9 ms·

So a culture that respects free speech something like this would occur --- Person A: I think we should have strong border protection and limited immigration

by syshum 6y ago

So a culture that respects free speech something like this would occur --- Person A: I think we should have strong border protection and limited immigration for these reasons ...... Person B: Well I understand and respect your position however I disagree because of these reasons..... --- Now a society with out a respect for free speech it would go -- Person A: I think we should have strong border protection and limited immigration for these reasons ...... Person B: You are a racist nazi, i am going to call your employer and tell them you are a racist nazi, and I will post on social media to get 1,000's more people to call you a racist nazi, i will also have news stories written telling the world what a racist nazi is, and after you are fired I am going to follow you to any new employer to make sure they know what a racist nazi you are... ----- Cancel Culture, aka the twitter verse is option B today.

femiagbabiaka 6y ago
I think this is a compelling hypothetical, but I can't think of a single person who only said they were in support of strong border protection and limited immigration and was subject to anything like what you're saying. Could you provide an example of what you mean?
- giancarlostoro 6y ago
  Except its not I have seen people called Neonazis just for being Republican or siding with Trump whether or not they are "Trump supporters" on issues. Even saying the name "Trump supporter" is evidence alone that there is an element of cancel culture. A woman was rejected from a college recently for posting a MAGA video on Tik Tok. Some developer is being called a Neonazi for protesting against an open source org that banned someone from a conference for wearing a MAGA hat. I say this too often on HN: today they silence the voice of those you disagree with, tomorrow its your voice. Not to mention: master-slave throughout tech, master branch in git, are all examples of absurd cancel culture. Meanwhile minorities shake their head.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Has any individual faced consequences for refusing to rename a branch? Are you saying that cancelling a word is a thing, and a dangerous one? At this point people are diluting the phrase "cancel culture" to mean "thing I don't like that is vaguely related to politics or political correctness". That's not a useful concept. It's just a thing to be angry about.
    - giancarlostoro 6y ago
      That's not what cancel culture is, but it's usually the precursor to it. People who are upset over things that are not yet causing negative side-effects know that they eventually will because already what's happened is a bit much in many cases. You shouldn't be fired for things you do and say outside of work, period.
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        > You shouldn't be fired for things you do and say outside of work, period. Why not? And are you claiming that this is simply a moral standpoint, or do you want to legally prevent employers from firing employees for off-work behavior?
        giancarlostoro 6y ago
        There's plenty of companies that don't fire employees for the things they do outside of work, it's been like this for ages, why should this become a normal standard all of a sudden? Just to appease the ever changing feelings of others? Unless I actually breach my company contract in some fashion I don't understand why what I do outside of work has anything to do with my company, in fact, unless I'm some executive, it shouldn't ever matter.
        joshuamorton 6y ago
        That's not what I asked. You stated companies shouldn't do this. Just because some entities have chosen to act in a certain way doesn't mean that it is morally correct for all entities to act in that way. Certain companies have been founded based on religious beliefs forever, that doesn't mean that it is morally correct for every company to have religious foundations. If you want to run your company that way, you're absolutely welcome to, but upon what reasoning do you claim it is wrong for me to act differently than you choose to?
- guygurari 6y ago
  Here are examples of people who were cancelled without even saying anything [1]. One was due to a misunderstanding. Another was due to something a family member said. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/stop-firing-innocent/613615/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/stop-firin...
