Nick Cave: 'cancel culture is bad religion run amuck'

Junkyard Tom

Errashareesh wrote: »

It's not a matter of left or right, just behaviour.

I always put 'the left' and 'the right' in "inverted commas" because I don't know anyone who fits neatly into those descriptions and I think it's another way of dividing people who probably agree on much more than they disagree on.

Errashareesh

As said earlier by ArnoldJRimmer, that's so prevalent now - with us or against us. No middle ground.

i_surge

Errashareesh wrote: »

As said earlier by ArnoldJRimmer, that's so prevalent now - with us or against us. No middle ground.

"Ok fine, we are against you"

Irrational tyrannical minority holding the reasonable majority to ransom. The tide is turning on that now hopefully.

2u2me

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Cancel culture though? Who has been cancelled from what? (not aiming that specifically at you fwiw.)

This is how the Seattle police chief described it in a recent letter to the city council. She resigned shortly afterwards.

I wanted to update you on recent events, particularly those that occurred late last night.
A residence of mine in Snohomish County was targeted by a large group of aggressive protestors late last night. My neighbors were concerned by such a large group, but they were successful in ensuring the crowd was not able to trespass or engage in other illegal behavior in the area, despite repeated
attempts to do so. Currently, the local sheriff (not SPD resources) is monitoring the situation.
I urge both of you, and the entire council, to stand up for what is right. These direct actions against elected officials, and especially civil servants like myself, are out of line with and go against every democratic principle that guides our nation. Before this devolves into the new way of doing business by mob rule here in Seattle, and across the nation, elected officials like you must forcefully call for the end of these tactics.
The events of this summer were initiated in a moment of grief and outrage over the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers and so many other Black and Brown people suffering at the hands of injustice. All of us must ensure that this righteous cause is not lost in the confusion of so many protestors now engaging in violence and intimidation, which many are not speaking against.
Sincerely,
Carmen Best
Chief of Police
Seattle Police Department

Junkyard Tom

Errashareesh wrote: »

As said earlier by ArnoldJRimmer, that's so prevalent now - with us or against us. No middle ground.

It's very human to be tribal. If you think about it though there are people on here whose politics I would really dislike, but I bet they'd help me push my car if it needed a jump-start, or donate to a loved one of mine if they needed life-saving cancer treatment abroad and vice versa.

Most normal people want what's best for society - they just have differences of opinion on how to achieve it.

Junkyard Tom

2u2me wrote: »

This is how the Seattle police chief described it in a recent letter to the city council. She resigned shortly afterwards.

Just had a quick read of the story. She voluntarily resigned from a $285,000 PA job after the local democratically elected council voted to cut funding for the police? (my heart bleeds for her).

Explain to me how that is cancel culture. Keep it simple now.

One eyed Jack

i_surge wrote: »

Not if you are them. Reputation and career damage are no joke for anyone.

You made snide remarks in the past hour, implying someone in favour of regulating prostitutuion can't get laid without paying for it. Would it be fair to have your life ruined over a colourful comment (harmless to all but the learned oversensitive) used to make your argument?

People are welcome to try anyway.

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Just had a quick read of the story. She voluntarily resigned from a $285,000 PA job after the local democratically elected council voted to cut funding for the police? (my heart bleeds for her).

Explain to me how that is cancel culture. Keep it simple now.

You can just tell from the sneering tone of your posts you're exactly the type to think it's ok to hound someone out of their job because you don't agree with them..

Junkyard Tom

Deleted User wrote: »

You can just tell from the sneering tone of your posts you're exactly the type to think it's ok to hound someone out of their job because you don't agree with them..

Stop crying. She resigned.

Explain to me how a police chief resigning from her job because a democratically elected council voted to cut funding for the police department is an example of cancel culture?

Who cancelled her from what?

It's not so much the disproportionate punishment on the actual individuals that's the problem, it's when this fear of speaking your mind permeates society holding social issues etc. in stasis or only going in one direction, the direction favoured by these mad ones on Twitter who feel so uppity and good about themselves when they ruin lives.

Junkyard Tom

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Stop crying. She resigned.

Explain to me how a police chief resigning from her job because a democratically elected council voted to cut funding for the police department is an example of cancel culture?

Who cancelled her from what?

I didn't say this was cancel culture..She resigned in protest because politicians defunded her department because they're bowing to pressure from idiots who don't know how the world works..

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well..yes, and no..Rowling was reasonable in what she said, was she not?..
Rushdie..like..He was free to say what he said..but he knew people could want to kill him after it..like..don't be surprised if it happens then..
Like, that cartoon agency in France..they were being deliberately provocative..**** happened..It's like..'well, what did you expect..'
Words can have consequences..

