150 public figures sign open letter decrying cancel culture

[Page]

Destitution is a consequence of their actions. If they don't like it, they shouldn't be a shitty person.

And who is to determine what is and isn't 'shitty'?

We do. Humans. We all have opinions of what is shitty and sometimes we get close to a consensus, and sometimes we fight about it.

[The Emerald Legion]

As far as I can tell, homosexuality was dropped from the DSM for political reasons rather than scientific ones.

>1972
>LGBT+ having enough political influence to pressure a scientific organization into making a purely political, rather than scientific, change of policy

What the actual fuck?

Don't yall realize if we actually had that much power all the way back then, it wouldn't have taken 3 separate Supreme Court decisions in the new millenium to repeal sodomy laws, institute marriage equality, and make employment discrimination illegal?

Like, honest question for people who believe that nonsense narrative. WHY do you actually believe it? It makes no fucking sense.

You do realize it's 2020 and some states, including incredibly liberal ones, still have Sodomy laws?

[Grootfries Rijk]

>1972
>LGBT+ having enough political influence to pressure a scientific organization into making a purely political, rather than scientific, change of policy

What the actual fuck?

Don't yall realize if we actually had that much power all the way back then, it wouldn't have taken 3 separate Supreme Court decisions in the new millenium to repeal sodomy laws, institute marriage equality, and make employment discrimination illegal?

Like, honest question for people who believe that nonsense narrative. WHY do you actually believe it? It makes no fucking sense.

You do realize it's 2020 and some states, including incredibly liberal ones, still have Sodomy laws?

That doesn't really change anything about what Gren said. If anything, it further validates the point they were making.

[Kowani]

“ as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion”

Because of the environment in which we find ourselves, the continuous failures of neoliberalism/neoconservatism, we cannot guarantee that reactionary ideas will be kept in check.
Rather, they find in the current state a welcome home, and so they must be denied the right to spread their ideas.

So, just to be clear, even if a "reactionary" - an evangelical, say - were to offer reasoned arguments for their position, your view is that they should be silenced and denied access to the public sphere?

Nah. Evangelicalism is on the decline, and there’s nothing they can do to change that. So, let them make all the arguments they want.

That sounds like intolerance of those holding different opinions - which is bigotry.

Is bigotry just magically okay when the target is on the right?

Nah. Silencing reactionary lefties is a good thing too.

Also worth noting to all the progressives here arguing the right-wing is worse,

Both Contrapoints and Philosophytube have testified in their videos that they have experienced neo-Nazi and reactionary harassment, and harassment from the left wing cancel culture types.

Both of them said the cancel culture was way worse.

Duh. Their audience is primarily left-wing, and they’ve been exposed to right wing harassment for years.

[Rostavykhan]

Mostly I think the pursuing them at their work and harassing their employer in an attempt to leave them destitute is beyond pale.

Doesn’t apply to jk Rowling in particular, but we’ve seen it used multiple times against people that didn’t deserve being made destitute.

Destitution is a consequence of their actions. If they don't like it, they shouldn't be a shitty person.

"Destitution and imprisonment are consequences of their actions. If they don't like it, they shouldn't be Communists."
"Being thrown from a helicopter is a consequence of their actions. If they don't like it, they shouldn't be Communists."
"Being censored and driven out of China is a consequence of their actions. If they don't like it, they shouldn't criticize Comrade Mao."
"

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

>1972
>LGBT+ having enough political influence to pressure a scientific organization into making a purely political, rather than scientific, change of policy

What the actual fuck?

Don't yall realize if we actually had that much power all the way back then, it wouldn't have taken 3 separate Supreme Court decisions in the new millenium to repeal sodomy laws, institute marriage equality, and make employment discrimination illegal?

Like, honest question for people who believe that nonsense narrative. WHY do you actually believe it? It makes no fucking sense.

You do realize it's 2020 and some states, including incredibly liberal ones, still have Sodomy laws?

You do realize that that hasn’t mattered since 2003, right?

[The Black Forrest]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

[Galloism]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

It’s not that new. Big name actors and such have been getting “cancelled” for years.

The new part is the crowd jumping in on unknown or fairly unknown people who, willingly or unwillingly, landed in their 15 minutes of fame, and now the mob must destroy them.

[Diarcesia]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

I think it started in a form resembling the current one with the conservatives. When one company became in their eyes politically correct, they put up their screeds on how they'll not patronize that business anymore.

[Gormwood]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

Pretty much. The biggest complaiers want bigotry to be consequence free.

[The Black Forrest]

>1972
>LGBT+ having enough political influence to pressure a scientific organization into making a purely political, rather than scientific, change of policy

What the actual fuck?