  - femiagbabiaka 6y ago
    I hadn't heard these stories, thank you! Sounds like we need bipartisan legislation for protecting political speech in the workplace, with some sensible limits.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  JK Rowling is a good example of middlebrow views getting you and anyone who can be associated with you in trouble. She has widely-held opinions like trans-women should be respected, but they are different from women. But if you log on to Twitter, she's vilified so much as a "transphobe" that people have been attacked for merely signing the same open-letter that she signed. https://twitter.com/emilyvdw/status/1280580388495097856 https://twitter.com/emilyvdw/status/1280580388495097856
  - mobilejdral 6y ago
    > She has widely-held opinions like trans-women should be respected Um no. She has admitted to being part of the known trans hate group GenderCritical. Edit: not sure why I am getting downvoted. She uses talking points from the GenderCritial group when she writes and even mentions them by name and that group was banned by reddit for being a hate group.
    - hombre_fatal 6y ago
      This is the sort of vague "argument"-crafting I expect on Twitter but not on HN where you have unlimited words to make a point and add understanding to the world. I googled "jk rowling gender critical" and all I see is a great google query if you want to find articles about how supposedly transphobic she is (without explaining what was specifically transphobic about what she said). If you're going to say someone has admitted to being part of a hate group, why not help us out and provide us some links?
      - mobilejdral 6y ago
        The recent opinion essay she wrote: https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-... A rebuttal of that essay with citations: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1270787941275762689.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1270787941275762689.html And an article talking about the banning of the hate subreddit r/gendercritical: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/06/29/reddit-bann-transphobia-gender-critical-page-hate-speech-donald-trump-steve-huffman/ https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/06/29/reddit-bann-transphobi...
- anonms-coward 6y ago
  Well here is a sample for you: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/07/a-new-low-in-higher-education.php https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/07/a-new-low-in-...
- senderista 6y ago
  Those opinions are currently stigmatized as “racist dogwhistles” and “white supremacy”. I’m generally pro-immigration myself, but I believe it’s possible to advocate for limited immigration without being a racist.
- commandlinefan 6y ago
  > Could you provide an example of what you mean? The CEO of Goya foods called Donald Trump a "great leader" and there's an active boycott of the brand as a result.
  - anonms-coward 6y ago
    To be fair, that sounds a lot more reasonable. A CEO represents their company and their actions leading to people boycotting their company is just people voting with their wallet. People have boycotted small businesses due to the opinion of the business owner's children, even after persistent apologies by the business owner. In this case I don't even think there is anything significantly wrong. This isn't much different than a company sanctioned advertisement gone wrong.
    - syshum 6y ago
      While people are free to Boycott for any reason they want A person that has respect for the concept of Free Speech WOULD NOT boycott a business simply because the CEO of that business supports the current president of the US. That is simply NOT a reasonable reaction to learning of said support. So no it does not "sound a lot more reasonable", it sounds like a perfect example of society losing respect for free expression
M2Ys4U 6y ago
Conversations like these don't happen in a vacuum. There's the immediate context of the conversation and there's the historical context of people A and B. And that's even assuming that the real meaning is in the text of the conversation rather than the subtext. "All lives matter" is a good example. As a point divorced from any context it's an entirely correct and virtuous statement to make. But in the context of BLMthe subtext of the statement makes it a radically different one, and pointedly offensive, one.

