Verdun
Premium Gold
- Oct 16, 2011
- 4,690
- 8,179
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Please answer the question.
Society/Culture Has cancel culture gone too far?
- Thread starter Sweet Jesus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Please answer the question.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,852
Verdun
Premium Gold
- Oct 16, 2011
- 4,690
- 8,179
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
1. You do not do nuance, or have any understanding of complexity.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,854
I'm sorry but I can't make your argument for you.
That's something you have to do on your own.
Verdun
Premium Gold
- Oct 16, 2011
- 4,690
- 8,179
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
No need to say sorry. As I said nuance and complexity is something you do not do - that is ok.
Night night.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,856
Next time, try to use your words.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,858
When did that happen, Chiefy?
Just because you had a dream about it, doesn't mean it was real. You couldn't sit me on my arse even if you got on all fours and offered to be my pouffe.
Defamation is adjucated in a court of law. Not denying it has flaws in its application. But it is a process.
Cancel culture is largely determined by a court of commercial vested interest. Unfortunately. Not always for a greater holistic view for the betterment of mankind. Tho I dont deny there are those pure at heart who rightly defend marginalisation. But its driven by voices of a populus and not an actual documented and practised process.
Colour me cynical and basic but thats how my simple minds eye sees the variance of the two.
Cancel culture is largely determined by a court of commercial vested interest. Unfortunately. Not always for a greater holistic view for the betterment of mankind. Tho I dont deny there are those pure at heart who rightly defend marginalisation. But its driven by voices of a populus and not an actual documented and practised process.
Colour me cynical and basic but thats how my simple minds eye sees the variance of the two.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,860
One is a legal protection. The other is all about "offence", and generally has no basis in law.
It's not hard.
These peanuts are saying a dog and an elephant are the same because they both have 4 legs.
True. But id even argue how cancel culture has any basis in law. It may transmute into defamation but the "culture" as it stands has zero basis in law.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,862
Well, some of that is in the eye of the beholder.
I'm not talking about defamation.
All good. I was just really struggling to understand the argument littered over several pages. Not for the first time on BF.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,864
These peanuts want to pretend that cancel culture isn't a real thing, or that it's so overstated by conservatives that even talking about it is off limits.
So their latest argument is "yeah well but defamation cases are cancel culture" without understanding the difference, or that many defamation cases are brought against media outlets, not against Joe Public. If you got rid of defamation law, Murdoch tabloids would have a field day.
Vested and myopic commercial interests are a dirty thing. But like oxygen, they undeniably exist. As does cancel culture due to its largely commercial oxygen. I dont even subscribe to the whole woke/non woke thang. Its a masquerade parade of semantics.. Sustained by economic interests.
But as I said, I have no doubt there are those that genuinely want equality for all but the loudest voices/reactions seem to me to be commercialy driven.
I dont even understand why this is even a topic of argument when its so patently obvious.
But as I said, I have no doubt there are those that genuinely want equality for all but the loudest voices/reactions seem to me to be commercialy driven.
I dont even understand why this is even a topic of argument when its so patently obvious.
A defamation threat may be used as a tactic to silence a critic or may be the expression of a legitimate grievance.
Couldn’t ‘cancellers’ also be expressing a legitimate grievance? There are legal protections against hate speech and discrimination.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,867
It still has basis in law, unlike cancel culture, which is simply a matter of "offence" or breaching certain orthodoxies.
You can't ignore the distinction between something that is a matter of law and something that isn't.
And I'm generally fine with those protections, depending how "hate speech" claims are defined and assessed. And discrimination isn't a matter of speech, necessarily. It's a matter of material discrimination. Maybe you mean vilification?
I'm not some fundamentalist who says absolutely anything goes. There are still public health and safety arguments that I accept, but I think generally there needs to be a high bar for censorship or removal. It can't simply be a matter of someone being "offended". That's not sufficient. But if it's content that is obviously illegal, then I don't think we're talking about cancel culture. That's simply a matter of enforcing the law, which I regard as distinct from cancel culture.
For example, if the government and/or platforms crack down on Islamic State recruiting people online by sharing beheading videos, I don't regard that as cancel culture. Same goes for inciting violence, other forms of online radicalisation, child pr0n, copyright infringements and any number of other legal restrictions on speech.
We can debate those restrictions but enforcing legal prohibitions, for which there are agreed reasons, isn't cancel culture. That's not what I'm talking about when I criticise cancel culture. That's reserved for content or speech that is otherwise legal but has simply been deemed "offensive" or disagreeable, prompting some folks to demand its removal.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #2,869
I thought you'd like that one.
- Sep 17, 2019
- 22,239
- 35,275
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #2,871
What a bizarre thing to say. What makes you think that Mark Hamill is close to far left?
Your compass is broken.
- Sep 17, 2019
- 22,239
- 35,275
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #2,873
- Sep 17, 2019
- 22,239
- 35,275
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Moderator
- #2,875
Let me guess, you think Biden is a radical leftie?
