How do you end 'cancel culture'?

[Patine]

Revolution.

Almost always leads to something worse, ESPECIALLY if it's set out to redress demographic-based grievances. I would say an American ZANU-PF-style regime would be no better than the sum of all fears of a Trump re-election and all the feared abuses of power that would follow. One form of insane, reactionary, extremist demographic-based regime is no better than another, and none should be supported or lauded or even tolerated by people with a conscience. All such regimes are the worst of socio-political evil, regardless of any pretense.

 

[Gorbles]

Almost always leads to something worse, ESPECIALLY if it's set out to redress demographic-based grievances. I would say an American ZANU-PF-style regime would be no better than the sum of all fears of a Trump re-election and all the feared abuses of power that would follow. One form of insane, reactionary, extremist demographic-based regime is no better than another, and none should be supported or lauded or even tolerated by people with a conscience. All such regimes are the worst of socio-political evil, regardless of any pretense.

How often is almost always? Was France worse-off thanks to the French Revolution? Was the US worse-off after their War of Independence (specifically with regards to the consequences of that war, and not independent actions taken generations later)?

As many criticisms as I could have of the modern US, I don't think they'd be any better under the British Empire, or indeed any direct British control at all.

You seem to be asserting a generalisation there. I'd be interested to know how it stacks up with history.

 

[Patine]

How often is almost always? Was France worse-off thanks to the French Revolution? Was the US worse-off after their War of Independence (specifically with regards to the consequences of that war, and not independent actions taken generations later)?

As many criticisms as I could have of the modern US, I don't think they'd be any better under the British Empire, or indeed any direct British control at all.

You seem to be asserting a generalisation there. I'd be interested to know how it stacks up with history.

France's history since the Tennis Court Oath and the Storming of the Bastille is very complicated, and involves a lot of other factors, including Counter-Revolutionary and more Moderate factors, and factors that factors that derived from other movements considered revolutionary in the context of their own day, but didn't yet exist in the Revolutionary Period (such as those that led to the Modern French Political Left-Wing Parties). Also, France's policies in Colonial and Post-Colonial Africa and Asia have been atrocious, and seemed to get worse under the Republic, in the grander scope of things. And, as a Canadian, and seeing our history as a Dominion who peacefully went their way and are not under tyrannical British Governors in the modern day - and whose level of individual dignity, prosperity, and personal justice today notably exceeds our neighbours south of the 49th, I wouldn't necessarily say the U.S. would be worse off in the long-run - maybe less politically, militarily, and economically powerful, but the great power of the U.S. as a nation has almost certainly had a detrimental effect on how they treat many of those in their borders, and the impunity they do so, and the culture that leads to it - the very same treatment of many of their people broadly being discussed in this thread. In other words, I more or less stand by my statement. Plus, in both the cases of the French and British Monarchies, there positions of power were not as solid at the time without a Revolution as many believe in retrospect, and the frittering away of Royal Authority to Constitutional Monarchy and Commonwealth (as already seen in the British Empire, even with the American Revolution notwithstanding, and probably also in the teetering, in truth, French Monarchy, as well).

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

I think Madison project estimation of past gdp per capita put Napoleonic France at a lower number than its late medieval counterpart. I'm not sure that French revolution is an example of a good thing but the causes are deep but the end was maybe the worst european war before the world wars. American revolution/war of independence is very different in nature because it was not about just a government change but about indepencence.

I don't think you can simply say that revolutions is going to be absolute bad or not. The revolution in France did probably great harm but maybe the American one worked because it had different goals.

The French revolution was basically just a purge of the old government which simply ended up creating maybe an even more despotic and brutal government than before under Napoleon. Slower political reforms would probably have worked better in the long run. That is the risk of a revolution, power vacuums and purge of the administrative elite can lead to bad consequences.

 

[Patine]

but maybe the American one worked because it had different goals.

I'm not convinced about that in the long-term. The differences in American government, priorities, culture, outlook, and it's fierce parochial independentism are very much also the sources of a lot of the biggest problems and failings of it's culture, politics, economic scheme, and social viewpoint, including, as I said, a lot of the things complained about on threads like these, and the very slow movement away from, or to redress them, or, in many cases, see them as problems. The classic scenario and case study of a Deep Decline of a Once Great Civilization and Empire - where founding ideals, no matter how outmoded and obviously detrimental, are clung to, and the past is embraced in toxic nostalgia, because the future looks so grim and no one wants to admit it. But, the stage of said Deep Decline where the Once Great Civilization and Empire is still unchallengeable militarily and economically externally, but is destroying itself socially and politically within. Like the Roman Empire about a century or two before any Goths were banging on the Gates of Rome, following the very roads that all led there. The ship is sinking, but the Captain doesn't care - he's too busy with secretive crimes and acts of treason against the ship, and the crew and passengers partying on the decks don't care, either. Such a tragic waste!

 

[Crezth]

Almost always leads to something worse, ESPECIALLY if it's set out to redress demographic-based grievances. I would say an American ZANU-PF-style regime would be no better than the sum of all fears of a Trump re-election and all the feared abuses of power that would follow. One form of insane, reactionary, extremist demographic-based regime is no better than another, and none should be supported or lauded or even tolerated by people with a conscience. All such regimes are the worst of socio-political evil, regardless of any pretense.

