Political Discussions for "Adults"

**Frownland** · 07-15-2020, 09:57 AM

I meant it in the sense of generating discussion via negative press so that you have people's attention when you put out whatever it is you're selling.

~~jwb~~ · 07-15-2020, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

but I also think as it is, the environment of the internet is so toxic to anyone not a white cis male, that there's a question of their right to speech without being shouted down and harassed

It's not just being shouted down though it's that once enough social pressure mounts the corporate overlords will simply remove you from the platform. If it was strictly people fleeing the platform cause they couldn't handle the response they were getting that would be a different question.

Lucem Ferre · 07-15-2020, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

I meant it in the sense of generating discussion via negative press so that you have people's attention when you put out whatever it is you're selling.

I know what you meant. Basically the Tekashi69 strategy. Say what you want but that snitching pedophile is a marketing genius.

~~jwb~~ · 07-15-2020, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

Saying that so-called cancel culture is an issue of open discussion or free speech misses the root cause of the issue. Our culture is so consumerist (to put it more specifically than capitalism) that people build identities around brands and while corporations try to build these identities when they can, it's a two way street. So they take notes on what people are saying to better feed into their clientele's identity and boost sales.

The type of criticism that people associate with cancel culture (which is noting biases, mainly) has always existed, but social media has given it a global platform. In the past, most business's only awareness of this pocket of public opinion was in the form of letters from people passionate enough to write in with their opinion (which funnels out most people off the bat), and was largely ignored unless it contained the word lawsuit. Censoring opinions typically came from religious groups because they had a reliable ideological base to mobilize. From the perspective of longstanding businesses, the criticism coming in on these new platforms is a massive influx of bad news or criticism despite it being an uninfluential segment of what people think of the brand, which sparks the damage control that is then viewed as censorship.

Consumerist concepts have bled into most elements of Western life. It's impacted the "marketplace of ideas", such as the customer is always right philosophy extending to how people form their opinions: that they're always right. Similarly, supply and demand is integrated into our behaviour so deeply that when corporations supply the product of "cancelling" someone for a minor offense, it sparks the explicit demand for cancellation where they may have more constructively criticized in the past. Cancel culture is a corporate product that sells too well to stop stocking.

Similar to what I mentioned earlier, cancel culture has evolved into Kanye-eque PR. Many outlandish "cancellations" from those wacky wacky leftists on twitter are just attempts to get celebrities discussed no matter what it takes leading up to the release of their book/album/Netflix special.

tl;dr burn down Toys r Us and force feed corporate elites with a tube like foie gras.

I agree with most of this but I don't see how identifying corporate culture as the driving mechanism is at all conflicting with the question of how this whole thing impacts open discussion and art. That question remains regardless of what the root cause is. That's why I don't find the argument that it doesn't matter as long as the government isn't the one policing speech to be very compelling.

Lucem Ferre · 07-15-2020, 10:12 AM

They can create their own platform.

Really it's mostly about harassment on those platforms. And even then they still suck at it.

Took them months to censor my post where I told Bill Maher to get raped in a ditch.

~~jwb~~ · 07-15-2020, 10:16 AM

"They can create their own platforms" is basically like telling workers to "start your own business."

It probably only took them a while cause you were irrelevant enough to not be on the radar.

**Frownland** · 07-15-2020, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

corporate overlords

This is also a good tl;dr for my post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I agree with most of this but I don't see how identifying corporate culture as the driving mechanism is at all conflicting with the question of how this whole thing impacts open discussion and art. That question remains regardless of what the root cause is.

Understanding the root cause leads to better understanding the issue and how to come up with a final solution. The concept of cancel culture (assuming that the bolded is referring to cancel culture) as it's typically presented places the blame on the individual over the [s]reptilians[/s] as a distractive tactic.

Quote:

That's why I don't find the argument that it doesn't matter as long as the government isn't the one policing speech to be very compelling.

The letter doesn't either, which is why I didn't address it in my post.

The Batlord · 07-15-2020, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoundgardenRocks

The ironic part is that America fell for the same trap that they (America) laid out for the Soviets in the late '70s. We trained Osama Bin Laden and worked with him and the Mujahideen as a bulwark to the Soviets when they invaded Afghanistan, in an effort to get them involved in a quagmire similar to America's venture in Vietnam. This trap, for all intents and purposes, worked. The Soviets wasted boatloads of money (in a period of economic stagnation for them) and the Afghan population grew to resent them.

Osama Bin Laden used this same strategy to provoke America into coming into the middle east and with the same basic strategy (prolonged guerilla warfare), they were able to drain America's wallet and show just how easily a "modern military" could be stopped.

I believe the US actually baited the Soviets into invading by supplying the Mujahadeen months before the invasion actually took place. Sort of like if the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was a Soviet false flag operation.

~~jwb~~ · 07-15-2020, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

I think in the case of, for example, alt right YouTube figures, it's pretty justified, even if the reason they do it is about $$$(like any corporate decision)

But in the case of cancellations hardly ever does it even have any long term negative effects

Like I said in one of my original posts this is simply a question of priorities. You might (and seemingly do) prioritize minimizing certain ideas over allowing open discussion. A lot of people do. I'm honestly somewhat undecided about that question. Obviously I can see the concern with a Nazi with large following, but there is a side of me that is turned off at the idea that the solution to this is just to place certain ideas out of bounds. That's the preferred method of every authoritarian structure, so there's no doubt it works to some degree, I just don't particularly like the way it works. Maybe Nazis or ISIS devotees are never deconverted by debate but I still find those debates interesting.

Also what are the long term negative affects of making a book about denying the Holocaust illegal? I know Americans are obsessed with the 1st amendment as the only definition of free speech but there are other countries with different rules who have the same basic goals you have. I don't think that line is nearly as cut and dry as it seems.

~~jwb~~ · 07-15-2020, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

As far as I can tell JK Rowling is still broadcasting transphobia to a large audience over Twitter

the article rotasi posted makes the argument that "cancel culture" is not a thing, it's reactionary speak

there is no great left stifling of speech

I'm not really familiar with whatever it is she's saying but do you think it's a good thing she's allowed/able to do so?

07-15-2020, 09:57 AM	#6751 (permalink)
Frownland SOPHIE FOREVER Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: East of the Southern North American West Posts: 35,541	I meant it in the sense of generating discussion via negative press so that you have people's attention when you put out whatever it is you're selling. __________________ Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. d e a f b o x

07-15-2020, 10:16 AM	#6756 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	"They can create their own platforms" is basically like telling workers to "start your own business." It probably only took them a while cause you were irrelevant enough to not be on the radar.