Quo Vadis GOP?

[garbon]

Well Stalin had demonstrated the beauty of a purge.

Pretty sure purges go back significantly longer than that.

What does Grumbles say? Whoosh.

Well if we're channelling grumbler I guess I'll thank you for demonstrating that you missed my point.

(    )

I don't welcome a distraction from my point on this topic.

[HVC]

Just to be clear, do we all agree "Cancel Culture" is bad now?

Did anyone here ever think cancel culture was good?

People losing their job for being revealed to be a massive racist, homophobe, or whatever, really seems fair enough to me.

Fine, I'll concede that Josq sucks

Although truthfully, even the coldest capitalist company would be dumb not to fire an open and avowed racist or homophobe because they're opening themselves up to lawsuits from minority employees. Absent cancel culture that would still be the case.

[Sheilbh]

FWIW I think DG and Raz have a point - I've definitely changed my views on this.

On a pure level of political tactics and strategy I think it's clear no-platforming and de-platforming have been failures at best and, at worst, counter-productive. I think it is important and relevant the extent to which the discourse on speech issues has been co-opted by the right on this - particularly around "safety" but also the legal framework of civil rights laws. I think it's in a similar way to several years of private sector solutions to public problems (we can do net zero through global finance and partnerships with banks). In both cases discovering that these are politically neutral tools and resources that can be used by your enemies as well. There is no reason any of this is intrinsically "progressive" just because it has been used by that side in recent years.

That isn't to say the right aren't hypocrites or there isn't a more concerted effort and strategy to that - because there is, especially in the use of civil rights legislation to punish dissent in higher education. But I think whenever you're "what about-ing" or pointing out the beam in someone's eye I think you've probably already lost because what the public will see is all the same. I think it's a bit like trying to make a point of Trump being a liar when you're pretending that Biden is physically and mentally fit for his presidential, despite very obvious visible evidence that everyone can see. Trump is a liar in a far more significant way but it's really tough to make that point when you're also having to tell a massive whopper every day.

I think the answer has to be a return to what should be a position of comfort for the left which is a principles led defence of free speech (of the type I think the ACLU have always done). Not least because it is going to be more necessary now than ever and part of that will involve admitting, at least, that mistakes were made. Similarly the market may play a role but if there are public goods or needs, like satellite comms and space, then it should be a publicly owned and accountable good not ceding essential parts of American foreign policy to billionaires. No doubt my agenda of robust protections for free speech and expropriation would carry all before it But I do think they need to start from what the principle is, what they actually believe and not the more Jesuitical distinction drawing.

Although I would also return to my point that I am convinced 99% of "cancel culture" stories is because employees have very limited rights. The vast majority would not and could not be fired in Europe because the bar is high and we're entitled to private lives outside our work. (I'd add this is partly why I've always been a bit suspicious of "authentic" self or "whole" self at work because to me, work is entitled to 8 hours of performance and that's it - them wanting the authentic or whole me is laying claim to time and me that isn't theirs )

[Razgovory]

]
Right now, there is a concerted effort by Republican activists to call up employers and get people fired for saying things they don't like.  Racism, homophobia are entirely legal in the US they are just politically inconvenient as you say.

That's a failing on americas part. No doubt part of your current mess. You shouldn't have been soft on fascists.

Even ignoring your crap laws on hate speech, I would still see quite a difference between someone expressing a desire to kill a significant chunk of your customer base vs someone who says they want to vote for the opposition party.

Yeah, I don't think you'd like it if we changed our hate speech laws.  Those pro-Palestinian protesters would be seeing serious jail time for chants "Burn Tel-Aviv to the ground" "Kill and Israeli soldier" and the like.

[crazy canuck]

Racism isn't unlawful in the United States of America?

Did the Civil Rights Act get repealed and nobody noticed?

[Razgovory]

Racism isn't unlawful in the United States of America?

Did the Civil Rights Act get repealed and nobody noticed?

No, you can be a racist in the United States.

[crazy canuck]

I think the answer has to be a return to what should be a position of comfort for the left which is a principles led defence of free speech (of the type I think the ACLU have always done).

Yes, but where we disagree is I don't see a lot of evidence that the left ever departed from this position.

[crazy canuck]

Racism isn't unlawful in the United States of America?

Did the Civil Rights Act get repealed and nobody noticed?

No, you can be a racist in the United States.

Yes, and you will suffer the consequences. You know, under the provisions of the Civil Rights Act.  That is why employers terminate employees who are racist.

[Razgovory]

Which civil rights act do you think that racism became unlawful in the US?

[Sheilbh]

Yes, but where we disagree is I don't see a lot of evidence that the left ever departed from this position.

There was certainly debate with the ACLU over this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html

I think this is where it gets slightly like the pretending Biden's fine point of basically ignoring or finessing away what people have seen in recent years. As I say in my view it's mostly at will employment contracts and the occasional unfortunate brush ups of normal people with terminally online culture. I always think about the Latino telecoms worker in California fired for making the okay sign which among the very online far-right is used as "white power" - he did subsequently get re-instated after the backlash and people acknowledged things might have got a little out of hand.

