NATION

PASSWORD

150 public figures sign open letter decrying cancel culture

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Should we submit to cancel culture and allow democracy to be dismantled?

Yes. We must embrace slavery while pretending to be against it by toppling statues of those who fought against slavery.
55
27%
No. We must fight for freedom and oppose tyranny at all costs.
136
67%
Maybe/unsure.
11
5%
 
Total votes : 202

User avatar
New Bremerton
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1347
Founded: Jul 20, 2018
Civil Rights Lovefest

150 public figures sign open letter decrying cancel culture

Postby New Bremerton » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:33 am

JK Rowling joins 150 public figures warning over free speech

Some 150 writers, academics and activists - including authors JK Rowling, Salman Rushdie and Margaret Atwood - have signed an open letter denouncing the "restriction of debate".

They say they applaud a recent "needed reckoning" on racial justice, but argue it has fuelled stifling of open debate.

The letter denounces "a vogue for public shaming and ostracism" and "a blinding moral certainty".

Several signatories have been attacked for comments that caused offence.

That includes Harry Potter author JK Rowling who was fiercely criticised this month for comments about transgender people.

A diverse cross-section of figures from across the globe put their names to the letter which was published on Tuesday in Harper's Magazine.

It includes US intellectual Noam Chomsky, eminent feminist Gloria Steinem, Russian chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov and author Malcolm Gladwell.

Several have had works banned in some countries, including British novelist Salman Rushdie, who lived in hiding after receiving death threats for his 1988 book Satanic Verses.

And at least two novels by Syrian writer Khalid Khalifa that criticised Syria's government were banned in his home country.

Other signatories are prominent historians of race and slavery, including Nell Irvin Painter, who wrote The History of White People and David Blight, who heads Yale University's Gilder Lehrman Center for the Study of Slavery, Resistance, and Abolition.

Many have been in public life for decades, while others are younger including 29-year-old activist Sarah Haider, whose organisation Ex-Muslims of North America aims to normalise religious dissent.
What does the letter say?

"The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted," suggests the letter.

It also says: "We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters.

"But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought."

The letter condemns "disproportionate punishments" meted out to targets of public shaming by institutional leaders conducting "panicked damage control".

It goes on to warn of fear spreading through arts and media.

"We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement," it says.

It adds: "We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional consequences."
What are they taking aim at?

In recent months, a number of figures have been shamed online for making comments considered offensive by some, including on topics of race, gender and sexuality.

In some cases, employers took action against the individual after sustained and targeted criticism.

The letter suggests: "Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes."

In June, the New York Times' opinion editor resigned amid outrage over a piece by a Republican senator calling for military forces to be sent to cities where anti-racism protests had turned violent.

Opinion contributors to the newspapers David Brooks and Bari Weiss added their names to the letter on Tuesday.

Last year a US professor who quoted a racial slur from a James Baldwin book in a lecture at New York's New School was cleared on charges of racial discrimination.

And in January, publisher Flatiron Books cancelled author Jeanine Cummins's tour after her novel American Dirt was strongly condemned for stereotypical descriptions of Mexicans.
What has the response been?

There has been a huge online response to the letter, with the Index on Censorship calling it an "important letter on open debate".

Irish novelist John Boyne tweeted in support, writing "hounding people for perceived moral slip-ups" is the "opposite of free speech".

One signatory - Matthew Yglesias, co-founder of liberal news analysis website Vox - was rebuked by colleague Emily VanDerWerff, a trans woman, who tweeted that Yglesias signing the letter "makes me feel less safe at Vox".

But VanDerWerff said she did not want Yglesias to be fired or apologise because it would only convince him he was being "martyred".

Signatory Jennifer Finney Boylan, a US author and transgender activist, apologised within hours of the letter being published, tweeting "I did not know who else had signed that letter".

Critics have tweeted past comments by signatories JK Rowling and Noam Chomsky on topics including transgender rights and genocide denial.

Others argued that those who signed the letter were overreacting.

