The Real problem with cancel culture

[Admiral Yi]

Prohibition originated from very conservative, religious groups.  It wasn't particularly left wing at all.

My history books agree with Beeb.

[Josquius]

Marty the Polish lawyer asked one time if the progressive left had ever been shown to be wrong about a cause in the long run.  Cultural appropriation and manspreading.

Something can be widely recognised as being broadly right but still have examples where people do it stupidly and in that circumstance its wrong.

[Admiral Yi]

Something can be widely recognised as being broadly right but still have examples where people do it stupidly and in that circumstance its wrong.

Please elaborate with specifics.

[Grey Fox]

The RoC culturally appropriates Poutine all the time, the double standards always apply.

Poutine is a fascinating example.  Yes, it's originally from Quebec.  By itself though it doesn't seem like such an amazing invention.  Fries have been served with gravy forever.  Putting cheese on top is also quite common.  What makes poutine unique is using cheese curds, which since they should be fresh make them hard to store.

But then a lot of what you'll get labelled as "poutine" just uses any old cheese.  I've heard of that dish being called "disco fries", but now at least in Western Canada it would be labelled as poutine - even though it's the exact same dish.

Yes. However, that's not where the appropriation is. The appropriation is when Poutine becomes Canadians and not Québécois.

[Josquius]

Something can be widely recognised as being broadly right but still have examples where people do it stupidly and in that circumstance its wrong.

Please elaborate with specifics.

"Saying Chinese people eat lots of rice is racist" is a dumb thing to say.
That doesn't mean it's somehow not possible to be racist or that the broad concept of "racism is bad" is wrong.

[Admiral Yi]

"Saying Chinese people eat lots of rice is racist" is a dumb thing to say.
That doesn't mean it's somehow not possible to be racist or that the broad concept of "racism is bad" is wrong.

Couldn't agree more.

[Admiral Yi]

Yes. However, that's not where the appropriation is. The appropriation is when Poutine becomes Canadians and not Québécois.

One guy invented it, not a province.

[frunk]

Prohibition originated from very conservative, religious groups.  It wasn't particularly left wing at all.

My history books agree with Beeb.

Notice I said originated.  Later on it became embraced by many other groups, but the early start was from conservative religious groups that felt drinking was a personal failing and sinful.  Note the first state to ban alcohol was that liberal stronghold Kansas, and the counties that have stayed dry to this day tend to be the most conservative in the country.

[Barrister]

Prohibition originated from very conservative, religious groups.  It wasn't particularly left wing at all.

My history books agree with Beeb.

Notice I said originated.  Later on it became embraced by many other groups, but the early start was from conservative religious groups that felt drinking was a personal failing and sinful.  Note the first state to ban alcohol was that liberal stronghold Kansas, and the counties that have stayed dry to this day tend to be the most conservative in the country.

I mean - you're just wrong.

Just for example we tend to treat "religious" as being synonymous with being "conservative", but you don't need to go all that far back to find very progressive religious leaders.  And no example is better than prohibition.  Trust me - the Women's Christian Temperance Union was not conservative.

Now the political views of the early 1900s do not match perfectly with the views of 2024.But the root of support for prohibition was to prevent drunkeness and violence and ultimately to improve society.  This was viewed as very progressive for it's day - and trying to make a radical change with an aim to improve society - what is more left-wing than that?

[Valmy]

Well it wasn't not a conservative issue. The most conservative parts of the country were the most militant about it. But it was certainly a bipartisan issue that also had progressive support. A big part of it was protecting women and children from the acts of drunken men.

[Sheilbh]

It may be different in the US that the UK but it is scrambling here because it's really difficult to map 19th century religious enthusiasms onto modern politics.