Don't yall realize if we actually had that much power all the way back then, it wouldn't have taken 3 separate Supreme Court decisions in the new millenium to repeal sodomy laws, institute marriage equality, and make employment discrimination illegal?

Like, honest question for people who believe that nonsense narrative. WHY do you actually believe it? It makes no fucking sense.

You do realize it's 2020 and some states, including incredibly liberal ones, still have Sodomy laws?

And? Having the law and enforcing it are two different things.

[Diarcesia]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

Pretty much. The biggest complaiers want bigotry to be consequence free.

I like to hear from you what sort of consequences would be considered proportional when someone is canceled. The cancel culture critics were saying it was too much, the supporters say the critics only want no accountability.

You do realize it's 2020 and some states, including incredibly liberal ones, still have Sodomy laws?

And? Having the law and enforcing it are two different things.

So... actually enforce the law? nvm I didn't realize you're talking about the sodomy laws. It'll be consistent with what they stand for to repeal it or at least have a roadmap to that goal.

[Galloism]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

Pretty much. The biggest complaiers want bigotry to be consequence free.

Big problem is the mob has no idea what bigotry even is, so even if it were a socially good thing to condemn bigots to starvation (I don’t think we should condemn anyone to starvation), that’s not what’s happening.

It’s picking up people who made bad choices, or refused to engage in racism in favor of minorities, or refused to engage in sexism, or people who are victims of false smear campaigns as “bigots”, and trying to make them homeless and destitute, even if their trespasses were minor or nonexistent.

This is not ok behavior. You have expressed repeated bigotry on the forum on the issue of sex and gender, but I don’t think it’s ok to pursue you at your work and harass your employer to try and make you homeless and destitute as a result. I don’t think it’s ok to do that to anyone. I care about you, and it would be horrible of me or anyone to do that to you knowing the result.

[Galloism]

Pretty much. The biggest complaiers want bigotry to be consequence free.

I like to hear from you what sort of consequences would be considered proportional when someone is canceled. The cancel culture critics were saying it was too much, the supporters say the critics only want no accountability.

And? Having the law and enforcing it are two different things.

So... actually enforce the law? nvm I didn't realize you're talking about the sodomy laws. It'll be consistent with what they stand for to repeal it or at least have a roadmap to that goal.

They can’t enforce it. Supreme Court invalidated it. It’s unenforceable (which is good).

[The Black Forrest]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

It’s not that new. Big name actors and such have been getting “cancelled” for years.

The new part is the crowd jumping in on unknown or fairly unknown people who, willingly or unwillingly, landed in their 15 minutes of fame, and now the mob must destroy them.

That’s true on the big name actors. Somebody beats the hell of somebody; you got “canceled”. Somebody supported gay people, etc., etc.

At least there have been “valid” instances like Weinstein for example. Even Spacey

The mob approach is a thing I wondered as well. It’s the must tear it down mentality that seems prevalent these days. Somebody does/says something good. Must find something to prove they really aren’t.

Kind of sad actually.

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

I think it started in a form resembling the current one with the conservatives. When one company became in their eyes politically correct, they put up their screeds on how they'll not patronize that business anymore.

There is some truth to that. Howard Stern talked about it for years. Disney faced it when have they have a park day for gay people.

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

Pretty much. The biggest complaiers want bigotry to be consequence free.

Hmmm? You can say liberals are guilty of that. Question comments which support a narrative and you either have issues and or support the thing they are angry about.

[The Holy Mercurian Empire]

As far as I can tell, homosexuality was dropped from the DSM for political reasons rather than scientific ones.

Have you actually met a homosexual person and had a legitimate conversation with them? Or do you just hate? Because I’ve met several LGBTQ+ people in my lifetime, and they’re smart, kind, and friendly, just like everybody else. Based on my own firsthand experience, I can tell you that nothing suggests a mental disorder, lower IQ, or lack of cognitive thinking ability.

What makes you think I hate them?

You would probably be able to have a similar conversation with many people who suffer from mental illnesses of some kind and come away with the same impression. High functioning autistics and those with mood disorders spring to mind as examples.

[Galloism]

It’s not that new. Big name actors and such have been getting “cancelled” for years.

The new part is the crowd jumping in on unknown or fairly unknown people who, willingly or unwillingly, landed in their 15 minutes of fame, and now the mob must destroy them.

That’s true on the big name actors. Somebody beats the hell of somebody; you got “canceled”. Somebody supported gay people, etc., etc.

Notably, even that has failed hard. Depp got cancelled, and now it appears he was the victim or at least the primary victim (daily reminder most domestic violence is mutual). We cancelled him for being a victim of a violent serial domestic abuser.

