Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[OttoVonBismarck]

If people are willing to fight about the meaning, that means they want to keep it, which is a refreshing change from PC and woke.

So I guess you guys are thinking:

1. Related to identity politics and

2. Punishment in the form of economic sanction?

If people are willing to fight about the meaning, that means they want to keep it, which is a refreshing change from PC and woke.

So I guess you guys are thinking:

1. Related to identity politics and

2. Punishment in the form of economic sanction?

I'm sorry what?

Cancel culture.

I'm not an arbiter of the term of anything, but at least as I commonly see it used cancel culture refers to a social response to someone's violation of a "norm", with the norm being something that is disputed as to whether it is a true societal norm or only a norm outside of the political right. The social response can be someone losing an invitation to a speaking engagement, or even losing their job.

Things that are actual crimes usually aren't really part of the cancel culture dialogue. Like no one considers the January 6th rioters to have been "canceled" when they were expelled from the U.S. Capitol. In your linked video a woman is committing an actual crime in Mexico, which gives it a very different tenor to the typical subject of cancel culture claims that I see in my personal experience.

[garbon]

Elmo is sounding extra deranged on Twitter: posting Pepe the Frog memes, going after Alexander Vindman...

Definitely need another 50 like this guy.

https://spacenews.com/spacex-launches-new-cargo-dragon-spacecraft-to-space-station/

And what does that link prove?

I don't think it proves anything.

Are you honestly unsure what point I am trying to make?

I'm not sure the delivery of power supply arrays, dwarf tomatoes and handheld microscopes is compelling enough to stand as evidence as to why we should want 50 Musks.

[Sheilbh]

To be honest I thought "cancel culture" was broader than that. I was thinking of its relatively limited life shelf recently because I saw two journalists who were "cancelled" a couple of years ago after lots of allegations of sexual harassment/misconduct re-appear. I suppose in my head it was as linked to Me Too as any free speech issues - even just weird ones like that New Yorker writer wanking on a Zoom call.

One was on the UK wing of the "dirtbag left" and now pops up in US "post-liberal" magazines like Compact, the other was really very much a centrist dad type who has apparently re-branded as a hardline remainer/FBPE type.

[Valmy]

To be honest I thought "cancel culture" was broader than that. I was thinking of its relatively limited life shelf recently because I saw two journalists who were "cancelled" a couple of years ago after lots of allegations of sexual harassment/misconduct re-appear. I suppose in my head it was as linked to Me Too as any free speech issues - even just weird ones like that New Yorker writer wanking on a Zoom call.

One was on the UK wing of the "dirtbag left" and now pops up in US "post-liberal" magazines like Compact, the other was really very much a centrist dad type who has apparently re-branded as a hardline remainer/FBPE type.

Cancel Culture is often used for those types of transgressions, not just speech. It is just a way to punish people for breaking social norms (though...you know...sexual harassment is a crime). It is not the reason for cancelling that bothers me so much as the arbitrary mob justice aspects of it and the fact that it usually only works on the little guys while the big stars and more charismatic types can brush it off. So it has a bullying thing going on as well.

[OttoVonBismarck]

At least in my perception guys like Harvey Weinstein or Matt Lauer weren't part of "cancel culture", but more facing consequences for broadly recognized bad behaviors. To me a hallmark of cancel culture is there is broad disagreement (most often but not exclusively between liberals and conservatives) as to whether the underlying behavior is risible or not. In the case of Weinstein he has been proven to have committed serious sexual crimes in court and is now in prison, and thus there is an imprimatur of believability around the many other claims towards him that were not covered in a court case. Lauer I believe never faced criminal charges, but I don't think anyone on the left or right would defend Lauer's alleged behaviors--rape / sexual assault are not considered acceptable even by conservatives.

Probably the most "classic" examples of cancel culture (and I think the origin of much of the dialogue) came from the movement to "disinvite" controversial speakers at universities. Often times these speakers were only seen as controversial by very small minorities of people, often on the extreme fringes of the left. A seminal example might be Bassem Eid--a Palestinian human rights activist who was invited to speak at the University of Chicago. Despite being an activist for Palestinian human rights his entire career, he had made some nuanced comments that were more balanced between Israel/Palestine than the typical "Israel bad, Palestine good", and for this reason he was canceled from his speaking engagement by leftists at UofC who wanted to show solidarity for Palestinians. Most ludicrous--this was primarily a bunch of upper class wealthy white kids canceling a man who lives in Jordan, who is a Palestinian, and who has fought for Palestinian rights his entire life--and they did so because they claim they supported Palestine.

