Gina Carano / Disney Star Wars

2

Comments

  • When has it ever been acceptable for a company that has employees that either deal directly with the public or represent the company in a public way to project abhorrent views?  

    I'm worried this misses the point. There is probably a dim minority of those who complain about "Cancel Culture" who would argue that in principle no one should ever lose a job for expressing their sincere beliefs - abhorrent or not. But, for the vast majority, the complaint is more nuanced; it is that those who get to decide what counts as "abhorrent" (not merely false, wrong, morally objectionable, but abhorrent) has shrunk to a particularly vocal subset of the political left (particularly vocal on social media), and (as a result), the boundaries of what count as "abhorrent" have rapidly expanded over the past decade and a half. 

    To be frank, I think this is mostly correct, and I find it troublesome. Just so no one misreads me - I am not defending any view expressed by Carano or anyone else mentioned in this thread. I'm merely concerned with the strategy (as outlined above) of dealing with views we find morally objectionable.

    You might think that the expanded boundaries of what counts as abhorrent (and what is outside the bounds of rational discourse) are where they should be (or closer to it). But, where do you think this ends? Maybe people can be shamed, fired, or "cancelled" into adopting just the right set of beliefs (or pretending that they have) so we can finally be ushered into utopia. Or, maybe those people feel bullied enough that they go find a bigger (dumber) bully to fight back. 
    alexander.klassen
  • I don’t know man, the last two presidents were, Donald Trump, champion of the far right, and Joe Biden, certainly more left than Trump but definitely not the champion of the far left, so it seems that the “political left” is not in fact the most powerful players in American culture right now. Also the right has their own cancel culture in the form of canceling anyone who criticizes Donald Trump. 
    DeeCretanBullGiovanni
  • bizmarkiefaderbizmarkiefader San Francisco
    edited February 12
     I always think about this article from 2018 when "cancel culture" comes up. This article came up again yesterday because the author of this was fired/let go/not given further work or whatever you want to call it from The Guardian for making a pretty mild joke about US financing of Israel on twitter


    A lot of good insights but this stood out to me about the "woke mob"

    I recently pointed out the irony that the supposedly suppressed anti-“political correctness” position is represented at length in numerous books, op-eds, YouTube shows, and TV interviews. But it’s worth noting the other half of this: The social justice position itself is often presented to the public through the voices of its critics rather than its adherents. It’s downright peculiar: When Jordan Peterson talks about “postmodern Marxists” we don’t really hear who they are (other than Adorno, who is dead). When David Brooks or Scott Alexander have written about the silly ideas of racial justice progressives, they have done it by imagining what the activists would say, or paraphrasing. Steven Pinker’s Enlightenment Now strongly criticizes “social justice warriors” for their notions, but while he explains their beliefs he doesn’t really tell us who in particular he’s talking about.

    The “SJWs” often come across as an amorphous, irrational, angry blob, which is undoubtedly how many of their critics see them. For the most part, they don’t seem to have names. I guess there’s Linda Sarsour; I’m told she’s one of them. But I don’t actually hear much from her, even though I can watch a video telling me why she’s a “complete idiot and a vile disgrace” (600,000 views!) or watch Dave Rubin interview someone who is not Linda Sarsour about how terrible Linda Sarsour is. This is strange, not because people who fit the conservative caricature of leftists don’t exist (they do; I’ve met one or two), or because the “anti-free speech” and “irrational” currents of progressivism are a fabrication (I’ve written about them), but because the right’s narrative is that the leftists are the ones who control the culture. If that were true, I would imagine I’d hear Colin Kaepernick talking all the time. But I’m not even sure I even know what Colin Kaepernick’s voice sounds like. Again, though, I could watch multiple interviews in which Dave Rubin talks to people about Colin Kaepernick.



    DeeCretanBull
  • When has it ever been acceptable for a company that has employees that either deal directly with the public or represent the company in a public way to project abhorrent views?  

