Woke and Cancel Culture

[summers]

I've seen people on both sides of woke/cancel culture argument in plenty of places lately, even here on ss. I'm really trying to figure out the negatives, because below is what I see them as, and maybe I'm wrong, and someone can clear things up for me.

Woke - my basic understanding is that "woke" people want equality and justice. Here are people I see labeled as woke:
Supporters of

• LGBTQ+ rights
• Pro-choice/women's reproductive rights
• Women's rights in general
• Social reform
• Separation of church and state
• Holding historical figures accountable for their actions
• etc...

Cancel culture - my understanding is discontinued support of (usually) celebrity or historical figures for various discretions. Examples:

• Columbus day (so many reasons, not the least of which should be Leif Erikson got to N America 400 years earlier)
• J K Rowling for her views on trans vs cis women
• Chris Noth for allegedly raping two women
• Mike Richards for comments he made about Jews and women
• etc...

I don't necessarily see these as negatives. I do realize some people have been canceled strictly on hearsay, which opens up the practice to potential abuse. At the same time, some people, like Marilyn Manson, seem to have been given a pass, even with numerous allegations of violence and misconduct. I also think some people are "fake woke" like Tim Cook, who didn't want to do business in states that don't support trans bathroom equality (yes, believe it or not, this is something that is important and I do support it), but is happy to have an Apple presence in countries where he would be killed because he's gay.

 

[Chinaski]

"Woke" is a term originating from civil rights movements, now used by bellicose reactionaries to dismiss progressive causes which threaten them in some way, whenever l see someone using the word as a pejorative term l immediately know they're a fucking arsehole.

"Cancel culture" doesn't exist. It originates from high profile people having their events "cancelled" after they'd done a public howler, for example student unions deciding not to have well-known transphobes attend to speak about feminism. Everybody who claims to have been "cancelled" does so on a very sizeable platform. JK Rowling is a bigot and yet she has enough defenders in the UK media and her income and profile is secure. The term "cancel culture" is something the wealthy, high profile and powerful public figures use when they are whining about the fact that people below them on the food chain have called them out on their shit.

 

[Pluto]

Your summary is very concise.

In many ways, this debate reflects the wider dilemma of balancing freedom of speech with the importance of ending the horrors committed by society against various minority/majority groups.

Here are some of the challenges faced by the left in this debate:

* The push for grand-scale social change at a rapid pace challenges the nature of the human brain to have its basic world view formed in childhood and then coast along for life.
* Certain cultures are intrinsically founded upon traditions such as conservative Christianity and will see their identity under threat; these cultures also happen to make up half the country
* The more vocal proponents of radicalism on both sides inevitably get a disproportionate amount of coverage, despite being some of the least intelligent and balanced commentators on these issues
* Many leftist tactics - weaponising feeling offended, thriving on victimhood, engaging in debate with hostility, shaming and 'cancelling' those who may in any way offer alternative perspectives for discussion - inadvertently utilise reverse psychology to radicalise right-wing opponents (hence the Trump-worship phenomenon, the outrage-obsessed cycles of culture-wars 'news' on Fox, etc.)
* There are numerous areas, such as leftist support for frightfully primitive Islamic cultures yet opposition to US Christianity, where contradictions run rife.
* 'Innocent until proven guilty' has been a basic human right since antiquity, prior to the modern era of 'justice' being installed by internet lynch mobs

As a direct supporter of universal respect, compassion and peace - surely the ultimate end goal of leftists - I see a lot of the issues here as a tragic case of idealistic young people who are acting based upon visceral desires to make the world a just place, yet they severely lack mentoring, humour, guidance and emotional wellbeing prior to initiating their crusades. They need proper role models who are not attention-seeking teenage celebrities, shit-stirring internet trolls or outrage-obsessed media personalities. (NB, the recent NYT issues with this website are a close-to-home example.)

They need to actually learn from older people who have extensive knowledge and life experience before opening their Twitter mouths about complicated issues, though that assumes there is anyone in their circle who has a balanced world view, as most Boomers do not, and 99% of social media and much of mainstream media is just bunk. I can recommend Bill Maher, as despite his sometimes crass ways, he actually hits the perfect middle ground of calling out both leftist nonsense and right-wing insanity.

