Cancel culture strikes again

Lexicus said:
I'm not sure what you mean by this. As far as I can tell, virtue-signalling is something that humans engage in universally as part of socializing. Smart people do it subtly.
Click to expand...

Everything is cancel culture, but virtue signalling - now that's a very specific thing.
 
I haven't bought a Domino's pizza in 50 years because of the anti abortion politics of its owner. Is that cancel culture? And in checking things this morning I found out Tom Monaghan the Domino's founder sold the company in 1998 to an investment group. :lol: I guess I could buy one of their pizzas now....
 
Birdjaguar said:
I haven't bought a Domino's pizza in 50 years because of the anti abortion politics of its owner. Is that cancel culture? And in checking things this morning I found out Tom Monaghan the Domino's founder sold the company in 1998 to an investment group. :lol: I guess I could buy one of their pizzas now....
Click to expand...
There's no need punish yourself by eating Dominos.
 
Birdjaguar said:
I haven't bought a Domino's pizza in 50 years because of the anti abortion politics of its owner. Is that cancel culture? And in checking things this morning I found out Tom Monaghan the Domino's founder sold the company in 1998 to an investment group. :lol: I guess I could buy one of their pizzas now....
Click to expand...
"Cancellation" is in practice something carried out by institutions against individuals, not by individuals against institutions. "Cancellation" describes an attempt to force somebody out of public life or out of a particular rea of public life, such a particular industry, which is a powerful only wielded by powerful institutions; how could a relatively anonymous private individual hope to "cancel" a powerful institution like a multinational corporation?

The framework of "cancel culture" is awkward and baggage-laden, but it does point towards the tremendous asymmetries of power between powerful institutions (both private and public) and individual citizens in contemporary society. That so many liberals refuse to acknowledge this asymmetry, and therefore align themselves implicitly with the institutions against the citizens, should be troubling.
 
Last edited:
Traitorfish said:
"Cancellation" is in practice something carried out by institutions against individuals, not by individuals against institutions. "Cancellation" describes an attempt to force somebody out of public life or out of a particular rea of public life, such a particular industry, which is a powerful only wielded by powerful institutions; how could a relatively anonymous private individual hope to "cancel" a powerful institution like a multinational corporation?

The framework of "cancel culture" is awkward and baggage-laden, but it does point towards the tremendous asymmetries of power between powerful institutions (both private and public) and individual citizens in contemporary society. That so many liberals refuse to acknowledge this asymmetry, and therefore align themselves implicitly with the institutions against the citizens, should be troubling.
Click to expand...
You seem to be talking about old-school "cancel culture", where the elite kept women and minorities out of certain industries and out of top management (especially women)

Today what we've got is public pressure on companies to enact justice, by denying rewards to horrible people (such as sexists, racists, etc) and people who are pushing dangerous policies. People who previously had no checks on their behavior are now being held accountable, and hate it (which is why they're throwing such a tantrum)

But it's basic capitalism: consumers are organizing, and companies are afraid of losing business if they continue supporting those people. This is public-driven, and the opposite of what it used to be and what you're describing.
 
Last edited:
red_elk said:
Not necessarily.
For example there was a case with a woman who got mobbed on Twitter because of one careless statement she made before boarding a plane to Africa. Her career was destroyed before the plane landed.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/22/pr-exec-fired-racist-tweet-aids-africa-apology
Click to expand...

It was the institution(s) that fired her. Of course this tends to happen only if there is outrage by a part of the public, but the public doesn't have real control - which is why this can easily affect "progressives" in the future despite currently mostly (?) affecting conservatives/others. Privately you can't cancel much, since after a time no one cares about other people's private opinions.
 
Lexicus said:
I'm not sure what you mean by this. As far as I can tell, virtue-signalling is something that humans engage in universally as part of socializing. Smart people do it subtly.
Click to expand...
For what purpose, economic? The smart ones are better at it?
 
