10 ms·

I don't think companies are capable of thinking freely out of fear of being cancelled. The only reason there doing it is because of social pressure no other rea

I don't think companies are capable of thinking freely out of fear of being cancelled. The only reason there doing it is because of social pressure no other reason. At certain point when does cancel culture stop. Elon someone who has done more for society than 99.9% of people yet says a few controversial things every now and then so people hate him. I know 100% every person has said or done things that is considered not inline with the narrative. As long as people aren't clearly threatening each other i see no reason cancel culture should exist. We have banks canceling peoples bank accounts because of a few words things are out of control. If you're not a perfect human being and follow the narrative 100% then you are removed from society.

hotpotamus 4y ago
Cancel culture is free speech. No government made VW take this action, did they?
- s9w 4y ago
- tropicalbeach 4y ago
  So companies are allowed to cancel peoples bank accounts because of a few words. The difference is companies aren't doing this because they want too. There scared and can't make decisions. If one person in a boardroom says Elon is this or Kanye is this we can't do business with him and if you don't agree with me then you are labeled as them. So everyone falls in line out of fear of being cancelled. You really think Adidas wanted to lose 40% of there revenue because of a tweet. They don't care what Kanye tweeted they would keep him if they knew they wouldn't get cancelled. It's detrimental to society because it is just the beginning and will be used as a tool for people to get what they want which isn't always going to be good things in the future. What ever happen to business is business. It's now turned into companies running social justice campaigns out if fear. I mean really were talking about things that are not that big of a deal.
  - ROTMetro 4y ago
    Yes, I really think Adidas, a company with a not so great history of being founded by former members of the Nazi party, wanted to cut ties with an anti-semite. Yes, peoples actions should have consequences, that is the whole point of free speech. Bring speech forward, and reward speech we support and discourage speech we don't, and let the market of ideas decide. Do you not believe in free speech and free markets? The market of ideas?
    - tropicalbeach 4y ago
      So if you own a small business and one of your accounts makes up 40% of your business. And the owner tweeted one controversial tweet, your going to cancel the account and not do business with them. 100% no and no one would. It's entirely out of fear adidas did it plain and simple. People who don't want his shoes don't have to buy them but i can guarantee one tweet wouldn't have affected his sales at all. Which proves the people canceling aren't the ones who buy his product anyways. That's the point.
      - velp 4y ago
        Re-stating your premise doesn't prove your point. It's also entirely possible that Adidas decided that the overhead of dealing with public backlash + the fact that Kanye himself is unstable meant that the brand was no longer a long-term investment, and given that understanding, they made the call to cut it cleanly at once. "Cancel Culture" is a bullshit term for "accountability"
        tropicalbeach 4y ago
        You know I am right that's you won't answer the question. You would really eliminate 40% of your business over a tweet. Ye merchandise would sell the same because nobody really cares about the tweet there just scared to get cancelled. Sales would be the exact same. No sane person wipes out 40% of there business unless there just scared. Cancel culture is toxic and bad for society.
      - 4y ago
- vetinari 4y ago
  The problem with cancel culture is not a free speech. It is an action, based on external pressure. Same way as "nice business you have there, would be unfortunate, if something happened to it".
  - jwalgenbach 4y ago
    Except it is the speech of those pressuring the company that is free. I can tell a company that supports things I don't agree with that I won't be a customer. If enough of customers vote with their wallets, the company will change it's policies because it cares about profit. No one is obligated to give either their money or attention to Elon Musk, or to third parties that are perceived to support Musk's companies.
    - vetinari 4y ago
      > If enough of customers vote with their wallets, the company will change it's policies because it cares about profit. The problem is, that it is not customers doing it. That would be classic boycott. It is pressure on supply chain, to isolate "misbehaving" company. Similar to racketeering. > No one is obligated to give either their money or attention to Elon Musk, or to third parties that are perceived to support Musk's companies. That's OK. But this is not about giving money or attention to Elon Musk. It is about pressuring others not giving money or attention to Elon Musk. And if you don't comply, you will be isolated too.
