Cancel culture strikes again

[Colon]

Amnesty strips Alexei Navalny of 'prisoner of conscience' status

Obviously, you cannot possibly be the victim of state persecution when you've distasteful comments 15 years ago. Don't worry about Putin's regime, someone else will surely come along who's equally capable of opposing him, but who's a bit more to the liking of the PC mullahs in the West. And if not, well then Putin did us all a favour getting that trash of the streets, because we all know that wokeness takes precedence over democracy and rule of law.

God damn it I'm pissed off. This is just the straw.

 

[Kyriakos]

I am not sure why anyone should care about what amnesty international says.

 

[Samson]

Just when I thought I had figured out what people mean by cancel culture, someone comes along and proves me wrong (esp. considering the rights group said it would however continue to “fight for his freedom”). Anyone want to come up with a definition that includes this?

“Amnesty International took an internal decision to stop referring to [Alexey] Navalny as a prisoner of conscience in relation to comments he made in the past. Some of these comments, which Navalny has not publicly denounced, reach the threshold of advocacy of hatred, and this is at odds with Amnesty’s definition of a prisoner of conscience,” the statement said, without specifying what those comments were.
Navalny has previously advocated for nationalist, anti-immigrant policies and is regularly accused by his critics on social media of being a white supremacist.
Fifteen years ago, Navalny filmed a pro-gun rights video in which he compared people from the North Caucasus, home to many Muslims, as “cockroaches” and then pretended to shoot one with a pistol.
“Navalny has not, to the best of our knowledge, made similar pronouncements in recent years, and this decision does not change our resolve to fight for his immediate release, and for an end to his politically motivated persecution by the Russian authorities,” Amnesty’s statement said.
A “prisoner of conscience”, Amnesty’s website says, is “someone has not used or advocated violence but is imprisoned because of who they are”.​

 

[GinandTonic]

Amnesty strips Alexei Navalny of 'prisoner of conscience' status

Obviously, you cannot possibly be the victim of state persecution when you've distasteful comments 15 years ago. Don't worry about Putin's regime, someone else will surely come along who's equally capable of opposing him, but who's a bit more to the liking of the PC mullahs in the West. And if not, well then Putin did us all a favour getting that trash of the streets, because we all know that wokeness takes precedence over democracy and rule of law.

God damn it I'm pissed off. This is just the straw.

What does this have to do with cancel culture?

 

[aelf]

Just when I thought I had figured out what people mean by cancel culture, someone comes along and proves me wrong (esp. considering the rights group said it would however continue to “fight for his freedom”). Anyone want to come up with a definition that includes this?

“Amnesty International took an internal decision to stop referring to [Alexey] Navalny as a prisoner of conscience in relation to comments he made in the past. Some of these comments, which Navalny has not publicly denounced, reach the threshold of advocacy of hatred, and this is at odds with Amnesty’s definition of a prisoner of conscience,” the statement said, without specifying what those comments were.
Navalny has previously advocated for nationalist, anti-immigrant policies and is regularly accused by his critics on social media of being a white supremacist.
Fifteen years ago, Navalny filmed a pro-gun rights video in which he compared people from the North Caucasus, home to many Muslims, as “cockroaches” and then pretended to shoot one with a pistol.
“Navalny has not, to the best of our knowledge, made similar pronouncements in recent years, and this decision does not change our resolve to fight for his immediate release, and for an end to his politically motivated persecution by the Russian authorities,” Amnesty’s statement said.
A “prisoner of conscience”, Amnesty’s website says, is “someone has not used or advocated violence but is imprisoned because of who they are”.​

What comes out of the colon is you-know-what, so I'm honestly not the least bit surprised.

 

[red_elk]

Obviously, you cannot possibly be the victim of state persecution when you've distasteful comments 15 years ago.

Becoming a victim of state persecution is not a big achievement per se. Stealing something from local store or evading taxes are easy ways.
But the "prisoner of conscience" status requires at least presence of conscience.

 

[GinandTonic]

Becoming a victim of state persecution is not a big achievement per se. Stealing something from local store or evading taxes are easy ways.
But the "prisoner of conscience" status requires at least presence of conscience.

