The Wickedness of Cancel Culture

[ManOnFire]

I need to make something clear: I am not a Republican, I don’t support Trump, and attacking “wokeness” isn’t a goal for me. I have to put that out there because most of the people who speak against cancel culture are these types. However, I am a black Democrat - nowhere near liberal, and I don’t ever want to be associated with liberalism. I am moderate in my democratic views, but will never be a Republican. Having said this, I too am against cancel culture, which is growing increasingly absurd and more wicked as we progress through the 21st century, and I’ll explain why.

Losing your job for an opinion

I can’t speak for the rest of the world but in the United States we have always been a nation of free speech and other freedoms, but we are now living in a draconian age of the thought police punishing people for having different views. To the point of people losing their jobs, getting kicked out of college, or even having Twitter and YouTube cancel your page/channel entirely for being “misinformation” or “controversial.” This is not freedom, this is a wicked form of control and brainwash.

Recently Paddy Cosgrove who was CEO of Web Summit stepped down for his comments against Israel with the whole situation going on over there with Gaza, which he was probably pressured to do. Cosgrove obviously supports Palestine and might even hate Israel, I don’t know, but his views are his views, and he shouldn’t have to resign for them unless he explicitly said something like “The world must kill Israel and all of the Jews!” I personally support Israel in their fight against Hamas, and I am not offended by Cosgrove’s views and would never care to cancel the guy for them.

In 2020 Gina Carano was cut from The Mandalorian because of her controversial political views as well. Some of them really may have had some racial undertones to them, and I personally do think she is probably a racist, however her views were not bothersome enough to me for her to be cut from the show. I felt like her character was a decent addition next to Mando and I was really hurt that she wouldn’t be showing up anymore. Some of her opinions I agreed with, but most of them I did not, and she kept them limited to her social media pages and didn’t shove that stuff in anybody’s face on The Mandalorian or at Disney, so there was no reason to cancel her for her personal ideas in my opinion.

Cancel culture is a hate movement

I cannot lie as a Democrat, most of the calls to cancel and destroy people for their thoughts are coming from the “liberal” side. We really are proving ourselves to be weak, sensitive individuals who cannot handle the world around us and can’t handle others who don’t think the way we do. So we’ve gotten crusades started to try to silence those we don’t agree with, to try to have their names and images smeared for being “controversial,” etc. This is wickedness.

So now Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube can delete or demonetize people’s pages and channels simply because a mass number of other people have declared hate and disgust for those individuals, or because they’re posting “misinformation” which are just opinions that these outlets want to silence. Sounds far from freedom of speech to me.

Learn to deal with differences

I have friends and co-workers who still love and support Trump, and half of them are racist. I don’t give a shit. Those are their views and they have a right to them. As long as they treat me with common courtesy and respect every day to my face, that’s all that matters to me. I can’t control their thoughts, and don’t want to. You can call me the N-word to your friends and family all day long, talk about Hispanics and Asians to the roof, but as long as you keep that shit to yourself we’re good.

I support Israel and I have friends and co-workers who support Palestine. That doesn’t offend me, they have a right to their views. But what you don’t have a right to is trying to twist history to fit your narratives of hating Israel, and neither does the media, which is also trying to vilify them but the IDF has video proof against those claims.

If you’re a woman who has sex with other women, or both, or you’re a man who has sex with other men, or you want to get a complete sex change and live in peace, that’s your business and your body, I don’t care. But what you don't have a right to do is have people lose their jobs or get kicked out of college for not agreeing with you.

Today’s new world is about teaching people to have hate for others who don’t follow their ideas, not to co-exist in peace with them. We are especially teaching young people this, and it's the reason why they have poor comprehension skills and selective listening issues, jumping to have something to say without hearing anything first. This is weakness and wickedness. And the people who have perpetuated this Orwellian movement are white-feminists, are young privileged college kids, are LGBTQ folks, and are non-white racial groups. There’s nothing wrong with all of us wanting to be heard, but it’s very wrong to try to cancel and crucify people for not being in lock step with us.