"It's hard to take claims like this seriously, especially when it's plain that people are complaining about an unprecedentedly free and open speech environment," tweeted journalist Osita Nwanevu.

And some suggested that many of the signatories are high-profile figures who benefit from access to institutions that readily publish their work.


Here's the full text of the open letter including the full list of signatories (bolding mine):

A Letter on Justice and Open Debate

July 7, 2020
The below letter will be appearing in the Letters section of the magazine’s October issue. We welcome responses at letters@harpers.org

Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and inclusion across our society, not least in higher education, journalism, philanthropy, and the arts. But this needed reckoning has also intensified a new set of moral attitudes and political commitments that tend to weaken our norms of open debate and toleration of differences in favor of ideological conformity. As we applaud the first development, we also raise our voices against the second. The forces of illiberalism are gaining strength throughout the world and have a powerful ally in Donald Trump, who represents a real threat to democracy. But resistance must not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma or coercion—which right-wing demagogues are already exploiting. The democratic inclusion we want can be achieved only if we speak out against the intolerant climate that has set in on all sides.

The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted. While we have come to expect this on the radical right, censoriousness is also spreading more widely in our culture: an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty. We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters. But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. More troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments instead of considered reforms. Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes. Whatever the arguments around each particular incident, the result has been to steadily narrow the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal. We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement.

This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the most vital causes of our time. The restriction of debate, whether by a repressive government or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those who lack power and makes everyone less capable of democratic participation. The way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away. We refuse any false choice between justice and freedom, which cannot exist without each other. As writers we need a culture that leaves us room for experimentation, risk taking, and even mistakes. We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional consequences. If we won’t defend the very thing on which our work depends, we shouldn’t expect the public or the state to defend it for us.

Elliot Ackerman
Saladin Ambar, Rutgers University
Martin Amis
Anne Applebaum
Marie Arana, author
Margaret Atwood
John Banville
Mia Bay, historian
Louis Begley, writer
Roger Berkowitz, Bard College
Paul Berman, writer
Sheri Berman, Barnard College
Reginald Dwayne Betts, poet
Neil Blair, agent
David W. Blight, Yale University
Jennifer Finney Boylan, author
David Bromwich
David Brooks, columnist
Ian Buruma, Bard College
Lea Carpenter
Noam Chomsky, MIT (emeritus)
Nicholas A. Christakis, Yale University
Roger Cohen, writer
Ambassador Frances D. Cook, ret.
Drucilla Cornell, Founder, uBuntu Project
Kamel Daoud
Meghan Daum, writer
Gerald Early, Washington University-St. Louis
Jeffrey Eugenides, writer
Dexter Filkins
Federico Finchelstein, The New School
Caitlin Flanagan
Richard T. Ford, Stanford Law School
Kmele Foster
David Frum, journalist
Francis Fukuyama, Stanford University
Atul Gawande, Harvard University
Todd Gitlin, Columbia University
Kim Ghattas
Malcolm Gladwell
Michelle Goldberg, columnist
Rebecca Goldstein, writer
Anthony Grafton, Princeton University
David Greenberg, Rutgers University
Linda Greenhouse
Rinne B. Groff, playwright
Sarah Haider, activist
Jonathan Haidt, NYU-Stern
Roya Hakakian, writer
Shadi Hamid, Brookings Institution
Jeet Heer, The Nation
Katie Herzog, podcast host
Susannah Heschel, Dartmouth College
Adam Hochschild, author
Arlie Russell Hochschild, author
Eva Hoffman, writer
Coleman Hughes, writer/Manhattan Institute
Hussein Ibish, Arab Gulf States Institute
Michael Ignatieff
Zaid Jilani, journalist
Bill T. Jones, New York Live Arts
Wendy Kaminer, writer
Matthew Karp, Princeton University
Garry Kasparov, Renew Democracy Initiative
Daniel Kehlmann, writer
Randall Kennedy
Khaled Khalifa, writer
Parag Khanna, author
Laura Kipnis, Northwestern University
Frances Kissling, Center for Health, Ethics, Social Policy
Enrique Krauze, historian
Anthony Kronman, Yale University
Joy Ladin, Yeshiva University
Nicholas Lemann, Columbia University
Mark Lilla, Columbia University
Susie Linfield, New York University
Damon Linker, writer
Dahlia Lithwick, Slate
Steven Lukes, New York University
John R. MacArthur, publisher, writer

