4 ms·

> I don't understand what motivates a move like this There's been this big shift the last 10 or so years that hasn't got enough attention. People somehow now a

> I don't understand what motivates a move like this There's been this big shift the last 10 or so years that hasn't got enough attention. People somehow now act like the world has to align to focus all its priorities on exactly what they prioritize, and can't imagine the idea that things matter differently to different people. The way things previously worked, you didn't have to agree with everything someone else did or said, you just had to get along. Now it's like "if you don't drop everything and take my cause as seriously as I do, you're dead to me" I had previously thought it was a "me generation" thing, but Neil Young is like 80 so i guess it's a societal shift.

rektide 5y ago
hahaha you surely must be joking. what a ridiculous spin! being political & caring about the world is not new. Young has been a strong advocate, loudly held moral stances for probably longer than many many of the readers on HN have been alive[1]. having backbone, a stance, caring: it's not new. this isnt really that different than asking Young to share a show with someone. our systems and our services have gotten more centralized, more controlled. the connection is not as clear & apparent as sharing a stage. but this is not some new radical new interpersonal cruelty Young has fostered. it's the simple desire to not associate with trash & cruelty, to find better spaces. that's not new. it's just good sense. we dont all have to follow the same code, but we should not be party to those supporting the despicable. obvious, & anything else anything less in madness. [1] https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&stesso=1&lang=en https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&ste...
- version_five 5y ago
  Pretending that the current brand of "activism" is the same as previous ones is disingenuous, and disrespectful. Previous struggles for rights, for example by women, blacks, and gays, as well as pushing back against "the man" - conformity with the establishment, were important causes, I don't need to dwell on that. The current need for outrage and attention while simultaneously being ultra conformist brand of slacktivism is nothing like that. Neil Young may have been an important part of past struggles, but he's just another establishment shill looking for attention now if this is the kind of hill he's dying on.
  - nwiswell 5y ago
    > Previous struggles for rights, for example by women, blacks, and gays, as well as pushing back against "the man" - conformity with the establishment, were important causes Ironically your attitude itself is not new. During the Civil Rights era it was a common meme among the "center" that emancipation was a worthy and noble cause but that ending segregation and Jim Crow was a bridge too far. Hindsight is 20/20...
    - version_five 5y ago
      Yes I've heard that before, but I don't think the comparison makes it impossible that this time is different. It's the shift from fighting for freedom to using more and more obscure perceived slights as a pretext for complaining that makes this time different. The goal is not equality or rights, the goal is securing the status of an elite
      - nwiswell 5y ago
        > The goal is not equality or rights, the goal is securing the status of an elite That's kind of an odd take. By the time the dust settles there will be more than a million Americans dead from COVID. The lion's share of them will have been unvaccinated. I don't think it's radical for someone to believe that they have a social duty to help ensure that public discourse around our most potent public health tool is rooted in science. Moreover I don't think there can be any reasonable disagreement that Joe Rogan is in a position of considerable influence to many millions of Americans, and consequently his commentary about vaccines (and COVID treatments) has been the proximate cause of many deaths, perhaps thousands, and I'm pretty sure that history will take a dim view. Neil Young's actions here are quixotic, certainly, but considering the personal cost he can hardly be accused of failing to walk the talk.