  - rpgbr 4y ago
    Free speech is “cancel culture” when I don’t like/agree with its outcome. Get over it, man.
    - vetinari 4y ago
      By your definition, racketeering is also free speech. Get over it, man.
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  Cancel culture is a circumvention of democracy and justice. No trials, no votes - just a handful of loudest, most reactionary people stamping their feet and screaming until they get what they want. Yes, free speech allows cancel culture to exist, but that in itself doesn't make it good.
  - krapp 4y ago
    >Cancel culture is a circumvention of democracy and justice. No trials, no votes - just a handful of loudest, most reactionary people stamping their feet and screaming until they get what they want. Yes, we call that a free society. People have the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of association, and are allowed to exercise those rights without government intermediation. Those rights even allow people to try to influence other people's behavior, or put public pressure on them in order to attempt to enforce social norms or push a political agenda outside the realm of voting or a court of law. >Yes, free speech allows cancel culture to exist, but that in itself doesn't make it good. So you don't believe in free speech, you just believe in freedom for the speech you agree with.
    - bheadmaster 4y ago
      > So you don't believe in free speech, you just believe in freedom for the speech you agree with. If cancel culture is freedom of speech, that would imply that KiwiFarms was also freedom of speech. Both are just "exercising their rights to try to influence other people's behavior". Cancel culture is short-sighted and influenced by sensationalism more than actual facts. It has an extreme chilling effect on the society. Truth is sometimes controversial at first, and cancel culture rids the society of those controversial thoughts that may sometimes be true. Ignoring the effects because "free speech means anyone can do whatever" will eventually lead to a society where there de-facto will be no free speech, at least no free speech which goes against the narrative.
      - krapp 4y ago
        KiwiFarms was freedom of speech, vile as they were, and I believe they got what they deserved. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, nor does it guarantee a platform.
- mlindner 4y ago
  Just because something is free speech doesn't mean it isn't also one or more of: abusive, incorrect, spiteful, vengeful, misguided or capable of being influenced in directions very poor for society.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
eliaspro 4y ago
I can't think of a single thing Elon has done to the benefit of society - it's all to the benefit of his personal wealth, sold to his cult-like following as "real life Tony Stark and Mother Theresa"-amalgation. Builds cars to cement the status quo of the most inefficient and destructive mean of transport there is. Hypes up futuristic potential, yet unrealistic long-distance transport to derail high-speed rail investments and projects. Works on building his vision of space exploration which will become a huge environmental and technical liability for future generations when following his envisioned scale and goals.
- stillkicking 4y ago
  I don't really care about Elon Musk as a philanthropist or not. He's like a one-man Apple in that way. But. - The environmental problem with electric cars is undoubtedly due to the batteries, both the manufacturing and the fact that the cars are much heavier as a result. But the idea that without electric cars more people would choose for alternative modes of transport is a bit dumb. The cars are inherently luxury vehicles, and in many places, the infrastructure isn't there for a low-car/car-free lifestyle. - You don't need hyperloop to derail high-speed rail investments and projects. Simple bureaucratic ineptitude and red tape will do that. Like that story of how SNCF pulled out of California and went and built trains in Morocco instead, which was cheaper and more efficient. - What's a huge technical liability is a bloated govt space agency that takes decades to deliver projects at 100x the cost of what a commercial vendor can do, while all the people who originally built the tech are retired or about to. And all that cost isn't just money, it represents an enormous amount of time and resources spent. Chastizing SpaceX for rejuvenating the space industry seems pretty ridiculous. It seems like you're just taking Musk as a convenient target to blame, because he should spend his resources more "wisely", but each of the examples you cite is actually due to an enormous systemic ineptitude elsewhere.
- mlindner 4y ago
  I guess saving the government billions of dollars in money that would have otherwise gone toward corporate graft and protectionism isn't a "benefit to society". Not to mention the extensive tax revenue that follows from the operation of his companies.