    I'm worried this misses the point. There is probably a dim minority of those who complain about "Cancel Culture" who would argue that in principle no one should ever lose a job for expressing their sincere beliefs - abhorrent or not. But, for the vast majority, the complaint is more nuanced; it is that those who get to decide what counts as "abhorrent" (not merely false, wrong, morally objectionable, but abhorrent) has shrunk to a particularly vocal subset of the political left (particularly vocal on social media), and (as a result), the boundaries of what count as "abhorrent" have rapidly expanded over the past decade and a half. 

    I understand that's the argument, but I don't see anything to suggest that it's true.  Companies make decisions based on what's most beneficial to them.  Largely, it's the public "the marketplace of ideas" that influences what companies think is most beneficial to them, and not some small subset of the left.  For example, in 2003 when MSNBC fired Phil Donahue before the Iraqi war, they did it because they were afraid that his show would become the home of an anti-war movement and it would be a "difficult public face for NBC in a time of war". MSNBC was responding to the fact that the public overwhelmingly supported the war - they decided that Donahue wasn't good for them and they canned him.  There have been thousands of similar examples...actors being forced to stay in the closet because an openly gay actor would have been bad for the movie studios (William Haines famously lost his career when he refused to enter into a sham marriage with a woman), McCarthyism, country radio banning the Dixie Chicks, Colin Kaepernick getting blacklisted etc  These things have been happening for a very long time and historically it has been coming from the right and focused on the left.  It was never called "cancel culture", it was just an understood price that marginalized people paid for existing in more conservative times.  What's changed in recent times is that younger people are more progressive than previous generations and by virtue of social media they can't be ignored.

    You might think that the expanded boundaries of what counts as abhorrent (and what is outside the bounds of rational discourse) are where they should be (or closer to it). But, where do you think this ends? Maybe people can be shamed, fired, or "cancelled" into adopting just the right set of beliefs (or pretending that they have) so we can finally be ushered into utopia. Or, maybe those people feel bullied enough that they go find a bigger (dumber) bully to fight back. 

    I don't think that the boundaries have been expanded, they've just shifted as public sentiment has evolved.  These questions about slippery slopes and what the future might hold might have been better asked to the people who boycotted "The Jeffersons" for featuring an interracial couple...the tactic is the same now, just the target has shifted.

    If we accept your framing of the issue, how do you propose we handle this?  Pretend you're the President of Disney Plus.  One of the actors from your top-rated show has repeatedly said things that have offended a huge percentage of your fanbase.  People are talking about canceling their subscriptions to your service.  You have a fiduciary responsibility to your investors.  What do you?
  • When has it ever been acceptable for a company that has employees that either deal directly with the public or represent the company in a public way to project abhorrent views?  


    You might think that the expanded boundaries of what counts as abhorrent (and what is outside the bounds of rational discourse) are where they should be (or closer to it). But, where do you think this ends? Maybe people can be shamed, fired, or "cancelled" into adopting just the right set of beliefs (or pretending that they have) so we can finally be ushered into utopia. Or, maybe those people feel bullied enough that they go find a bigger (dumber) bully to fight back. 
    As John Oliver (or at least his writers) once put it, "somewhere". It ends somewhere. I think Disney's re-hiring of James Gunn or the NYT not letting Sarah Jeong's old tweets prevent her hiring indicates that the powers that be are perhaps more thoughtful now than they once were. And that they might try to distinguish between old comments or jokes that may have been in bad taste and bigoted, toxic beliefs.

    Also, this isn't Carano's first controversial comment. It's one thing if they had released her after the first season when she was getting fan criticism for some of her posts. The fact that they didn't act until further comments continued the pattern, such as if I remember right expressing skepticism about masks, tacit support for January 6, and now this Holocaust one, indicates to me that Disney was willing to show restraint, at least for a time.
    CretanBullDee
  • @CretanBull

    I’m not sure how much we disagree (or maybe even what precisely we disagree about).

    To be sure (as you rightly point out), the phenomenon that people are complaining about when they complain about “cancel culture” is not new, and it is not (entirely) unique to the left. But, the emergence and relatively new prevalence of social media in our lives does (I would argue) exacerbate the problem in unique and profound ways. Since (again, as you point out) young / liberal people are overrepresented on certain social media platforms, the current problem (if it is one) is more prevalent on (though not unique to) the left.