        vorpalhex 5y ago
        > The lion's share of them will have been unvaccinated. Most of them died before vaccines were available. So, you aren't wrong but... > ensure that public discourse around our most potent public health tool is rooted in science. Fact checking is not aligned with science, which is a continual process of correction. Remember when fact checkers all jumped in about how masks didn't do any good when that was the official CDC and WHO position? We have known since the 1990s with SARS that masks are effective.
- erik_seaberg 5y ago
  It’s more like sharing a shopping mall with them. Merchants don’t endorse each other and may not have many customers in common, yet outsourcing common construction and parking and security is better for all of them.
breakyerself 5y ago
We didn't have a large, loud faction of conspiracy theorist celebrities and politicians disseminating disinformation about public health in the middle of a pandemic any time in the last 100 years either.
- version_five 5y ago
  There have always been boogeymen people used rhetorically. This is not any different
  - fumar 5y ago
    Are you saying that boogeymen from 1950s have the same media reach as boogeymen in 2022? The medium and reach make a difference, no?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - breakyerself 5y ago
    Yes. Like the boogey man currently called cancel culture.CRT is another.
    - the_doctah 5y ago
      I'm sorry, are you trying to say cancel culture doesn't exist?
      - breakyerself 5y ago
        I'm sorry are you trying to say there aren't prominent conspiracy nutters spreading misinformation about the pandemic?
    - version_five 5y ago
      Those things certainly don't require that we break societal norms or use them as an excuse for taking any kind of extreme action. There are lots of ways to constructively disagree with things, my point is that we've strayed from those into new territory where complaining and outrage are the end and not the means
SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
There's been a big shift recently, but the general phenomenon of weird performative stunts isn't new at all. Did you know about the time Marlon Brando refused to accept an Oscar because he was mad about the government response to a protest in South Dakota? It'd be another story if Young were going around saying that he's gonna try to cancel any artist who stays on Spotify, or that you and I have a moral obligation to quit Spotify, but taking your ball and going home is a very well time-tested protest strategy.
- jancsika 5y ago
  > Did you know about the time Marlon Brando refused to accept an Oscar because he was mad about the government response to a protest in South Dakota? He also went on Dick Cavett and made some insane connection between that random protest and the stereotypes of Native Americans in Hollywood movies and tv shows. Not only that, he traveled back in time to participate in the civil rights movement to gain enough credibility to convince an actress who'd been at the occupation of Alcatraz to accept his Oscar and give a speech connecting Native American stereotypes and that random protest. We're talking serious Back to the Future level shit here. Brando's nuts.
  - SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
    It's pretty stunning how consistently intense, passionate arguments get sanitized to mere disagreements in the popular imagination. You read about the Cross of Gold speech, where William Jennings Bryan declared that the gold standard is an enemy to humanity and whipped up a mob to cancel anyone who supported it, and it comes across as some kind of polite dispute.
KittenInABox 5y ago
WTF? How is this new? Did everyone forget the Dixie Chicks?
- erik_seaberg 5y ago
  That was inevitable; they offended their own audience.
  - beart 5y ago
    It went way beyond offending their audience. The Dixie Chicks were black listed. This was also a time when people started calling french fries, freedom fries, among other insane "patriotic" things.
- DoItToMe81 5y ago
  The Dixie Chicks fiasco was isolated to the US and mocked internationally. What I suspect he's talking about is how these attitudes are now global.

