in mental health and I've treated some people I wouldn't want to go to a women's shelter that believe they should go there. That is me, a white male in a position of power, deciding where this transperson should and shouldn't go, which is what is at stake here and what a lot of folks would say is part of the problem.

Preventing your kids from getting tear gassed is easy. They shouldn't be at the kind of protests where far left radical protesters show up.

Seems to me you're denying cancel culture simply because you agree with it.

In the US we have a tradition of peaceful protesters not being attacked by the police.

We shouldn't compromise our values because a few bootlickers think it is better to hide in our homes.

Peaceful protesters don't loot stores ^^

the vast majority of people attacked by the police were not 'looting stores'. in fact, in the few instances where 'looting' actually occurred, the police was remarkably absent and passive - and it doesn't take a genius to figure out why.

not surprised to see you shill for oppressive authoritarianism though, it's what you people always cheer for.

This post was edited by fender on Jul 8 2020 07:48am