    On social media, ideas and groupthink spread faster than anyone could’ve imagined pre-internet. Perhaps more troubling, when we’re all interfacing with one another with walls of screens and text between us, we tend to see those with whom we disagree in a much less humane light. The practice of the giving a charitable interpretation is a consideration of a vanishingly few. Also, maybe it’s a truly tiny fraction, but at least a small minority seem to pile on the cancel wagon for what seems to be less about making the world a better place, and more for (something like) sport... or their own entertainment.

    Social media has exacerbated a number of pre-existing problems, this (I would argue) is just one of them.

    As for your question: if we accept my framing of the issue...

    If I were the Disney CEO, I would do my due diligence and make sure that my decision to let an actor go based on the threat of a boycott was based on sound reasoning. I think sometimes we naively assume “These companies have so much money at stake, every decision they make must be made on a mountain of data.” They could be acting out of fear that turns out to be irrational. People make very hollow political and financial threats all the time. The people who are watching Netflix right now who explicitly said they were canceling it because of the “Cuties” thing is not zero.

    If the data came back and unequivocally said “Yep, shareholders will lose money if we don’t fire this person.” then I would begrudgingly fulfill my legal obligation to my shareholders.

    That said, my original, intended message was not to the CEOs doing the firings, but to the social media culture at large, I guess. Since this  thing that we do - shunning or “cancelling” people for expressing views that are unpopular or morally objectionable - is uniquely / greatly amplified by social media (in ways that *could* do harm) maybe we should do what we can to pull back the reins a bit. Again, if we project where all of this is headed in (say) 5 or 10 years... does cancelling via social media uproar turn out to be a tool that brought about a better world? Maybe... but that is placing a bet with a potential downside that is worth considering.
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    edited February 12
    jluzania 

    As John Oliver (or at least his writers) once put it, "somewhere". It ends somewhere. I think Disney's re-hiring of James Gunn or the NYT not letting Sarah Jeong's old tweets prevent her hiring indicates that the powers that be are perhaps more thoughtful now than they once were. And that they might try to distinguish between old comments or jokes that may have been in bad taste and bigoted, toxic beliefs.

    Also, this isn't Carano's first controversial comment. It's one thing if they had released her after the first season when she was getting fan criticism for some of her posts. The fact that they didn't act until further comments continued the pattern, such as if I remember right expressing skepticism about masks, tacit support for January 6, and now this Holocaust one, indicates to me that Disney was willing to show restraint, at least for a time.
    To be frank, the John Oliver line always seemed like a dodge to me (by him and / or his writers). Asking “Where does it end?” is (in most cases) a clumsy way of asking “Where are these trends heading, and how confident can we be that the costs won’t outweigh the benefits?” But that interpretation - though it seems like a much more reasonable question - probably doesn’t set him up to get a laugh.

    Also, I wasn’t defending Carano (or objecting to her firing) in particular. I genuinely don’t have a strong opinion about that issue. It does seem like (if she especially wanted to keep her job at Disney) she should’ve been smart enough to tone it down a bit (to say the least).
     
    Instead, I was responding to what I thought was a broader sentiment expressed a few times in this thread: the thing that typically gets labelled “cancel culture” is (with perhaps only the rarest of exceptions) generally a good development and the only people who think otherwise are people who’ve got it comin’.
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    @JoshuaHeter I mean, we all understand your argument. We just don’t agree with it. 
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    edited February 12
    @Dee, what assumptions of my argument do you think are false? Or, why do you think that I’m making an invalid inference based on those assumptions?
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    @JoshuaHeter I’m really not into having philosophical debates about my opinions. You appear to have concerns about “cancel culture going too far” (in a nutshell). I don’t have those concerns. 
    JoshuaHeterasmallcat
  • I gotta think it’s so much easier to be quiet and hateful and rich than it is the be loud and hateful and unemployed. Big dumbass. 
    JoshTheBlack
  • I gotta think it’s so much easier to be quiet and hateful and rich than it is the be loud and hateful and unemployed. Big dumbass. 
    I think one thing I’ve learned as of late is that there is a subset (or perhaps the majority) of the wildly rich and successful types that feel like they’re untouchable, probably justifiably since so many of these types have largely gone unchastened over the years, and because they think they can get away with anything, they just say and do whatever without thinking of the consequences because there are no consequences for people in their class. Until there are. 

