4 ms·

> I'm really sorry about that, but how do you want people to act? Like the resilient adults they should be. > I grind my teeth everytime I hear middle/upper c

> I'm really sorry about that, but how do you want people to act? Like the resilient adults they should be. > I grind my teeth everytime I hear middle/upper class people complaining at boycotts and 'cancel '. What do you want from them? I want them to present their views, and attempt to convince others of the merits of those views. I don’t want them to use bullying, intimidation, authoritarianism, or violence to force others to adopt (or pretend to adopt) their viewpoint. > They can't protest, because of violences against statues and McDonald's Why do you treat “protest” and “riot” as synonyms? They’re not. > They can't strike without getting teared down by most MSM So what? You’re not owed agreement from anyone. If they want their strikes to be supported by others, they first need to convince others that they should be supported.

sophacles 4y ago
>> I grind my teeth everytime I hear middle/upper class people complaining at boycotts and 'cancel '. What do you want from them? > I want them to present their views, and attempt to convince others of the merits of those views. > I don’t want them to use bullying, intimidation, authoritarianism, or violence to force others to adopt (or pretend to adopt) their viewpoint. Are you really equating "not choosing to buy stuff" and "not choosing to watch/attend stuff" with violence? Listen, I get it - you think you're entitled to a revenue stream, that whatever nonsense you build deserves money. Here's the deal though, the free market is also about the spender getting to choose what they spend money and time on. If you don't like it, too bad - no one owes you agreement nor money just because.
- teakettle42 4y ago
  >> I don’t want them to use bullying, intimidation, authoritarianism, or violence to force others to adopt (or pretend to adopt) their viewpoint. > Are you really equating "not choosing to buy stuff" and "not choosing to watch/attend stuff" with violence? No, and I’m genuinely confused as to how you arrived at that interpretation of my statement. > Listen, I get it - you think you're entitled to a revenue stream, that whatever nonsense you build deserves money. How did you arrive at this conclusion? It has no relation whatsoever to what I wrote.
  - sophacles 4y ago
    How did I arrive at it? Well you quoted a bit about boycotts that included a question about alternatives. This type of quoting is often a technique to declare "the text after this before the next quote is a response". So when you then responded with a point about wanting them to make arguments instead, and emphasized it with "not ... violence", you sure seem to have equivocated them. If that wasn't your intent, my bad and I have no idea what you were intending to say. The second conclusion assumes you made the violence point of course and is basically substitution: boycotts = violence = not spending money People are generally entitled to not have violence directed at them. (becomes) People are generally entitled to not have not spending money directed at them. (can simplify as) People are generally entitled a revenue stream.
orwin 4y ago
So you think the yellow jacket movement were riots. Fine. By the way, they did convince other they should be supported. Most strikes in my country start with 40 to 60% support (because we actually have political education), and after a day of CNN-like 24h hours news, by billionnaire-owned medias, you see a 10% drop in support. Easy to convince for some more than for others, right? But anyway. ---------------- >> I grind my teeth everytime I hear middle/upper class people complaining at boycotts and 'cancel '. What do you want from them? >I want them to present their views, and attempt to convince others of the merits of those views. >I don’t want them to use bullying, intimidation, authoritarianism, or violence to force others to adopt (or pretend to adopt) their viewpoint. Yes, so convincing 1 to 5 percent of the population on social media and ask them to boycott a product or a brand is fine then? Exactly my point. Or do you think this is bullying (that would be rich tbh). Like i said, if you actually said once "vote with your wallet", you don't get to whine about boycotts. I know hundreds of people who boycotted Total (or shell, i was a kid and doens't remember) after one supertanker shipwreck that polluted hundred of miles of coast, were you against this boycott too? Once everybody, including children spend hours cleaning beaches and trying to save birds, once the protests didn't even make national news anymore, and blocking the refinery was met with police force, what do you think they could have done? burn everything? Or boycott one of the dozen companies who who do the same thing anyway, no matter how inefficient that is? What were their options as "resilient adults"? You see, i know most people complaining about cancel culture agree with boycotting when this doesn't really affect them or their political views. I have uncles who are so hypocritical about it, it mades me laugh to ask them "what should you do" because i love to make them sweat a little.

sophacles 4y ago

>> I grind my teeth everytime I hear middle/upper class people complaining at boycotts and 'cancel '. What do you want from them? > I want them to present their views, and attempt to convince others of the merits of those views. > I don’t want them to use bullying, intimidation, authoritarianism, or violence to force others to adopt (or pretend to adopt) their viewpoint. Are you really equating "not choosing to buy stuff" and "not choosing to watch/attend stuff" with violence? Listen, I get it - you think you're entitled to a revenue stream, that whatever nonsense you build deserves money. Here's the deal though, the free market is also about the spender getting to choose what they spend money and time on. If you don't like it, too bad - no one owes you agreement nor money just because.

teakettle42 4y ago
>> I don’t want them to use bullying, intimidation, authoritarianism, or violence to force others to adopt (or pretend to adopt) their viewpoint. > Are you really equating "not choosing to buy stuff" and "not choosing to watch/attend stuff" with violence? No, and I’m genuinely confused as to how you arrived at that interpretation of my statement. > Listen, I get it - you think you're entitled to a revenue stream, that whatever nonsense you build deserves money. How did you arrive at this conclusion? It has no relation whatsoever to what I wrote.
- sophacles 4y ago
  How did I arrive at it? Well you quoted a bit about boycotts that included a question about alternatives. This type of quoting is often a technique to declare "the text after this before the next quote is a response". So when you then responded with a point about wanting them to make arguments instead, and emphasized it with "not ... violence", you sure seem to have equivocated them. If that wasn't your intent, my bad and I have no idea what you were intending to say. The second conclusion assumes you made the violence point of course and is basically substitution: boycotts = violence = not spending money People are generally entitled to not have violence directed at them. (becomes) People are generally entitled to not have not spending money directed at them. (can simplify as) People are generally entitled a revenue stream.

orwin 4y ago

So you think the yellow jacket movement were riots. Fine. By the way, they did convince other they should be supported. Most strikes in my country start with 40 to 60% support (because we actually have political education), and after a day of CNN-like 24h hours news, by billionnaire-owned medias, you see a 10% drop in support. Easy to convince for some more than for others, right? But anyway. ---------------- >> I grind my teeth everytime I hear middle/upper class people complaining at boycotts and 'cancel '. What do you want from them? >I want them to present their views, and attempt to convince others of the merits of those views. >I don’t want them to use bullying, intimidation, authoritarianism, or violence to force others to adopt (or pretend to adopt) their viewpoint. Yes, so convincing 1 to 5 percent of the population on social media and ask them to boycott a product or a brand is fine then? Exactly my point. Or do you think this is bullying (that would be rich tbh). Like i said, if you actually said once "vote with your wallet", you don't get to whine about boycotts. I know hundreds of people who boycotted Total (or shell, i was a kid and doens't remember) after one supertanker shipwreck that polluted hundred of miles of coast, were you against this boycott too? Once everybody, including children spend hours cleaning beaches and trying to save birds, once the protests didn't even make national news anymore, and blocking the refinery was met with police force, what do you think they could have done? burn everything? Or boycott one of the dozen companies who who do the same thing anyway, no matter how inefficient that is? What were their options as "resilient adults"? You see, i know most people complaining about cancel culture agree with boycotting when this doesn't really affect them or their political views. I have uncles who are so hypocritical about it, it mades me laugh to ask them "what should you do" because i love to make them sweat a little.