9 ms·

Cancellation culture exists because this is the expected norm for those in power. A slap on the wrist at worst while being protected by their powerful friends a

Cancellation culture exists because this is the expected norm for those in power. A slap on the wrist at worst while being protected by their powerful friends and expensive lawyers. Most likely they'll also destroy the lives of anyone who tries to get justice (blacklisting, smear campaigns, lawsuits, etc.). So you get a mob together where no one person is an easy target for having their life destroyed and ignore the justice system which can be easily bent with money/connections. It's a logical response to the power structure in place.

Waterluvian 6y ago
I honestly hadn’t considered that before: cancel culture is an overreaction to an under reaction. I guess that’s just kind of what we do when we wield our protest powers. I wonder if a sensible measured reaction would be met more openly (although maybe not even possible to do).
- marcinzm 6y ago
  As I see it, measured reactions against power structures get squashed. Maybe you get a token appeasement that actually changes nothing. It's just too easy for those in power to make it go away so they logically go that route. Going overboard is the only way to force a reaction other than suppression (not guaranteed of course, you might just get massive suppression instead).
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    A good example of this is unionization. If a decent chunk of employees are upset about things, but you don’t do anything to alleviate it, they’re more likely to want to unionize so they can force the hand of their employer.
  - Waterluvian 6y ago
    Intuitively I think you’re right. But I also think the side effect of overreaction is that those who disagree can very easily point at it to dismiss the cause’s legitimacy. “Can’t take them seriously at all. They want to cancel everyone and defund everything.”
    - marcinzm 6y ago
      True but you generally get to this point where all other lesser options have failed. People are lazy and won't put the effort into mob justice if they see an easier approach. There have been decades of previous issues that simply were swept under the rug. I also don't think public opinion matters when it comes to mob justice. It's background noise. The conversation is between the mob and those in power. If the mob frightens them enough then changes will be made. What those outside the mob think is irrelevant unless they care enough to form their own mob.
      - Waterluvian 6y ago
        I hear you. I wonder though if the amount that the mob frightens the power is affected by public opinion. Especially when it involves politicians.
        marcinzm 6y ago
        I think some politicians will care but it depends on the specifics of their voter bases. The mob and anti-mob groups tend to split across political lines so for many politicians one or the other are already lost causes. So it's a question of how your expected voter base thinks about the issue and that's likely to be a lot more skewed than the overall population. So even if 50% of the population is anti-mob, if 90% of your political party local voters are pro-mob then you have a reason to listen.
        krapp 6y ago
        It's less that people are mob or anti-mob so much as pro their mob and anti the other mob. Don't forget that cancel culture is not an entirely left-wing phenomenon. Plenty of the same people who rail against SJWs and leftists cancelling people would have no problems with cancelling Bill Maher, the Dixie Chicks or Colin Kaepernick.
- ghaff 6y ago
  And it's largely random. Someone's ill-considered tweet or even post on an internal company email list or political donations or etc. ends up going viral, they get fired, and the whatever will be at the top of Google searches for possibly the rest of their life.
- 75dvtwin 6y ago