Traitorfish said:
"Cancellation" is in practice something carried out by institutions against individuals, not by individuals against institutions. "Cancellation" describes an attempt to force somebody out of public life or out of a particular rea of public life, such a particular industry, which is a powerful only wielded by powerful institutions; how could a relatively anonymous private individual hope to "cancel" a powerful institution like a multinational corporation?

The framework of "cancel culture" is awkward and baggage-laden, but it does point towards the tremendous asymmetries of power between powerful institutions (both private and public) and individual citizens in contemporary society. That so many liberals refuse to acknowledge this asymmetry, and therefore align themselves implicitly with the institutions against the citizens, should be troubling.
Click to expand...

This is not at all surprising, seeing how, economically and in terms of reach, influence, the institutions have grown beyond anything seen in previous history. Their power to cancel is a useful instrument in keeping the balance of “healthy” user base. They don’t care one way or the other, as far as particular arguments are concerned, what corporations do need is a productive environment in the space they created, which, if maintained successfully, is going to help eating into competitor’s market share. The asymmetry of power is an economic asymmetry, amplified by loudspeakers and other amenities of a modern institution, or a powerful individual.
 
A Tennessee hat store lost some of its contracts after its dimwitted owner decided to sell yellow, six-sided star patches saying "Not Vaccinated." What a bonehead!

Point being: is this "cancel culture?"

I still maintain the position that "cancel culture" is just another obnoxious buzz-word that caught on.
 
amadeus said:
A Tennessee hat store lost some of its contracts after its dimwitted owner decided to sell yellow, six-sided star patches saying "Not Vaccinated." What a bonehead!

Point being: is this "cancel culture?"
Click to expand...

I think it's 'cancel dumbasses'.
 
Cancel culture, boycotting, ethical consumerism, sanctions, consumer activism etc. which although are very similar and serve very similar purposes should not be confused with each other as I think some members are doing.
 
MaryKB said:
Today what we've got is public pressure on companies to enact justice, by denying rewards to horrible people (such as sexists, racists, etc) and people who are pushing dangerous policies. People who previously had no checks on their behavior are now being held accountable, and hate it (which is why they're throwing such a tantrum)

But it's basic capitalism: consumers are organizing, and companies are afraid of losing business if they continue supporting those people. This is public-driven, and the opposite of what it used to be and what you're describing.
Click to expand...

Ah, but that is until these powerful institutions are cowed by people power and decide it's better for them to bow to pressure. Then it becomes cancel culture... and good socialists are supposed to decry it? Not really sure how the 'cancel culture' logic works, tbh.

Modder_Mode said:
Cancel culture, boycotting, ethical consumerism, sanctions, consumer activism etc. which although are very similar and serve very similar purposes should not be confused with each other as I think some members are doing.
Click to expand...

I wonder how you'll manage to draw a neat line between boycotting, sanctions, consumer activism on one side and 'cancel culture' on the other.
 
Birdjaguar said:
I haven't bought a Domino's pizza in 50 years because of the anti abortion politics of its owner. Is that cancel culture? And in checking things this morning I found out Tom Monaghan the Domino's founder sold the company in 1998 to an investment group. :lol: I guess I could buy one of their pizzas now....
Click to expand...
You can't do that because that would be cancelling your own cancellation... which of course is cancel culture.

As an aside, Dominos is much better than it used to be, about twice as good I'd say. More specifically, it is a 2/10 now whereas it used to be a 1/10.
 
amadeus said:
A Tennessee hat store lost some of its contracts after its dimwitted owner decided to sell yellow, six-sided star patches saying "Not Vaccinated." What a bonehead!
Click to expand...
More like “What the hell were they thinking?!”.
 
Sommerswerd said:
As an aside, Dominos is much better than it used to be, about twice as good I'd say. More specifically, it is a 2/10 now whereas it used to be a 1/10.
Click to expand...
Dominos is a nice treat to have once in a while. But it can’t hold a candle to local Pizza shops. At least around my area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom