How Far Will the Woke Mob Go?

And trying to do so through historical revsionism and censorship is a crime against humanity - albeit a non-violent one - because it attempts to amputate and maim what we are as a species and cripples our ability to learn and grow from the mistakes.
It’s not going to the level of 1984’s Ministry of Truth, the originals are going to be left untouched. It’s that they’re just placing the warning card at the start. It’s only the versions that are gonna be tweeked if they’re going to be aired on TV or at least have a “viewer discretion is advised” titlecard with an appropriate rating. We’ve done this before when rated R films are aired on TV in the past.
 
It’s not going to the level of 1984’s Ministry of Truth, the originals are going to be left untouched. It’s that they’re just placing the warning card at the start. It’s only the versions that are gonna be tweeked if they’re going to be aired on TV or at least have a “viewer discretion is advised” titlecard with an appropriate rating. We’ve done this before when rated R films are aired on TV in the past.

Not YET. But all toxic socio-political movements start much smaller scale than they end up. Snowball effects and slippery slope arguments are much more valid than people reflexively give them credit for nowadays. Saying that something is not CURRENTLY at a certain bad level for serious concern to silence criticism or legitimate fear, says absolutely nothing for how they may actually end up. History, in fact, has proven this much many, many times.
 
Not YET. But all toxic socio-political movements start much smaller scale than they end up. Snowball effects and slippery slope arguments are much more valid than people reflexively give them credit for nowadays. Saying that something is not CURRENTLY at a certain bad level for serious concern to silence criticism or legitimate fear, says absolutely nothing for how they may actually end up.
What toxic socio-political movement? The only one I see right now are the Alt-Right who sick their claws on vulnerable people (Notably straight white men who feel emasculated) and brainwash them to their ideology and into a pipeline of hate. This, this is just acting like chicken little thinking “SJWs are after muh vidia”.

Do you honestly think the woke thought police are going to go through every film in history and remove the bad bits? Provided even if a woke thought police even exist in the first place.

History, in fact, has proven this much many, many times.
Do you have any proof outside the Russian Revolution and the Chinese Cultural Revolution? (I’m taking these out of the table since these seem to be the go to for righties to jump to).
 
to for righties to jump to).

Ah, I see that, like several other people, have disingenuously assigned a socio-political label of convenience to me that my posts in no way, shape, or form, demonstrate any adherence to for the purpose of unverified slander and discrediting of my viewpoints and to make me, in an overt tactic of lies, "an easier rhetorical target." There are four or five others on this forum who have committed rhetorical suicide and threw away all of their possible credibility and legitimacy with me by stooping to just vile low because that was the only way they felt they could get over one on me. It is the tactic on this forum I find the most despicable, pitiful, loathsome, and desperate, and the one I have the least patience and forgiveness and most contempt. You have now joined their number.
 
I uh, don’t think GenM is calling you a righty in that sentence. You are overreacting.
 
Ah, I see that, like several other people, have disingenuously assigned a socio-political label...
You done? Can we address the argument instead of going into a persecution complex? Again, do you have any sources to back up your claim of “History, in fact, has proven this much many, many times.”

I’ve already outlined that I don’t accept the fallout of the Russian Revolution and the Chinese Cultural Revolution because they’ve been used so much by the right that’s it’s litteraly beating a dead horse at this point. It’s in no way calling you a righty.

You have now joined their number.
“I refuse to be placed in this box you placed me in! :D” - Innuendo Studios, The Alt-Right Playbook.
 
“I refuse to be placed in this box you placed me in! :D” - Innuendo Studios, The Alt-Right Playbook.

Okay, you've done it again. Your saying only "Alt-Right," object to such a disingenuous tactics, or could possibly do so (quite ironic that you chose a group who wear their ideologies on their sleeves and tend to do that to others often too - but since it's obvious nothing is beneath you now, rhetorically, it's probably no surprise). Of course, the fact that I consider these out-of-touch, whiny, Mom's Basement, punks who call themselves the Alt-Right as vile and despicable as I find self-righteous people like you probably means nothing in your vapid world view, because EVERYONE must be pegged, however artificially or contrivedly, into one destructive and ruinous binary extreme or another in this war of stupidity threatening a death spiral of civilization - and pegged by American socio-political movements and labels, even if they're not American (like I'm not) - or the "system of reference," doesn't work if everyone's not firmly on "their side," rooting for "their team," - well, the "system of reference," just doesn't work, PERIOD, and extremists on BOTH sides have too far, done too much damage, and too little good - and so have you!
 
So you have nothing to back up your statements of “History, in fact, has proven this much many, many times.”?
 
So you have nothing to back up your statements of “History, in fact, has proven this much many, many times.”?

Oh, I do. It's just obvious I'd be casting pearls before swine by doing so. You poorly timed playing that losing card in the same hand as your historical question (and, BTW, history - world history - is a forte of mine, but you've so disgusted me now I have so desire to dig up and demonstrate these examples - as I said pearls before swine).
 
Things you also like to do to me often. We're not really as different in our rhetorical styles as you seem to think. You're just often less honest and more self-righteous about it.
I mean, don't let me distract you from taking offense from every poster you reply to in the thread, but I just wanted to say thanks for your admittance here.
 
I mean, don't let me distract you from taking offense from every poster you reply to in the thread, but I just wanted to say thanks for your admittance here.

Not every poster, @Gorbles. Not nearly as close to that as you may think. Though it may seem that way from your skewed priorities of reading and responding to posts.
 
The past was ugly, nasty, barbaric, brutal, and awful. But we cannot fix, change, or better the past, restrospectively. And trying to do so through historical revsionism and censorship is a crime against humanity - albeit a non-violent one - because it attempts to amputate and maim what we are as a species and cripples our ability to learn and grow from the mistakes of our forbears. The future should be what is endeavoured to be bettered, because REAL, MEANINGFUL and PRODUCTIVE work can be done there, not a sugary chicanery that ultimately helps no one.

Isn't acknowledging the sins of the past part of making a better future?
 
Isn't acknowledging the sins of the past part of making a better future?

Yes, but trying to have a historical view they're acknowledged artificially within their own context, and censored in historical portrayals, to soothe the sensibilities of modern people is self-defeating and distorts our understanding of history, and ability to learn from, and appreciate it. Like those who want to edit the N-word out of Harper Lee and Mark Twain's books just don't get it...
 
Last edited:
Yes, but trying to have a historical view they're acknowledged artificially within their own context, and censored in historical portrayals, to soothe the sensibilities of modern people is self-defeating and distorts our understanding of history, and ability to learn from, and appreciate it. Like those who want to edit the N-word out of Harper Lee and Mark Twain's books just don't get it...
If it’s a reprint of the novel, a nth edition. I wouldn’t have an issue if it’s for general consumption. The original edition isn't going to be touched or edited.
 
How much of Blazing Saddles would be left if all the offensive language was removed? It would look like one of those dubbed 60s Asian martial arts movies.
 
How much of Blazing Saddles would be left if all the offensive language was removed? It would look like one of those dubbed 60s Asian martial arts movies.
Last I recalled Blazing Saddles is rated R (not sure what the equivalent would be outside the US). I think people who watch it knows fully well that it contains foul language and is rated R in today’s movie ratings. Though personally, going George Lucas on the film to scrub out any offending languages would be a waste of time and energy where a movie rating would be sufficient.
 
The problem with Huck Finn is not bad language but the fact that it's marketed as educational fiction for children. Twain never intended the novel to be such and has been controversial since it's publication. It's more akin to 19th century Stephen King's It or Stand by Me. Features kid protagonists but is intended for mature readers.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but trying to have a historical view they're acknowledged artificially within their own context, and censored in historical portrayals, to soothe the sensibilities of modern people is self-defeating and distorts our understanding of history, and ability to learn from, and appreciate it. Like those who want to edit the N-word out of Harper Lee and Mark Twain's books just don't get it...

I agree but a disclaimer in the forward seems fine. . .

How much of Blazing Saddles would be left if all the offensive language was removed? It would look like one of those dubbed 60s Asian martial arts movies.

I mean yea most of Mel Brooks works and Monty python's and on and on and on. . .but again a disclaimer in the beginning hurts nothing and allows the show to go on! :p
 
Oh FFS do people really think language being cleaned up is a new thing? Am I the only one that grew up during the Satanic Panic?

I mean Blazing Saddles was pretty tame for a rated R movie even in its time and the only reason people keep bringing it up is because of Mel Brooks' quote that he couldn't make that movie today. He did not say that because of censorship or race, only idiots who know nothing about the movie's purpose think that. It's not even bad on race and most "woke" people like it because the hero is a handsome black guy who happens to be the smartest, wittiest, most charismatic guy in the film. It's a satire of the "Good Guy" western that was so overdone at the time that the genre makes today's glut of superhero movies and TV shows look niche. That genre is essentially dead and Blazing Saddles played a major role in killing it. Mel Brooks said he couldn't make it today because he literally couldn't. It wouldn't have the same impact because the genre it's making fun of does not exist today. The only westerns we have today are gritty antihero movies and whatever slapstick garbage Adam Sandler or whoever is cranking out...oh and whatever Wild Wild West and Cowboys Vs Aliens were supposed to be. He can't make it today because it wouldn't work, not because of censorship. I haven't heard of a single lefty who wants that movie cancelled. It's a fabrication of the culture war morons like Ted Cruz and that diphorsehocky Ben Shapiro.

Censorship was even worse decades or even a couple centuries ago. The "woke mob" isn't going to censor language any worse than stuffy Victorians or Prohibition teetotalers. People are freaking out about Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn? Those books were banned decades ago because the protagonists were considered immoral role models. They survived and are still considered classics. So what if people want a version with cleaner language? It'd be easier to read them to kids. I read them to my sons and had to clean it up on the fly because I didn't want my 5 year old running around saying the N-word. The original unedited version will always exist.

Don't worry, we're going to be just fine. Adhere to woke culture if you want, ignore it if you like, won't make a difference. Just don't be a racist douche and you'll pull through no problem. Society goes through growing pains every once in a while where sometimes things that were once ok are now taboo and just as often things that were once taboo now aren't (extra-marital sex, weed, etc).
 
Top Bottom