Many religious groups' interests were very often not what we'd consider conservative - their goal was "reform" of all sorts based on their religious convictions or "improving" man and society. Abolitionism, temperance, sexual continence, ending child labour, suppression of prostitution, converting China, women's suffrage (very, very often linked to temperance) etc - for many on the more evangelical wing of Protestantism they were interested in some or all of those and saw them as connected and about remedying sin/"improving" the world. To us they're a mix of the admirable, the wildly conservative and the utterly mad

Certainly British temperance movement definitely had origins in the reforming, socially engaged wing of (strong), non-conformist Protestantism. It was really strong in Methodist communities for example - and as the saying goes that the Labour Party owes more to Methodism than Marxism, temperance and strong presences in working class activists groups, trade unions, left wing "improving" middle class types. I don't know if you'd necessarily say left - but definitely from the radical, liberal, non-conformist bits of the country not the conservative, agrarian, Anglican areas.

Generally here at least, conservatives were a bit more louche in their Christianity and less engaged in the cause of "reform".

Edit: Away from right-left - I have heard abolitionism and temperance as the first political issues in the UK (and maybe the same elsewhere) with standalone women's organisations and campaigns. Both way before women had the vote but really important steps in women asserting a public political role with campaigns, marches, rallies, newspapers etc by and for women.

[crazy canuck]

It may be different in the US that the UK but it is scrambling here because it's really difficult to map 19th century religious enthusiasms onto modern politics.

Many religious groups' interests were very often not what we'd consider conservative - their goal was "reform" of all sorts based on their religious convictions or "improving" man and society. Abolitionism, temperance, sexual continence, ending child labour, suppression of prostitution, converting China, women's suffrage (very, very often linked to temperance) etc - for many on the more evangelical wing of Protestantism they were interested in some or all of those and saw them as connected and about remedying sin/"improving" the world. To us they're a mix of the admirable, the wildly conservative and the utterly mad

Certainly British temperance movement definitely had origins in the reforming, socially engaged wing of (strong), non-conformist Protestantism. It was really strong in Methodist communities for example - and as the saying goes that the Labour Party owes more to Methodism than Marxism, temperance and strong presences in working class activists groups, trade unions, left wing "improving" middle class types. I don't know if you'd necessarily say left - but definitely from the radical, liberal, non-conformist bits of the country not the conservative, agrarian, Anglican areas.

Generally here at least, conservatives were a bit more louche in their Christianity and less engaged in the cause of "reform".

Edit: Away from right-left - I have heard abolitionism and temperance as the first political issues in the UK (and maybe the same elsewhere) with standalone women's organisations and campaigns. Both way before women had the vote but really important steps in women asserting a public political role with campaigns, marches, rallies, newspapers etc by and for women.

I think that is all correct.

And so the claim that temperance was a "progressive" policy is also problematic.  It was, as you say, a reform movement deeply entwined with religious objectives.

[Sheilbh]

Marty the Polish lawyer asked one time if the progressive left had ever been shown to be wrong about a cause in the long run.  Cultural appropriation and manspreading.

I think the even better answer would be prohibition.  But you're not wrong.

It depends what you mean by progressive left. But eugenics and imperialism/social darwinism or the Webb's "Soviet Communism - A New Civilisation" (the first edition had a question mark, that was dropped in later editions).

In a more recent example Liberty (then the National Council for Civil Liberties), the UK equivalent of the ACLU was allowed a pro-paedophilia group to be affiliated and passed supportive resolutions as the next frontier of sexual and civil liberties. It took a lot of pushback especially from gay rights groups to kick them out.

No side is always going to be right in the long run because what we consider right is as socially constructed and contingent as opinions in the past - but so too are the way we construct our concepts of "progressive left". There is no document of civilisation that is not at the same time a document of barbarism.

[Valmy]

I think cultural appropriation is a thing but it really only applies to large corporations like Disney. Not random anime fans from Ohio or whatever. So the progressive left was pointing to something but, as usual, took it too far. Like I don't think white women doing yoga is going to make everybody forget that yoga is an Indian thing.

Manspreading was a stupid internet thing I think. I don't think it was a big cause of the progressive left.

[Sheilbh]

Manspreaders should be shot