rektide 5y ago

hahaha you surely must be joking. what a ridiculous spin! being political & caring about the world is not new. Young has been a strong advocate, loudly held moral stances for probably longer than many many of the readers on HN have been alive[1]. having backbone, a stance, caring: it's not new. this isnt really that different than asking Young to share a show with someone. our systems and our services have gotten more centralized, more controlled. the connection is not as clear & apparent as sharing a stage. but this is not some new radical new interpersonal cruelty Young has fostered. it's the simple desire to not associate with trash & cruelty, to find better spaces. that's not new. it's just good sense. we dont all have to follow the same code, but we should not be party to those supporting the despicable. obvious, & anything else anything less in madness. [1] https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&stesso=1&lang=en https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&ste...

version_five 5y ago
Pretending that the current brand of "activism" is the same as previous ones is disingenuous, and disrespectful. Previous struggles for rights, for example by women, blacks, and gays, as well as pushing back against "the man" - conformity with the establishment, were important causes, I don't need to dwell on that. The current need for outrage and attention while simultaneously being ultra conformist brand of slacktivism is nothing like that. Neil Young may have been an important part of past struggles, but he's just another establishment shill looking for attention now if this is the kind of hill he's dying on.
- nwiswell 5y ago
  > Previous struggles for rights, for example by women, blacks, and gays, as well as pushing back against "the man" - conformity with the establishment, were important causes Ironically your attitude itself is not new. During the Civil Rights era it was a common meme among the "center" that emancipation was a worthy and noble cause but that ending segregation and Jim Crow was a bridge too far. Hindsight is 20/20...
  - version_five 5y ago
    Yes I've heard that before, but I don't think the comparison makes it impossible that this time is different. It's the shift from fighting for freedom to using more and more obscure perceived slights as a pretext for complaining that makes this time different. The goal is not equality or rights, the goal is securing the status of an elite
    - nwiswell 5y ago
      > The goal is not equality or rights, the goal is securing the status of an elite That's kind of an odd take. By the time the dust settles there will be more than a million Americans dead from COVID. The lion's share of them will have been unvaccinated. I don't think it's radical for someone to believe that they have a social duty to help ensure that public discourse around our most potent public health tool is rooted in science. Moreover I don't think there can be any reasonable disagreement that Joe Rogan is in a position of considerable influence to many millions of Americans, and consequently his commentary about vaccines (and COVID treatments) has been the proximate cause of many deaths, perhaps thousands, and I'm pretty sure that history will take a dim view. Neil Young's actions here are quixotic, certainly, but considering the personal cost he can hardly be accused of failing to walk the talk.
      - vorpalhex 5y ago
        > The lion's share of them will have been unvaccinated. Most of them died before vaccines were available. So, you aren't wrong but... > ensure that public discourse around our most potent public health tool is rooted in science. Fact checking is not aligned with science, which is a continual process of correction. Remember when fact checkers all jumped in about how masks didn't do any good when that was the official CDC and WHO position? We have known since the 1990s with SARS that masks are effective.
erik_seaberg 5y ago
It’s more like sharing a shopping mall with them. Merchants don’t endorse each other and may not have many customers in common, yet outsourcing common construction and parking and security is better for all of them.

breakyerself 5y ago

We didn't have a large, loud faction of conspiracy theorist celebrities and politicians disseminating disinformation about public health in the middle of a pandemic any time in the last 100 years either.

version_five 5y ago
There have always been boogeymen people used rhetorically. This is not any different
- fumar 5y ago
  Are you saying that boogeymen from 1950s have the same media reach as boogeymen in 2022? The medium and reach make a difference, no?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- breakyerself 5y ago
  Yes. Like the boogey man currently called cancel culture.CRT is another.
  - the_doctah 5y ago
    I'm sorry, are you trying to say cancel culture doesn't exist?
    - breakyerself 5y ago
      I'm sorry are you trying to say there aren't prominent conspiracy nutters spreading misinformation about the pandemic?
  - version_five 5y ago
    Those things certainly don't require that we break societal norms or use them as an excuse for taking any kind of extreme action. There are lots of ways to constructively disagree with things, my point is that we've strayed from those into new territory where complaining and outrage are the end and not the means

SpicyLemonZest 5y ago

There's been a big shift recently, but the general phenomenon of weird performative stunts isn't new at all. Did you know about the time Marlon Brando refused to accept an Oscar because he was mad about the government response to a protest in South Dakota? It'd be another story if Young were going around saying that he's gonna try to cancel any artist who stays on Spotify, or that you and I have a moral obligation to quit Spotify, but taking your ball and going home is a very well time-tested protest strategy.

jancsika 5y ago
> Did you know about the time Marlon Brando refused to accept an Oscar because he was mad about the government response to a protest in South Dakota? He also went on Dick Cavett and made some insane connection between that random protest and the stereotypes of Native Americans in Hollywood movies and tv shows. Not only that, he traveled back in time to participate in the civil rights movement to gain enough credibility to convince an actress who'd been at the occupation of Alcatraz to accept his Oscar and give a speech connecting Native American stereotypes and that random protest. We're talking serious Back to the Future level shit here. Brando's nuts.
- SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
  It's pretty stunning how consistently intense, passionate arguments get sanitized to mere disagreements in the popular imagination. You read about the Cross of Gold speech, where William Jennings Bryan declared that the gold standard is an enemy to humanity and whipped up a mob to cancel anyone who supported it, and it comes across as some kind of polite dispute.

KittenInABox 5y ago

WTF? How is this new? Did everyone forget the Dixie Chicks?

erik_seaberg 5y ago
That was inevitable; they offended their own audience.
- beart 5y ago
  It went way beyond offending their audience. The Dixie Chicks were black listed. This was also a time when people started calling french fries, freedom fries, among other insane "patriotic" things.
DoItToMe81 5y ago
The Dixie Chicks fiasco was isolated to the US and mocked internationally. What I suspect he's talking about is how these attitudes are now global.