150 public figures sign open letter decrying cancel culture

[Auristania]

Yes, the institution may still be racist, but none of the people in it are racist, as racism currently can't be exercised by people of color.

The members of the racist institution are victims of the racism of the institution, not perpetrators of racism.

So if a black President bombs an Arab country and that leads to open air slave markets, he is still a victim of the institution of racism while dropping bombs?

According to SJW, the President is the victim. The bomb destroys the roof of the slave market in that Arab country. The slaves cannot be victims of racism, according to SJW, only Whites can be racist.

[The Black Forrest]

That seems like a false generalization. Mobs can and do accept when people change their minds. It varies from each individual mob sure. James Gunn will say so but it ain't an absolute.


False demonization can't be pined down to solely privilege. The fact that cancel drama can come from the black and trans community should be proof enough.

... No offense but the black and Trans Community are far more privileged than the people living in literal mud-huts surviving off subsistence farming and wondering where they're going to get their clean water.

That is true. However, until there is a one world government ala star trek; how people are surviving in other countries is irrelevant to a discussion of black and trans rights or lack there of in this country.

[Gormwood]

... No offense but the black and Trans Community are far more privileged than the people living in literal mud-huts surviving off subsistence farming and wondering where they're going to get their clean water.

That is true. However, until there is a one world government ala star trek; how people are surviving in other countries is irrelevant to a discussion of black and trans rights or lack there of in this country.

Also known as Relative Privation Fallacy.

[The Black Forrest]

So if a black President bombs an Arab country and that leads to open air slave markets, he is still a victim of the institution of racism while dropping bombs?

According to SJW, the President is the victim. The bomb destroys the roof of the slave market in that Arab country. The slaves cannot be victims of racism, according to SJW, only Whites can be racist.

[Gormwood]

According to SJW, the President is the victim. The bomb destroys the roof of the slave market in that Arab country. The slaves cannot be victims of racism, according to SJW, only Whites can be racist.

With an attempted "BUT OBAMA" no less.

[Diarcesia]

Boeing executive steps down over a 33-year-old essay

Paywalled summary reads:

Niel Golightly stepped down after an employee complained about an article he wrote in 1987 that said women should not serve in combat. He said those views do not reflect his opinion today.

[Stylan]

So if a black President bombs an Arab country and that leads to open air slave markets, he is still a victim of the institution of racism while dropping bombs?

According to SJW, the President is the victim. The bomb destroys the roof of the slave market in that Arab country. The slaves cannot be victims of racism, according to SJW, only Whites can be racist.

Where can I meet this "SJW" person?

[Uiiop]

Boeing executive steps down over a 33-year-old essay

Paywalled summary reads:

Niel Golightly stepped down after an employee complained about an article he wrote in 1987 that said women should not serve in combat. He said those views do not reflect his opinion today.

I wonder how much of these firings are from expectations of outrage rather than outrage actually happening.
Like people who complain can and will accept a "That was a long time ago and i'm a different person now." even if they should have assumed so in the first place.

That explains how Showing results for Fawlty towers got taken down over something that was literally settled by the people offended by it.

[Liriena]

Boeing executive steps down over a 33-year-old essay

Paywalled summary reads:

I wonder how much of these firings are from expectations of outrage rather than outrage actually happening.

From what I've seen, most "progressive" corporate actions of this sort tend to be preemptive. Same with how many brands dropped terms or mascots from their advertising in reaction to BLM, even though nobody associated with BLM had so much as mentioned them in the first place.

[Liriena]

According to SJW, the President is the victim. The bomb destroys the roof of the slave market in that Arab country. The slaves cannot be victims of racism, according to SJW, only Whites can be racist.

Where can I meet this "SJW" person?

Living rent free in Auristania's head.

[Ostroeuropa]

I wonder how much of these firings are from expectations of outrage rather than outrage actually happening.

From what I've seen, most "progressive" corporate actions of this sort tend to be preemptive. Same with how many brands dropped terms or mascots from their advertising in reaction to BLM, even though nobody associated with BLM had so much as mentioned them in the first place.

They're looking busy. Like how an office worker looks busy when the boss walks by, right before they go back to browsing forums. They're throwing out the appearance of activity.

[Nakena]

When so different bigshots like Atwood, Chomsky and Fukuyama all unite in a common cause you know for whom the bell tolls.

[Picairn]

When so different bigshots like Atwood, Chomsky and Fukuyama all unite in a common cause you know for whom the bell tolls.

Fukuyama? Is that the guy who wrote The End of History, arguing that the world had reached the finish line in the course of history with the collapse of the Communist Bloc?

Man, the 90s were optimistic, albeit a little naive. The struggle of ideologies continue...

[Ifreann]

No, of course not. The paid vacation isn't necessarily permanent and is unrelated to efforts towards accountability.

Well, if we don't want racists back in our businesses, the vacation would necessarily have to be permanently paid or you just moved when their punishment occurs outward a little bit (when the paid portion ends).

What I'm getting at is that a person can stop being racist and go back to work. Or not, whatever. I hardly think that we really need literally everyone working.

It's sort of like when you're at a restaurant and a waiter is incompetent. If you give him a small tip or no tip because of his incompetence, and he's living on his own and needs those tips to live, that punishment will incentivise him to change his ways and become a better waiter, so that he can get more tips and continue to survive.

If he's living at home with his parents and doesn't even need the money, that incentive is removed. He'll just think you're an asshole and not reflect on his own behavior, as the punishment didn't "sting". It is important to threaten them with destitution or they will not reflect on their ways. This is as true of a rude waiter as it is of a white supremacist asshole.