Edit: Also on the de-platforming/no platforming point I remember the pressure for, say, Joni Mitchell to remove her music from Spotify because they became Joe Rogan's podcast platform (she has since returned to Spotify). And I deeply, fundamentally believe that Joni Mitchel should not know who Joe Rogan is and we shouldn't force that on her.

Edit: On female artists actually the various iterations of "Taylor Swift's silence is deafening" also springs to mind.

[crazy canuck]

Yes, but where we disagree is I don't see a lot of evidence that the left ever departed from this position.

There was certainly debate with the ACLU over this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html

I think this is where it gets slightly like the pretending Biden's fine point of basically ignoring or finessing away what people have seen in recent years. As I say in my view it's mostly at will employment contracts and the occasional unfortunate brush ups of normal people with terminally online culture. I always think about the Latino telecoms worker in California fired for making the okay sign which among the very online far-right is used as "white power" - he did subsequently get re-instated after the backlash and people acknowledged things might have got a little out of hand.

Edit: Also on the de-platforming/no platforming point I remember the pressure for, say, Joni Mitchell to remove her music from Spotify because they became Joe Rogan's podcast platform (she has since returned to Spotify). And I deeply, fundamentally believe that Joni Mitchel should not know who Joe Rogan is and we shouldn't force that on her.

Edit: On female artists actually the various iterations of "Taylor Swift's silence is deafening" also springs to mind.

Canada does not have at will employment.  And employees are terminated for making racist, homophobic or misogynist statements.  The anecdotes you have raised are fringe cases that are not inconsistent with my point.

[crazy canuck]

Which civil rights act do you think that racism became unlawful in the US?

You got me Raz, I concede the US is lawless.

[Josquius]

Although I would also return to my point that I am convinced 99% of "cancel culture" stories is because employees have very limited rights. The vast majority would not and could not be fired in Europe because the bar is high and we're entitled to private lives outside our work. (I'd add this is partly why I've always been a bit suspicious of "authentic" self or "whole" self at work because to me, work is entitled to 8 hours of performance and that's it - them wanting the authentic or whole me is laying claim to time and me that isn't theirs )

I'd agree, ish. But this is where the level of the offence is an issue.

Level 1- guy is identified as being part of a homophobic mob attacking a couple or something like that...
If the police are pressing charges then innocent until proven guilty. He's suspended pending an outcome.

If he is found guilty then obviously he is fired.

If the outcome is mistaken identity, he wasn't even in the country, then back to work he goes.

If no conviction is brought against him but it's pretty obvious he was involved... Then really don't blame the employer for firing him. He has the right to launch a legal appeal against this of course if it truly was mistaken.

Level 2- they dance around the line of legality and as per usual with this stuff the police don't care.

Still valid for them to be fired I would think. The risk of the police actually making a move and the reputational damage plus practical damage of having a staff member on trial is there.

Level 3- they're being clever and not looking like breaking the laws but still clearly a far right hate monger....
They're under observation. Just firing them isn't on. The question is can they keep it in their private life and are they still capable of doing their job.
If there's more than a hint they do let their views come into their work... Good case for firing I would say.
You're entitled to vote for the party that says all Muslims are scum, but if your company thinks your behaviour might offend Muslim customers then fair play to them to decide on a sacking.

Level 4- they support the wrong party or the like but remain civil online. 
Maybe if it's an extreme homophobic party there could be a case if they lied to get the job in the gay bar...
But generally this is fine.
Verging on cancel culture here as they could well have people keeping tabs on them.

Level 5- somebody has standard views but one time  makes a joke which is a bit racist and a Internet mob jumps on them and sets out to ruin their life.... This is cancel culture. This isn't cool.

]
Right now, there is a concerted effort by Republican activists to call up employers and get people fired for saying things they don't like.  Racism, homophobia are entirely legal in the US they are just politically inconvenient as you say.

That's a failing on americas part. No doubt part of your current mess. You shouldn't have been soft on fascists.

Even ignoring your crap laws on hate speech, I would still see quite a difference between someone expressing a desire to kill a significant chunk of your customer base vs someone who says they want to vote for the opposition party.

Yeah, I don't think you'd like it if we changed our hate speech laws.  Those pro-Palestinian protesters would be seeing serious jail time for chants "Burn Tel-Aviv to the ground" "Kill and Israeli soldier" and the like.

You and your obsession

You know, I'd be pretty against that. Though obviously a bit different when speaking of impossible stuff in a far away land rather than kill the Jews right here right now.

[DGuller]

Wow, I didn't expect the response to my quote of Josq to lead to people demonstrating how incapable they became of understanding the meaning of free speech.

[HVC]

Wow, I didn't expect the response to my quote of Josq to lead to people demonstrating how incapable they became of understanding the meaning of free speech.

If you worked for someone who was openly against people of Eastern European descent and they fired or otherwise discriminated against you would you sue? Would your employer be smart to retain them and not fire them when they found out about their views? Would  you consider firing your hypothetical boss be cancel culture?

It's not a free speech thing because no government involvement, I'm just curious on your opinion.