150 public figures sign open letter decrying cancel culture

[Radfems Inc]

A black police officer is still furthering the system of racism, “mate.” Diversifying institutions will change the margins at best.

So if its an institution of all black people top to bottom but it was once made by white and may have been racist, it is still a racist institution? That is almost as insane an idea as the other way around.

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.

[Diarcesia]

So if its an institution of all black people top to bottom but it was once made by white and may have been racist, it is still a racist institution? That is almost as insane an idea as the other way around.

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.

*Looks at Rwanda*

[Radfems Inc]

Honestly, really rich figures are hard unless we cut them out of the banking system (as Vapormancer helpfully suggested!). Mostly we will have to target from the ground up the middle class that can be effectively hurt by these things and tacitly support them which gives cover to the Bill Cosby's and Harvey Weinstein's of the world.

IE, the only ones that can be effectively targeted for reform are the Sue Schafer's and Wuestenbergs and James Damores of the world. The rest will have to be drug along slowly with the rest of society once we cut the rot out of the middle, because that much wealth makes them untouchable.

Shaming or divesting from banking industries in order to affect their decision making will not happpen at such a scale that would be needed to cause such change, especially considering the wealth gap. They're more than happy already to take money from organized crime and then take the fines; people who say naughty words aren't even on their radar.

While I'm all for cancelling pseudocelebrities, youtubers, and other influencer types to affect public opinion about what is appropriate and what is not, it's a very incremental change that requires sustained and organized effort to actually be effective in isolation, especially because those targets also get a respectable amount of sympathy traffic from their fans during times of controversy.

Like fuck racists/sexists/etc sure, and cancelling them is fine, its just not a truly revolutionary tactic, and until that wealth remains, those with the societal power to raise up others will choose their sympathizers over their critics. Without at least the threat of revolutionary societal change, bark remains without bite. Capital always wins.

So... communism?

[Vapormancer]

So if its an institution of all black people top to bottom but it was once made by white and may have been racist, it is still a racist institution? That is almost as insane an idea as the other way around.

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?

[Farnhamia]

You guys are honestly funny. Have fun trolling, "freedom fighters".

*** Warned for troll-naming. ***

Report trolls, don't just point and go "LOL ... troll."

[Kowani]

Wow. None of what you said addressed my point at all.
You’re off your game, Marches.

It did indeed. Please explain to the class why you are on the side of the big banks and endorsing things which crush actual dissent? Why are you for rainbow Defense industries? Go ahead, I'm waiting. You dodged before, I'll give you another shot.

I’m not, but you seem desperate to paint me as if I am.

No…? I never claimed anything of the sort. What makes an organization racist are it’s actions, not who comprises the leadership.

Perhaps you should said that instead of boilerplate that means something else? That might make it easier.

Have you considered not reading things that aren’t there into my posts?

Despite your living in the twitter bubble,the General societal consensus is moving away from reactionary ideas.

Yes, towards reactionary ideas like celebrating our military industrial complex CEOs who are women and Tech Bros of color.

I’m case you didn’t notice, the younger people are the ones calling to lessen defense spending, get money from the “defense” industry out of politics, break up Big Tech… Despite what you seem to think, we can fight in two fronts at once.

What a huge systemic change. Are you proud of yourself? I'm hurt you'd accuse me of being in the twitter bubble. That was unnecessary. I thought we were friends.

Your near pathological need to misrepresent everything I say is not my fault, though perhaps the snap is.

So if its an institution of all black people top to bottom but it was once made by white and may have been racist, it is still a racist institution? That is almost as insane an idea as the other way around.

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.

…Wow. Good way to address none of what anyone has claimed.

[Radfems Inc]

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?

The institution has predated the black president by quite some time, and he doesn't make those decisions in a vacuum. While he or she may make bad decisions, those bad decisions can never be racist, because racism is prejudice with combined historical and institutional power. While the president may have some institutional power, he or she are also chained by their institutions, advisors, laws that predate them, etc.

There's a reason why Angela Merkel hasn't been able to, via sweeping change, enact pure gender equality in germany in the space of only a few years.

The same is true of a black president and the racism of the institution where he now inhabits a large chair.

[Kowani]

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

Gonna be honest, once you start working to further the racism, you lose your victim card.