I don't want people who are bad waiters to starve to death in the gutter. For one, I don't want that happen to anyone, especially not when we have more than enough for everyone to be fed and housed. For another, I really don't think that people will best learn how to wait tables if they are under constant threat of death. That kind of stress is not going to be conducive to mastering new skills. For another, even if that was a good way to teach people to be better waiters, having good waiters is really not so important that we should essentially be putting a gun to their heads.

---

Is the concern for people left destitute because they can't get a job legitimate? Or is it just a cover for trying to protect bigots, who are themselves driving people out of the workforce by their bigotry and subjecting those people to the same destitution?

If they use it to protect bigots, that's a separate valid issue to address. I get it, I am usually skeptical of many advocacies and crusades because it had been done for ulterior motives. That doesn't minimize my concern that innocents were left destitute because the mobs are not doing their due diligence. Why do you think many want the death penalty abolished?

See, I do care about people who are destitute because they can't get a job, whether that is because they have a criminal record or because they are a member of a marginalised community or because they are just a raging shithead and no one wants to work with them. And thus I want to decouple people's access to housing and healthcare and all of that from whether or not they have a job. I do not want raging shitheads to keep their jobs, because they will make their workplace a worse place by being a raging shithead. I do want members of marginalised communities to keep their jobs, because they are not making their workplace worse by being Black, or trans, etc. You see how this works? People suffering when they lose their job isn't a good argument for protecting bigots, it's a good argument for making it so that people don't suffer when they lose their job.

Same here.

The people who signed this letter and their motives for doing so are not a separate issue, they are the issue. Plainly their motivation is not protecting people from losing their jobs in general, or they would not only be speaking out now and only about "cancel culture".

---

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?

Looks like I found the origin.

Backlash Against Goya CEO Explained As Calls For Boycott Grow

The President of Goya - Probably one of the biggest Latino food companies if not THE biggest - praised Trump. Which of course went down well with a shitload of non-Cuban Latinos including Miranda.

And of course a boycott call is now being sneered down as "cancel culture".

Highlights include Ted Cruz condemning this boycott, when it wasn't so long ago that he supported the boycott of Nike.

---

When so different bigshots like Atwood, Chomsky and Fukuyama all unite in a common cause you know for whom the bell tolls.

Fukuyama? Is that the guy who wrote The End of History, arguing that the world had reached the finish line in the course of history with the collapse of the Communist Bloc?

Man, the 90s were optimistic, albeit a little naive. The struggle of ideologies continue...

[Diopolis]

Fukuyama? Is that the guy who wrote The End of History, arguing that the world had reached the finish line in the course of history with the collapse of the Communist Bloc?

Man, the 90s were optimistic, albeit a little naive. The struggle of ideologies continue...

And then History 2 turned out to be mostly schlock about aliens.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Boeing executive steps down over a 33-year-old essay

Paywalled summary reads:

Niel Golightly stepped down after an employee complained about an article he wrote in 1987 that said women should not serve in combat. He said those views do not reflect his opinion today.

Time to pass laws to curb corporations from persecuting people for old things they wrote.

[Ethel mermania]

Boeing executive steps down over a 33-year-old essay

Paywalled summary reads:

Time to pass laws to curb corporations from persecuting people for old things they wrote.

Title 7 needs to be expanded to include belief.

[Uiiop]

Criticism of another one of the signers led to firings even while he denies having anything to do with.
Now i actually think both parties may be telling the truth under the same logic i brought in my last post. Companies are stupid and may exaggerate negative things that may not actually happen to them. It's reasonable but not necessarily correct to think when a company fires you over possible legal action the person who would told them so.


However this does means that this particular person hasn't probably exposed all of cancel culture. The blame isn't just on the mob folks...it's on the corps who knee-jerk before actually checking if people are foaming at the mouths over them or not. To recognizxe would mean a better way to defuse harms.

[Gormwood]

Criticism of another one of the signers led to firings even while he denies having anything to do with.
Now i actually think both parties may be telling the truth under the same logic i brought in my last post. Companies are stupid and may exaggerate negative things that may not actually happen to them. It's reasonable but not necessarily correct to think when a company fires you over possible legal action the person who would told them so.


However this does means that this particular person hasn't probably exposed all of cancel culture. The blame isn't just on the mob folks...it's on the corps who knee-jerk before actually checking if people are foaming at the mouths over them or not.

Deleted.

[Uiiop]

Criticism of another one of the signers led to firings even while he denies having anything to do with.
Now i actually think both parties may be telling the truth under the same logic i brought in my last post. Companies are stupid and may exaggerate negative things that may not actually happen to them. It's reasonable but not necessarily correct to think when a company fires you over possible legal action the person who would told them so.


However this does means that this particular person hasn't probably exposed all of cancel culture. The blame isn't just on the mob folks...it's on the corps who knee-jerk before actually checking if people are foaming at the mouths over them or not.

Deleted.

Fixed.

[Ostroeuropa]

Despite the "Both-sides"-ism the left likes to claim, Fox has decided not to fire Nick Cannon over his anti-white and anti-semitic comments and retain him as a host of The Masked Singer, while also releasing a statement saying they condemn his statements and disagree with them, and will not be as forgiving of him voicing those opinions on air.

The comments include suggestions that Jews run the world in a conspiracy, and that White people are "Closer to animals" and "Lesser" than black people.

The approach by Fox seems to me to be a more sensible one, given their emphasis that if he does it in the workplace he'll face consequences. The problem is, left wing outlets with anti-white, anti-male mentalities will not respond in kind. That suggests to me legislation needs to be enacted to secure workers rights against this.

Noteworthy is that Fox has decided to retain him despite *open and classic old school anti-semitism and racism* of a straight up "Whites are inferior" and "Jews run the world" type, in stark contrast to the hysteria the left wing identity politics crowd has over esotetic disagreements they equate with those kind of positions.