Not all such incidents of cancel culture are so clear cut and so stupid by the canceling party, but this is a good starting point I think for a classic example of it.

To me, an offensive tweet and now you're fired is also an example of cancel culture.

I don't think that every instance that can be called an instance of cancel culture is intrinsically wrong. If I work for a menswear brand that primarily markets to black people and I tweet out something in my publicly-associated Twitter account condemning BLM, while I don't think it is necessarily morally wrong to have an anti-BLM view, and you could say I was canceled, I think it is appropriate/fine for my employer to dismiss me--his role is to sell clothing and I did something that made that more difficult.

[Zanza]

Someone has a slightly unrealistic view of their own importance:

[Tamas]

"Cancel culture" is fast approaching the fate of "woke" in the sense that it is becoming / already has become a blanket term by the far-right to label any consequence they might suffer for expressing their views. And while some of those consequences might be unfair, most of them just come with the territory of freedom of speech they pretend to care about.

[OttoVonBismarck]

"Cancel culture" is fast approaching the fate of "woke" in the sense that it is becoming / already has become a blanket term by the far-right to label any consequence they might suffer for expressing their views. And while some of those consequences might be unfair, most of them just come with the territory of freedom of speech they pretend to care about.

Pretty much this. Being overly woke and some examples of cancel culture are real problems of behavior by the left, but when they get magnified and expanded in scope multiple orders of magnitude by the right they become absurdities, and mention of them becomes a shield to defend the worst behaviors while denying other people basic freedom of speech and free association.

[Valmy]

Sort of like how SJW went from being a term for a form of uncompromising paranoid nuttery by a minority of far left social activists online to basically anybody who who didn't hate minorities before being dropped for "woke" in 2017.

[Berkut]

Whew, that's a relief.

We figured out that anyone criticizing the left is just an attempt to deny other peoples basic freedoms!

Now we can all pat each other on the back and not have to worry about left wingers anymore!

We won't even notice the irony of shutting down criticism from within our own ranks by ad hominem in the service of "free speech"!

A bunch of upper class wealthy white progressives canceling dissent by others, who are progressives as well, and who have expressed their desire for progressive ideals their entire life--and they did so because they claim they support progressivism! It's just delicious!

[Valmy]

Whew, that's a relief.

We figured out that anyone criticizing the left is just an attempt to deny other peoples basic freedoms!

Um...no. I was saying how that term started as a legitimate criticism, one I agreed with and used the term SJW myself for awhile, before becoming a scare term for basically anybody on the social left.

The left has tons of assholes in it since your political choices have nothing at all to do with what a piece of shit you are. Policing those people is very difficult with the rhetorical tools at their disposal.

Now we can all pat each other on the back and not have to worry about left wingers anymore!

Criticizing the right for manipulating terms meant to discuss the problem of asshole paranoid deranged people on the left to basically mean that EVERYBODY who disagrees with them is like that does not mean the problem does not exist.

We won't even notice the irony of shutting down criticism from within our own ranks by ad hominem in the service of "free speech"!

Well that's just being on the internet.

A bunch of upper class wealthy white progressives canceling dissent by others, who are progressives as well, and who have expressed their desire for progressive ideals their entire life--and they did so because they claim they support progressivism! It's just delicious!

How do you know they are upper class and white? I usually only see this online and to the best that I have noticed these kinds of assholes tend to be rather diverse.

[The Brain]

Someone has a slightly unrealistic view of their own importance:

I don't think Musk has the mental stability to successfully install himself as tyrant.

[Berkut]

Whew, that's a relief.

We figured out that anyone criticizing the left is just an attempt to deny other peoples basic freedoms!

Um...no. I was saying how that term started as a legitimate criticism, one I agreed with and used the term SJW myself for awhile, before becoming a scare term for basically anybody on the social left.

It goes without saying, or it should, that the right is going to attack the left for anything they can.

That includes attacking them for things that are bullshit and entirely made up, and they are going to attack them for things where they just disagree, and they are going to attack them for things where there is actually a legitimate issue.

That last category, of course, is what we are talking about. The right is going to exaggerate it as much as they can, of course.

Again, this is not new. Standard SOP for every political party ever.

What is ridiculous is that in this particular case, people on the left are actually using the fact that the right does this as a way of simply dismissing actual criticism of "woke" politics. This is happening right here in this very thread, right now.

There aren't any right wingers on Languish to speak of - nobody involved in this discussion is exaggerating the problem because they love sticking it to progressives. 

The fact that the right exaggerates every sin of the left sucks. But it is a known quantity.