[New Bremerton]

Dave Rubin gives his thoughts on the open letter

[Vapormancer]

I’m not, but you seem desperate to paint me as if I am.

You endorsed their tactics, taking of their money and giving them even more societal pressure. That makes on their side.

Have you considered not reading things that aren’t there into my posts?

I can't keep up with the various dogmas of progressivism. Maybe get standard definitions?

I’m case you didn’t notice, the younger people are the ones calling to lessen defense spending, get money from the “defense” industry out of politics, break up Big Tech… Despite what you seem to think, we can fight in two fronts at once.

Where is their actual power? Its nowhere. You have zero power on your own. Infact, your power has been rolled back since the halcyon days of Bernie in 2016. Whatever is done whether it be defund the police or stop wars aggression. In 2008, it lead to humanitarian interventions and even more conflicts. Now it is private security who don't need fat pension or healthcare, to be even more brutal and give the city less legal liability. Where are your victories? Show them. The only thing I've seen is surrender, failure and more surrender. Afterall, one can't think of a better example of what is going on than the Squad endorsing that fat corporate bailout en masse LOL.

Your near pathological need to misrepresent everything I say is not my fault, though perhaps the snap is.

What have I misrepresented? I've merely pointed out the fact your cause is in bed with Goldman Sachs and you are more than willing to be their play thing. You endorse giving these people unprecedented power. You support Chinese style terror tactics and seem to think that the status quo with a rainbow flag is a win.

[Kowani]

I’m not, but you seem desperate to paint me as if I am.

You endorsed their tactics, taking of their money and giving them even more societal pressure. That makes on their side.

Not really true, but okay.

Have you considered not reading things that aren’t there into my posts?

I can't keep up with the various dogmas of progressivism. Maybe get standard definitions?

Fuck labels, embrace people.

I’m case you didn’t notice, the younger people are the ones calling to lessen defense spending, get money from the “defense” industry out of politics, break up Big Tech… Despite what you seem to think, we can fight in two fronts at once.

Where is their actual power? Its nowhere. You have zero power on your own. Infact, your power has been rolled back since the halcyon days of Bernie in 2016. Whatever is done whether it be defund the police or stop wars aggression.

You mean the generation that got stuck in two major financial crisis is taking a long time to assert their financial and economic strength, which helps lead to political change? Yeah, I wonder why.

In 2008, it lead to humanitarian interventions and even more conflicts.

…Do you think Obama was a progressive?

Now it is private security who don't need fat pension or healthcare, to be even more brutal and give the city less legal liability.

Things done by corporate democrats, sure.

Where are your victories? Show them. The only thing I've seen is surrender, failure and more surrender. Afterall, one can't think of a better example of what is going on than the Squad endorsing that fat corporate bailout en masse LOL.

I don’t know what news you’re reading, but, hey, narratives.

[Radfems Inc]

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

Gonna be honest, once you start working to further the racism, you lose your victim card.

That's because you think decisions are made in a vacuum.

Imagine this scenario. The prosecutor's office is all blind black women. They're deaf too. They can't see or hear the people they're charging, receive any feedback at all. They receive all their documentation on the subject via a braille stack of information that has deliberately sanitized race and given all the perpetrators arrested bland names.

But crack cocaine is still disproportionately punished compared with everything else by law. Because of old laws passed by racist actors within the institutions that came before.

Is the institution going to come out with a racist result? Does that mean the actors within were acting in a racist way?

[The Reformed American Republic]

That's institutional racism not racism.

Yours is not the view of those who are anti-racist.

DiAngelo’s book is a radical statement at a time when the debate is so polarised. It seems we are forever talking about race. Or talking about why we can’t talk about race. So the problem isn’t a lack of conversation about racism but the different levels of understanding about what it is.

“We have to stop thinking about racism simply as someone who says the N-word,” she says. “This book is centred in the white western colonial context, and in that context white people hold institutional power.” This means understanding that racism is a system rather than just a slur; it is prejudice plus power. And in Britain and the US at least, it is designed to benefit and privilege whiteness by every economic and social measure. Everyone has racial bias but, as DiAngelo is determined to establish, “when you back a group’s collective bias with lingering authority and institutional control, it is transformed”.

