The Real problem with cancel culture

[DGuller]

A man being disinvited to speak is now a culture?

I thought the complaint was that people were having their lives ruined.

It's almost like there can be multiple ways of muzzling people.

[Berkut]

A man couldn't speak once and the world has fallen?

So now the argument has moved from "there is no such thing as cancel culture" to "there is such a thing, but it's actually fine"?

A man being disinvited to speak is now a culture?

I thought the complaint was that people were having their lives ruined.

The complaint is rather clear, and has been elucidated several times now.

Having people get their voices canceled because they once said something the twitter mob finds objectionable will stifle the free and open exchange of ideas.

This is a great example, since in this case, it is his views on something that are not even tangentially related to what he was invited to speak about to begin with...

[HVC]

A man couldn't speak once and the world has fallen?

So now the argument has moved from "there is no such thing as cancel culture" to "there is such a thing, but it's actually fine"?

A man being disinvited to speak is now a culture?

I thought the complaint was that people were having their lives ruined.

As a scientist getting denied venues to talk about your research very much can ruin you. bye bye grant money if you can't get your work out there.

[The Minsky Moment]

Yep sounds like his ability to participate in society is now over.

No but a bunch of interested people in Cambridge lost their ability to hear him speak on a matter of great public interest.  How is that a winning outcome?

My first reaction on reading his Newsweek piece on DEI is that it was naive, unsophisticated, and misleading.  But ironically, the reaction at MIT provides support for his argument.

[The Minsky Moment]

The problem is that opposition to affirmative action is actually a position held by the majority of people in the US. 

I bet you could get highly varying results depending on how you phrased the question.

[Berkut]

Just think about what kind of effect this is going to have on other people.

This guy was asked his opinion about affirmative action when it comes to hiring faculty and admitting students into universities. He is no expert on that subject of course, but he likely does have extensive experience as an academic himself.

So he contributes to an article about that.

Now, you may not agree with his views. But you cannot possibly look at them and say "Anyone expressing such views is beyond the pale of acceptability!" The views in question are on an important topic! Is affirmative action working? Should we keep doing it? If so, should it be adjusted or changed? Is there a better way? Are we achieving the goals set out?

These are all very fair questions to ask. But the message here is clear - if you don't give the right answer when asked these questions, your career may very well be compromised, even if in a completely different area!

If you cannot see how this will and has stifled open and honest discussion, then I suspect you actually don't have any respect for the principle and utility of open and honest discussion.

And this is happening, right now. People are most definitely not willing to even engage on these topics anymore, because they know there is nothing but trouble if they do.

[Berkut]

The problem is that opposition to affirmative action is actually a position held by the majority of people in the US. 

I bet you could get highly varying results depending on how you phrased the question.

Oh, no question. That is such a nuanced position, I bet you could craft reasonable questions that result in radically different results.

[viper37]

A man being disinvited to speak is now a culture?

I thought the complaint was that people were having their lives ruined.

Is a man using the n* word racism? Or is it more that it happens, more than once?

Your life won't be ruined by some stranger calling you a f* or a n*.  Yet, I'm sure you'd prefer to be addressed as "Sir" or "Mister", like most people here.  Just like I prefer "Sir" to "Frog".  Your life would not be ruined either if you were forbidden from entering a place that refuses to serves black or gay people.  Your ancestors were likely denied entry into lots of places, yet they survived.  They were prevented from a bunch of things while being freemen & women.  Yet their lives weren't ruined.  So it's all ok, I guess?

I think you fail to see the big picture here.  One man being disinvited is no big deal.  Just like one insult randomly thrown at at you wouldn't be a big deal.  But it's a symptom of something bigger, as it keeps on happening.

[grumbler]

Just think about what kind of effect this is going to have on other people.

This guy was asked his opinion about affirmative action when it comes to hiring faculty and admitting students into universities. He is no expert on that subject of course, but he likely does have extensive experience as an academic himself.

So he contributes to an article about that.

