Intellectuals weigh in on Cancel Culture

Larbre34

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Well most of them are adults now so they need to grow up. You are not going to agree with every writer of every book you read.

You would think she was talking about sending people to camps the reaction she got.

Couldn't agree more.

It should be a matter of great concern that many of this generation cannot engage in debate with vigour or cope with 'agree to disagree'. I think thats the whole genesis of the cancel culture, if you shut it up, you've won.

Bonniedog

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Blaming Marx for the gulags is like blaming Adam Smith for Slavery, or Jesus Christ for the Spanish Inquisition.

Adam Smith was opposed to slavery. So were industrial capitalists even just on grounds that it constituted unfair competition.

Marx has rather more responsibility for the gulags in that people who believed in his Mystic Meg prophecies - all of them proven wrong - built them. They also shared his total intolerance of any dissent and his support for suppressing his opponents, including left wing ones.

rossie1977

rossie1977 wrote: »

Trump is worst president in US history. While he isn't Hitler his time as President has make it easier for someone far smarter than Trump himself to actually take down the institutions of power from within like Putin, Orban, Erdoğan have done in their countries.

You think Trump is worse that GW Bush? the man who lied to the world, isolated the US from his allies, destroyed their credibility as a protector, started a war which has killed thousands of Americans and others? And introduced laws which vastly reduced the rights of its citizens? I think you've simply forgotten what the US was like when GW was in power. Trump is bad most times, but Seriously?

This Trump hate is utterly bizarre sometimes.

CrankyHaus

Deleted User wrote: »

You think Trump is worse that GW Bush? the man who lied to the world, isolated the US from his allies, destroyed their credibility as a protector, started a war which has killed thousands of Americans and others? And introduced laws which vastly reduced the rights of its citizens? I think you've simply forgotten what the US was like when GW was in power. Trump is bad most times, but Seriously?

This Trump hate is utterly bizarre sometimes.

Yeah but when Bush, and his Administration crammed with war profiteers, started two forever wars that destabilised their respective regions for decades while crashing the US Economy and mobilising the religious right as a support base he made sure to stay within the rules of politeness and comportment for Presidents so it's all okay.

rossie1977

Deleted User wrote: »

You think Trump is worse that GW Bush? the man who lied to the world, isolated the US from his allies, destroyed their credibility as a protector, started a war which has killed thousands of Americans and others? And introduced laws which vastly reduced the rights of its citizens? I think you've simply forgotten what the US was like when GW was in power. Trump is bad most times, but Seriously?

This Trump hate is utterly bizarre sometimes.

Ok back up one second.

What do you think happens if Trump is President of the US on September 11th 2001. What is his response?

And its not me just saying it. Presidential historians have Trump ranked dead last. In fact Republican historians have Trump in the bottom five!

MadYaker

Another thread full of the usual suspects ranting about "the left" I still don't know what that term actually means. Who or what is the left? Nobody seems to know but its the subject of numerous dumb threads on here, just like this one.

TomTomTim

MadYaker wrote: »

Another thread full of the usual suspects ranting about "the left" I still don't know what that term actually means. Who or what is the left? Nobody seems to know but its the subject of numerous dumb threads on here, just like this one.

Your supposed lack of understanding isn't a failure of others. Much like what has already been done on this thread, you attempt to ignore what is right in front of you, all done in the name of your own bias. I'd explain the left to you if I thought you were approaching this in good faith, but you're clearly not.

MadYaker

TomTomTim wrote: »

Your supposed lack of understanding isn't a failure of others. Much like what has already been done on this thread, you attempt to ignore what is right in front of you, all done in the name of your own bias. I'd explain the left to you if I thought you were approaching this in good faith, but you're clearly not.

Its my first post inthe thread so I'm not sure how you can say I'm not posting in good faith. I have some bias like everyone, I try to think with that in mind. Not sure how its relevant to the question I asked. I always get an answer like this when I ask this question. Never an actual explanation always a dodge.

The term is used as the basis for numerous discusssions on this site such as that in this very thread. I'm just curious to know what exactly people are thinking when they use the term. It never makes much sense to me.

Junkyard Tom

Bonniedog wrote: »

Marx has rather more responsibility for the gulags in that people who believed in his Mystic Meg prophecies - all of them proven wrong - built them.

Let me preface by saying I'm not a Marxist scholar, and I doubt you are either, so I'm only speaking to my own limited knowledge of his writings.

Firstly, inasmuch as the Soviet Union was Marxist, it turned a nation of illiterate potato-farming serfs into an industrial superpower who put a man in space with extensive infrastructure and free education within a few decades. The Soviet Union's industrial output was comparable with the US's in many aspects.

Before you start crying about gulags and famines I'm not condoning anything the Soviet Union did. Personally, I'd rather live in rags and be free than be comfortable and live in a ****-hole where you get locked up for speaking the wrong bastard's name out of place.