That is why she is scathing of those who claim “reverse racism” exists; after all, people of colour can show prejudice against white people. It is equally condemnable, but this form of discrimination does not come with systemic privilege and so is not racism as per the modern definition.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... n-diangelo

Yours is an old definition. Archaic. Akin to using "let" to mean prevent or restrict, or "faggot" to mean "a bundle of sticks".

No, many still use the term the way I do. People who want to race bait by changing the definition aren't the authority on English usage.

[Kowani]

Gonna be honest, once you start working to further the racism, you lose your victim card.

That's because you think decisions are made in a vacuum.

Imagine this scenario. The prosecutor's office is all blind black women. They're deaf too. They can't see or hear the people they're charging, receive any feedback at all. They receive all their documentation on the subject via a braille stack of information that has deliberately sanitized race and given all the perpetrators arrested bland names.

But crack cocaine is still disproportionately punished compared with everything else by law. Because of old laws passed by racist actors within the institutions that came before.

Is the institution going to come out with a racist result? Does that mean the actors within were acting in a racist way?

Ignoring for a second the fact that the prosecutor’s office can decide to drop the charges, yes, both the institution and the members are acting in a racist way.

[Radfems Inc]

That's because you think decisions are made in a vacuum.

Imagine this scenario. The prosecutor's office is all blind black women. They're deaf too. They can't see or hear the people they're charging, receive any feedback at all. They receive all their documentation on the subject via a braille stack of information that has deliberately sanitized race and given all the perpetrators arrested bland names.

But crack cocaine is still disproportionately punished compared with everything else by law. Because of old laws passed by racist actors within the institutions that came before.

Is the institution going to come out with a racist result? Does that mean the actors within were acting in a racist way?

Ignoring for a second the fact that the prosecutor’s office can decide to drop the charges, yes, both the institution and the members are acting in a racist way.

How are the members acting in a racist way?

[Diarcesia]

Ignoring for a second the fact that the prosecutor’s office can decide to drop the charges, yes, both the institution and the members are acting in a racist way.

How are the members acting in a racist way?

The way I see it? By preserving the system as it is except that the only change is who is the oppressor or the victim.

We're getting off topic here, but this point is applicable to cancel culture.

[Kowani]

Ignoring for a second the fact that the prosecutor’s office can decide to drop the charges, yes, both the institution and the members are acting in a racist way.

How are the members acting in a racist way?

They refuse to challenge the system’s racist outcomes in any meaningful way, for one thing.

[Radfems Inc]

How are the members acting in a racist way?

They refuse to challenge the system’s racist outcomes in any meaningful way, for one thing.

And how would they do that? After all, they don't even know who's being charged (racial makeup speaking).

[Vapormancer]

Not really true, but okay.

If you hand a known madman and murderer a gun, then you are on his side no?

Fuck labels, embrace people.

Ah yes, thats why you yelled "reactionary", "boomer" and vague comments of "the youth" earlier! You would do well to cloak your hypocrisy better.

You mean the generation that got stuck in two major financial crisis is taking a long time to assert their financial and economic strength, which helps lead to political change? Yeah, I wonder why.

They won't ever. Thats the trick and the ruse you are falling for. All the effort for occupy wallstreet, BLM and others, and it has gotten nothing. Its because you aren't grasping at power, its just street larping.

…Do you think Obama was a progressive?

You might be too young to remember this but that is what he ran as yes. That is how he vanquished Hillary.

Things done by corporate democrats, sure.

The same "corporate" democrats who are called brave and stunning progressives. I don't disagree that is where their loyalty is. I just point out your "movement' is their handmaiden. As long as Mayor Lightfoot is LGBT+, she can privatize the police AND the highways, doing what no Republican could ever do.

I don’t know what news you’re reading, but, hey, narratives.

Only after the fact and after the vote my boy. If I remember correctly, this is what matters at the end of the day. She could have revolted but she fell into line like a good lapdog. That is why it was a voice vote, so that they could declare after the fact they actually opposed things. If it were such a good bill, she could have demanded a vote by record like that Republican who was pilloried. But hey, your narratives right! When it comes to actual concrete action involving power, they come up short every single time. Thats why they are weak and you fall for it.