Good job everyone.

At least there have been “valid” instances like Weinstein for example. Even Spacey

The mob approach is a thing I wondered as well. It’s the must tear it down mentality that seems prevalent these days. Somebody does/says something good. Must find something to prove they really aren’t.

Kind of sad actually.

That may be part of it, but I think a lot of it has to do with video editing and selective presentation.

Hear me out.

You look at the original Wuestenberg (hope I spelled that right) tape. You see a crazy white woman holding a gun on someone. Her husband doesn’t appear to stop her. So he’s cancelled - keep in mind he’s a university employee who works with veterans to get people educated.

What you didn’t see is them repeatedly threatening her and her husband with violent physical harm, and his (in particular) repeated attempts at deescalation and withdrawal. His actions weren’t ok nor were his wife’s - but it was an ill advised action in a heated moment, had nothing to do with his work, and he probably shouldn’t have been cancelled. All that was in a different video, and he was already cancelled before anyone saw that one.

And of course, the woman repeatedly threatening them with physical harm and blocking them from leaving? Well, no consequences, so far as we can tell. We moved on before that came out to find someone else to cancel.

[Rostavykhan]

-snip-

Don't forget instances like Skai Jackson doxing some thirteen year-olds for using edgy humour and memeing among themselves. Got a kid expelled from their school and their parents fired from their jobs just because the kid said "guacamole nigga penis" on twitter.

Obviously, the kid was simply facing the consequences of his actions :^)

You know, having their entire family thrown into chaos and having parents who had no involvement in the issue losing their jobs for doing things that every kid does, thus offending the Twitter mob.

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

A curiosity question.

Who really started this approach? I ask as I saw a tweet from Lin-Manuel Miranda saying he was basically going to boycott Goya.

More then a few conservative replies mentioned “cancel” blah blah blah.

Is this a new thing or people jumping on it as it’s a simple way to dismiss?

Pretty much. The biggest complaiers want bigotry to be consequence free.

Yes, as everyone should.

[Necroghastia]

Pretty much. The biggest complaiers want bigotry to be consequence free.

Yes, as everyone should.

Yikes.

[Sharania]

I see the thread is still full of people who are happy that a bunch of horrible cancel-rabid fragile whites and crypto-rightwingers joined forces with both-sidist centrists and a few faux liberals to sign a free speech petition. Because that’s how people power and free speech really works, folks! That’s why the people all across the world risk their lives to escape and start anew in the US! And you know what?
The petition is already working!!! No one has been cancelled since The Letter came out.

So what the reality doesn’t match what they claim to support in The Letter? It’s all about the MESSAGE!

P.S.
Of course this "debate" is happening as people die in a pandemic — and as the entire world faces the worst economic catastrophe in several generations. Not to mention the disastrous "rule" of Trump still going on...

[Galloism]

I see the thread is still full of people who are happy that a bunch of horrible cancel-rabid fragile whites and crypto-rightwingers joined forces with both-sidist centrists and a few faux liberals to sign a free speech petition. Because that’s how people power and free speech really works, folks! That’s why the people all across the world risk their lives to escape and start anew in the US! And you know what?
The petition is already working!!! No one has been cancelled since The Letter came out.

So what the reality doesn’t match what they claim to support in The Letter? It’s all about the MESSAGE!

P.S.
Of course this "debate" is happening as people die in a pandemic — and as the entire world faces the worst economic catastrophe in several generations. Not to mention the disastrous "rule" of Trump still going on...

Are you ok?

[Kowani]

I see the thread is still full of people who are happy that a bunch of horrible cancel-rabid fragile whites and crypto-rightwingers joined forces with both-sidist centrists and a few faux liberals to sign a free speech petition. Because that’s how people power and free speech really works, folks! That’s why the people all across the world risk their lives to escape and start anew in the US! And you know what?
The petition is already working!!! No one has been cancelled since The Letter came out.

So what the reality doesn’t match what they claim to support in The Letter? It’s all about the MESSAGE!

P.S.
Of course this "debate" is happening as people die in a pandemic — and as the entire world faces the worst economic catastrophe in several generations. Not to mention the disastrous "rule" of Trump still going on...

The fuck are you talking about-

[Organized States]

Imagine being fundamentally opposed to the idea of being called out for saying racist or hateful shit and having consequences for those actions.

Freedom of Speech does not equal Freedom from Consequences.

[Soiled fruit roll ups]

Imagine being fundamentally opposed to the idea of being called out for saying racist or hateful shit and having consequences for those actions.

Freedom of Speech does not equal Freedom from Consequences.

Yes, basic human rights stuff.