RIP in Peace, Vox - our former board member has joined the New York Times

[SaysWho?]

1 minute ago, Bacon said:

Ah, sorry, It was Lopez

 

This entire thing indeed does make me feel better.

[Jason]

 

[SuperSpreader]

On 1/23/2022 at 4:24 PM, CayceG said:

 

 

No, actually. They're far LEFT. But they're an example of the horseshoe theory thing. 

 

They defend Assad in Syria by denying he committed chemical attacks. They are deferential to Russia in all manner of story when the US and Russia intersect (UK chemical attacks, Syria, Ukraine). They deny the Uyighur ethnic cleansing. Overall, they are anti-imperialist when it comes to the US, but take the diametrical opposite position, which is often pro-Russia or pro-China. 

 

Oh, and they have lately gone DEEP into anti-vax nonsense. Their founder, Max Blumenthal, was at that anti-vax rally in DC today. 

 

 

So basically, they're contrarian cranks that go so deep on an ideology they fly past reasonable conclusions and go straight to propaganda--much like Lopez. 

Both sides?

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

I wonder what reporting trollpez will withhold in order to save for a book?

[CitizenVectron]

1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

I wonder what reporting trollpez will withhold in order to save for a book?

 

Maybe D1P will get a section.

[CitizenVectron]

Opinion | America Has a Free Speech Problem - The New York Times

WWW.NYTIMES.COM

---

A new poll finds Americans very anxious about the state of free speech.

 

 

Wherein the NYT editorial board equates dragging racists online with banning teachers from talking about slavery. Both sides!

 

Like, even if you think that people (in general) are too sensitive/reactive to what people say...that is not even close to being on the same level as governments banning speech/instruction. If I hear someone say something I don't like, I am exercising my own rights by then telling other people about what they said, and why I think they are wrong—even if I am being a dick about it. If someone doesn't like what I say and then passes laws to stop me from saying it, that's actual censorship.

[Jason]

2 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

Opinion | America Has a Free Speech Problem - The New York Times

WWW.NYTIMES.COM

---

A new poll finds Americans very anxious about the state of free speech.

 

 

Wherein the NYT editorial board equates dragging racists online with banning teachers from talking about slavery. Both sides!

 

Like, even if you think that people (in general) are too sensitive/reactive to what people say...that is not even close to being on the same level as governments banning speech/instruction. If I hear someone say something I don't like, I am exercising my own rights by then telling other people about what they said, and why I think they are wrong. If someone doesn't like what I say and then passes laws to stop me from saying it, that's actual censorship.

 

[CitizenVectron]

Yep. "Free speech" to many people means the ability to say whatever you want without consequence. But that's not free speech at all. It's telling that the people who believe this are almost entirely from groups that have traditionally been in the top levels of power structure.

[GeneticBlueprint]

It has been fascinating watching the decline of the NYT. It was never perfect but the galaxy brain takes over the past five or so years have been disappointing to say the least.

[stepee]

People who complain about free speech in America are just SO bad at understanding what free speech is. They 100% do not want free speech, the entire thing is they want you to not have your free speech. They are trying to ask for a safe place essentially, but they want that safe place to be everywhere, and only safe for them.

[Jason]

1 minute ago, stepee said:

People who complain about free speech in America are just SO bad at understanding what free speech is. They 100% do not want free speech, the entire thing is they want you to not have your free speech. They are trying to ask for a safe place essentially, but they want that safe place to be everywhere, and only safe for them.

 

 

[Jason]

 

[stepee]

4 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

 

 

 

 

[SuperSpreader]

3 minutes ago, stepee said:

 

 

 

 

You forgot to @me bro. 

[SuperSpreader]

This is deep D1P philosophy that's gonna make us famous. I'll accept my crown later thx.

[stepee]

3 minutes ago, SuperSpreader said:

This is deep D1P philosophy that's gonna make us famous. I'll accept my crown later thx.

 

yes it’s 100% amazing okay

[SuperSpreader]

1 minute ago, stepee said:

 

yes it’s 100% amazing okay

 

I'm desperate for praise 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

“The solution to speech you don’t like is more speech!”

 

”ok, well your speech is thinly veiled racis…”

 

”no, no, it means I get to talk more and you can’t interrupt me. Back to what I was saying: if you will notice the size of the white and Black skull…”

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

Yep. "Free speech" to many people means the ability to say whatever you want without consequence. But that's not free speech at all. It's telling that the people who believe this are almost entirely from groups that have traditionally been in the top levels of power structure.

I am curious about this perspective, which I see more frequently over time. It seems to often be said by people who reject the notion of “cancel culture” existing, but it would appear to me that cancel culture is essentially consequences for saying the wrong things.

 

So I don’t know why people run away from the idea of cancel culture when it looks as though they believe in what it is.

 

I notice similar with regard to those who getting fervent that CRT isn’t being used in k12 education, but also want CRT as a framework for education when you look at the policies these same people support.