Susan Madrak, writer
Phoebe Maltz Bovy, writer
Greil Marcus
Wynton Marsalis, Jazz at Lincoln Center
Kati Marton, author
Debra Mashek, scholar
Deirdre McCloskey, University of Illinois at Chicago
John McWhorter, Columbia University
Uday Mehta, City University of New York
Andrew Moravcsik, Princeton University
Yascha Mounk, Persuasion
Samuel Moyn, Yale University
Meera Nanda, writer and teacher
Cary Nelson, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Olivia Nuzzi, New York Magazine
Mark Oppenheimer, Yale University
Dael Orlandersmith, writer/performer
George Packer
Nell Irvin Painter, Princeton University (emerita)
Greg Pardlo, Rutgers University – Camden
Orlando Patterson, Harvard University
Steven Pinker, Harvard University
Letty Cottin Pogrebin
Katha Pollitt, writer
Claire Bond Potter, The New School
Taufiq Rahim, New America Foundation
Zia Haider Rahman, writer
Jennifer Ratner-Rosenhagen, University of Wisconsin
Jonathan Rauch, Brookings Institution/The Atlantic
Neil Roberts, political theorist
Melvin Rogers, Brown University
Kat Rosenfield, writer
Loretta J. Ross, Smith College
J.K. Rowling
Salman Rushdie, New York University
Karim Sadjadpour, Carnegie Endowment
Daryl Michael Scott, Howard University
Diana Senechal, teacher and writer
Jennifer Senior, columnist
Judith Shulevitz, writer
Jesse Singal, journalist
Anne-Marie Slaughter
Andrew Solomon, writer
Deborah Solomon, critic and biographer
Allison Stanger, Middlebury College
Paul Starr, American Prospect/Princeton University
Wendell Steavenson, writer
Gloria Steinem, writer and activist
Nadine Strossen, New York Law School
Ronald S. Sullivan Jr., Harvard Law School
Kian Tajbakhsh, Columbia University
Zephyr Teachout, Fordham University
Cynthia Tucker, University of South Alabama
Adaner Usmani, Harvard University
Chloe Valdary
Lucía Martínez Valdivia, Reed College
Helen Vendler, Harvard University
Judy B. Walzer
Michael Walzer
Eric K. Washington, historian
Caroline Weber, historian
Randi Weingarten, American Federation of Teachers
Bari Weiss
Sean Wilentz, Princeton University
Garry Wills
Thomas Chatterton Williams, writer
Robert F. Worth, journalist and author
Molly Worthen, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Matthew Yglesias
Emily Yoffe, journalist
Cathy Young, journalist
Fareed Zakaria

Institutions are listed for identification purposes only.


This open letter is long overdue. A strong message must be sent to those who would seek to permanently ruin the lives of ordinary, innocent, decent people over even the slightest hint of "microaggression" and years-old tweets that were posted when they were literally still kids in struggle sessions and cultural revolutions that would make Mao proud. These entitled, SJW "activists" and phony "journalists" have nothing better to do because they are ironically very privileged. They hypocritically scream about how they're sO oPpReSsEd and they're the victim of [insert bigotry here] and kIlL aLl mEn and wHiTe lIvEs dOnT mAtTeR but WE'RE the racists, sexists, "Islamophobes", and bigots, not them. This kind of authoritarian, anti-free speech bullshit must be stamped out before it has a chance to take root, corrupt our democracies, and threaten our cherished freedoms and very way of life.

Even Barack Obama has spoken out against cancel culture, as has Donald Trump. While this letter was written primarily by liberals and moderate leftists (including moderate far-leftists such as Noam Chomsky) and denounces Trump as an authoritarian demagogue, I believe that opposition to cancel culture ought to be a sustained, bipartisan effort. After all, authoritarian repression isn't unique to any particular ideology or religion and is a key part of human nature.