Now, you may not agree with his views. But you cannot possibly look at them and say "Anyone expressing such views is beyond the pale of acceptability!" The views in question are on an important topic! Is affirmative action working? Should we keep doing it? If so, should it be adjusted or changed? Is there a better way? Are we achieving the goals set out?

These are all very fair questions to ask. But the message here is clear - if you don't give the right answer when asked these questions, your career may very well be compromised, even if in a completely different area!

If you cannot see how this will and has stifled open and honest discussion, then I suspect you actually don't have any respect for the principle and utility of open and honest discussion.

And this is happening, right now. People are most definitely not willing to even engage on these topics anymore, because they know there is nothing but trouble if they do.

There's an example of this being done right now, if you listened to All Things Considered today:  a small but very vocal group has taken it upon themselves in a number of western-state counties to cancel any county health board members who support following CDC guidance on masks and vaccination.  They harass the meetings, picket the business premises of the doctors involved, etc.  Doctors are resigning from health boards because the harassment is too much for them.

But, not a problem, right, garbon?  It's not the end of the world, so all is okay, right?  No one's life is ruined (if they resign), so no harm and no foul, correct?

[Berkut]

The war continues. It's latest victim: a racist rock.

https://news.wisc.edu/no-longer-a-memorial-rock-removed-from-campus/?fbclid=IwAR11qFQzBgiWBxUi2rKmfrLnVcZs7SUb0AkNyTj0DHESbyY6apsBlGdfp-0

If someone told me about this, I would not believe them. It has to be one of those "Lets see how ridiculous a story we can invent!" kind of things.

[Barrister]

The war continues. It's latest victim: a racist rock.

https://news.wisc.edu/no-longer-a-memorial-rock-removed-from-campus/?fbclid=IwAR11qFQzBgiWBxUi2rKmfrLnVcZs7SUb0AkNyTj0DHESbyY6apsBlGdfp-0

If someone told me about this, I would not believe them. It has to be one of those "Lets see how ridiculous a story we can invent!" kind of things.

I do want to point out this happened over the summer, and the article is dated August 6... Because I had heard the story at the time and went - "wait - they're moving another rock?!?"

But yeah.  Notice that the rock was referred to by the "deeply offensive nickname that included a racial slur" back in 1925.  Not any time more recently.

[grumbler]

The war continues. It's latest victim: a racist rock.

https://news.wisc.edu/no-longer-a-memorial-rock-removed-from-campus/?fbclid=IwAR11qFQzBgiWBxUi2rKmfrLnVcZs7SUb0AkNyTj0DHESbyY6apsBlGdfp-0

If someone told me about this, I would not believe them. It has to be one of those "Lets see how ridiculous a story we can invent!" kind of things.

I don't get what the objections to the rock were, but I guess there's really no need for me to know.  Seems like an easy and cheap solution to what seems to have sincerely bothered enough people to motivate the university to move it.

[The Brain]

The article doesn't really explain things fully. Was the rock still commonly referred to as the nickname that included a racial slur, or was that just in the 1925 article?

[Sheilbh]

The article doesn't really explain things fully. Was the rock still commonly referred to as the nickname that included a racial slur, or was that just in the 1925 article?

Yeah I think if the nickname or similar stuck then I think it makes perfect sense, but that wasn't clear to me from the article.

[Barrister]

The war continues. It's latest victim: a racist rock.

https://news.wisc.edu/no-longer-a-memorial-rock-removed-from-campus/?fbclid=IwAR11qFQzBgiWBxUi2rKmfrLnVcZs7SUb0AkNyTj0DHESbyY6apsBlGdfp-0

If someone told me about this, I would not believe them. It has to be one of those "Lets see how ridiculous a story we can invent!" kind of things.

I don't get what the objections to the rock were, but I guess there's really no need for me to know.  Seems like an easy and cheap solution to what seems to have sincerely bothered enough people to motivate the university to move it.

If you look at the size of the crane, and truck, required to move the rock it appears to me the solution was neither easy or cheap.  That would have costs thousands of dollars.