 

I am not looking for a reply (though you’re certainly welcome to), just some thoughts that came to my mind while eating lunch and reading your comment 😊

[Chris-]

5 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I am curious about this perspective, which I see more frequently over time. It seems to often be said by people who reject the notion of “cancel culture” existing, but it would appear to me that cancel culture is essentially consequences for saying the wrong things.

 

So I don’t know why people run away from the idea of cancel culture when it looks as though they believe in what it is.

 

I notice similar with regard to those who getting fervent that CRT isn’t being used in k12 education, but also want CRT as a framework for education when you look at the policies these same people support.

 

I am not looking for a reply (though you’re certainly welcome to), just some thoughts that came to my mind while eating lunch and reading your comment 😊

It’s not ‘running away’ from cancel culture to deny the ridiculous framing applied to it. 

[CitizenVectron]

2 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I am curious about this perspective, which I see more frequently over time. It seems to often be said by people who reject the notion of “cancel culture” existing, but it would appear to me that cancel culture is essentially consequences for saying the wrong things.

 

So I don’t know why people run away from the idea of cancel culture when it looks as though they believe in what it is.

 

I notice similar with regard to those who getting fervent that CRT isn’t being used in k12 education, but also want CRT as a framework for education when you look at the policies these same people support.

 

I am not looking for a reply (though you’re certainly welcome to), just some thoughts that came to my mind while eating lunch and reading your comment 😊

 

I believe in "Consequence Culture," the general idea that you can (and should!) be responsible for the things you say, within reason. So if I say something really really horrible, then it's understandable and acceptable for people to point that out, say I am wrong, and for me to face some consequences. There are definitely ways this can go too far, but I don't think it often does. A hypothetical example would be someone saying something borderline sexist in a videogame, and then they end up losing their job, their family, etc, when their identity is revealed during the backlash if it went viral, etc.

 

The media position (and the one pushed by the right wing) is that cancel culture isn't consequence culture, it's that good values (i.e. old fashioned and bigoted) are okay to have and that believing those things should have zero consequences, and so anyone trying to "cancel" anyone else is the real bigot, not the bigot.

 

I don't know a lot about CRT itself, but my understanding is that actual CRT is a university-level niche discipline that has nothing to do with the CRT outrage (kind of like calling Russia communist). The outrage over CRT is that the right wing thinks that anything that sets out to show that white people have ever done anything wrong is bad, and is CRT. In terms of what people want, it's that these things are taught. We should know that slavery existed and that it was bad, but also supported by the US government. But that's not CRT, but it's called CRT and then attacked as indoctrination.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Chris- said:

It’s not ‘running away’ from cancel culture to deny the ridiculous framing applied to it. 

People aren’t just denying framing, they are saying nobody is trying to do it while also arguing that people should be removed from platforms or the content they publish should be deleted if it doesn’t meet “community standards”. I think it is possible to say that despite efforts, “canceling” is apparently ineffective. 

 

Like @CitizenVectron’s brilliant and hilarious “Chappelle canceled into 4 more Netflix specials”. 
 

But my point is that people *want* to do the thing they say isn’t happening. Why not just say you do want to do that?

[Kal-El814]

17 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

People aren’t just denying framing, they are saying nobody is trying to do it while also arguing that people should be removed from platforms or the content they publish should be deleted if it doesn’t meet “community standards”. I think it is possible to say that despite efforts, “canceling” is apparently ineffective. 

 

Like @CitizenVectron’s brilliant and hilarious “Chappelle canceled into 4 more Netflix specials”. 
 

But my point is that people *want* to do the thing they say isn’t happening. Why not just say you do want to do that?

 

The “cancel culture” that conservative outlets panic about is not happening, wanting to deplatform people engaging in hate speech / trans panic / what supremacy, falsehoods about medicine in the middle of a pandemic, etc., is not the same thing. Wanting to kick fascists off twitter is not cancel culture. I accept that individuals can and do get shouted down, but it remains the more marginalized voices that this happens to more often, whereas the consequences for getting up in town halls and screaming about CRT, for example remain generally non-existent.

 

I acknowledge this is splitting hairs, but conservative, white, Christian, straight, cis people are in little to no danger of “being canceled,” generally and certainly in comparison to someone who is, say, openly trans.

 

Or to wit…

 

 

I might pretty ardently think that the marginal tax rate above $400K a year should be 90%, but I don’t think people who disagree with that should face social consequences for publicly advocating for lower taxes. If you’re out there advocating for gay conversion therapy or talking about how negroid musculature makes black people inherently better athletes and more resistant to pain, yeeted into the sea you should be.