Absolutely words can have consequences, and that’s why I disagreed with the poster earlier who suggested that children need to be taught to toughen up and all the rest of it, because all that does is permits obnoxious twats to say whatever they like about whoever they like and be free from the consequences of their behaviour. That’s not a lesson I’d want taught to any child.

For what it’s worth I don’t think JK was in any way reasonable in what she said. Her intention was clearly to provoke people, and she has much more power to do that than some nobody, she has much more influence over people than anyone firing abuse at her. That doesn’t make what they do right, any more than she was right in doing what she did either.

Same with Rushdie, same with the journalists in France. It simply comes down to the fact that if you’re gonna go out of your way to provoke people, you’re gonna get blowback.

Junkyard Tom

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't say this was cancel culture..She resigned in protest because politicians defunded her department because they're bowing to pressure from idiots who don't know how the world works..

Nobody forced her out of her job. She voluntarily resigned. The local council voted for the cuts.

The US has a massive prison population and has spent trillions of dollars on its failed criminal justice system and you want to see that continued? Who are the idiots?

2u2me

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Stop crying. She resigned.

Explain to me how a police chief resigning from her job because a democratically elected council voted to cut funding for the police department is an example of cancel culture?

Who cancelled her from what?

The example of the cancel culture was her describing how mobs of people came to her neighbourhood.

A residence of mine in Snohomish County was targeted by a large group of aggressive protestors late last night.

The city council bowed to the wishes of these mobs and this is the reason she cites for her resignation; that and the fact that she would have to fire 100 recruits she recently hired who are the most diverse class of officers ever seen in Seattle.

When was it ever right to give into pitchfork yielding mobs?

i_surge

One eyed Jack wrote: »

because all that does is permits obnoxious twats to say whatever they like about whoever they like and be free from the consequences of their behaviour. That’s not a lesson I’d want taught to any child.

Let people say what they want, and let themselves down and there many be consequence naturally enough. We both agree on that I think.

Rounding up a mob to manufacture consequences is where it goes overboard.

So let's push for a middle ground where there is decency on both sides. Destroying someone for the crime of disagreeing is equally obnoxious and twattish.

What do you think?

2u2me

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It simply comes down to the fact that if you’re gonna go out of your way to provoke people, you’re gonna get blowback.

The mob says that as well. You provoke them by not paying the extortion money.

Memnoch

Errashareesh wrote: »

Well the trans debate is a prime example. The abuse JK Rowling got for saying biological sex can't be changed. Now yeah, she wasn't "cancelled" - as I said earlier, stupid term. But nothing she said was hateful. Debate - cool, but abuse?

I'm coming to this conversation as someone who is experiencing a level of censorship of my own artistic work as a result of what we commonly refer to as cancel culture.

What JK Rowling said was to deny the reality of trans people. Fundamentally, it is a delegitimization of their very existence. When someone in a position of influence and reach like her says something like this it has very real and very serious consequences.

Delegitimization is the first step of a slippery slope that leads to bullying, intimidation and ultimately violence. Trans kids and people get assaulted at an alarming rate. They get abused verbally and physically.

There are countless trans and gay kids that have committed suicide over the years because of this. They are vulnerable, struggling with her identity, isolated and marginalized. So her tweet is harmful and destructive and she deserves the criticism she got for that. I suspect that a lot of people who have an issue with her being repudiated are more likely coming from a place where they themselves have a fundamental problem with trans people and their very existence and acceptance in society.

She also has hundreds of millions and no amount of Internet canceling is going to impact her life in any tangible way. But if she feels humiliated, rejected and isolated then it is more than a little ironic considering that is what belies the sentiment of her own words.

Memnoch

Errashareesh wrote: »

Another example: that woman in Central Park who called the police on an African American man who wasn't doing anything to her, and she made a point of race baiting on the call: she was a vindictive weapon for doing that. And stupid when he was filming. No sympathy for her when she was subsequently identified on social media. Wouldn't be one for joining a mob myself but it was her own doing.

However, when they started targeting her employer, that crossed the line for me. They harangued her employer into sacking her. They did sack her - and that's their choice. It's a standard business decision not to want to be associated with such behaviour. But they announced on Twitter that they had sacked her. Wtf? They were harassed so much that they felt the need to announce an internal HR decision on Twitter?! That's just ****ed up.

Clumsy as the "cancel" term is, I think it's shorthand for punishing people disproportionately.