by syshum 6y ago

femiagbabiaka 6y ago

I think this is a compelling hypothetical, but I can't think of a single person who only said they were in support of strong border protection and limited immigration and was subject to anything like what you're saying. Could you provide an example of what you mean?

giancarlostoro 6y ago
Except its not I have seen people called Neonazis just for being Republican or siding with Trump whether or not they are "Trump supporters" on issues. Even saying the name "Trump supporter" is evidence alone that there is an element of cancel culture. A woman was rejected from a college recently for posting a MAGA video on Tik Tok. Some developer is being called a Neonazi for protesting against an open source org that banned someone from a conference for wearing a MAGA hat. I say this too often on HN: today they silence the voice of those you disagree with, tomorrow its your voice. Not to mention: master-slave throughout tech, master branch in git, are all examples of absurd cancel culture. Meanwhile minorities shake their head.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Has any individual faced consequences for refusing to rename a branch? Are you saying that cancelling a word is a thing, and a dangerous one? At this point people are diluting the phrase "cancel culture" to mean "thing I don't like that is vaguely related to politics or political correctness". That's not a useful concept. It's just a thing to be angry about.
  - giancarlostoro 6y ago
    That's not what cancel culture is, but it's usually the precursor to it. People who are upset over things that are not yet causing negative side-effects know that they eventually will because already what's happened is a bit much in many cases. You shouldn't be fired for things you do and say outside of work, period.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      > You shouldn't be fired for things you do and say outside of work, period. Why not? And are you claiming that this is simply a moral standpoint, or do you want to legally prevent employers from firing employees for off-work behavior?
      - giancarlostoro 6y ago
        There's plenty of companies that don't fire employees for the things they do outside of work, it's been like this for ages, why should this become a normal standard all of a sudden? Just to appease the ever changing feelings of others? Unless I actually breach my company contract in some fashion I don't understand why what I do outside of work has anything to do with my company, in fact, unless I'm some executive, it shouldn't ever matter.
        joshuamorton 6y ago
        That's not what I asked. You stated companies shouldn't do this. Just because some entities have chosen to act in a certain way doesn't mean that it is morally correct for all entities to act in that way. Certain companies have been founded based on religious beliefs forever, that doesn't mean that it is morally correct for every company to have religious foundations. If you want to run your company that way, you're absolutely welcome to, but upon what reasoning do you claim it is wrong for me to act differently than you choose to?
guygurari 6y ago
Here are examples of people who were cancelled without even saying anything [1]. One was due to a misunderstanding. Another was due to something a family member said. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/stop-firing-innocent/613615/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/stop-firin...
- femiagbabiaka 6y ago
  I hadn't heard these stories, thank you! Sounds like we need bipartisan legislation for protecting political speech in the workplace, with some sensible limits.
hombre_fatal 6y ago
JK Rowling is a good example of middlebrow views getting you and anyone who can be associated with you in trouble. She has widely-held opinions like trans-women should be respected, but they are different from women. But if you log on to Twitter, she's vilified so much as a "transphobe" that people have been attacked for merely signing the same open-letter that she signed. https://twitter.com/emilyvdw/status/1280580388495097856 https://twitter.com/emilyvdw/status/1280580388495097856
- mobilejdral 6y ago
  > She has widely-held opinions like trans-women should be respected Um no. She has admitted to being part of the known trans hate group GenderCritical. Edit: not sure why I am getting downvoted. She uses talking points from the GenderCritial group when she writes and even mentions them by name and that group was banned by reddit for being a hate group.
  - hombre_fatal 6y ago
    This is the sort of vague "argument"-crafting I expect on Twitter but not on HN where you have unlimited words to make a point and add understanding to the world. I googled "jk rowling gender critical" and all I see is a great google query if you want to find articles about how supposedly transphobic she is (without explaining what was specifically transphobic about what she said). If you're going to say someone has admitted to being part of a hate group, why not help us out and provide us some links?
    - mobilejdral 6y ago
      The recent opinion essay she wrote: https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-... A rebuttal of that essay with citations: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1270787941275762689.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1270787941275762689.html And an article talking about the banning of the hate subreddit r/gendercritical: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/06/29/reddit-bann-transphobia-gender-critical-page-hate-speech-donald-trump-steve-huffman/ https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/06/29/reddit-bann-transphobi...
anonms-coward 6y ago
Well here is a sample for you: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/07/a-new-low-in-higher-education.php https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/07/a-new-low-in-...
senderista 6y ago
Those opinions are currently stigmatized as “racist dogwhistles” and “white supremacy”. I’m generally pro-immigration myself, but I believe it’s possible to advocate for limited immigration without being a racist.
commandlinefan 6y ago
> Could you provide an example of what you mean? The CEO of Goya foods called Donald Trump a "great leader" and there's an active boycott of the brand as a result.
- anonms-coward 6y ago
  To be fair, that sounds a lot more reasonable. A CEO represents their company and their actions leading to people boycotting their company is just people voting with their wallet. People have boycotted small businesses due to the opinion of the business owner's children, even after persistent apologies by the business owner. In this case I don't even think there is anything significantly wrong. This isn't much different than a company sanctioned advertisement gone wrong.
  - syshum 6y ago
    While people are free to Boycott for any reason they want A person that has respect for the concept of Free Speech WOULD NOT boycott a business simply because the CEO of that business supports the current president of the US. That is simply NOT a reasonable reaction to learning of said support. So no it does not "sound a lot more reasonable", it sounds like a perfect example of society losing respect for free expression

M2Ys4U 6y ago

Conversations like these don't happen in a vacuum. There's the immediate context of the conversation and there's the historical context of people A and B. And that's even assuming that the real meaning is in the text of the conversation rather than the subtext. "All lives matter" is a good example. As a point divorced from any context it's an entirely correct and virtuous statement to make. But in the context of BLMthe subtext of the statement makes it a radically different one, and pointedly offensive, one.