It’s got to go.

[madhatters4]

i don't know. we have freedom of speech but not freedom from consequence. a company deserves the right to decide who is employed by their company. if a person is making statements that either fly in the face of the company's ideology or simply may negatively impact their financial bottom line the company should have the right to terminate employment.

similarly we've seen kids recently expelled from schools for supporting palestine or even Hamas. I don't agree with the support of Hamas but do we consider it cancel culture when those students are expelled for voicing their opinions?

my feeling is cancel culture is a truly democratic characteristic of our country. if you say or do something that a significant number of people disagree with then you may face a consequence. i personally don't think company's like bud light should go down the drain because of the collateral damage done to those in their employ. i don't necessarily think students should lose college scholarships or be expelled because of their political or social views. but then it wouldn't be very fair to suggest that people or company's can't suffer the consequence of their action.

[ManOnFire]

It's still wrong. What if everyone loved Andrew Tate even if his ideas are still wrong or "misogynist" and you voiced your love for him at work and never got fired for it? Or if everyone loved Trump even if he still said all the crazy, wrong things he did? As a culture we're picking and choosing what we're going to find acceptable, and that's where cancel culture is making itself a beast.

"Wrong is still wrong even if everyone is doing it. Right is still right even if no one is doing it." - St. Augustine

[exitseven]

@madhatters44If this is going to be the case than we no longer have free speech. This is what the democrats want anyway. The constitution is just another piece of paper to them.

[goaded]

@exitseven So if a teacher at your children's school said they'd enjoy sex with their students, you'd be fine with that? It's just someone exercising their free speech, after all. How about if someone thinks that a book about two male penguins adopting a baby penguin is suitable for small children?

[exitseven]

@goaded that is exactly the stuff I would not be good with. I worked in a K-12 school system and before I was hired the Superintendent had a long talk with me about what he expected from his staff. That included drunk driving, screwing somebody who was not your wife and bouncing checks all over town. When I was a kid that conversation would not have been necessary because everyone would have assumed it was

[goaded]

@exitseven Which bit, and do you have free speech or not?

[exitseven]

@goaded You cannot tell students you want to have sex with them. You also cannot yell FIRE in a crowded theater. You also cannot use the medium os verbal communication to commit a crime.

[goaded]

@exitseven So, when Trump was interfering in the Georgia election, he wasn't just exercising free speech?

And you can "tell students you want to have sex with them", you just can't expect not to be fired for it.

[exitseven]

@goaded He was trying to get to the bottom odmf the election fraud. Georgia was one of the states that had the most complaints lodged against it.

[goaded]

@exitseven Georgia's election was run by Republicans. Honest Republicans. They knew there wasn't any election fraud, it was all lies. Guiliani lied about the election workers, he even admitted it in court. edition.cnn.com/.../index.html

[exitseven]

@goaded not so fast.
sos.ga.gov/.../obama-appointed-judge-strikes-blow-rule-law-georgia-elections

[goaded]

@exitseven You mean this part?

"Georgia is recognized as a national leader in elections. It was the first state in the country to implement the trifecta of automatic voter registration, at least 16 days of early voting (which has been called the “gold standard”), and no-excuse absentee voting. Georgia continues to set records for voter turnout and election participation, seeing the largest increase in average turnout of any other state in the 2018 midterm election and record turnout in 2020, with over 1.3 million absentee by mail voters and over 3.6 million in-person voters utilizing Georgia’s new, secure, paper ballot voting system."