I think that anyone who tries to tell me what I can and can't say or do, or must say and do, under pain of losing my job, family, friends, and my very way of life, or possibly worse, can go fuck themselves. I will not kneel in submission to the dictates of BLM and MeToo (far-left), extol the virtues of the CCP (formerly far-left, now far-right), or acknowledge the inherent supremacy of Malays over non-Malays, Muslims over non-Muslims, and the infallible nature and unassailable position of Islam (far-right).

The U.S. Democrats and the British Labour Party, SNP, and Liberal Democrats must immediately purge these far-left, cancel-culture extremists from their ranks, immediately denounce and distance themselves from them, and send a clear message that all views are welcome and both internal dissent and debate as well as wider public discourse will be not only tolerated but widely encouraged if they wish to regain my erstwhile support. They must reassure moderate conservatives, moderate leftists, libertarians, centrists, classical liberals, and others not of the woke, far-left persuasion that they will not be marginalized and discriminated against for failing to toe the BLM/MeToo line and toe it precisely and enthusiastically, especially if they happen to be white and male.

Concrete steps must be taken to decisively eradicate cancel culture. Those who practice and promote it should be called out, and failing that, they should be given a taste of their own medicine through public shunning. Schools should be required to teach students about the evils of cancel culture and the importance of maintaining a free and open exchange of ideas at all costs. The youth of today must be deprogrammed. University courses that promote cancel culture must be defunded by governments and their degrees instantly derecognized at all levels of society.

Social media platforms that selectively enforce site rules in such a way as to selectively discriminate against users for holding certain views should be liable to lawsuits. They should be treated as essential public utilities just as internet access already is. MSM outlets should immediately fire any so-called "journalists" whose occupation consists primarily of canceling, or threatening to cancel, individuals over a perceived slight against society. They should invite actual debate and discussion by interviewing guests who are both critical of and supportive of BLM/MeToo and not just the latter.

What do you think, NSG? Do we fight for freedom, uphold liberalism, and defend democracy, or do we embrace ideological servitude while dishonestly pretending to be against slavery in all its forms? Feel free to answer in the poll provided.
Libera te tutemet ex inferis (Liberate yourself from hell)
Alt of Glorious Hong Kong. View Factbook here.

User avatar
Wayneactia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1388
Founded: Aug 01, 2014
New York Times Democracy

Postby Wayneactia » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:35 am

As soon as the Republicans denounce the KKK and stop taking campaign donations from them, we'll talk.

/thread

User avatar
The Reformed American Republic
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1341
Founded: May 23, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Reformed American Republic » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:36 am

Its nice to see that there is now some pushback against this crap.

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:36 am

imagine being named dexter filkins lmao

anyways this wont do anything lmao, besides, anyone who actually values what celebrities tweet about is fucking stupid

just form your own opinions, you shouldn't need JK rowling or the twitter crowd wanting to cancel her because she doesn't like transwomen or whatever

if you do you're an idiot
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
Rusozak
Minister
 
Posts: 2375
Founded: Jun 14, 2015
Father Knows Best State

Postby Rusozak » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:39 am

Totally not a biased poll.
NOTE: This nation's government style, policies, and opinions in roleplay or forum 7 does not represent my true beliefs. It is purely for the enjoyment of the game.

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:40 am

Rusozak wrote:Totally not a biased poll.

its nsg what do you expect
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
Deltia-
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 105
Founded: Jul 13, 2019
Capitalizt

Postby Deltia- » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:48 am

tbf political correctness has gotten too far. in the beginning it was ok now it's morphing into a lowkey version of what the nazis did, just under a red/pink coat of paint.
Federal Kingdom of Deltia | Bundskongsriik Avontiken
A PMT de facto minarchist mafia state in OTL Poland that's Anglo-German and under a nominal constitutional monarchy with workhouses, coke legalization, militarism, public torture and executions and more!.
Overview | Monarch | Riikskanzler | Parties
(06/30/2032)Der Weld:Florida Man tries to make napalm soup in microwave Now Playing:Juice WRLD, Marshmello - Come and Go 
Stonks: ADV 35 - +0.2%|CAC- -0.1%|FTSE- +0.4%|DAX- +0.3%
A 13.4 civilization, according to this index.(Tier: 7|Level: 2|Type: 5)
Each good reply, Alisa will gain 1% sanity. Counting: -20
YL/AL thing for me
Vanquish the summerposters!
Dibs on the next sig and best flag threads.

