Liberals, progressives and conservatives of note sign open letter to end cancel culture. (Noam Chomsky/J.K. Rowling/Gloria Steinem/David Brooks etc.)
- Thread starter Dreiko
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Two things on college. How exactly do you make college free? If by free you mean, paid for by the government, that's not free, that's having the taxpayers pay for it. Which would be fine and well... but we've been living in a time where college doesn't seem to actually do much for most people in getting the jobs they want and just burdens them with huge debt to the point that some now call for "debt forgiveness". So is college even worth all this money to begin with?
Well, very nice.
It was more of a "I see you don't appear to have considered that their interest is purely based on economic reasons or maintaining their current power. Perhaps consider this more deeply!" kind of gotcha, I didn't say it supposing you'd be a corporatist of any kind
That said, it was still kind of a gotcha statement, which is unprofessional and kind of unfair, so I very much apologize. It was rude of me.
Eh, I half agree.
Fixing the underlying inequality of power/class would solve a LOT of the world's social problems. Absolutely not all of them, there are hateful bigots out there who hate others purely because they were taught to, after all. I highly doubt that "confederate flag karen" type people will stop thinking black people are inferior even if she gets a living wage, healthcare free at point of service, and a universal basic income.
I assure you, most people saying "eat the rich" are saying it for shock value and to make people pay attention to the discontent of the people suffering inequality, and that most of them would be totally fine with millionaires existing, so long as the system was made much more equitable.
That said, I don't blame "cultural marxism" (whatever that acutally is, I've heard a load of definitions, many of them gross or nonsense) for cancel culture. See the rest of my post talking about how we've been cancelling/exiling/etc people since early society.
I really don't think that's possible for large businesses and groups, especially any that have any degree of prominence. Especially for publically traded businesses, whose entire reason to exist is to make more money for the shareholders and investors.
Smaller groups that only need and want to appeal to certain niches can and do take stands on stuff....But the larger you get, the less people you can afford to risk angering.
EDIT: That said, if there's the sweeping massive overhauls done that capitalism needs in order to be on strict enough guard rails that it can't exploit the hell out of people just to have better quarterly reports, maybe that'll change.
Last edited:
I don't think the argument is that marxism is the only political ideology to practice this but that it is the one using this tactic in current mainstream media.
It's not a belief. It's an objective fact.
Perhaps one of our more patient fellow forumites might help you out, but I realized long ago that convincing someone who purposely stuck their own head in the sand to voluntarily remove it is not really my forte.
I will leave you with an easy-to-find example though: anti-vax nurses
This joke of a petition is just Pinker and Rowling gathering around whatever institutional and social credibility they have under the guise of promoting a discussion. Pinker especially considering he's clinging on to a theoretical nativism that most people in linguistics don't subscribe to anymore, neither is his position about anti-empiricism particularly useful. Rowling is just mad that her celebrity no longer makes her free of fault and Chomsky is just siding with Pinker over UG.
How is marxism using cancel culture in mainstream media, I'm chomping at the bit.
I dunno. I'm not the one saying it is. Me explaining what I think people are trying to say doesn't mean I support their claim.
And here I was hoping to be enlightened by the arguments you reference on behalf of others in passing, maybe someone else will come along and elaborate on them and how they relate to marxism, social media spats and some modicum of empiricism.
My point was that they never said only marxists use this tactic. It's a way for those with power to silence those they do not like and so it goes beyond any one political philosophy.
Yeah except I've never seen marxists advocate for it as a political strategy. Hell, encouraging a firing as a response to spreading reactionary sentiment only reaffirms the worker-bourgeois power dynamic and that it's a locus for social change, which comes across as woefully puritannical, that material deprivation through the capitalist relation of production does nothing to target the structures at hand and individualises social ills, at which point we're in the realm of Calvinism.
But if you're just using it in passing then that's whatever, I'll wait for someone who identifies with such arguments.
I like the idea of Cancelling everyone who can be shoved into the Cancel Culture box. It has a nice ring to it.
We shall call them the Anti-Cancellers and they shall ride out and Cancel everyone who Cancels
PS This is meant to be sarcastic but with the likes of Sam Harris and Dave Rubin, I can see this actually happening
We shall call them the Anti-Cancellers and they shall ride out and Cancel everyone who Cancels
PS This is meant to be sarcastic but with the likes of Sam Harris and Dave Rubin, I can see this actually happening
Actually, again, can we bring up Hate Speech? Because the whole point of Hate Speech Laws is to make sure there is open debate. As I've said previously, I think words like racist and sexist should be curtailed too, so there can be open debate.
Also, I am still bewildred that we are so worried about Cancelling when there are so many death threats going around. One is way worse than another and its not the cancelling. How about we just do a sweep?
(yes, I did my 6mth check in with Jim)
Also, I am still bewildred that we are so worried about Cancelling when there are so many death threats going around. One is way worse than another and its not the cancelling. How about we just do a sweep?
(yes, I did my 6mth check in with Jim)
Isn’t Pinker also mad people keep saying he was friends with Jeffery Epstein and is more mad about the cancelling of fellow academics for their mutual association with Epstein? As for Chomsky he’s a very old left libertarian, he’s thinking about McCarthy not Rowling getting mad about being called a TERF.
Also, Tstorm has decided I’m a terrorist because I shitpost at him rather than ever address him seriously and he’s calling himself anti-cancel, hilarious.