[madhatters4]

@exitseven freedom of speech doesn't apply to employment, it never has. free speech doesn't apply to movie company's hiring and or firing people. free speech means you can say, "i support hamas" and not be arrested for it. cancel culture isn't interrupting freedom of speech. cancel culture is just another form of freedom of speech and expression to an extent. people are free to say what they want. and other people are free to react and act to it in the way they want so long as it is legal

[madhatters4]

what is wrong about a person losing their job because their employer doesn't want their opinions (being espoused on public forums) associated with their company? where's the freedom for the company in that?

we've always chosen what we choose to be acceptable. the difference was what people said generally was kept between them and the people they said it to in that moment. now we amplify opinions because we have a means to (social media, cell phones, etc, etc) and as a result we have to be more careful and conscious about what we say and where we say it. we have to evolve how we behave in modern times.

great example is lenny bruce. he was comedian before cell phones and social media. he was unapologetic in voicing his opinions. he was effectively canceled because comedy clubs decided they wouldn't platform his opinions. this was 60ish years ago.

[goaded]

@exitseven Seriously, though, the ruling is here: media.snopes.com/2020/12/show_temp.pl-2-1.pdf and the election was already under way, and the authorities hadn't complied in full with the NVRA.

[Avicenna]

@goaded: Your straw man is a red herring- a teacher suggesting something like that is not exercising free speech. Having sex with children is illegal, causes enormous psychological damage to vulnerable young people, and it's particularly dangerous for a teacher to espouse it.

As for your other straw man- "thinking" something is legal, but it still doesn't mean it would be an appropriate book for small children given its actual purpose, which is to promote homosexuality, not to educate. Books for small children should be educational, not pushing inappropriate adult topics on them.

[goaded]

@Avicenna What I see you saying is that there are limits to speech. I also see you making an assumption that the teacher was telling the children and not another adult that they'd like to have sex with their students.

Of course it can be appropriate to educate children that families come in all shapes and sizes, because that's the world they live in. (And there really were two male penguins that adopted a fertilised egg in New York Central Park Zoo.)

[Avicenna]

@goaded: Yes, there are limits to speech. But not ones based on ideology, which is what you leftists are always doing.

I assumed no such thing because it makes no difference who the teacher says that to. Any teacher who wants to have sex with their students is automatically unsuitable for employment as a teacher of children.

You're not fooling anyone, goaded- everyone knows you're trying to push an agenda on young children. We know this because you claimed you'd bring your (non-existent) grandchildren to drag queen "performances".

[goaded]

@Avicenna So stopping teachers from talking about LGBT+ to children isn't an ideological position? LGBT+ people exist, many of them are parents, even of children in schools where you want to take away the freedom of the teachers to explain in an age-appropriate way how "different" isn't the same thing as "bad" (let alone evil). What's the next ideological target, single parents?

I re-read what you said, and I agree you didn't assume the teacher was talking to the children, but you were factually wrong when you say "suggesting something like that is not exercising free speech". en.wikipedia.org/.../Boy_Love_Association exists, and it's legal in the US on the grounds of free speech.

It would absolutely be suitable to "cancel" or fire a teacher if you found out that they were a member. @exitseven claimed "If [no freedom from consequences of your speech] is going to be the case than we no longer have free speech. This is what the democrats want anyway. The constitution is just another piece of paper to them.". I brought it up as a counter-example. He's fine with consequences for speech he doesn't like.

Banning books from schools and libraries on ideological grounds is stifling their authors', teachers' and librarians', freedom of speech.

[exitseven]

goaded School committees and administrators have been choosing what books t o allow in libraries forever. There is a limited space and budget and billions of books. Somebody has to choose. what books belong there. Would you be okay with having your kid having this book in the library?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBhy_vlgKS4

[Avicenna]

@goaded: It's not free, i. e., protected speech for a teacher. Schools have to protect children. Which is why people with an agenda like you can't be allowed to dictate what children are exposed to at school. A lot of things exist in the world that aren't appropriate for children to be exposed to, especially in a school environment. It's only ideological to leftists who want to force their ideology on others as part of their desire for totalitarian control. There is nothing stifling "librarian's freedom of speech" by telling them if they are exercising bad judgement by putting books inappropriate for children in the school library. I sure hope you'd agree that pornographic materials are inappropriate for schoolchildren. Note also that surfing for porn on a school network or computing device is something that adults are also not allowed to do, whereas it may be perfectly fine for them to do at home (assuming it isn't child pornography).
As for "artistic expression", the "artists" or "authors" are not being prevented from publishing their material and distributing it where appropriate. Would your force a mosque to allow pornographic materials or books about homosexuality in its library on the grounds that they are preventing freedom of speech if they don't?