  I would think of the economic persecution of individuals as powerful weapon. just like with any weapon: - some will call it 'great equalizer'. Meaning that a victim no matter how small and physically weak, can still fight off a number of aggressors - some will call it a tool of death making, that belongs to the hands of military (in the case of cancel culture, it would be equivalent to saying that this tool belongs government ) Point is, just like usage of any weapon, the morality and legality of economic persecution depends on: - what / who is it used for - amount of collateral damage - who used it - were there other means, was it legal - the manipulative power of the legal team defending the use One thing we can sure of, any new weapon gets adapted by all sides of a conflict. The case of misuse of this weapon, in my view, was against Brendan Eich [1] [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2014/04/05/backlash-against-brendan-eich-crossed-a-line/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2014/04/05/backlash...
  - ghaff 6y ago
    You also had the bidirectional mess at PyCon a number of years back. One problem is that what is going to completely blow up is at least somewhat unpredictable. And, especially if an individual is low level/status (unlike Eich), many companies are going to take the path of least resistance and "kill them all and let God sort them out" so to speak. Which of course given that "blow up" is pretty much defined by social media footprint means that they'll also have whatever happened probably dog them is search results for a long time.
gruez 6y ago
But who's getting canceled under cancel culture? The people "in power"[1], or rank and file employees? From a unscientific sampling of cancellations[2], it doesn't seem many people in power are being canceled. The only one I can think of is Brendan Eich, but even then I doubt he has powerful connections. If this is the case, it doesn't seem like cancel culture is achieving its objective of punishing people who previously couldn't be punished. [1] The parent comment mentioned "being protected by their powerful friends and expensive lawyers", so I wouldn't consider someone to be "in power" just because they're high on the totem pole within a small organization. [2] https://twitter.com/SoOppressed/status/1282404647160942598 https://twitter.com/SoOppressed/status/1282404647160942598
- krapp 6y ago
  Celebrities, CEOs and politicians have also been cancelled, if that counts.
  - gruez 6y ago
    Can you provide some examples?
    - toyg 6y ago
      Louis CK.
  - echelon 6y ago
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pajiba.com/AMP/celebrities_are_better_than_you/an-incomplete-list-of-all-of-the-celebrities-canceled-in-2020-so-far.php https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pajiba.com/AMP/celebrities_... Side note: JFC I hate Google Amp. I'm preserving the link out of disgust.
- auganov 6y ago
  It's like hacking. Most hackers won't be able to hack a specific target. But with a wide enough net they will get some hits. And the hits are usually due to the victim doing something really stupid rather than the hacker's ability. So you'd expect you'll mostly see nobodies get hacked.
TeeMassive 6y ago
> Cancellation culture exists because this is the expected norm for those in power. The problem with that line of thinking is how "those in power" is defined more and more broadly and has now evolved to a point where who you are is more important than what you did. So now most people who gets cancelled do not tend to be the Harvey Weinstein but one of those "racist Karens" videos where the context have been cut off and the people are obviously in the early onset of dementia or college kids making offensive jokes on Twitter. > So you get a mob together where no one person is an easy target for having their life destroyed and ignore the justice system which can be easily bent with money/connections. This is double edged knife since mobs and thugs can be bought too. There is a reason why all modern nations give the state the legal monopoly on violence. > It's a logical response to the power structure in place. Correction, it is an emotional response. Mobs are never "logical".