Secondly, Marx was critical of capitalism's unequal relationship between capitalist and worker. Do you really think Marxism calls for a system that was worse than capitalism for unequal distribution of power? A system where if workers don't meet targets dictated to them by a powerful cabal they could end up being worked to death in a Siberian labour camp? Can you justify that to me? Go ahead, I'll wait.

nigeldaniel

Sadly, I am starting to think, the masses do not lust after the truth, they demand illusions. Can not recall who said that but it was a book I read some time ago.

randomchild

MadYaker wrote: »

Another thread full of the usual suspects ranting about "the left" I still don't know what that term actually means. Who or what is the left? Nobody seems to know but its the subject of numerous dumb threads on here, just like this one.

It is not discourse that must stoop to your level but you must raise yourself to it.

The term comes from the French revolution where members of the new parliament who wished for rapid change sat on the left side of the chamber and those who wished for slower change sat on the right.

Bonniedog

Dear oh dear, Junkyard.

There were no serfs in 1917. Just like Adam Smith had nothing to do with slavery.

So Soviet Union was only country to have better living standards in the 1970s than 60 years previously was it?

And no, its GDP was never greater than the US. Not by a country mile - it was around 25%.

Jesus, maybe you ought to get a fkn library card before you throw in your tuppence worth :-)

TomTomTim

nigeldaniel wrote: »

Sadly, I am starting to think, the masses do not lust after the truth, they demand illusions. Can not recall who said that but it was a book I read some time ago.

I don't think they demand them, but they are forced on them, and most people don't like to rock the boat. As herd animals we always want to be part of the herd, for the most part, and to be safest in the herd you nob your head and go along with whatever is trendy no matter how insane it is. No amount of conditioning can remove this trait from humans.

rossie1977

rossie1977 wrote: »

Ok back up one second.

What do you think happens if Trump is President of the US on September 11th 2001. What is his response?

And its not me just saying it. Presidential historians have Trump ranked dead last. In fact Republican historians have Trump in the bottom five!

American politics has swung dramatically, as has their media. The bile that comes out of the media, politicians, and lobbyists regarding Trump would have been unheard of during GW Bush's time. While there was the occasional reporter with extreme views, they were a rarity. Now, it's the norm.

I wouldn't trust the rankings because it's so damn politically motivated. Their culture has swung so damn much. Obama did so much to further increase the divisions within American society, with Trump adding the icing to that cake.

In any case, you didn't really answer my point. Do you think Trump is worse than GW? Seriously. Not as an American, but as an Irish person looking in from the outside and disconnected by most of the drama.

ronivek

MadYaker wrote: »

Another thread full of the usual suspects ranting about "the left" I still don't know what that term actually means. Who or what is the left? Nobody seems to know but its the subject of numerous dumb threads on here, just like this one.

I think in general the whole reliance on these labels allows people to argue about what are fundamentally complex and nuanced issues without actually engaging in understanding what they're talking about.

There are some people who seem to have quite a bit of reading into relevant topics but I feel like even then they tend to favour certain authors/orators and tend to shout about what they've read/watched within the relevant echo chambers.

Brian?

Am I the only one who's sick of the radical left being called "liberals"?

There was a simpler time when the radical left was entirely concerned with bringing down the entire capitalist system and replacing it with an egalitarian utopia. Now we're accused of all sorts.

"Cancel culture" is not a product of the radical left. It's a product of a massive corporations protecting their bottom lines. The complete opposite of what most on the left believe in.

The people who support "Cancel culture" are a very strange bunch to me. The seem to lurch from outrage to outrage. The same is true of the people on the right who oppose them, they're outraged by outrage. They see forced diversity and tokenism everywhere.

The left needs to get back to wearing duffel coats and plotting the downfall of the capitalist system.

Brian?

MadYaker wrote: »

Another thread full of the usual suspects ranting about "the left" I still don't know what that term actually means. Who or what is the left? Nobody seems to know but its the subject of numerous dumb threads on here, just like this one.

We used to be a great bunch of lads. Now we're purple haired, third wave feminists who want to silence dissent.

Junkyard Tom

Bonniedog wrote: »

Dear oh dear, Junkyard. There were no serfs in 1917. Just like Adam Smith had nothing to do with slavery. So Soviet Union was only country to have better living standards in the 1970s than 60 years previously was it?

And no, its GDP was never greater than the US. Not by a country mile - it was around 25%.

Jesus, maybe you ought to get a fkn library card before you throw in your tuppence worth :-)

Sorry, I was taking you seriously, you're operating at a more juvenile level than I'd expected. Jog on back to the YouTube comments section with the rest of them.

Edit: I got the GDP thing, wrong I was thinking of oil production or something.

Bonniedog

Trump is a War monger who is almost unique in not bringing America into a new war.

Not much of a war monger is he?

Bonniedog

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Sorry, I was taking you seriously, you're operating at a more juvenile level than I'd expected. Jog on back to the YouTube comments section with the rest of them.

Taking me seriously?

You are historically illiterate.

It's not You tube you need, its a few books

MadYaker

MadYaker wrote: »

Its my first post inthe thread so I'm not sure how you can say I'm not posting in good faith. I have some bias like everyone, I try to think with that in mind. Not sure how its relevant to the question I asked. I always get an answer like this when I ask this question. Never an actual explanation always a dodge.