No NS stats
ADV 35=Deltian stock index

User avatar
Conservative Republic Of Huang
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1516
Founded: Jul 09, 2015
New York Times Democracy

Postby Conservative Republic Of Huang » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:49 am

What it sounds like OP, is that you are advocating for the same measures that you so heartedly denounce to be taken against those who you perceive as supporting "cancel culture."

Also, "deprogramming"? Sounds like a nicer way to say indoctrination.
Pro: Direct democracy, e-democracy, parliamentary sovereignty, state secularism, non-violent direct action (striking), police reform, syndicalism, democratic workplace management
Anti: Most types of representative democracy, ultra-nationalism, imperialism, autocratic workplace management

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:50 am

Deltia- wrote:tbf political correctness has gotten too far. in the beginning it was ok now it's morphing into a lowkey version of what the nazis did, just under a red/pink coat of paint.

man i sure do remember when ernst thälmann called hitler a "f*ggot" (censored so i do not get reported by AWFLs) over twitter and then he got deplatformed
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
The Reformed American Republic
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1341
Founded: May 23, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Reformed American Republic » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:55 am

[Redacted]
Last edited by The Reformed American Republic on Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Black Forrest
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41475
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby The Black Forrest » Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:57 am

Do people really want to debate, share ideas, or knowledge these days?

It seems more about owning the other side, dismissing them, finding some comment so they can claim hypocrite, or fully support some stance?

Part of exchanging ideas is the effort to learn and or master them. Today we seem to be more about the quick answer.
*I am a master proofreader after I click Submit.
* There is actually a War on Christmas. But Christmas started it, with it's unparalleled aggression against the Thanksgiving Holiday, and now Christmas has seized much Lebensraum in November, and are pushing into October. The rest of us seek to repel these invaders, and push them back to the status quo ante bellum Black Friday border. -Trotskylvania
* Silence Is Golden But Duct Tape Is Silver.
* I felt like Ayn Rand cornered me at a party, and three minutes in I found my first objection to what she was saying, but she kept talking without interruption for ten more days. - Max Barry talking about Atlas Shrugged

User avatar
Asle Leopolka
Diplomat
 
Posts: 841
Founded: Oct 18, 2019
Corporate Bordello

Postby Asle Leopolka » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:04 am

The Black Forrest wrote:Do people really want to debate, share ideas, or knowledge these days?

It seems more about owning the other side, dismissing them, finding some comment so they can claim hypocrite, or fully support some stance?

Part of exchanging ideas is the effort to learn and or master them. Today we seem to be more about the quick answer.

