Forum Replies Created
October 27, 2020 at 10:13 pm #336845
Right Wing terrorism usually targets innocent people. Fortunately it is rare.October 26, 2020 at 10:59 pm #336786
When right-wingers are daydreaming about how capitalism will work in the perfect utopian society created after we get rid of all regulations they call it “free market”. What you are currently decrying as the “cancel culture” is literally how the “free market” approach to deregulation is supposed to work. If you’re unhappy with a product, don’t buy that product and it will go away. If you’re unhappy with a company just don’t do business with that company and it will die. Tell everyone you know about your terrible experience and they’ll band together with you to punish the offending corporation.
So it’s “good” when we’re talking about getting rid of all regulations and letting the free market decide. And I’m sure it was “good” when Politically Incorrect got cancelled. But in this case, which is exactly the same, it’s totally different and it’s “bad”. I actually believe conservatives literally cannot see their own hypocrisy.
You’re talking about boycotting which is only one aspect of Cancel Culture — not even the most common aspect, at that.October 26, 2020 at 10:47 pm #336782
This seems to be a cultural phenomenon unique to the US in particular. Although the younger Japanese are into American pop culture, they would never think of tearing down their traditions. They are a monolithic culture distinctly Japanese. The resistance to the idea of assimilation into a white Christian culture is problematic to social cohesion in America. Despite the resistance, we are a distinctive cultural type recognizable to foreigners.
Right. Young Westerners are not a good representation of young people worldwide. Even the usual mentality of young people that we think of doesn’t really translate worldwide.October 26, 2020 at 10:41 pm #336779
OK I was thinking you- @thatoneguy – were saying that some people think they know what it means, but their definition is wrong. You are also right some Millennials can’t handle it when things don’t go their way, but like every generation there are those who can.
Yeah, but it’s more common in younger generations than older generations.
Even in the Boomer generation there are people who can’t handle it when things aren’t going their way. A prime example is the dotard.
Nah, Trump handles adversity well because he’s the type of guy who has naturally high self esteem. He acts like a fool a lot of the time but he doesn’t let that hold him back — which is not always a good thing, of course.October 26, 2020 at 10:11 pm #336777
By “normal life” I mean the day to day life most people live. Ripping up cities is disruptive to the people who live there.
Right Wing terrorism doesn’t affect many people except in an abstract way.October 22, 2020 at 11:02 pm #336652
Ayaan Hirsi Ali has an amazing story of escaping Islam. She has been “cancelled” more than once, so she knows how it works. She can also parallels of Islam to to “woke” “cancel culture”. In this exchange, which is onngoing, she and a conservative friend discuss how “liberal” has taken on new meaning in the next generation, 40 and under. It’s not as much about actually caring and increasing freedoms as much as it is about avoiding “harm” and “trauma”. Those are bad things, but if your thinking is wrong, then it can be traumatic to change it, someone will need to do harm to poor reasoning. Wokeism has become more like libertarianism, maximizing freedom to point that an ideology that includes slavery should be considered a freedom.
Yes! This is a good description of the difference between younger and older liberals.October 22, 2020 at 10:50 pm #336651
@thatoneguy What makes you think that Millennials are “weaklings”?
Their inability to handle when things don’t go their way. Of course not all millennials are like that, but most are.
I’ll also bite on another question, what is “cancel culture”. If there is confusion as to what it is, then we need a definition as to what it is.
There isn’t really any definition of it — it’s just several common things that happen to people who make controversial statements online.October 21, 2020 at 10:47 pm #336605
@thatoneguy I would like you to clear up a couple of things here, just so that I clearly know your position for the purpose of any further discussion.
I agree that right-wing terrorism is “a very small percentage of criminal activity overall”, as you stated. My first question is, would you not agree that Antifa, even if your view of them is 100% correct, is ALSO “a very small percentage of criminal activity overall”?
Yes. Antifa is a drop in the bucket in nationwide crime.
And second, are you, as it appears you are, conceding that right-wing terrorism is not “imaginary” as you had previously stated?
Your position has clearly changed. In my own mind I can see clearly what the answer to my second question is and, if you’re being honest with both of us, I know what your answer to the first question is. But I want to know how you would answer those two questions.
Yesterday I would have assumed you would simply deflect or not answer. Today I can see that is not who you are. You may do some mental gymnastics to minimize the damage when you accept that you were wrong about something (we are all wrong sometimes and we all do mental gymnastics to some extent to minimize that to ourselves, so I’m not accusing you of anything I am not guilty of a thousand times over), but you do accept facts.
I’m going to be perfectly honest with you here. The reason I am asking these two pointed questions is because I want to know which is more important to you, the fact or your narrative. You are obviously not the “believe at all cost”, frankly, idiot (once again, I’m very sorry that I thought that of you) that I took you for. So I want to know who you really are.
