Cancel Culture?

[wattaj]

Cancel Culture seems to be a thing at the moment. Isn't it really just a bunch of whiny gits whose intellectual argument is so weak, and whose emotional resilience is so fragile, that they'll scream and scream and scream until they get what they want? And isn't it all exacerbated by a reactionary corporate culture driven by 'Likes' rather than conviction?

[Old Greg]

Cancel Culture seems to be a thing at the moment. Isn't it really just a bunch of whiny gits whose intellectual argument is so weak, and whose emotional resilience is so fragile, that they'll scream and scream and scream until they get what they want? And isn't it all exacerbated by a reactionary corporate culture driven by 'Likes' rather than conviction?

WGAS

[jayn200]

Their intellectual argument isn't weak, it just doesn't exist. It's completely an emotional argument made by individuals with severe mental health issues who piggy back on the platform of more successful individuals because of how modern social media works.

It will eventually go away, society and technology just haven't figured it all out yet. It will settle down.

[elsergiovolador]

It's just bored billionaires funding various ex-couch potato stir groups for shifts and giggles. It is interesting that our services slept through this - maybe they didn't think of it as a threat to the nation's well-being.

The poor also need circuses (apart from bread), so this is great way to get them engaged while other things can continue BAU.

[BR14]

WGAFF

FTFY

[ladymuck]

The cancel thing has been bumbling around for years. Who gets 'cancelled' and why is determined by the issue causing the most noise at any given moment.

[Old Greg]

Their intellectual argument isn't weak, it just doesn't exist. It's completely an emotional argument made by individuals with severe mental health issues who piggy back on the platform of more successful individuals because of how modern social media works.

It will eventually go away, society and technology just haven't figured it all out yet. It will settle down.

Can you evidence that these individuals have severe mental health issues, or is this just your emotional / triggered response?

[Jog On]

Cancel Culture seems to be a thing at the moment. Isn't it really just a bunch of whiny gits whose intellectual argument is so weak, and whose emotional resilience is so fragile, that they'll scream and scream and scream until they get what they want? And isn't it all exacerbated by a reactionary corporate culture driven by 'Likes' rather than conviction?

It would be easier to just ignore if didn't have the clout that it does. People's careers and lives are being ruined by it and companies do cave into it to stay on the right side of woke Twitter and their ever moving goalposts.

There are some interesting cases coming out of people standing up to it and living to tell the tale.

[woohoo]

It's definitely out there, it's in the Universities which means it will continue to make it's way out in the real world.

[rogerfederer]

Their intellectual argument isn't weak, it just doesn't exist. It's completely an emotional argument made by individuals with severe mental health issues who piggy back on the platform of more successful individuals because of how modern social media works.

It will eventually go away, society and technology just haven't figured it all out yet. It will settle down.

Does 'cancel culture' include no-platforming known racists, anti-semites and the like? The idea is to not give then a credible platform, such as within universities or on TV channels, as these avenues provide support for their opinions.

Cancelling someone for a shallow past offense is over the top, but ensuring that people who are using inflammatory language, racism, homophobia and similar is a good way of explaining that society doesn't support those causes. They're still free to publish some of those views, within reason, on the internet or in publications, but the scope of uptake of those opinions is limited. Without this racism would be more rife than it is, although it's worse than it seems now, given that racism is structurally ingrained into core UK institutions.

What other solutions do we have apart from no-platforming? To conflate some daft Z-list celebrity being no-platformed to well known severe racists being no-platformed isn't really comparable. We should separate out the small time folk with stupid opinions from the known malignant individuals who try to make money and gain power from unacceptable opinions. Racism and homophobia are unacceptable opinions.

We need to separate the severe no-no from the minor mistakes and cases when minor controversial opinions are blocked. The former are a stain on society, such as racists and neo-nazis. The original purpose of no-platforming (renamed 'cancel culture' by the right wing press, I have noticed) was to stop these dangerous ideas being spread as credible through reliable sources of news, internet, tv shows and in universities. Is it fair to stop neo-nazis, for example, having a podium to express their opinions on Question Time or at Oxford Talk open days? Yes, I think it's credible to stop that occurring. The difference is disallowing some minor uncontroversial thing to take place that a broad spectrum of people may be interested in, such as politics, where opinions are the source of much ire.