Let me ask you this- should people in a primary and secondary school classroom environment be allowed to openly talk about how much they hate members of specific racial, ethnic, or religious groups? For example, in Germany, should librarians be allowed to order Hitler's Mein Kampf for their libraries?

[goaded]

@exitseven Yes, I would (they're both non-fiction, by the way). I can accept that other people might have a different opinion.

As usual in discussions of this sort, the right is misrepresenting the discussion. The problem isn't that some books might be considered inappropriate, it's that a vocal minority are demanding that all books containing LGBT+ themes in any way be removed from schools and libraries. (If you need any proof of that, look no further than the suspect list containing a book for no other reason than the author's surname was Gay.)

Do you think that teaching children that "different" is not the same as "bad" or "evil" is a bad thing?

[exitseven]

@goaded kids do not need to be taught this at all. There is a limited amount of class time in a school day and limited resources for materials. Curriculums should be designed to teach life skills like math and science. LGBTQ should not be taught at all. If it is a part of a lesson it should be included but liberals want to push the narrative that it is a better alternative than heterosexual. Most adolescents are very confused and unhappy with their lives and they want to encourage kids to get sex change operations because they think it will make all their problem go away. Some schools counsel kids without the parents permission.

[goaded]

@Avicenna It's free speech for any person, but a teacher can expect negative consequences if they express it. That's the whole point of this opinion and what I've been saying throughout.

You seem determined to ignore your own agenda and insist that only I have one in this discussion. Why do you think that is? As far as I can tell, your ideology is that admitting the reality of same-sex relationships or trans people causes those things (which you don't like), which is bullshit.

I mean, seriously, "It's only ideological to leftists who want to force their ideology on others as part of their desire for totalitarian control.". Yours is the side telling people what they're not allowed to read, not the other way around.

You are both misrepresenting the problem. What's "pornographic" about And Tango Makes Three? Nothing at all, and you know it.

[goaded]

@exitseven Kids don't need to be taught right from wrong? Empathy? I think you'll find they do.

I specifically asked "Do you think that teaching children that "different" is not the same as "bad" or "evil" is a bad thing?", nothing to do with LGBT, it could be skin, hair or eye colour, religion, speech disorders, left-handedness, anything.

Nobody on the left is pushing the idea that anything is better than anything else, that's exactly what the right is doing by painting people who are different as second class citizens who shouldn't be allowed to marry or adopt, or even read about people like themselves.

Some parents would beat their children for being different, those kids have a right to a non-judgemental hearing.

[exitseven]

@goaded the left has been pushing that white men are the devil for years. All these special groups that claim that they are victims of the white man instead of taking some personal responsibility for their lives are all. Brainwashed by the liberals to believe that they need to be taken care of by the government are pondered to so they will get votes.

[goaded]

@exitseven You know simply saying the same thing over and over doesn't make it true, right? You really don't think the lived experiences of your parents and grandparents don't affect your life?

[goaded]

Oh, and you're avoiding the question: "Do you think that teaching children that "different" is not the same as "bad" or "evil" is a bad thing?".

Remember, it could be skin, hair or eye colour, religion, speech disorders, left-handedness, anything, yes, including sexual tendencies.

Come on, either you think it's a bad thing or we actually agree on something, which would be a good thing, wouldn't it?