Using that as an excuse to dismiss criticism is dirty pool. It is, in fact, an attempt to shut down conversation rather then engage and admit there is a problem and something should be done about it. And it is a problem. Forget the ethics or principles involved, it is just bad politics.

[Barrister]

To be honest I thought "cancel culture" was broader than that. I was thinking of its relatively limited life shelf recently because I saw two journalists who were "cancelled" a couple of years ago after lots of allegations of sexual harassment/misconduct re-appear. I suppose in my head it was as linked to Me Too as any free speech issues - even just weird ones like that New Yorker writer wanking on a Zoom call.

One was on the UK wing of the "dirtbag left" and now pops up in US "post-liberal" magazines like Compact, the other was really very much a centrist dad type who has apparently re-branded as a hardline remainer/FBPE type.

"Cancel culture" is certainly a phrase that gets thrown around so much it doesn't have a defined meaning.  But let's try and impose some order on it.

The most obvious examples of "cancel culture" are when an absolute nobody - somebody with no public profile - says something inappropriate, it goes viral, and the person is then promptly fired.  This is an older example, but an infamous one: a woman named Justine Sacco tweeted "Going to Africa.  Hope I don't get AIDS.  Just kidding.  I'm white!" just before getting on a plane to Africa.  Her tweet promptly went viral, and by the time she was fired she had lost her job.  I think everyone would agree these kind of examples are outrageous and clearly "cancel culture".  People with no public profile should be lose their jobs over saying something stupid.

Moving up the list, you have examples of people with public profiles (often journalists) who say or do something offensive in private, who wind up being fired.  Several examples of journalists using the n-word in private (not in a derogatory way) who get fired.  Jeffrey Toobin is sort of an example of this (though I would think his sin of masturbating during a zoom call when he thought the camera was off was slightly worse).  I think many people would agree these examples are also "cancel culture" (Toobin is a little more complex as he wasn't fired per se).

Moving further up the list: still people with public profiles who now say or do something offensive in public.  Lots of examples here.  You have Roseanne Barr saying racist stuff and getting kicked off her show.  You have Kanye West saying anti-semitic stuff and losing his shoe contract.  Colin Kaepernick kneeling for the anthem and not getting another NFL contract.  JK Rowling being not supportive of trans rights and being denounced by almost everyone involved in Harry Potter.  This is where it gets more complex - as a public person you certainly can and should be criticized for what you say in public.  This is I think where any consensus falls apart.  It depends on what was said, and to what extent the person is "cancelled".  Of my above examples Roseanne and Kanye got what was coming to them, Kaepernick was taking a perfectly valid position but I can understand why conservative NFL owners were leery of him, and Rowling is also taking valid positions, but I don't think she's actually been "cancelled".

Moving to the end of the list though is public figures who commit out-and-out crimes.  Harvey Weinstein.  Kevin Spacey.  Donald Trump.  To call what happened to these people "cancel culture" is deliberate obfuscation.

[Sheilbh]

"Cancel culture" is certainly a phrase that gets thrown around so much it doesn't have a defined meaning.  But let's try and impose some order on it.
[...]
Moving to the end of the list though is public figures who commit out-and-out crimes.  Harvey Weinstein.  Kevin Spacey.  Donald Trump.  To call what happened to these people "cancel culture" is deliberate obfuscation.

Sure. I was going to post separately (probably in the UK thread because they're UK journalists and it reminds me of Andrew Wakefield) about these examples as an example of how short-lived being cancelled seems to be. I'd been thinking about it for a while because I saw both of them pop up in relatively quick succession.

I'm not fully sure where they would sit on your spectrum. It was during me too and basically in both cases there was a single allegation of groping and unwanted kissing (after they'd been told they weren't interested) - I think possibly originally nott naming them. Then lots of other women in journalism said they'd had the exact same experience, or knew who they were talking about. I think what they did probably were crimes but no-one ever reported them and they weren't ever prosecuted.

But, because of their behaviour becoming public, they basically stopped getting commissioned. People also started unfollowing them and not tweeting or retweeting their stuff (I think one had a blog). And there was a lot of talk about them having a reputation which their friends/ideological allies just ignored. As I say the thing I thought was interesting was that they are both back just a couple of years later although by going to places/writing for communities that don't know them as well.

But those both seemed to me to be examples where I'd describe what happened as people being "cancelled", so I clearly think it's a bit broader than speech but I'm not sure that I have any real idea on what the definition is or where the lines are. I wasn't using "cancel culture" in relation to them to try and make a point about how ridiculously wide its usage is, but because that's how I thought about what happened to them.