It's been that way since about 2014 or 2015. When I was working on my doctorate I saw it in my students - they didn't care about listening, if you said something even slightly triggering/problematic/unwoke you were dismissed and run out of town. Hell, I even saw students try getting other students expelled over it. It's very juvenile and makes things worse, not better.
W̵̲͔͇͒̌̉̆̇͛̋ͅa̸̢̼̺̅̉̊͝l̶̟͈̳̗͒͜l̷̫͝ ̶̱̱̘͖̙̬͖̈́̏̕͘ō̴̼̭̥͔̮̟͒̒͒ͅn̴̖̦͎̯͕̈́̿͘͠ ̸̞̼͉͙́͐̏͝ẗ̴̮͕̰̫̖͉̩̍͆̂͛͝h̵̖̋̉̾̎͆e̸̞̩̳̲͙͎͑ ̴̩̈̽̈́͑S̵̯̮̟͈͎̭͠t̸͍̗̹̬͉̙̓͆̔̿r̸̡̤̺̱̹͈̦͑̈́̅ẹ̶̮͔̳̆͆̄̏̔e̴̢̺͚̠̟͕̋̄̂̓̽͘t̴̢̡̩͙̫̼̚,̸̩̖͌̈́͐̇ ̷̨͐͆P̵̳̦͗r̶̹̪̯͕̬̰̍̓͆o̷̠̱͙̠͔̗̫̽f̶̱͙͇̼̬̮̻̊͌̋į̸̯̩̖͇̍͋̓̾́̏̽ͅt̴͇̬͍̗̺̀̈́̈́͗͊ ̴̧̯̼̩͑̓̒͗i̷̪̲̜̮̼̲̎͑͊̂̕n̶͍̂ ̴͓̻̤̬͎̫̹̎͌̈́́̕͝t̸̺͚͍̕h̷͖͎̙͍̬̫̰̍̀̃̿̓e̷̛̩̔̑̌̾͊ ̵̤̖͎͔͖̂͘͝S̴̳͖̩̪͕̒͒̌͌͝h̷̝͇̱̝̻̓̓͂͑̒ȅ̶̛̞̱̮̏͐͜ḕ̷͙͉̄͜ť̸̫̩̟s̴̲̲̏̑̏̇͆͂͘͜

ᛖᚷᛟ ᛋᚢᛗ ᛒᛖᛋᛏᛁᚨ ᛖᚷᛟ ᚲᚢᛚᛏᚢᛋ
Personality: Chaotic Good | ENTJ | Math dominant | Pro business
Politically: Classical liberal | Pro 2A | Pro Choice | Behavioral economist

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:04 am

The Black Forrest wrote:Do people really want to debate, share ideas, or knowledge these days?

It seems more about owning the other side, dismissing them, finding some comment so they can claim hypocrite, or fully support some stance?

Part of exchanging ideas is the effort to learn and or master them. Today we seem to be more about the quick answer.

no, people don't care about that stuff anymore

the dichotomy has always been about whats cool and shit like that, politics is about power and power is inherently cool because people want it because it grants them freedom

owning the libs or owning the cons online as opposed to debating them in person or god forbid, actually going out and doing the shit that they desire to do (ie socialists organizing unions, right wingers doing anti-abortion stuff, or woke idpol centrists furiously attempting to find how much african DNA they have so they can conquer their white guilt) is something that people can do more the former of as opposed to the latter

me calling someone a racist or a faggot online is 100x easier than me going out and actually attempting to make a change, this applies likewise for more people

people enjoy fast gratification - it is only natural that this would manifest in this way in regards to political opinions online
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
Vassenor
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52840
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Vassenor » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:08 am

So what actually -is- cancel culture? Because whenever it comes up it's always someone moaning that people don't like them spouting bigotry any more.
Jenny / Sailor Astraea
WOMAN

MtF trans and proud - She / Her / etc.
100% Asbestos Free

Team Mystic
#iamEUropean

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:10 am

Vassenor wrote:So what actually -is- cancel culture? Because whenever it comes up it's always someone moaning that people don't like them spouting bigotry any more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_sh ... eir%20past
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
Asle Leopolka
Diplomat
 
Posts: 841
Founded: Oct 18, 2019
Corporate Bordello

Postby Asle Leopolka » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:12 am

Vassenor wrote:So what actually -is- cancel culture? Because whenever it comes up it's always someone moaning that people don't like them spouting bigotry any more.