    I’m certain that there are a size-able number of innocent people who have been “canceled” for invalid reasons, just like in certain there are innocent people who got caught up in false “Me Too” claims. However, I remain unconvinced that the false negatives outweighs the positives in either situation. That is to say, I still strongly believe the number of assholes who were correctly identified as assailed via Me Too and who have been “canceled” is on orders of magnitudes greater than the number of innocent people who have been impacted by either movement. American has a real problem with successful/rich/influential assholes getting away with figurative (and in some cases literal) murder for decades now without any consequences and if the pendulum swing back has to knock out a few “good” celebrities of rich people or taste makers or whatever in the process of rooting out the corruption then so be it. Eventually the pendulum may swing too far and “cancel culture” may get out of hand, but we just had the biggest opponent of “cancel culture” elected as president and so far neither he nor most of his supporters seem at all chastised by their reprehensible actions so it really does not seem like “far left” cancel culture is something to worry about right now. 
    calebthrower
  • @JoshuaHeter I would love to see hard data to back up the idea that more innocent people are being canceled than actual assholes who deserve it. If this turns out to be the case, I would wholly disavow the “cancel culture” movement such as it is. I have not see any data from any reliable source to indicate this and the examples in this very thread seem entirely justified. A lot of people I see complain online about cancel culture have one or two anecdotes about someone they sort of know who got “canceled” as if this is emblematic of a wider trend without any hard evidence to back it up. 
    asmallcat
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    I hope everyone is aware that many other Disney employees have posted similar or worse posts on social media and the torches and pitchforks never come for them.  

    Pedro Pascal used the bad guys from WW2 in a tweet from 2018 as well.  Very similar to what Carano posted. Nothing from Disney. He also posted a meme comparing current day conservatives to the US confederacy and the WW2 bad guys right after the election, that was fine.

    Krystina Arielle (she hosts the High Republic YouTube show) has numerous tweets about how backwards and bad the white population of America is, not a peep from Disney. 

    https://disneystarwarsisdumb.wordpress.com/2021/01/20/host-of-the-high-republic-show-has-lots-of-lectures-for-white-people/amp/

    Jack Morrissey is a producer for Disney and he posted this?  Isn't this kind of over the top or no big deal?

    https://thecoloradoherald.com/2021/disney-producer-jack-morrissey-maga-kids-to-the-wood-chipper/

    Are we all reasonable enough to say this is a bit more out there than anything Carano posted?   

    Don't forget Disney literally thanked the CNY government for letting them film Mulan near the "re-education" camps for the Uighur Muslims.  It's in the credits of that movie.  This link is from CNBC. 

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/08/disney-thanked-groups-linked-to-china-detention-camps-in-mulan-credits.html

    Pretty bad hypocrisy by Disney, but obviously everyone has their own viewpoints on things. 




  • Alkaid13Alkaid13 Georgia
    edited February 12
    Oh Disney the company can absolutely go fuck themselves, the China thing is completely reprehensible and they have a history of taking the wrong side on several issues over the course of almost a century now. I don’t think Iger et. al are saints or anything, the reason they shit-canned Carano is almost certainly based more on a monetary decision than an ethical one. They just happened to have made an ethically correct decision in this situation. They can still suck a big rancid dick collectively. 
    rhcoop
  • calebthrowercalebthrower South Carolina
    Alkaid13 said:
    Oh Disney the company can absolutely go fuck themselves, the China thing is completely reprehensible and they have a history of taking the wrong side on several issues over the course of almost a century now. I don’t think Iger et. al are saints or anything, the reason they shit-canned Carano is almost certainly based more on a monetary decision than an ethical one. They just happened to have made an ethically correct decision in this situation. They can still suck a big rancid duck collectively. 
    This made me laugh, although I'm sure it wasn't intentional  :D
  • CoryCory New Scotland
    What's the China thing?
  • calebthrowercalebthrower South Carolina
    edited February 12
    Cory said:
    What's the China thing?
    I don't want to speak for @Alkaid13 but I'm assuming he's referring to the Mulan controversy 