 

[Chinaski]

Won't be watching the clip but l fully disagree with your post on the fundamental basis that it puts the onus on young left-wing people online to somehow remedy the fact that rich right-wingers are griping about being "cancelled by the Woke Mafia" or some shit. Personally l think if someone high-profile is upset because the internet now enables the riff-raff to directly challenge them on their bullshit then it's they who need to look inward.

 

[GenesAndEnvironment]

I thought woke was when you went overboard and started looking ridiculous or something. Good to know what's going on, I don't get updated on the political stuff anymore. Guess the forum is largely "woke" with the advocacy of suicidal people's rights, heh.

I don't know about cancelling, I tend to look at people I disagree with as factually incorrect rather than evil. Think it's better to not get all emotional when it's not necessary (arguing on Twitter, etc). Not that I'm super good at controlling my own emotions all of the time, but without the fucking psych pills I have a shot at it. I can enjoy a debate, but I don't want to get people fired or whatever, hmm.

 

[noname223]

I think the culture war is an instrument of the powerful to distract us from the corrupt system we live in in. They gain more and more money and power and we argue about Dr. Seuss or the diversity of some fucking M&Ms.
I think we should talk more about the economics rather than this unncecessary bullshit.

 

[Chinaski]

I thought woke was when you went overboard and started looking ridiculous or something. Good to know what's going on, I don't get updated on the political stuff anymore. Guess the forum is largely "woke" with the advocacy of suicidal people's rights, heh.

I don't know about cancelling, I tend to look at people I disagree with as factually incorrect rather than evil. Think it's better to not get all emotional when it's not necessary (arguing on Twitter, etc). Not that I'm super good at controlling my own emotions all of the time, but without the fucking psych pills I have a shot at it. I can enjoy a debate, but I don't want to get people fired or whatever, hmm.

Tbh nobody does get "cancelled", the Oxford Union 'cancelled' an event with Germaine Greer after she went all-out transphobe and that's about the limit. Anyone who complains about being "cancelled" on a media platform has by definition *not been cancelled*. It's since been adopted either as a bullshit cry-bully tactic by pricks or as some tedious minor celeb complaining because they expressed a shit view and got pushback.

I often see it play out like:

Person 1: says something knowingly offensive deliberately

Person 2: that's offensive

Person 1: OH HAVE I OFFENDED YOU SNOWFLAKE

Everyone else: l agree with Person 2

Person 1: I SEE I'M BEING CANCELLED BY THE WOKE MOB, CHASED OUT OF TOWN BY PITCHFORK-WIELDING VEGANS JUST FOR HAVING AN OPINION, WHATEVER HAPPENED TO FREE SPEECH

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

* Many leftist tactics - weaponising feeling offended, thriving on victimhood, engaging in debate with hostility, shaming and 'cancelling' those who may in any way offer alternative perspectives for discussion - inadvertently utilise reverse psychology to radicalise right-wing opponents (hence the Trump-worship phenomenon, the outrage-obsessed cycles of culture-wars 'news' on Fox, etc.)

This was my understanding of what being woke is. I didn't know it originated from civil rights movements.

As far as cancel culture goes, I immediately think about Don Imus who cracked a joke seeing a female basketball team consisting mostly of black women and called them "nappy headed hos", the media jumped on it and he had to go on an apology tour. They took one off color remark said in jest and deemed him a racist. The funny thing is at the time he was about to go a charity event and it got canceled due to the bad press, but nobody gave a shit about that.

Cancel culture from my understanding is taking one thing somebody did, a lot of the time out of context, and attempting to get them fired for it, regardless of whether they apologize or not. Its done in bad faith and has nothing to do with justice.

 

[GenesAndEnvironment]

Tbh nobody does get "cancelled", the Oxford Union 'cancelled' an event with Germaine Greer after she went all-out transphobe and that's about the limit. Anyone who complains about being "cancelled" on a media platform has by definition *not been cancelled*. It's since been adopted either as a bullshit cry-bully tactic by pricks or as some tedious minor celeb complaining because they expressed a shit view and got pushback.