[RealMarek]

Interestingly, the cancel culture was invented by mainstream conservatives. William F. Buckley and the National Review went about purging the paleoconservatives and other non-neoconservatives on the right, deriding them as “racist,” “isolationist,” “extremist,” etc. whether or not it was true. It’s pretty clear in retrospect that Buckley was probably assisted by the CIA to do this and that the institutional conservatives are tolerated as a containment mechanism to police right-wing opinion. The problem the elites have today is that the establishment conservatives have so alienated ordinary conservative Americans that they cannot do this effectively anymore, thus the regime is relying on corporate allies to crack down on populist dissent.

[ManOnFire]

Very interesting to know.

[sage2021]

I don't think you needed to clarify what Trump's followers might or might not do. It might be the norm about what you're saying. Can't you people ever leave Trump and his followers out of the mixed up people who are doing things they want to do, even though most people don't agree with them.

Can you please restrain yourself from mentioning Trump's name? This is a test..

[ManOnFire]

Well, I failed the test lol. But I used him because he has been a major "controversial" icon of influence for a pretty large demographic of the population.

[rgii55447]

I agree that cancel culture seems to be largely a thing on the left these days, but I can't deny that the right has an increasing number of bad eggs, and I am a bit worried of someone like DeSantis was to become president.

[ManOnFire]

That worries me a lot.

[Avicenna]

The elephant in the room is that it's a tool of Marxist totalitarians used to purge (that was the term used in Maoist China and the Soviet Union) political opponents for their dissenting views rather than anything else. That's the context in which it's dangerous.

[exitseven]

Losing your job because of an opinion that has no relationship to your job function severely curtails out right to free speech. When one group controls big tech, higher education, show business and the media it makes it difficult for opposing voices to be heard.

[love_conquers_lust]

Show me.

Or here’s a novel idea. Find a nation where you can be a Republican, because it sounds like you’re a man without a country. Neither party wants hard working, tax-paying citizens to leave.

“I cannot lie as a Democrat”. Cultural appropriation. George Washington-“I cannot tell a lie.” He warned of the dangers of party systems.

Democrats assumes the other party is racist because they are members of that demographic. Other races follow them. It doesn’t get much more racist than that.

Why does Affirmative Action afford added protection to every protected class except one? Why are they as human beings singled out for something they had no control over?

If a given race is so up in one’s head that it stirs unhealthy amounts of envy, I advise one CHOOSES to go elsewhere. Out of sight, out of mind is very apt here.

We don’t control what we’re born with. We control how we play the hand we’re dealt.

[XingQi]

Cancel culture has existed for thousands of years. It's called our actions holding consequences. Nobody is exempt from criticism.

The problem I hold is when the "cancel culture" is actually socially-engineered to falsely frame individuals rather than call out criminals, thugs, and evil individuals for their proven actions.

[goaded]

You don't get cancelled for the opinion that vanilla icecream is better than chocolate, you get cancelled for opinions that hurt people, at least on the left. The first example of cancellation I can think of was when the right cancelled the Dixie Chicks for saying they were ashamed of Bush. How does that compare to people saying they should Nuke Gaza?

[ManOnFire]

Except that what "hurts" people is subjective. Most of the opinions that are nowadays being canceled are canceled because a group of people whined about them on the streets and gave the impression that most of the world agrees, when in reality most people don't. So because of these groups who have hurt feelings, we now have to silence everyone else who doesn't agree with them.

Comments that are full of violence should get people canceled, but not because you say Israel committed war crimes or that Trump is your leader, even if I don’t agree with that.

[goaded]

I don't think we're working with the same definition of "cancelled". I would stop going to see my favorite actor if it turned out that they were so deluded they thought Trump was still president. That's my personal choice. "Cancelling", as far as I can see, is simply making people (and organisation) aware of what someone's said and letting them make up their own minds. What's wrong with that?

[ManOnFire]

That's not canceling. Canceling is deciding to kick someone off a show, social media, etc. or out of college, or make them lose their job for having ideas/opinions that aren't what a group likes.

[goaded]

Yes it is. The employers make a decision based on what their customers or other stakeholders think about what someone is saying. Any organisation in their right mind would get rid of someone promoting paedophilia, is that "cancelling"?