    https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2020/09/disney-mulan-controversy-issues
  • Alkaid13 said:
    Oh Disney the company can absolutely go fuck themselves, the China thing is completely reprehensible and they have a history of taking the wrong side on several issues over the course of almost a century now. I don’t think Iger et. al are saints or anything, the reason they shit-canned Carano is almost certainly based more on a monetary decision than an ethical one. They just happened to have made an ethically correct decision in this situation. They can still suck a big rancid duck collectively. 
    This made me laugh, although I'm sure it wasn't intentional  :D
    Lol. I mean I guess it still works either way. Yeah I was referring to the Mulan thing. You just can’t glad-hand around with China as if they haven’t been essentially committing genocide on an ethnic group and act like things are hunky-dory just cuz you want better movie sales there. 
    rhcoop
  • edited February 12
    rhcoop said:
    I hope everyone is aware that many other Disney employees have posted similar or worse posts on social media and the torches and pitchforks never come for them.  

    Pedro Pascal used the bad guys from WW2 in a tweet from 2018 as well.  Very similar to what Carano posted. Nothing from Disney. He also posted a meme comparing current day conservatives to the US confederacy and the WW2 bad guys right after the election, that was fine.

    Krystina Arielle (she hosts the High Republic YouTube show) has numerous tweets about how backwards and bad the white population of America is, not a peep from Disney. 

    https://disneystarwarsisdumb.wordpress.com/2021/01/20/host-of-the-high-republic-show-has-lots-of-lectures-for-white-people/amp/

    Jack Morrissey is a producer for Disney and he posted this?  Isn't this kind of over the top or no big deal?

    https://thecoloradoherald.com/2021/disney-producer-jack-morrissey-maga-kids-to-the-wood-chipper/

    Are we all reasonable enough to say this is a bit more out there than anything Carano posted?   

    Don't forget Disney literally thanked the CNY government for letting them film Mulan near the "re-education" camps for the Uighur Muslims.  It's in the credits of that movie.  This link is from CNBC. 

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/08/disney-thanked-groups-linked-to-china-detention-camps-in-mulan-credits.html

    Pretty bad hypocrisy by Disney, but obviously everyone has their own viewpoints on things. 




    Let me lead off with this - whataboutism is not an argument. The answer to "is this thing right or wrong" is never "look at all these other bad things that also exist!" That is irrelevant to this issue. 

     Disney can be right about one thing and wrong about others. There's big coward energy from basically every corporation about China (a country literally committing genocide right now) because China = $$$$. However, just because Disney is wrong to be so deferential to China does not mean they are somehow also wrong to not rehire Carano. Disney is a garbage company, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. 

    And no, none of the stuff you posted is as out there as saying being hated for being a trump supporter is like being a Jew in nazi germany. None of it. Let's go through them one by one.

    Pascal - Since you don't link the tweets, I can only assume what was said, but comparing the tactics of the GOP in the US today to the tactics of the Nazis is perfectly reasonable, because there are striking parallels. They both paint the press as the enemy of the people, and call any negative story fake news, even when it is objectively true. They both lie constantly about obviously true facts. The GOP/Trump tried to illegally overturn the results of a legitimate, democratic election by fabricating stories of voter fraud - this is a coup, and the Nazis tried the same thing once, failed, then managed to take control of the government. This is after Trump falsely claimed massive fraud in an election he WON, all because he lost the popular vote. They intentionally separated families at the border and put them in camps (obviously not death camps, but still). There was then rampant abuse, up to and including unnecessary surgeries, on people in those camps. Pointing out that the GOP uses a LOT of the same tactics as the Nazis is not the same as saying that conservatives in the US have it as bad as the Jews in Nazi Germany. 