The term is used as the basis for numerous discusssions on this site such as that in this very thread. I'm just curious to know what exactly people are thinking when they use the term. It never makes much sense to me.

My opinion of it..

The majority of Irish people are fairly "left" in terms of social issues etc. but when the term is used on boards.ie, it generally means the more active people, the people who post on Twitter or on here fighting their cause. You can pretty much get a handle on all of their views based on how they treat one issue. They all follow the same dogma and honestly, a lot of it comes across as fake, like they're forcing themselves to be 100% pro an issue when they'd have never even considered it before. They remove the grey area from debate and say you're with us or you're against us.

Most of us agree with their stances but we see that their actions are a threat to society's ability to discuss issues. The fact they all come out with the same "private companies can do what they want" mantra when defending cancelling is comedy because that is something you'd expect the right to say. It's convenient at the moment that the internet's biggest companies are ran by left-leaning people and so it's convenient to defend cancelling opinions you don't want to hear. If it were the other way around, they'd be arguing that Twitter is a public service and should be afforded the same protections.

Brian?

ronivek wrote: »

I think in general the whole reliance on these labels allows people to argue about what are fundamentally complex and nuanced issues without actually engaging in understanding what they're talking about.

There are some people who seem to have quite a bit of reading into relevant topics but I feel like even then they tend to favour certain authors/orators and tend to shout about what they've read/watched within the relevant echo chambers.

Best post I've read on boards in a long time.

jam_mac_jam

Brian? wrote: »

Am I the only one who's sick of the radical left being called "liberals"?

There was a simpler time when the radical left was entirely concerned with bringing down the entire capitalist system and replacing it with an egalitarian utopia. Now we're accused of all sorts.

"Cancel culture" is not a product of the radical left. It's a product of a massive corporations protecting their bottom lines. The complete opposite of what most on the left believe in.

The people who support "Cancel culture" are a very strange bunch to me. The seem to lurch from outrage to outrage. The same is true of the people on the right who oppose them, they're outraged by outrage. They see forced diversity and tokenism everywhere.

The left needs to get back to wearing duffel coats and plotting the downfall of the capitalist system.

Yes. I hate the word liberals it's very American and kind of a misuse of what the word actually means.

Junkyard Tom

Bonniedog wrote: »

Taking me seriously?

Here you go 'genius'. Try again.

Marx was critical of capitalism's unequal relationship between capitalist and worker. Do you really think Marxism calls for a system that was worse than capitalism for unequal distribution of power? A system where if workers don't meet targets dictated to them by a powerful cabal they could end up being worked to death in a Siberian labour camp? Can you justify that to me? Go ahead, I'll wait.

Bonniedog

you seem to be missing the part where someone sitting in the British Library 160 years ago couldn't predict the future.

So he had no idea of what was going to happen.

However, he did reject democracy and freedom of opinion as well as advocating state ownership of the means of production.

Anarchists like Proudhon and Bakunin and conservative critics did in fact foresee that this would lead to an even worse tyranny than the one they were supposed to be overthrowing. And they were correct.

MadYaker

randomchild wrote: »

It is not discourse that must stoop to your level but you must raise yourself to it.

The term comes from the French revolution where members of the new parliament who wished for rapid change sat on the left side of the chamber and those who wished for slower change sat on the right.

You've misinterpreted my question. I understand what left wing is and what left wing views are. I'm just wondering what people mean when they use the term "the left". Is it everyone that has left wing views? Only some of them? Half? A certain goup? An individual? It just sounds like a ridiculous meaningless generalisation to me so when I read a post by someone saying "the left thinks X", or "the left says Y" I wonder who or what exactly they are talking about.

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

Am I the only one who's sick of the radical left being called "liberals"?

There was a simpler time when the radical left was entirely concerned with bringing down the entire capitalist system and replacing it with an egalitarian utopia. Now we're accused of all sorts.

"Cancel culture" is not a product of the radical left. It's a product of a massive corporations protecting their bottom lines. The complete opposite of what most on the left believe in.

The people who support "Cancel culture" are a very strange bunch to me. The seem to lurch from outrage to outrage. The same is true of the people on the right who oppose them, they're outraged by outrage. They see forced diversity and tokenism everywhere.

The left needs to get back to wearing duffel coats and plotting the downfall of the capitalist system.

Absolutely.

Cancel culture is most definitely not a leftward vein.

Calhoun

Interesting how the cancel culture piece works, it goes hand in hand with doxxing (tracking people down to employer ect) so i feel its days are a little bit numbered and government will put in some laws against it.

The big downside of this is allot of our online freedoms probably will be eroded to do this.

MadYaker

I don't get the trashing statues thing anyway. How is some statue of some guy that died hundreds of years ago oppressing people today? Just seems like mindless vandalism to me.

ancapailldorcha

Brian? wrote: »

Am I the only one who's sick of the radical left being called "liberals"?

Definitely not. I'm a liberal centrist and remain bewildered as to why Irish culture warriors insist on using the American meaning of the term.