Edit: And Congress's response did infact stop at Wall Street, I'm heartily chuckling as I read their grand standing. Any one of them could have made it a record vote. Fantastic, really top notch ammunition, thank you very much Kowani!

[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?

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".

[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?

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".

Funny that this sort of boycott came from conservatives. Remember Kaepernick?

[The Black Forrest]

Soo? If by his actions he is hurting his employer? He is exempt? Sorry there are ramifications for actions. Just as a community can punish you so should an employer. Especially with hateful actions.

Your solution is simply turning things over to the employee. Not exactly a solution. Being off the clock doesn’t give you the right to sticking it to the employer. Especially in such hateful manor.

The problem is not as simple as you would think. There has to be give and take.

I don't follow your logic here.. or lack there of.. What does the employee's personal political beliefs have to do with his employer? If he isn't wearing his uniform or claiming to be a face of the company outside of his work then he isn't sticking it to anyone. Getting doxed by a bunch of extremist loonies stalking him and trying to blackmail them is not the employees fault or problem. And nobody's being punished remember.. as this would take that possibility off the table. You can't punish a company for not giving into your demands when those demands are illegal.

If you can't follow the logic, you ask questions. Dismissing without reason is rather lazy. Anyway.

Nobody is saying anything about going to a trump rally and getting fired. The guy mention is a white supremacist who was at Charlotte taking part in intimidating non-whites. The coffee shop where he worked has a mixed clientele. He got fired due to his racism going against the beliefs of the business.

You greatly assume he turns off his hate when he works. We don't know if he did or could and at this point is irrelevent.

I work in mixed environments. Such a worker would become a disruption factor.

It's not as simple as you claim it is....

The problem is this line of reasoning is that you just justified firing people who participate in pride parades, or blm rallies, supporting the black panthers, or participating in a demonstration that devolved into a riot, or any one of a hundred million other political actions.

They people are seeking to exclude or intimidate people like the white supremacists.

This is all irrelevant. I know it's hard for some people to grasp today, with the edu system, esp higher, being what it is today in terms of critical, non dogmatic thinking skills.. so hold on.. People are well within their right to believe in things you don't. Rights don't stop where your feelings/ego/crusade begins. Unless they are doing something illegal, protecting their rights is no different than protecting anyone else's in a free society.. in fact it wouldn't be a free and open society if it didn't. Some people need to learn how to get over themselves and gain some perspective!

Oh lordy. fefe arguments? Boring. Anyway.

Nobody said they can't believe in what they want to believe. You introduced that tangent. You can think and express what ever you want. Keep in mind you are not exempt from the consequences. People are funny that way.

As to perspectives? Well? If people aren't accepting your views, they are probably not the problem.

[Gormwood]

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".

Funny that this sort of boycott came from conservatives. Remember Kaepernick?

Even older. Remember when The Dixie Chicks were doing a show in London and announced that they were ashamed W. Bush was President?

[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?

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".

Fascinating. Well? You shoot your mouth off; dirty laundry can be exposed. It will be interesting to see if anything comes from the labor practices and the claims of being heavily philanthropic.

[Kurnugia]

"Sure a black man got stranggled to death by a police officer, but before we get too busy with it, we should really talk about the slums of Nairobi."

Except what the cancel culture group on social media has gone out of their way to cancel people for much less. This is the worst form of misrepresentation I have ever seen.

Holy shit. This just reeks of "Idk how speech and agitation works". Violence and oppression against minorities don't just happen because someone had a bad day. There is a systematic demonization that comes beforehand. Esp. with claims J.K. R*wling-types are making of trans people wanting to infiltrate women spaces, autistic people being manipulated into thinking they were trans and the list goes on.

Speech has consequences. You're just fine that minorities bare the brunt of it.

Tbh the whole cancel culture meme isn't defined clearly. So the whole discussion is pointless. I am fe. not fine with fireing some factory worker over a shitty joke. Celebrities, on the other hand, can absolutely be canceled when they refuse to back down when they use their public platforms to cause harm against a minority.

Anyhow just give my thoughts about this letter: It will amount to absolutely nothing lol. We have the Rona, an election year, and the BLM protests. It has already been forgotten.