The context here is that completely innocent black people have been killed at an alarming rate by police in the US while simply going about their daily lives. So when this woman threatened to call the police we're not talking about something that is inconvenient it is a threat of murder by cop. Generally speaking, the consequences for threatening someone's life are quite severe. She knew exactly what she was doing, she was playing on the fear that if she called the police they would not necessarily react in a proportionate manner to this man simply because he was black.

In that context, I think she got exactly what she deserved. She threatened to have him killed and ended up getting her own life destroyed. If this, for example, stops other people from frivolously calling the police on innocent black people then that will most likely save lives. It might also help American society get to a place where ordinary black people can go about their daily business without being in fear.

As far as examples of cancel culture goes this is hardly a repudiation.

i_surge

Memnoch wrote: »

I'm coming to this conversation as someone who is experiencing a level of censorship of my own artistic work as a result of what we commonly refer to as cancel culture.

Could you tell us more about it?

Was it reasonable and how did you feel about it?

Junkyard Tom

2u2me wrote: »

The example of the cancel culture was her describing how mobs of people came to her neighbourhood.

She has a right to live in peace. What did they get her cancelled from?

The city council bowed to the wishes of these mobs and this is the reason she cites for her resignation

Not. Cancel. Culture. She resigned voluntarily. That's a city council making a decision and I daresay they had a good excuse to trim the budget when they're facing a huge hole in their funds with the recession beginning to bite.

that and the fact that she would have to fire 100 recruits she recently hired who are the most diverse class of officers ever seen in Seattle

.

As if you give a shit about that.

i_surge

Memnoch wrote: »

In that context, I think she got exactly what she deserved. She threatened to have him killed and ended up getting her own life destroyed. If this, for example, stops other people from frivolously calling the police on innocent black people then that will most likely save lives. It might also help American society get to a place where ordinary black people can go about their daily business without being in fear.

I think it is a case of two wrongs don't make a right but it has some poetic justice as you describe it (even though I disagree 1000% with the mechanism).

Edit....

Actually, scrap that...you made a huge distorted leap to think the guy would be killed by a cop.

One eyed Jack

2u2me wrote: »

The mob says that as well. You provoke them by not paying the extortion money.

Cathy Newman wants her strawman back.

So what if that’s what the mob says, who was talking about the mob?

Sawduck

Nick Cave cancelled for canceling cancel culture

i_surge

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Cathy Newman wants her strawman back.

So what if that’s what the mob says, who was talking about the mob?

It was a metaphor. :rolleyes:

Errashareesh

JK Rowling didn't deny the reality of trans people one bit. Trans people change their gender certainly but biological sex cannot be changed. She was simply challenging this fallacy. And the abuse she got was outrageous. If someone says gender can't be changed, they are denying the reality of trans people. Saying that you can't go from having male sex organs to female ones is not.

As for the woman in Central Park, I said pretty much the same as you in terms of her behaviour and the reaction being her doing (but she didn't threaten to have the man killed). What I object to is the way people on social media dragged her employer into it though. They harangued her employer - which has nothing to do with the incident, to the point of the employer feeling forced to TWEET about an internal HR decision.

One eyed Jack

i_surge wrote: »

Let people say what they want, and let themselves down and there many be consequence naturally enough. We both agree on that I think.

Rounding up a mob to manufacture consequences is where it goes overboard.

So let's push for a middle ground where there is decency on both sides. Destroying someone for the crime of disagreeing is equally obnoxious and twattish.

What do you think?

See that’s just it though, I know where you’re coming from when you’re suggesting that people should be let say what they want and should take responsibility for the consequences of their behaviour, but I don’t agree that anyone should be permitted to say what they want in the first place.

It’s not that anyone has actually suffered anything for merely disagreeing with someone, hell I disagree with plenty of people and they disagree with me, but some people will purposely go out of their way to humiliate other people like social media is a popularity contest and they know they’ll get plenty of claps on the back for it. They also know they’re going to provoke people into reacting.

They’re doing the rounding up of the mob themselves when they have their legions of followers clapping them on the back for being an obnoxious twat when they go out of their way to provoke people. Nobody has their lives destroyed for simply disagreeing with someone. It happens all the time that people disagree with each other.

Memnoch

i_surge wrote: »

Could you tell us more about it?

Was it reasonable and how did you feel about it?

I made a short film about a male victim of domestic violence. A white male victim. I can tell you that this is a very high quality piece of work, it is nuanced, thoughtful and I feel relevant. I have had films that were amateurish in comparison accepted into big Irish festivals yet this one has had not much luck. I suspect that festival programmers are afraid of the consequences if they give a platform to such a piece. I have had someone from a major television network tell me that even though they love the film they can't take the risk because people might get triggered.