    I am not remotely sure where you are going with the Arielle stuff. Everyone of those tweets is basically saying racism exists and white people do the most to make sure it continues to exist, or about her own experiences. This is demonstrably true. A majority of white people vote for the conservative party, who claims that racism is over. Are you attempting to make some sort of #notallwhitepeople point? If you think "hey, I don't do any of that stuff!" Congratulations, either that tweet isn't about you, so you can move on, or you are doing some of this stuff without realizing it! I'd love you to point out which specific tweet in there you think is racist against white people. An again, context matters. It is certainly possible for an individual to be racist against white people, however there has NEVER been systemic racism against whites in the US, and there has never been a person who suffered throughout society in the US because they were white. 

    Also, I'm not sure "disneystarwarsisdumb.wordpress.com" is really the site to go to for nuanced takes, especially when the same article links multiple youtube videos about how "disney hates white people." Give me a fucking break. The two main characters of the new trilogy were white. The star of their new biggest franchise is white. They are making an Obi-Wan series as their next big TV project, and I hate to tell you this, but Ewan McGregor is white. Also, if you haven't, I recommend you click through to some of the channels linked in this "article." It's just the absolute worst "actually white male nerds are the real victims!" youtube garbage. If you look around and these are the people supporting your position, it might be time to take a long, hard look at it. 

    Morrissey - it's a dumb, bad joke in bad taste (see also the Trump head photoshoot with Kathy Griffin, who lest we forget, DID get cancelled for that). He also apologized for it and said he was trying to make a joke and it didn't land. Literally the next day. Also he's a producer, not a big front-facing part of the company. Finally, it was one tweet. Carano has a pattern. 
    DeeDashEngine
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    edited February 12
    @Alkaid13

    I don’t think anyone has claimed that there have been more innocent people who have been cancelled than “assholes who deserve it”.

    That said, it would be fairly difficult to do any sort of rigorous study or survey on the topic in large part because “assholes who deserve it” isn’t exactly a well defined, scientifically precise category.

    But of course, that - I would argue - is kind of the problem.
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    Alkaid13 said:
    Oh Disney the company can absolutely go fuck themselves, the China thing is completely reprehensible and they have a history of taking the wrong side on several issues over the course of almost a century now. I don’t think Iger et. al are saints or anything, the reason they shit-canned Carano is almost certainly based more on a monetary decision than an ethical one. They just happened to have made an ethically correct decision in this situation. They can still suck a big rancid dick collectively. 
    I don't think it is a money decision.  Her character's toys sold a lot better than a LOT of the sequel character's do and she plays a pretty popular character on the show.

    The Black Series figure of her character is going crazy on the secondary market right now. 

    I think it was a purely ideological decision by Disney management.  Just my opinion.  

    Obviously, people can disagree.
  • bizmarkiefaderbizmarkiefader San Francisco
    This was still up as of now ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    image


  • Just a summary...

    Phil Donahue loses his job for speaking out against war -- no fear of cancel culture
    Dixie Chicks get banned for speaking out against war - no fear of cancel culture 
    Colin Kaepernick loses his job for protesting police violence - no fear of cancel culture

    Gina Carano doesn't have her contract renewed after giving people deadly advice in the middle of a pandemic coupled with anti-semitism - CANCEL CULTURE IS OUT OF CONTROL!!! 
    asmallcatDeehisdudeness915Giovanni
  • Just a summary...

    Phil Donahue loses his job for speaking out against war -- no fear of cancel culture
    Dixie Chicks get banned for speaking out against war - no fear of cancel culture 
    Colin Kaepernick loses his job for protesting police violence - no fear of cancel culture

    Gina Carano doesn't have her contract renewed after giving people deadly advice in the middle of a pandemic coupled with anti-semitism - CANCEL CULTURE IS OUT OF CONTROL!!! 
    This is... a straw man.
  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited February 12
    Just a summary...

    Phil Donahue loses his job for speaking out against war -- no fear of cancel culture
    Dixie Chicks get banned for speaking out against war - no fear of cancel culture 
    Colin Kaepernick loses his job for protesting police violence - no fear of cancel culture

    Gina Carano doesn't have her contract renewed after giving people deadly advice in the middle of a pandemic coupled with anti-semitism - CANCEL CULTURE IS OUT OF CONTROL!!! 
    This is... a straw man.
    I don't think so really.  And to be 100% clear it wasn't aimed at you at all, and if it came across that way I apologize...I only meant it as a summary of the discussion at large (including in the zeitgeist at large and not just here).  In no way was it intended to be a dig at you, again if it came across that way I'm sorry as it wasn't my intention.
    JoshuaHeter
  • JoshuaHeterJoshuaHeter Omaha, NE
    edited February 12
    @CretanBull ;

    I sincerely appreciate the clarification. My apologies for the defensiveness.