Indeed. He can be both a victim of state persecution and a total bellend. At which point, perhaps, Amnesty felt it was appropriate to campaign for his release but not term him a prisoner of conscience.

 

[Lexicus]

God damn it I'm pissed off. This is just the straw.

You are very smart. This is a very smart and intelligent thing to be pissed off about.

 

[Arwon]

It seems fairly reasonable that Amnesty wouldn't be a huge endorser of political figures who, given power, would do all the bad non Amnesty friendly things themselves.

 

[Tee Kay]

amazing how many people here defend disendorsement of pro-democracy politician fighting against an authoritarian regime with a history of media manipulation based on unverified videos 15 years ago

i guess CFC-OT has been always been this bad and i was just stupider back then

 

[Zardnaar]

amazing how many people here defend disendorsement of pro-democracy politician fighting against an authoritarian regime with a history of media manipulation based on unverified videos 15 years ago

i guess CFC-OT has been always been this bad and i was just stupider back then

Navalny isn't perfect but liberalism as the west would define it isn't such a thing in Russia.

Of course there's a few individuals but even if you had free and fair elections withat least by western standards. proportional representation odds are you would have a conservative Russian parliament

 

[Lexicus]

amazing how many people here defend disendorsement of pro-democracy politician fighting against an authoritarian regime with a history of media manipulation based on unverified videos 15 years ago

Conversely, what is the point of getting invested in an uncritical view of Navalny? Why can't we acknowledge the man has flaws?

 

[Imaus]

Tell us - how will Navalny's Russia would be different from Putins'? A few more rotating Chairmen?

 

[Lexicus]

Tell us - how will Navalny's Russia would be different from Putins'? A few more rotating Chairmen?

There will still be a war in Chechnya every couple of decades, but now the legislature will write angry letters to the executive about it, telling the executive how angry they are

 

[Samson]

Proper cancel culture strikes India

India plans to oblige social media companies to erase contentious content fast and assist investigations

The latest draft rules – which would be legally enforceable – say companies should remove content as early as possible but not later than 36 hours, after a government or legal order.
They must also assist in investigations or other cybersecurity-related incidents within 72 hours of a request.
Further, if a post depicts an individual in any sexual act or conduct, then companies must disable or remove such content within a day of receiving a complaint, the rules added.

The draft proposal also requires companies to appoint a chief compliance officer, another executive for coordinating on law enforcement and a “grievance redressal officer”.
All must be resident Indian citizens.

Only slightly related:
Police in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh questioned an Amazon executive for nearly four hours on Tuesday over allegations that a political drama, Tandav, hurt religious sentiments and caused public anger.​

 

[Samson]

Should this get you cancelled?

 

[Gorbles]

Should this get you cancelled?

From the article:

“The Charlie Hebdo killing was a terrorist attack. Muslim leaders not only condemned the killings, but the fact that the professor actually used it as proof of Islam’s stance on freedom of expression was absolutely appalling,” the law student, who wished to remain anonymous, told Al Jazeera.

“The professor cherry-picked his examples to put Muslims in such a negative light when there are examples of the contrary – he just chose to not talk about them,” he said.

Definitely seems like the quality of his teaching isn't up to scratch. That's not so much being "cancelled" as a regular consequence of being bad at your job. The same goes for being Islamophobic; it isn't a stretch to assume "don't openly be a bigot" is something staff are held to in terms of their conduct on the job.

 

[red_elk]

Indeed. He can be both a victim of state persecution and a total bellend.

He can even be both a victim of state persecution and a criminal.

 

[Farm Boy]

I don't know. A well written PowerPoint only complements a lecture point rather than containing it. Is it one? Is there specific context? Or is it a garbo PowerPoint that actually is for the horsehockey students who skip then check blackboard, and thus need to be the point itself without context? I didn't click it Samson.

 

[Samson]

I don't know. A well written PowerPoint only complements a lecture point rather than containing it. Is it one? Is there specific context? Or is it a garbo PowerPoint that actually is for the ****** students who skip then check blackboard, and thus need to be the point itself without context? I didn't click it Samson.

All the data in the article is that one slide and students comments that are pretty negative, Gorbles' quote is pretty representative.