[ManOnFire]

That's crime, and they should be canceled. Not because you have "controversial" opinions on sexuality, politics, etc.

[goaded]

Is it a crime in the US? I don't think it is. As long as they don't do anything, they're simply expressing an opinion.

[ManOnFire]

So if that's really how it works then Paddy Cosgrove wouldn't have needed to step down for his opinion. And others either who had "controversial" opinions.

[goaded]

I think we're talking at cross purposes. Look, promoting paedophilia is not illegal in the US (https://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association), I doubt either of us think it would be unreasonable for a school to fire someone they found out was a member.

My question is: would that be "cancelling"? If not, why not?

[ManOnFire]

@goaded That’s canceling for the right reason. Pedophilia is a crime. It's violence. That is a very solid reason to cancel and fire somebody. And even if they openly endorsed/supported pedophilia but never did it. They should be tossed, yes.

[goaded]

So "cancelling" is OK with you. Pedophilia is a crime, but talking about it is not (in the US, because of the 1st Amendment), and it's obviously not violence.

[ManOnFire]

Cancelling is okay when there's a super valid reason for it, as in the instance we just went through. Pedophilia is a crime, talking about it in general is not. Unless you're talking about it to endorse it or talking about it with intent to commit it, or have committed it.

Talking about Israel committing war crimes is NOT a crime and not a reason for someone to be cancelled unless you're talking about killing all the Jews and wiping out Israel. Talking about NOT agreeing with LGBTQxyz is not a crime and not a reason for someone to be cancelled unless you're declaring LGBTQxyz should all be murdered. Etc.

We're just going in circles at this point.

[goaded]

I'm just trying to come to an agreement on definitions. I think you're still wrong about "talking about [paedophilia] to endorse it", because that's just speech people don't like, I'm not sure about "talking about it with intent to commit it", but obviously "have committed it" is a confession to a crime.

It's not even hard to respectfully disagree with people. Saying "I believe trans people would be better served with psychological help than drugs and surgery" is wrong, but it's respectful. Saying "you want children to have their dicks cut off" is both wrong and disrespectful.

That said, your example of someone saying Israel shouldn't be indiscriminately bombing Gaza and it's a war crime shouldn't get you cancelled, the companies that pulled out of the show because of that (assuming I didn't miss anything else he said) are in the wrong.

I would be put off watching any show where I knew the studio knew that one of the actors was racist. In that respect, I think the studio was acting reasonably.

As to ideas being OK as long as they keep them to themselves, people publishing those thoughts on the internet aren't keeping them to themselves, are they?

[goaded]

Oh, one (last?) thing: intolerance of intolerance is essential in a tolerant society, if it is to survive. I'd say that's the same as hating hate speech. That doesn't make the left haters or intolerant, it's targetted at the ideas, not the people.

[DB1973]

People who are in power, not specific names, have used the Woke Wand to stir up hate amongst us all just for their no end of power and prestige.
can't say I agree with all, But certainly great points.

[BoopBoopBeep]

My man if I could buy you a drink right now I would. Shame more people aren't reading this.

[Snakeyes7]

Uhm, sweaty, I think you mean to say "consequense culture", biggit!

Kidding, but it is amusing to see the left fighting against the monster they created. Now that it has been made into their problem, now they have a problem with it.

The worst thing is that they are not going to learn a damn thing after this.

[strateguy632]

paddy Cosgrove was not simply an opinion, gaza is hammas recognized terrorists. promoting terrorism is a big deal in contrast to pro or anti gay.

[ManOnFire]

Well, hold on there. He didn't actually endorse Hamas. He simply said Israel was committing war crimes. Those are still two different things.

[findacure4wokeness]

Cancel Culture is all about disempowering western people who are trying to protect the societies they built and love. Cancel Culture silences people but also makes people who were once tolerant more resentful and racist.

[Luopio27]

Co-existing isn't coded in human nature.