    And, I’ll  admit that people certainly have a tendency to only start caring about a problem or to overreact to it only when it begins to affect “their side”. And that is certainly something that has happened (at least sporadically if not more so) in regard to the “cancel culture” issue.
    CretanBull
  • asmallcat said:
    ...I recommend you click through to some of the channels linked in this "article." It's just the absolute worst "actually white male nerds are the real victims!" youtube garbage. If you look around and these are the people supporting your position, it might be time to take a long, hard look at it... 
    If you follow through on this, either:
    A. Be logged out of your youtube account, preferably on an incognito/private tab.  **Preferable**
    B. Delete the view from your watched history.

    Otherwise, youtube will continue to show you increasingly radical content until you are seeing full on QAnon fascist propaganda. 

    Re:  The ongoing discussion:

    I think there is a legitimate conversation to be had regarding censorship (cancel culture) and the good and bad effects it has on speech.  It seems that the political right believes the typical approach of the "woke" left is to cancel anything at the point of accusation and plug their ears while refusing to listen to any context.  It seems that the political left believes the typical approach of the "racist" right is to cry censorship any time their reprehensible views are challenged, increasing their racist shouting in an attempt to enrage the left to the point they yell back and then start in with, "See, they're crazy!"  All the while cancelling everyone who expresses an opinion they don't believe in.

    There is much more nuance in real life.  While there are certainly people on the left who try to censor things in bad faith, they are not the people who hold the political power.  They make a lot of noise on social media, but it doesn't often gain much traction.  The vast majority of cancelling originating on the left and targeting the right (in my estimation), is valid criticism of clearly bad things.  (i.e. fascism, as indicated by the 14 characteristics of fascism; racism; projecting Nazism on people who are calling them out for spouting literal Nazi propaganda; etc.)  Where the vast majority of cancellation I see on the right is more of a rubber/glue scenario.  You're gonna cancel me?  Nah.  You're cancelled.  Goodyear decided to enforce their uniform policy and won't allow me to wear my Trump hat because they don't want to have their CUSTOMERS (read: source of money) feel uncomfortable by something that is completely and easily avoidable?  Nope, cancel Goodyear.  

    Censorship is universally bad, in my opinion.  Part of not having censorship, is having some bad people also not be censored.  Where my point breaks down though is that all of these platforms (twitter, facebook, etc) have been allowed to balloon and swoop up all their competitors, amplifying their power in the market.  If we had dozens, or hundreds, of social platforms, being banned from one wouldn't carry the same level of censorship that it currently does.  I would happily trade all of the cancelling for some good old-fashioned trust-busting.  Then if your toxic views get banned on Twitter, you can take it to facebook.  If it gets banned there, take it to the next platform, and the next.  Hell, break up the monopoly of ISPs in America.  If we had actual competition, rates would go down, the offerings would go up, and you could HOST YOUR OWN website/blog/chatapp/social media platform out of your house.  Even better, if you were on municipal broadband (government owned and operated) then if they took down your site, it WOULD be a 1st amendment violation.
  • Hollywood is a rotten place , and I guess their motto always been conform or be gone . So this is nothing new . I understand her firing from a business point of view because she's been a headache to lucasfilm and in a franchise like the Mandolorian they can afford to do without her . If anyone is interested in exploring a different point of view on this subject i recommend reading this article in NY MAG
    rhcoop
  • edited February 14
    It's laughable to me that some people can look at everything that's happened in politics in the last five years, both in America and elsewhere, and be convinced that we're on a slippery slope to some sort of left-wing cancel culture dystopia. Like sure, there was a coup attempt a month ago, whatever, but what we should really be concerned about is a few rich people losing their jobs.
    GiovanniasmallcatCretanBullDee
Sign In or Register to comment.