The facts have to support the narrative. The facts are antifa is real and is involved in BLM rioting that interferes with regular peoples lives but it is also not going to destroy America. And Right Wing terrorism exists but is less of a threat to normal life than the rioting.October 21, 2020 at 10:16 pm #336601
Exactly what an extremist like yourself would say. The distinction that I highlighted is what widdershins briefly stated. “Cancel culture” is the new term for “boycott”. But boycotts actually were pretty tame and usually well organized and targeted. So, we changed killing little furry animals and smoking and brought attention to how a chocolate company was doing terrible things to people and the planet. We got major institutions to stop investing in South Africa, creating one of the greatest modern freedom movements. It took a while for the right wing to get the hang of it, but they finally found a way to make it look bad, with these new terms.
Boycotting is just one aspect of cancel culture.
Meanwhile, there was a more nefarious dynamic happening, one that is not so connected to politics. Kids were given participation ribbons, parents hovered and didn’t let them go build things with rusty nails. As they began to get leadership positions, they didn’t tolerate the slow road of kissing up to the old guard and they found these new found powers and open forums could be manipulated. It’s such a mix of questioning authority and misunderstanding the value of tradition, it’s going to take a while to sort it out.
Partly true. Millennials are weaklings and they were made that way by the adults around them.
Most older people probably heard something like, the world doesn’t revolve around you so shut your mouth, when they were growing up, and it used to be true. It’s not like that for Millennials since they were treated like superstars their whole lives by society in general — not just their parents — so you can’t really blame them for thinking the world does revolve around them…….. because it really does. Colleges are just continuing the trend and Cancel Culture is simply just a part of that.October 21, 2020 at 9:52 pm #336597
Absolutely not true. The right wing has been doing it for decades. They just aren’t that good at it. I’m an Ozzy fan. I remember the RIGHT WING cancel culture of the ’80s targeting mostly music and video games. It just failed because they were inept and their arguments were not reality based. And have you ever heard of a “book burning”? The cancel culture is neither specifically left wing nor is it new. It’s just easier to get a show canceled than it is to cancel a rock star, a book or, in more recent memory, Oreo cookies or Golden Gram crackers and a handful of other products and companies supportive of LGBT rights.
That’s called censorship, not cancel culture.
October 20, 2020 at 10:47 pm #336550
- This reply was modified 1 week, 2 days ago by thatoneguy.
- This reply was modified 1 week, 2 days ago by thatoneguy.
Cancel culture is mainly a White Millennial and Generation Z social media phenomenon. It stems from the same thing as “safe spaces” on college campuses. It is also a 100% Left Wing mentality. The majority of people involved are shrill Whites who could be called very privileged, which is why they are leftists in the first place.
There is confusion about what cancel culture actually is — what really constitutes it, as the usual suspects are too unstable to be consistent. That might be the biggest problem with it.
In my view cancel culture doesn’t really affect many people who matter; it’s mainly in academia and pop culture. However, it is definitely big problem for those who support debate and free inquiry.October 13, 2020 at 10:26 pm #336330
I listed 14 things, nine of which were either right-wing terrorist attacks or groups of right-wing terrorist attacks. You took exception with 3. Of those 3, you were wrong on 1 and another was ambiguous, so you took it as the wrong attack. But let’s say you were right on all 3. Out of a list of 9 attacks, several of which were groups of multiple attacks, but we’ll take them as one, would you say the word “few” more accurately describes the number “3” or the number “6”? When the number is actually 8 out of 9, would you say that the word “few” accurately describes 8/9ths of the whole?
As for the others listed, they all are right wing terrorism except for the boogaloo thing, which seems to be a bunch of dorky posers who haven’t done anything, and “mosque shootings” are debatable.
Still, a very small percentage of criminal activity overall.October 13, 2020 at 10:03 pm #336329
Incorrect. Fields drove from Ohio to attend the rally. He had undeniable neo-Naxi and white supremacist beliefs and kept a photo of Hitler by his bedside. The actu was deliberate and motivated by his political beliefs. It’s on a list of right-wing terrorist attacks on Wikipedia.
I mean he didn’t have anything to do with organizing the event. It was a target of opportunity. The vehicular assault could be called terrorism but not the rally itself — unless you think that sort of group assembling is inherently terroristic.October 13, 2020 at 9:44 pm #336328
Good take by Greenwald as usual. It is ridiculous for journalists to call for other journalists they don’t agree with to be censored — especially over something as piss poor as the 1619 project — but that is the world we live in.
Actually that’s not totally true. It’s the world they live in and as Greenwald pointed out, they helped create it, so f*** them.
The biggest downside is it doesn’t really matter as woke journalism is not about facts but feelings. The woke audience is fine with that. Maybe the journalistic integrity and editorial freedom Greenwald believes in is simply obsolete.October 12, 2020 at 10:27 pm #336293
Only a few of these can be called right wing terrorism.
Really? Which ones did I get wrong?
Charleston and the synagogue shootings were definitely right wing terrorism. The shooters outlined their plans and wanted to go down in history as terrorists.
Las Vegas massacre had an unknown motive but the victims were at a country music concert and that is a conservative fan base. So unlikely motivated by right wing sentiment.
Pulse nightclub shooting was Islamic terrorism.
Charlottesville was only terrorism if you think certain groups should not have the right to assemble. The driver of the vehicle that ran over the girl was not part of the rally.