I often see it play out like:

Person 1: says something knowingly offensive deliberately

Person 2: that's offensive

Person 1: OH HAVE I OFFENDED YOU SNOWFLAKE

Everyone else: l agree with Person 2

Person 1: I SEE I'M BEING CANCELLED BY THE WOKE MOB, CHASED OUT OF TOWN BY PITCHFORK-WIELDING VEGANS JUST FOR HAVING AN OPINION, WHATEVER HAPPENED TO FREE SPEECH

I'm sure people have actually gotten fired or whatever (attacked physically, social ostracization, etc) from controversial political views (on all sides throughout history). Well, neither me (nor you, come to think of it) are super averse to causing offense, hah. Don't think there should be such a focus on offense and feelings, it's like a kindergarten or something.

 

[Pluto]

I think the culture war is an instrument of the powerful to distract us from the corrupt system we live in in. They gain more and more money and power and we argue about Dr. Seuss or the diversity of some fucking M&Ms.
I think we should talk more about the economics rather than this unncecessary bullshit.

This is very insightful. Notice who is laughing all the way to the bank (eg. Mark Zuckerberg, Rupert Murdoch) while human behaviour reverts back to the stone age.

Cancel culture from my understanding is taking one thing somebody did, a lot of the time out of context, and attempting to get them fired for it, regardless of whether they apologize or not. Its done in bad faith and has nothing to do with justice.

That definitely happens, but there is such a thing as a person saying or doing something that they shouldn't and being called out for it. The problem is that when we divide ourselves into radical left and right-wing camps, there can be no intelligent debate on how to proceed or where to draw lines in the sand.

 

[summers]

I don't know about cancelling, I tend to look at people I disagree with as factually incorrect rather than evil.

I think there is some of both in the cancel world. People like Columbus were pretty much evil. Most of the founding fathers of the US were slave owners - conservatives try to give them a pass saying it was how culture was at the time. I think in that regard they were genuinely bad people - regardless of the era, good people weren't slave owners.

People also get canceled for what they say. This could even happen to normal people who lose their jobs. I'm kind of on the fence with some of these cases. For example, if someone wrote an offensive blog post when they were 14, and now they're 30 and getting called out for it, that's not really fair - people do grow and change.

Canceling gets a little more complicated when it comes to things like sexual harassment, rape, etc., mainly because most of the time it's the word of the accuser against the accused. This is compounded by proven cases of false accusations.

 

[GenesAndEnvironment]

I think there is some of both in the cancel world. People like Columbus were pretty much evil. Most of the founding fathers of the US were slave owners - conservatives try to give them a pass saying it was how culture was at the time. I think in that regard they were genuinely bad people - regardless of the era, good people weren't slave owners.

Well, yeah, if you literally own slaves then you should have your events cancelled and get banned from Twitter.

 

[Pluto]

Won't be watching the clip but l fully disagree with your post on the fundamental basis that it puts the onus on young left-wing people online to somehow remedy the fact that rich right-wingers are griping about being "cancelled by the Woke Mafia" or some shit. Personally l think if someone high-profile is upset because the internet now enables the riff-raff to directly challenge them on their bullshit then it's they who need to look inward.

I can't comment on this without there being a specific example or issue. A lot of extreme right-wing movements have used claims of free speech suppression as a trojan horse to gradually normalise all sorts of frightfully backward policies. In my view there needs to be a voice of reason to overpower political insanity on both sides, and the prevailing culture needs to prioritise people capable of intelligent discourse rather than endless cycles of triggering outrage.

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

That definitely happens, but there is such a thing as a person saying or doing something that they shouldn't and being called out for it. The problem is that when we divide ourselves into radical left and right-wing camps, there can be no intelligent debate on how to proceed or where to draw lines in the sand.

Absolutely, but the way I always saw it is, if someone has a radical opinion I disagree with, I want them to be able to say it without fear of reprecussions, because it lets me know to stay the hell away from them. When I grew up, you could say wild things and nobody blinked. Now, was it right? Maybe not, but things were a lot more fun, and there were more ways of expressing camaraderie and affection. Now I see a lot more aggression and an actual lack of discussion because having discussions always boils down to the same things over and over. It sucks.

and the prevailing culture needs to prioritise people capable of intelligent discourse rather than endless cycles of triggering outrage.

Nope. You can't do this. I know what you're saying, and in a vacuum I agree, but you can't prioritize some people's speech over others because it will inevitably end with an elite class of people who are allowed to have opinions and a lower class who is disregarded.