hotpotamus 4y ago

Cancel culture is free speech. No government made VW take this action, did they?

s9w 4y ago
tropicalbeach 4y ago
So companies are allowed to cancel peoples bank accounts because of a few words. The difference is companies aren't doing this because they want too. There scared and can't make decisions. If one person in a boardroom says Elon is this or Kanye is this we can't do business with him and if you don't agree with me then you are labeled as them. So everyone falls in line out of fear of being cancelled. You really think Adidas wanted to lose 40% of there revenue because of a tweet. They don't care what Kanye tweeted they would keep him if they knew they wouldn't get cancelled. It's detrimental to society because it is just the beginning and will be used as a tool for people to get what they want which isn't always going to be good things in the future. What ever happen to business is business. It's now turned into companies running social justice campaigns out if fear. I mean really were talking about things that are not that big of a deal.
- ROTMetro 4y ago
  Yes, I really think Adidas, a company with a not so great history of being founded by former members of the Nazi party, wanted to cut ties with an anti-semite. Yes, peoples actions should have consequences, that is the whole point of free speech. Bring speech forward, and reward speech we support and discourage speech we don't, and let the market of ideas decide. Do you not believe in free speech and free markets? The market of ideas?
  - tropicalbeach 4y ago
    So if you own a small business and one of your accounts makes up 40% of your business. And the owner tweeted one controversial tweet, your going to cancel the account and not do business with them. 100% no and no one would. It's entirely out of fear adidas did it plain and simple. People who don't want his shoes don't have to buy them but i can guarantee one tweet wouldn't have affected his sales at all. Which proves the people canceling aren't the ones who buy his product anyways. That's the point.
    - velp 4y ago
      Re-stating your premise doesn't prove your point. It's also entirely possible that Adidas decided that the overhead of dealing with public backlash + the fact that Kanye himself is unstable meant that the brand was no longer a long-term investment, and given that understanding, they made the call to cut it cleanly at once. "Cancel Culture" is a bullshit term for "accountability"
      - tropicalbeach 4y ago
        You know I am right that's you won't answer the question. You would really eliminate 40% of your business over a tweet. Ye merchandise would sell the same because nobody really cares about the tweet there just scared to get cancelled. Sales would be the exact same. No sane person wipes out 40% of there business unless there just scared. Cancel culture is toxic and bad for society.
    - 4y ago
vetinari 4y ago
The problem with cancel culture is not a free speech. It is an action, based on external pressure. Same way as "nice business you have there, would be unfortunate, if something happened to it".
- jwalgenbach 4y ago
  Except it is the speech of those pressuring the company that is free. I can tell a company that supports things I don't agree with that I won't be a customer. If enough of customers vote with their wallets, the company will change it's policies because it cares about profit. No one is obligated to give either their money or attention to Elon Musk, or to third parties that are perceived to support Musk's companies.
  - vetinari 4y ago
    > If enough of customers vote with their wallets, the company will change it's policies because it cares about profit. The problem is, that it is not customers doing it. That would be classic boycott. It is pressure on supply chain, to isolate "misbehaving" company. Similar to racketeering. > No one is obligated to give either their money or attention to Elon Musk, or to third parties that are perceived to support Musk's companies. That's OK. But this is not about giving money or attention to Elon Musk. It is about pressuring others not giving money or attention to Elon Musk. And if you don't comply, you will be isolated too.
- rpgbr 4y ago
  Free speech is “cancel culture” when I don’t like/agree with its outcome. Get over it, man.
  - vetinari 4y ago
    By your definition, racketeering is also free speech. Get over it, man.
bheadmaster 4y ago
Cancel culture is a circumvention of democracy and justice. No trials, no votes - just a handful of loudest, most reactionary people stamping their feet and screaming until they get what they want. Yes, free speech allows cancel culture to exist, but that in itself doesn't make it good.
- krapp 4y ago
  >Cancel culture is a circumvention of democracy and justice. No trials, no votes - just a handful of loudest, most reactionary people stamping their feet and screaming until they get what they want. Yes, we call that a free society. People have the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of association, and are allowed to exercise those rights without government intermediation. Those rights even allow people to try to influence other people's behavior, or put public pressure on them in order to attempt to enforce social norms or push a political agenda outside the realm of voting or a court of law. >Yes, free speech allows cancel culture to exist, but that in itself doesn't make it good. So you don't believe in free speech, you just believe in freedom for the speech you agree with.
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    > So you don't believe in free speech, you just believe in freedom for the speech you agree with. If cancel culture is freedom of speech, that would imply that KiwiFarms was also freedom of speech. Both are just "exercising their rights to try to influence other people's behavior". Cancel culture is short-sighted and influenced by sensationalism more than actual facts. It has an extreme chilling effect on the society. Truth is sometimes controversial at first, and cancel culture rids the society of those controversial thoughts that may sometimes be true. Ignoring the effects because "free speech means anyone can do whatever" will eventually lead to a society where there de-facto will be no free speech, at least no free speech which goes against the narrative.
    - krapp 4y ago
      KiwiFarms was freedom of speech, vile as they were, and I believe they got what they deserved. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, nor does it guarantee a platform.
mlindner 4y ago
Just because something is free speech doesn't mean it isn't also one or more of: abusive, incorrect, spiteful, vengeful, misguided or capable of being influenced in directions very poor for society.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

eliaspro 4y ago

I can't think of a single thing Elon has done to the benefit of society - it's all to the benefit of his personal wealth, sold to his cult-like following as "real life Tony Stark and Mother Theresa"-amalgation. Builds cars to cement the status quo of the most inefficient and destructive mean of transport there is. Hypes up futuristic potential, yet unrealistic long-distance transport to derail high-speed rail investments and projects. Works on building his vision of space exploration which will become a huge environmental and technical liability for future generations when following his envisioned scale and goals.

stillkicking 4y ago
I don't really care about Elon Musk as a philanthropist or not. He's like a one-man Apple in that way. But. - The environmental problem with electric cars is undoubtedly due to the batteries, both the manufacturing and the fact that the cars are much heavier as a result. But the idea that without electric cars more people would choose for alternative modes of transport is a bit dumb. The cars are inherently luxury vehicles, and in many places, the infrastructure isn't there for a low-car/car-free lifestyle. - You don't need hyperloop to derail high-speed rail investments and projects. Simple bureaucratic ineptitude and red tape will do that. Like that story of how SNCF pulled out of California and went and built trains in Morocco instead, which was cheaper and more efficient. - What's a huge technical liability is a bloated govt space agency that takes decades to deliver projects at 100x the cost of what a commercial vendor can do, while all the people who originally built the tech are retired or about to. And all that cost isn't just money, it represents an enormous amount of time and resources spent. Chastizing SpaceX for rejuvenating the space industry seems pretty ridiculous. It seems like you're just taking Musk as a convenient target to blame, because he should spend his resources more "wisely", but each of the examples you cite is actually due to an enormous systemic ineptitude elsewhere.
mlindner 4y ago
I guess saving the government billions of dollars in money that would have otherwise gone toward corporate graft and protectionism isn't a "benefit to society". Not to mention the extensive tax revenue that follows from the operation of his companies.