Waterluvian 6y ago

I honestly hadn’t considered that before: cancel culture is an overreaction to an under reaction. I guess that’s just kind of what we do when we wield our protest powers. I wonder if a sensible measured reaction would be met more openly (although maybe not even possible to do).

marcinzm 6y ago
As I see it, measured reactions against power structures get squashed. Maybe you get a token appeasement that actually changes nothing. It's just too easy for those in power to make it go away so they logically go that route. Going overboard is the only way to force a reaction other than suppression (not guaranteed of course, you might just get massive suppression instead).
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  A good example of this is unionization. If a decent chunk of employees are upset about things, but you don’t do anything to alleviate it, they’re more likely to want to unionize so they can force the hand of their employer.
- Waterluvian 6y ago
  Intuitively I think you’re right. But I also think the side effect of overreaction is that those who disagree can very easily point at it to dismiss the cause’s legitimacy. “Can’t take them seriously at all. They want to cancel everyone and defund everything.”
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    True but you generally get to this point where all other lesser options have failed. People are lazy and won't put the effort into mob justice if they see an easier approach. There have been decades of previous issues that simply were swept under the rug. I also don't think public opinion matters when it comes to mob justice. It's background noise. The conversation is between the mob and those in power. If the mob frightens them enough then changes will be made. What those outside the mob think is irrelevant unless they care enough to form their own mob.
    - Waterluvian 6y ago
      I hear you. I wonder though if the amount that the mob frightens the power is affected by public opinion. Especially when it involves politicians.
      - marcinzm 6y ago
        I think some politicians will care but it depends on the specifics of their voter bases. The mob and anti-mob groups tend to split across political lines so for many politicians one or the other are already lost causes. So it's a question of how your expected voter base thinks about the issue and that's likely to be a lot more skewed than the overall population. So even if 50% of the population is anti-mob, if 90% of your political party local voters are pro-mob then you have a reason to listen.
        krapp 6y ago
        It's less that people are mob or anti-mob so much as pro their mob and anti the other mob. Don't forget that cancel culture is not an entirely left-wing phenomenon. Plenty of the same people who rail against SJWs and leftists cancelling people would have no problems with cancelling Bill Maher, the Dixie Chicks or Colin Kaepernick.
ghaff 6y ago
And it's largely random. Someone's ill-considered tweet or even post on an internal company email list or political donations or etc. ends up going viral, they get fired, and the whatever will be at the top of Google searches for possibly the rest of their life.
75dvtwin 6y ago
I would think of the economic persecution of individuals as powerful weapon. just like with any weapon: - some will call it 'great equalizer'. Meaning that a victim no matter how small and physically weak, can still fight off a number of aggressors - some will call it a tool of death making, that belongs to the hands of military (in the case of cancel culture, it would be equivalent to saying that this tool belongs government ) Point is, just like usage of any weapon, the morality and legality of economic persecution depends on: - what / who is it used for - amount of collateral damage - who used it - were there other means, was it legal - the manipulative power of the legal team defending the use One thing we can sure of, any new weapon gets adapted by all sides of a conflict. The case of misuse of this weapon, in my view, was against Brendan Eich [1] [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2014/04/05/backlash-against-brendan-eich-crossed-a-line/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2014/04/05/backlash...
- ghaff 6y ago
  You also had the bidirectional mess at PyCon a number of years back. One problem is that what is going to completely blow up is at least somewhat unpredictable. And, especially if an individual is low level/status (unlike Eich), many companies are going to take the path of least resistance and "kill them all and let God sort them out" so to speak. Which of course given that "blow up" is pretty much defined by social media footprint means that they'll also have whatever happened probably dog them is search results for a long time.

gruez 6y ago

But who's getting canceled under cancel culture? The people "in power"[1], or rank and file employees? From a unscientific sampling of cancellations[2], it doesn't seem many people in power are being canceled. The only one I can think of is Brendan Eich, but even then I doubt he has powerful connections. If this is the case, it doesn't seem like cancel culture is achieving its objective of punishing people who previously couldn't be punished. [1] The parent comment mentioned "being protected by their powerful friends and expensive lawyers", so I wouldn't consider someone to be "in power" just because they're high on the totem pole within a small organization. [2] https://twitter.com/SoOppressed/status/1282404647160942598 https://twitter.com/SoOppressed/status/1282404647160942598

krapp 6y ago
Celebrities, CEOs and politicians have also been cancelled, if that counts.
- gruez 6y ago
  Can you provide some examples?
  - toyg 6y ago
    Louis CK.
- echelon 6y ago
  https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pajiba.com/AMP/celebrities_are_better_than_you/an-incomplete-list-of-all-of-the-celebrities-canceled-in-2020-so-far.php https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pajiba.com/AMP/celebrities_... Side note: JFC I hate Google Amp. I'm preserving the link out of disgust.
auganov 6y ago
It's like hacking. Most hackers won't be able to hack a specific target. But with a wide enough net they will get some hits. And the hits are usually due to the victim doing something really stupid rather than the hacker's ability. So you'd expect you'll mostly see nobodies get hacked.

TeeMassive 6y ago

> Cancellation culture exists because this is the expected norm for those in power. The problem with that line of thinking is how "those in power" is defined more and more broadly and has now evolved to a point where who you are is more important than what you did. So now most people who gets cancelled do not tend to be the Harvey Weinstein but one of those "racist Karens" videos where the context have been cut off and the people are obviously in the early onset of dementia or college kids making offensive jokes on Twitter. > So you get a mob together where no one person is an easy target for having their life destroyed and ignore the justice system which can be easily bent with money/connections. This is double edged knife since mobs and thugs can be bought too. There is a reason why all modern nations give the state the legal monopoly on violence. > It's a logical response to the power structure in place. Correction, it is an emotional response. Mobs are never "logical".