 

[Pluto]

Well, yeah, if you literally own slaves then you should have your events cancelled and get banned from Twitter.

I support banning the founding fathers from Twitter, on condition we also ban the ancient Greeks and other historical slave-owning societies.

 

[summers]

I think the challenge being able to separate a person's positive contributions and negative actions. For example, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence - an incredibly important piece that establishes governments are established to support their citizens, and citizens have the right to reform or replace their government. Also that people be allowed to pursue what they believe will benefit them and their families:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

At the same time, he was a horrible person who owned over 600 slaves. So while he was assuredly a hypocrite saying all men are created equal, the power of those words can't be denied.

 

[Feeding Pigeons]

You nailed it, threesummers. That is also another reason why people should not seek to silence their enemies or people they disagree with. You can vehemently hate someone, but they can still be capable of teaching you something or providing insight.

Its hard though, as you said, its a challenge.

 

[Chinaski]

I can't comment on this without there being a specific example or issue. A lot of extreme right-wing movements have used claims of free speech suppression as a trojan horse to gradually normalise all sorts of frightfully backward policies. In my view there needs to be a voice of reason to overpower political insanity on both sides, and the prevailing culture needs to prioritise people capable of intelligent discourse rather than endless cycles of triggering outrage.

I don't think there's a "both sides" to this, this would give legitimacy to those who cry about being "cancelled" where it shouldn't exist imo.

I'm sure people have actually gotten fired or whatever (attacked physically, social ostracization, etc) from controversial political views (on all sides throughout history). Well, neither me (nor you, come to think of it) are super averse to causing offense, hah. Don't think there should be such a focus on offense and feelings, it's like a kindergarten or something.

Yeah tbh I've been involved in politics for a long while and pals of mine have been abused, threatened etc for the views they hold, I've had a few hairy moments myself tbf, the difference is l don't go on TV sitting on a pile of money to complain about how I'm some kind of victim of a bloodthirsty mob. In fact the point you raise is a good one in that the REAL cancel culture is when people are blacklisted from their work due to being a trade union activist, or people are unable to re-enter society due to a criminal record which forever taints them, these people are legit "cancelled" and usually by those same reactionary forces who bleat about the "woke" whenever they're challenged.

 

[D&D]

I enjoyed reading the posts in this thread.
All of them.
Even those I do not necessarily agree with.
I still subscribe to the principle - "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
It might be old fashioned but that does not make it less valuable. Only less profitable. Obscene profits could never be made out of humble tolerance.

 

[Pluto]

Its hard though, as you said, its a challenge.

There was a good example in the music world many years ago. The Pantera singer Phillip Anselmo got into trouble a few times for making remarks offensive to black people and then having to apologise in response to backlash. Personally (and yes I am a 'POC') I couldn't care less that he has said a few stupid things, as his music made an incredible impact on my life. It's possible to love someone without agreeing with everything they have ever said or done. Also, this is how we actually build bridges and learn to love one another.

 

[xLosthopex]

I used to consider myself very much a 'radical leftist' and existed in the whole woke/cancel culture online ideological echo-chambers, but my opinions on this have changed over the last while
I still consider myself a leftist but am very much opposed to cancel culture, I once thought(more like was made to think by the 'woke' mob) that it was a good thing but I've now realized it's more about virtue signaling than actually trying to help people improve themselves and make the world a better place, which is what I believe the goal should be, but the reality is cancel culture only serves to shame and ostracize people, and in some cases actually kills people, and I don't personally see how that can be called 'justice'

Reading Africa Brooke's essay "Why I'm leaving the cult of wokeness" and listening to her interview with Jordan and Mikhaila Peterson was really influential to me, also the work of Clementine Morrigan and listening to her podcast (highly recommend checking these people out)

 

[Sherri]

Very wise words @threesummers!

 

[WhiteRabbit]

I think the challenge being able to separate a person's positive contributions and negative actions. For example, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence - an incredibly important piece that establishes governments are established to support their citizens, and citizens have the right to reform or replace their government. Also that people be allowed to pursue what they believe will benefit them and their families:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

At the same time, he was a horrible person who owned over 600 slaves. So while he was assuredly a hypocrite saying all men are created equal, the power of those words can't be denied.

Yup, and he didn't just own slaves. He raped them. He raped Sally Hemings for years.