It's basically shaming the ever-living fuck (up to the point of personal and financial ruin) out of anyone who has any "controversial" opinion, which is often in the eye of the beholder. Driving out openly racist/bigoted businesses and individuals is one thing, but wanting to completely ruin someone because they vote Republican/Trump (which is the most often case) is petty as shit. Another more recent example is the WaPo hit job.
W̵̲͔͇͒̌̉̆̇͛̋ͅa̸̢̼̺̅̉̊͝l̶̟͈̳̗͒͜l̷̫͝ ̶̱̱̘͖̙̬͖̈́̏̕͘ō̴̼̭̥͔̮̟͒̒͒ͅn̴̖̦͎̯͕̈́̿͘͠ ̸̞̼͉͙́͐̏͝ẗ̴̮͕̰̫̖͉̩̍͆̂͛͝h̵̖̋̉̾̎͆e̸̞̩̳̲͙͎͑ ̴̩̈̽̈́͑S̵̯̮̟͈͎̭͠t̸͍̗̹̬͉̙̓͆̔̿r̸̡̤̺̱̹͈̦͑̈́̅ẹ̶̮͔̳̆͆̄̏̔e̴̢̺͚̠̟͕̋̄̂̓̽͘t̴̢̡̩͙̫̼̚,̸̩̖͌̈́͐̇ ̷̨͐͆P̵̳̦͗r̶̹̪̯͕̬̰̍̓͆o̷̠̱͙̠͔̗̫̽f̶̱͙͇̼̬̮̻̊͌̋į̸̯̩̖͇̍͋̓̾́̏̽ͅt̴͇̬͍̗̺̀̈́̈́͗͊ ̴̧̯̼̩͑̓̒͗i̷̪̲̜̮̼̲̎͑͊̂̕n̶͍̂ ̴͓̻̤̬͎̫̹̎͌̈́́̕͝t̸̺͚͍̕h̷͖͎̙͍̬̫̰̍̀̃̿̓e̷̛̩̔̑̌̾͊ ̵̤̖͎͔͖̂͘͝S̴̳͖̩̪͕̒͒̌͌͝h̷̝͇̱̝̻̓̓͂͑̒ȅ̶̛̞̱̮̏͐͜ḕ̷͙͉̄͜ť̸̫̩̟s̴̲̲̏̑̏̇͆͂͘͜

ᛖᚷᛟ ᛋᚢᛗ ᛒᛖᛋᛏᛁᚨ ᛖᚷᛟ ᚲᚢᛚᛏᚢᛋ
Personality: Chaotic Good | ENTJ | Math dominant | Pro business
Politically: Classical liberal | Pro 2A | Pro Choice | Behavioral economist

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:13 am

Asle Leopolka wrote:
Vassenor wrote:So what actually -is- cancel culture? Because whenever it comes up it's always someone moaning that people don't like them spouting bigotry any more.

It's basically shaming the ever-living fuck (up to the point of personal and financial ruin) out of anyone who has any "controversial" opinion, which is often in the eye of the beholder. Driving out openly racist/bigoted businesses and individuals is one thing, but wanting to completely ruin someone because they vote Republican/Trump (which is the most often case) is petty as shit. Another more recent example is the WaPo hit job.

or teenagers getting cancelled for acting like retards
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
Vassenor
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52840
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Vassenor » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:13 am

Esotyrica wrote:
Vassenor wrote:So what actually -is- cancel culture? Because whenever it comes up it's always someone moaning that people don't like them spouting bigotry any more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_sh ... eir%20past


So basically it's bad to decide you don't want anything to do with people now.
Jenny / Sailor Astraea
WOMAN

MtF trans and proud - She / Her / etc.
100% Asbestos Free

Team Mystic
#iamEUropean

User avatar
Merther
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 174
Founded: Mar 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Merther » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:16 am

This thread's poll makes no sense. The cancel culture originates FROM Democracy. It's ye aulde left vs right, now renamed liberals vs conservatives. Different names, same useless system.
Merther is not a nation, but the name of a lifeless planet located within a fictionnal planetary system : Cyrthe. To know more about it, click here and don't forget to read the spoilers !
And yes, when I type it's me, the player, typing. I didn't know I had to precise that.

