|
The Muppets On PCP posted:https://twitter.com/wectnews/status/1277643423131095040 Crane Fist posted:[Matt Christman voice]: owned
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 04:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
that week when the new york writers discovered incels was way better than this crappy cancel week
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 04:26
|
|
|
Retromancer posted:no one who doesn’t live on Twitter gives a gently caress about cancel culture. it’s something that only lives on the hell platform and never intrudes into actual real life. cancel culture in the mainstream are the times people had to petition to bring Family Guy and Arrested Development back
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 04:31
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:like with many faux outrages by centrists, libs and the right, cancel culture can be many different things, depending on the situation. here's some i've been able to list: and like clockwork, we have a new definition fresh out the oven: https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/1286471171806986240
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 04:34
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:What even is cancel culture supposed to be? quote:"cancel culture" is this really ill-defined phrase that vaguely refers to people trying to launch campaigns of boycotts or ostracism against people who have, from a certain viewpoint, expressed an objectionable or reprehensible opinion
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 04:39
|
|
|
i think the entire CC debate is boring but the breakdowns are pretty fun. this is another guy who has been having a pretty entertaining ongoing breakdown all year: https://twitter.com/BLCKD_COM_PILLD/status/1286486917526310912?s=19 https://twitter.com/BLCKD_COM_PILLD/status/1286503670318862337?s=19 https://twitter.com/BLCKD_COM_PILLD/status/1286417070347948035?s=19 i mean i think eli's cartoons are mostly obvious and not good too but how are you "catching" his attention when you're directly @ing him all day long, lol gh0stpinballa has issued a correction as of 04:54 on Jul 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 04:51
|
|
|
Retromancer posted:no one who doesn’t live on Twitter gives a gently caress about cancel culture. it’s something that only lives on the hell platform and never intrudes into actual real life. lol my friend was talking to me just 2 days ago at the pub about lego canceling some plane because of its associations with the military. a few weeks ago, some twitter "journalist" tried to cancel a brewery because it's called Colonial and got a chain of shops to stop stocking them. redskins announced they're renaming. it's definitely spilled over from the Extremely Online to real life.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 05:02
|
|
|
oh yeah that reminds me, three other things that also examples of cancel culture: 9. managers/hr departments providing warnings or even simply discussing an issue someone complained about with the offending individual 10. a company changing the name of a product 11. boycotts
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 05:14
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Phil Donahue was fired over his opposition to the Iraq War - people right now might say that that's an example of "cancel culture" just for the rhetorical juxtaposition, but what this really means is that what we might call "cancel culture" has really just been the variety of ways that our society has managed to censor those who hold views heterodox to capitalism and imperialism a real famous guy who got cancelled (you might might know him), is Oedipus
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 05:20
|
|
|
crepeface posted:this is extremely good and puts into clear words the kind of arguments i've been making with my lib friends about cancel culture. anyone know what the bruenigs podcast is like? i like their posts but i can't imagine a married couple's podcast would be riveting listening for me I will listen to it sometimes and it's usually pretty good. My big issue with it is that the free version both omits episodes and is released like a week or so behind the premium which seems like overkill... They do solo episodes where it's just one of them talking about a topic they are knowledgeable about and those are my favorite. Last one of those was Liz talking about bubonic plague and it was pretty interesting
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
Newest Chapo ep on Canada reminds me of this batshit insane conspiracy blog posting from way back about Satanic Mounties running international drug and sex trafficking and its marginally less batshit to me now
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 06:10
|
|
|
podcast
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 06:15
|
|
|
one weird trick to get paid to listen to podcasts! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 06:19
|
|
|
Dr. Killjoy posted:Newest Chapo ep on Canada reminds me of this batshit insane conspiracy blog posting from way back about Satanic Mounties running international drug and sex trafficking and its marginally less batshit to me now wait, is that the thing they covered on TrueAnon a little while ago?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
i ate at arbys and spent two hours the next day on the toilet i should be paid for such alienating labor
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 06:50
|
|
|
I feel like "cancel culture" has simply gotten conflated with "censorship" and most of these people complaining about it seem to be making the same "free speech" arguments we've heard since forever. I believe everyone are actually fine with cancel culture as long as people they disapprove of are being canceled, and the media elite libs who are denying this are actually protecting their privileged position of being the arbiters of acceptable speech. Any actual threat to the system is "canceled" from the get go, so a "free speech" argument is low risk, and rarely serves anyone but the status quo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 09:37
|
|
|
Somehow managing to get more pathetic than 'They're taking the tits out of my video games!' when the people complaining are literal celebrities
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 09:40
|
|
|
Goast posted:i ate at arbys and spent two hours the next day on the toilet i should be paid for such alienating labor You just don't have what it takes to be a fast food reviewer
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 09:45
|
|
|
thotsky posted:I feel like "cancel culture" has simply gotten conflated with "censorship" and most of these people complaining about it seem to be making the same "free speech" arguments we've heard since forever. I believe everyone are actually fine with cancel culture as long as people they disapprove of are being canceled, and the media elite libs who are denying this are actually protecting their privileged position of being the arbiters of acceptable speech. Any actual threat to the system is "canceled" from the get go, so a "free speech" argument is low risk, and rarely serves anyone but the status quo. That's pretty much exactly right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 09:49