Revolution isn’t nice, it’s a response people create to tyrannical, unyielding government. But this is not like Zimbabwe, as understandable as that was, because Black Americans are not the majority. Some kind of demographic revenge fantasy is small potatoes compared to the issue that unites many more, the issue of capitalism treating people as disposable labor drones, to be spied on, taken in the night, and left to die of treatable illness. In the class based analysis, as prompted by Mise, the solution to racism is for Black and white workers to join forces and liberate themselves as workers united.

 

[Crezth]

And is this going to make the white supremacists quake with fear in their Nazi jackboots?

It’s just a statement of fact. All revolutions have some infighting. There was a lot of infighting during the civil rights movement too, and the white supremacists successfully managed to assassinate most of the Black leaders in that time, but do not mistake power and an advantageous position for courage. All fascists are afraid, deep down, afraid of change and afraid that the society they want is being taken away from them. Many people die fighting for freedom, but it’s still a worthwhile fight, because resistance is what they fear.

 

[The Civs 6]

You wait for it to ride out. Cancel culture will end. A few of the genuine problems will be addressed while the rest of the noise will go away, as people realize the brutal reality that cancel culture is commanded by crypto communists who just want to boss others around and tell them how to live their lives.

 

[cardgame]

I didn't know you had to be a communist in order to want bad people to stop receiving money. In fact, it sounds pretty capitalist to me. Market forces and so on.

 

[The Civs 6]

I didn't know you had to be a communist in order to want bad people to stop receiving money. In fact, it sounds pretty capitalist to me. Market forces and so on.

as for people shouting down entertainers or whatever, it's not really a question of when people will stop doing that. idiots will always be idiots - these are the same kind of people who yelled when they made freaking Sonic's arms blue or whatever. Entertainers and companies just have to grow a backbone and realize that the idiots are just noise and represent less than 10% of people, certainly not the silent majority.

 

[cardgame]

Hold up, this thread is about cancel culture. How did you drag 'defund the police' into this?

 

[Lexicus]

Again I'm all for massive redistribution of wealth, I've argued for it my whole life, but the stats you posted still shows that rich black people are 3 times more likely to be killed by police than rich white people. You clearly need to do something else on top of that. I don't really get what's controversial about this tbh, that a solution that is no doubt a great one at addressing poverty, won't necessarily entirely address racism?

I am not an expert on the police, much less the highly militarised police force they have in America, so me starting this off by talking about police violence in America is my own fault.

You wanna talk controversial? I'm a police abolitionist: I do not have much faith that "sensitivity training" or whatever will accomplish much to reduce that disparity. We need to just get rid of our "highly militarized police force" and start over.

So your popular example of "progressive" is people who rate Obama highly.

Not exactly. It's just, some of the 90% are definitely "progressives."

Maybe for you they're synonymous?

Again, not quite. Liberal is a broader circle, which includes people I would not describe as progressive.

 

[The Civs 6]

Hold up, this thread is about cancel culture. How did you drag 'defund the police' into this?

edited to reflect that - just a mental fart on my part.

 

[Patine]

I didn't know you had to be a communist in order to want bad people to stop receiving money. In fact, it sounds pretty capitalist to me. Market forces and so on.

Oh, no! Certainly not! Joseph McCarthy and the HUAC, whose "Blacklisting," was an almost identical phenomenon, actually targeted alleged Communists (and homosexuals), and propped up a growingly militaristic and paranoid police regime in the U.S. unheard of in American politics prior to WW2. But, either way, it IS a form of unaccountable and irresponsible witch hunting that, like all witch hunting, is a gross aberration to any sense of justice in and of itself.

 

[The Civs 6]

Yeah cancel culture is the exact same thing as McCarthyism except the script is flipped. And just like that era, people will come to their senses some day.

 

[cardgame]

Is the federal government promoting cancel culture?

 

[The Civs 6]

Is the federal government promoting cancel culture?

So witchhunting and bully tactics are fine except when some elements of the government are supporting them? I'd like to hear your response to that. And from my perspective the universities and municipal governments, significant government institutions both, are complicit in cancel culture.

And let me add - at least communists were actually a threat to the American government. A few holdout dinosaurs from a previous era are not an existential threat to our nation.

 

[cardgame]

It sounds like you "want to control what other people do, say and think."

Cancel culture is market forces in action, a demand (or lack thereof) driven by the consumer being met by management "cancelling" for example Louie CK

 

[The Civs 6]

It sounds like you "want to control what other people do, say and think."

Cancel culture is market forces in action, a demand (or lack thereof) driven by the consumer being met by management "cancelling" for example Louie CK

I never said people should stop. I'm speaking from the perspective of someone who experienced cancel culture firsthand. I wish I had had more backbone at that time. I think others in my position should have more backbone. How is that wanting to control what anyone does? I just disagree with why these people are doing it.

And screw people like Louis CK. I have no time for people who actually did bad things. But when a judge gets heat because he says his former clerk had "street smarts", and that clerk just happened to be black? That's stupid and I don't agree with it. And unfortunately a lot of cancel culture is just internet crowd based thought policing.

 

[cardgame]

I never said people should stop.

So witchhunting and bully tactics are fine?