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:17 am

Vassenor wrote:


So basically it's bad to decide you don't want anything to do with people now.

if someone called you a faggot online 5 years ago should they be eligible for social punishment today
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
Merther
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 174
Founded: Mar 30, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Merther » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:20 am

Esotyrica wrote:
Vassenor wrote:
So basically it's bad to decide you don't want anything to do with people now.

if someone called you a faggot online 5 years ago should they be eligible for social punishment today

Imagine if a new branch of the judiciary system opens just for all the 12 year old kids who called you the n word when you ran over them in GTA 4 Free mode in 2008
Merther is not a nation, but the name of a lifeless planet located within a fictionnal planetary system : Cyrthe. To know more about it, click here and don't forget to read the spoilers !
And yes, when I type it's me, the player, typing. I didn't know I had to precise that.

User avatar
Esotyrica
Attaché
 
Posts: 73
Founded: Jul 06, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Esotyrica » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:20 am

Merther wrote:
Esotyrica wrote:if someone called you a faggot online 5 years ago should they be eligible for social punishment today

Imagine if a new branch of the judiciary system opens just for all the 12 year old kids who called you the n word when you ran over them in GTA 4 Free mode in 2008

god i want that
go outside and do the activism you want instead of debating AWFL-type liberalism on NSG

User avatar
Cekoviu
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16381
Founded: Oct 18, 2017
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Cekoviu » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:23 am

> Should we submit to cancel culture and allow democracy to be dismantled?
Image
RWDT - REST IN POWER
David Hume fangirl, massive Tuvaboo, anti-imperialist, and Castroist socialist. Also a sex-negative SWERF, traditionalist SJW, and Anglo-Catholic Episcopalian.
/tʃɛ'koʊ.vi:.ju:/ (check-OH-vee-you)

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54469
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:28 am

The normalization of cancel culture has led to the point where people are essentially 24/7 image management employees for their company, but don't get paid for it. This extends to ordinary members of the public getting fired for stuff if the mob happens to target them.

I'd support a law banning companies from behaving that way by acknowledging that. If they fire you for some shit that didn't happen while you were on the clock, then were you ever really off the clock? Seems like they might owe you back pay and wage+hour violation fines.

This is a good example of how the "Progressive" left are actually pretty terrible for society and for the left wing.

"Hey, we decided to make it so your boss is now in control of you and your behavior 24/7 and you need to worry about being fired even in your personal lives.".
"Thanks, I hate it.".
Last edited by Ostroeuropa on Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
The plague has been worse for women.
It's true that more men are dying from COVID, but that's not exactly a cause for celebration.
https://i.redd.it/oqy5p3p1ayv41.png

User avatar
Major-Tom
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12237
Founded: Mar 09, 2016
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Major-Tom » Wed Jul 08, 2020 10:28 am

Vassenor wrote:So what actually -is- cancel culture? Because whenever it comes up it's always someone moaning that people don't like them spouting bigotry any more.


No, I think you've missed the point. We should call people out on bigotry. Full stop. Should we attempt to "cancel" and "invalidate" people and their careers, their livelihoods and their income for things they said in the past that might be problematic? No.

Because a lot of famous people out there are cancelled for pretty small things in comparison to the actual racism, misogyny, and hatred we see among our leaders here in the United States. Those aforementioned famous folk should have the chance to apologize, to reflect on why what they did was wrong, and then move on provided they exemplified sincerity and regret.

All of us on this forum, if we were famous, could probably be "cancelled" for something we've said or beliefs we might have used to hold, especially with how low the metric for being "cancelled is." We're ravenous on social media, and if we see something said that was concerning (even if it was years ago), our instinct is just to shout "cancelled." It's absurd and you know it.
White Trash Hipster- Overly Proud Arizonan - Swimmer - Hiker - Future Teacher - Powered by Caffeine and Nicotine
Who is Tom?
Other Pertinent Factbooks
Pro: Social Democracy, Labour Unions, Progressivism, Civic Nationalism, Gun Rights, Environmentalism, Civil Liberties; TLDR, broadly Centre-Left(ish) but not dogmatic.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Feline Goetland, Google [Bot], Grinning Dragon, Neanderthaland, Necroghastia, Northern Davincia, Picairn, Shazbotdom, Sundiata, The Yellow Emperor, Xmara

Advertisement

Remove ads