[Fizzzzle]

Oh, I firmly believe that CRT absolutely is *not* taught in schools, but it fucking SHOULD be. At least a more digestible version, anyway. Like CRT was just this niche idea in academia before Fox News decided to scare everyone into thinking their kids are being indoctrinated with "your ancestors have done a lot of horrible things," and I'm like... You know, that's not a bad idea. People need to stop being proud of their ancestors, they were pretty much all terrible people. Even Lincoln was pretty fucking racist by our standards. And the decisions of those assholes still affect people today, disproportionately people of color.

 

And I've always been of the opinion that people take cancel culture too far when they just dig up random shit someone said a decade ago without allowing for discourse and change, but you can't just yell whatever you want publicly on the internet and not expect to be drug through the mud, so to speak. And when people start to say they just feel "uncomfortable" voicing their views on public, it's because they know the majority of people do not agree with them. If that's the case, then make a fucking convincing argument why you're right. Don't just shout into the void, pat yourself on the back, and then act like a victim when people call you a fucking idiot

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Crt is rebranded school indoctrination rhetoric from the 80s 

 

cancel culture is the same thing rebranded as pc culture nonsense from the 90s

 

its all racism, sexism, queerphobia, and grievance just dressed in a new shirt. It’s all conservatives have. The sad part is seemingly intelligent people fall for it time and time again. 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Like there is zero difference between these sentences:

”I know it’s not pc, but Black people are x”

”I’m going to get cancelled for this, but Black people are x”

 

 

[Guest]

I feel like all of these replies backed up what I just mused about  Regardless of whether it is actually happening or not, you all would like it to. It just rings a little hollow to say something isn’t happening simply because it is apparently ineffective despite a decent number of people wishing it were so. People do want to silence those who say wrong things. They do want to use CRT as a framework in education, not just in classroom materials, but also in how education is administered generally, all the way down to how schools are funded.

 

When people accuse me of doing something that I believe in, I don’t have a problem with saying I am indeed doing that! I don’t know why liberals tend to shy away from embracing these things and instead let conservatives define language for them.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

You’re falling for how nebulous the definition of crt is and giving the right wing a pass on their obvious attempt to whitewash history and entrench the racial hierarchy 

[stepee]

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

 

I am not looking for a reply

 

idk man this screammmmms “sbl is bored today”

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

You’re falling for how nebulous the definition of crt is and giving the right wing a pass on their obvious attempt to whitewash history and entrench the racial hierarchy 

Not a pass, it’s literally the point. Stop letting bad actors redefine language for you! I think about this often in the context of my businesses. When we set the standard for behavior from the moment people pull into the parking lot to the moment they pull out of the parking lot, we shape the behavior of our guests. If we leave it to the ruffians to set the standard, everybody behaves worse.

 

When you just throw your hands up and say “it’s not happening!” you have lost the language battle.
 

2 minutes ago, stepee said:

 

idk man this screammmmms “sbl is bored today”

 

😂 I don’t really know where this notion came from. I’m never bored, I just have times where I am able to engage in discussion for longer periods. Like today, I got up early to get all my Friday work done getting the theaters prepped from the weekend, so I had a lazy afternoon. Just picked up my stupid Mac Studio from the Apple store and will be setting her up shortly.

[Bacon]

why are people talking about cathode-ray tubes ?

[Kal-El814]

4 minutes ago, stepee said:

idk man this screammmmms “sbl is bored today”

 

The new Mac studio is so fat he’s going to have more time to be bored now!

 

18 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I feel like all of these replies backed up what I just mused about  Regardless of whether it is actually happening or not, you all would like it to. It just rings a little hollow to say something isn’t happening simply because it is apparently ineffective despite a decent number of people wishing it were so. People do want to silence those who say wrong things. They do want to use CRT as a framework in education, not just in classroom materials, but also in how education is administered generally, all the way down to how schools are funded.

 

When people accuse me of doing something that I believe in, I don’t have a problem with saying I am indeed doing that! I don’t know why liberals tend to shy away from embracing these things and instead let conservatives define language for them.

 

I don’t mind saying that I think fashy shit, hate speech, etc., should be purged from social media platforms. Or that talking heads / networks that engage in it should lose advertisers. I also don’t think this is “cancel culture.” It’s a bunch of people saying Louis CK style, “back in my day I could call things gay and use homophobic slurs with impunity because when *I* said them they weren’t done hatefully,” bullshit. The people who scream the loudest about “being canceled” are the ones making a living off of doing so, it’s not a valid concern for them.

 

CRT being taught in grade schools is just a wild red herring, motherfuckers cannot agree that “the Civil War was about slavery” should be in textbooks, we’re so far away from anything even remotely resembling what CRT is being taught in schools that the courses may as well be on Mars.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

But my point is that people *want* to do the thing they say isn’t happening. Why not just say you do want to do that?

 

Not only do I want to do it, it's merely the starting point for what I REALLY want to do!

 

And I will GLADLY admit that and go into excruciating detail of what I would do if given the opportunity and the power to do so.

[GeneticBlueprint]

I'm fine "cancelling" racists, perverts, libertarians, etc. Call it whatever you want.