Obviously, I understand where they're coming from because their careers and livelihoods are at stake. That does not make this any less frustrating an experience. That said, not everything in the film translates as I intended and so I can understand that it could be interpreted in a less than productive way and as a filmmaker I have to take responsibility for that.

Ultimately, I believe that people who do get to see it will be able to look at it in a balanced way and will not think any worse of me for what I have to say.

While this is difficult for me personally, I understand that all of this is happening in the context of decades of systematic oppression and discrimination against women, LGBTQ and ethnic minorities. If we look at the way women have been treated, harassed and assaulted with absolute impunity it is really quite horrific. My own wife has been harassed many times during her professional career. Without what we call cancel culture there would have been none of the accountability that we are seeing now. Look at the sweeping changes and scandals unfolding in so many industries from the film industry to music, theater and video games to corporations and board rooms.

Women should be able to go to work without having to worry about being harassed or assaulted. These systems have been in place for so long and have been so deeply entrenched that there is bound to be some messiness and perhaps even unfairness in bringing about such seismic change. But this is a change that is certainly necessary in my view.

Overall, I think that these changes have been essential and positive for society. Yes, there it will be and has been an unfairly negative impact on a small minority of individuals, myself included, but I think it has made the lives of countless women and others much more bearable and safe and that is a price that is worth paying.

I also think that these are growing pains and that in time society will find an equilibrium where examples of people being unfairly canceled will become few and far between. Also, because now there are consequences for exploitative and abusive behavior this will make people think much more before they act and so as society progresses there will be less need for such stringent pushback.

In the meantime, I keep submitting my film to festivals and hope people get a chance to see it and make up their minds.

Memnoch

i_surge wrote: »

I think it is a case of two wrongs don't make a right but it has some poetic justice as you describe it (even though I disagree 1000% with the mechanism).

Edit....

Actually, scrap that...you made a huge distorted leap to think the guy would be killed by a cop.

It's not a distorted leap. Black people have been killed for less by police in America. The point is that she was going to call the cops and tell them she was scared for her life because of this person.

There is no telling what the consequences for him could have been if the police arrived thinking there was a dangerous person there.

In my view, it is not permissible for people to use police in this way to threaten someone that they are having a civil disagreement with. I think the consequences she faced for trying to do that are pretty proportionate and set a good example for the kind of behavior that should not be tolerated in society.

i_surge

Memnoch wrote: »

I made a short film about a male victim of domestic violence. A white male victim. I can tell you that this is a very high quality piece of work, it is nuanced, thoughtful and I feel relevant. I have had films that were amateurish in comparison accepted into big Irish festivals yet this one has had not much luck. I suspect that festival programmers are afraid of the consequences if they give a platform to such a piece. I have had someone from a major television network tell me that even though they love the film they can't take the risk because people might get triggered.

Obviously, I understand where they're coming from because their careers and livelihoods are at stake. That does not make this any less frustrating an experience. That said, not everything in the film translates as I intended and so I can understand that it could be interpreted in a less than productive way and as a filmmaker I have to take responsibility for that.

Ultimately, I believe that people who do get to see it will be able to look at it in a balanced way and will not think any worse of me for what I have to say.

While this is difficult for me personally, I understand that all of this is happening in the context of decades of systematic oppression and discrimination against women, LGBTQ and ethnic minorities. If we look at the way women have been treated, harassed and assaulted with absolute impunity it is really quite horrific. My own wife has been harassed many times during her professional career. Without what we call cancel culture there would have been none of the accountability that we are seeing now. Look at the sweeping changes and scandals unfolding in so many industries from the film industry to music, theater and video games to corporations and board rooms.

Women should be able to go to work without having to worry about being harassed or assaulted. These systems have been in place for so long and have been so deeply entrenched that there is bound to be some messiness and perhaps even unfairness in bringing about such seismic change. But this is a change that is certainly necessary in my view.

Overall, I think that these changes have been essential and positive for society. Yes, there it will be and has been an unfairly negative impact on a small minority of individuals, myself included, but I think it has made the lives of countless women and others much more bearable and safe and that is a price that is worth paying.

I also think that these are growing pains and that in time society will find an equilibrium where examples of people being unfairly canceled will become few and far between. Also, because now there are consequences for exploitative and abusive behavior this will make people think much more before they act and so as society progresses there will be less need for such stringent pushback.

In the meantime, I keep submitting my film to festivals and hope people get a chance to see it and make up their minds.

You seem quite brainwashed to accept it that way. The word delegitimise was used earlier and this sums it up. It points out a very deep problem. I suffered some physical and emotional abuse from a very unstable ex, no harm done in the end but it still happened so that is certainly not what should be cancelled!

Hopefully most are starting to see through this.