SOCIAL JUSTICE

Miken said:
I was around for McCarthy as well.
Click to expand...
In Germany, we got this trend with some delay, it took off in the 70ies and only ended when the cold war petered out, really, and the laws are still there, but not enforced with any rigor any more.
 
The twitter sphere.

Only 20% of people have Twitter. Perhaps 1% are woke, but they are extremely vocal. They think they rule the world.

The problem is someone speaks in favour of say, JK Rowling questioning the relationship between trans rights and women's rights -- and 29 thousand twitter users bully their employer into to having to fire them, etc.
 
Last edited:
So where does my woke love for all humanity jibe with working to have somebody fired and lose their ability to support their family and children, because that person says what I don't like them saying?
 
RJM Corbet said:
So where does my woke love for all humanity jibe with working to have somebody fired and lose their ability to support their family and children, because that person says what I don't like them saying?
Click to expand...

59cf0d13af3a019f01dd1faa41a90190.jpg
 
RJM Corbet said:
Make light at your own cost, imo:

Click to expand...
Regarding someone buying her book and burning it: this is often employed in a ritual sense when someone wants to break ties with past programming--making a clean break. Did any of these people call for censoring Rowling's work in the same manner that lots of people called for censoring the Harry Potter series when it first came out?
 
I also remember something about Harper's Bazaar calling for stopping the cancel culture. This caught my attention, because a few years ago Harper's Bazaar kept coming up in my ads feed with such inane crap (to the point that it seemed like they were stalking me) that I had to specifically block them from my ads feed. It's the only time I've ever had to do this, but I do believe it is my personal right to do so, as it is my personal right to request any ad agency that they remove me from their mailing lists.
 
seattlegal said:
Regarding someone buying her book and burning it: this is often employed in a ritual sense when someone wants to break ties with past programming--making a clean break. Did any of these people call for censoring Rowling's work in the same manner that lots of people called for censoring the Harry Potter series when it first came out?
Click to expand...
Yes the fundamentalist Christians burned her books because they thought she was turning children towards witchcraft. but such people are not really well known for virtue signalling woke liberal tolerant values?
 
Last edited:
RJM Corbet said:
Yes the fundamentalist Christians burned her books because they thought she was turning children towards witchcraft. but such people are not really well known for virtue signalling woke liberal tolerant values?
Click to expand...
I would venture to say that the early attempts to burn her books actually boosted her sales. ;)

That said, I would agree that the cancel culture can be quite dogmatic, as can any hivemind/collective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
seattlegal said:
would venture to say that the early attempts to burn her books actually boosted her sales. ;)
Click to expand...
Perhaps. But I don't think JKR needed it?
seattlegal said:
That said, I would agree that the cancel culture can be quite dogmatic, as can any hivemind/collective.
Click to expand...
It is wrong for any movement which portrays itself as progressive and tolerant, to have the instinct to take out not only those who disagree, or even those who ask questions, but to cancel (= kill) those who remain silent and who do not actively vocally support it. Imo
 
Last edited:
Now they're after Joe Rogan, for the simple reason that he allows all sorts of people to express their opinions on his show, some of whom the woke left do not like very much.

But the in depth podcasts are hours long, so listeners get to hear the whole story, not just selected soundbites.

Inconvenient. He has to go ...
 
Last edited:
Doesn't it sound a bit familiar? Doesn't it ring any bells?
 
Last edited:
RJM Corbet said:
Perhaps. But I don't think JKR needed it?

It is wrong for any movement which portrays itself as progressive and tolerant, to have the instinct to take out not only those who disagree, or even those who ask questions, but to cancel (= kill) those who remain silent and who do not actively vocally support it. Imo
Click to expand...
Like I said, collectives can be dogmatic, and in the scenario you are presenting, being dogmatic to the point of witch-hunting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Ok, so where are the outraged woke voices against this authoritarian instinct to crush dissent?

Instead they seem to prefer to retreat into wounded personal victimhood?

Or is it justified by 'affirmative action' to balance past inequities? And again where do we seem to have heard this stuff before -- victimhood as the justification for tyranny?
 
Last edited:
The truth comes out in the end, sometimes it takes a bit longer than we really want ... Imo
 
Last edited:
RJM Corbet said:
Ok, so where are the outraged woke voices against this authoritarian instinct to crush dissent?

Instead they seem to prefer to retreat into wounded personal victimhood?

Or is it justified by 'affirmative action' to balance past inequities? And again where do we seem to have heard this stuff before -- victimhood as the justification for tyranny?
Click to expand...
My guess is that this cancel culture is fueled by those with a poor sense of personal boundaries who have difficulty discerning between individuals and collectives. (aka narcissists.)
 
I think one can say whatever one wants to say, the society will do things in its own way. Changes take time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top