|
|
|
interpreting the issue charitably, complaints of cancel culture are that the standard reaction to an opinion with which ones disagrees is to try to remove the speaker from being able to put forward opinions in the future rather than attempt to engage seriously with the opinion or simply dismiss it this is a problem in a lot of circumstances, because when one becomes too comfortable with simply suppressing dissent it inevitably leads to weird dogmatism like that gwen snyder character, or more seriously you end up with whole organisations turning insular and running into some serious ideological dead ends. this especially often happens with radical movements, whose instinct will rereasonably be that most outside criticism is simply not constructive or worth wasting time on - it's easier to, say, find some reason that the critic is non-serious in some way than to actually evaluate the criticism, which can simply be 'was friendly to someone who's bad'. i've genuinely seen people prepared to dismiss a sympathetic politician for saying 'thank you' to a TERF who commisserated that they were suffering racist abuse the other thing is that, in a marketised discourse, consumer activism becomes very tempting. newspapers like being able to put eyes on their stories, and they like maintaining their prestige, so threatening that can both threaten them in a real way and, perversely, allowing such campaigning to succeed occasionally is in the newspaper's best interest because it drives the engagement which is their lifeblood throwing some journalist or editor to the wolves occasionally is probably a worthwhile investment - the new york times is never going to have trouble with digging up people willing to work for it no matter how precarious their positions, after all the big problem with cancel culture interpreted in this way as an activist strategy is that it doesn't *do* anything. you can get some rear end in a top hat kicked out for printing a tom cotton op-ed calling for blood in the streets, but that rear end in a top hat will just be replaced by another identical rear end in a top hat because the real interests of the new york times, which are unchanged. at best, dismissing people can lead to a space where you can have constructive discussions on certain terms without having to go back and explain the basics to some troll, but that can be done more easily by gating participation somehow, e.g. by setting up an organisation with a specific charter and having those discussions there basically consumer activism is a dead end, still boycotting israel
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 10:11
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:the big problem with cancel culture interpreted in this way as an activist strategy is that it doesn't *do* anything. you can get some rear end in a top hat kicked out for printing a tom cotton op-ed calling for blood in the streets, but that rear end in a top hat will just be replaced by another identical rear end in a top hat because the real interests of the new york times, which are unchanged. this seems deeply pessimistic and oversimplified, and kind of a bad example. like, yeah, obviously the new york times as a broad entity is never going to actually align with leftist ideals, but there is absolutely space for it to be less lovely with someone other than james bennet helming the op-ed department. bennet made the call on the cotton op-ed! the nyt didn't throw some rando under the bus or anything. it seems to weird to say on one hand we need to be less dogmatic and on the other hand say that there's literally no difference between anyone at the new york times, and they're all going to make as bad and lovely decisions as bennet
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 10:27
|
|
|
dogmatism is bad for the group being dogmatic, not in any moral sense but purely pragmatically because it means that you're increasingly unable to keep up with events the NYT op-ed editor has a specific function and that function is basically unchanged when replacing some individual. the new person could be better in some ways, but their primary job is to keep the space for legitimate discussion within the bounds of bourgeois acceptability, which means that it's of very limited use to spend lots of effort buying into their actual business model and driving engagement with the NYT brand to make some cog in that machine less bad in some specific way. i, at least, see no reasonable means for that to turn into serious change - at best you're exchanging a bidenite with a warrenite. hooray.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 10:36
|
|
|
Its also why the Financial Times is one of the best news sources out there, because capitalists are making actual financial decisions based on their reporting and so they have to reflect actual reality somewhat. Trashfuture did a couple of episodes on a shady accounting practice called Reverse Factoring which the FT then picked up and started doing investigative journalism on, which is not a sentence I think you could say about any other paper unless its one of those "dirtbag left safari" articles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 10:59
|
|
|
financial times owns and is a better materialist rag than any street corner pamphlet
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 11:22
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:What does Felix say about 2000s era internet? That in a way, pre-2008\2012 media didn't have all of the concern trolling and cynical deployment of idpol and so on at play, and that by returning to a Pre-Trump world, the power wielded by pundits that cherish themselves would dissipate and would no longer become relevant. And that major figures of the culture of the time would love to back to that time. The earlier can be easily dismissed if you remember that... Shakesville and the like started flourishing around that time. Cracked would have somewhat cynical "Actually, it's progressive to endorse the military complex and here's a minority informing you how actually, invading Vietnam would be a good idea" nonsense painted in progressiveness. I am using that specific website since it occupied that space on people's heads would later on be with Gawker and the like. And needless to say, Gawker's destruction was cheered on by those forces, to this day being still talked about by people that were around as "going after a gay businessman and Motherfucking Epic Hulk Hogan". Going back to those times would mean that a lot of the left media framework that Felix tried to stick to wouldn't be there, or extremely adversarial painting him as too wacky or too sensitive. Fighting In the Age of Loneliness would be pinned as "sjw, purple-haired shrieky liberal woman" bullshit because it's not propping up all of the resulting pain that lead into it into Cristianos Ronaldos and would be pinned by that crowd in the exact same way Virgil Texas did with Deadspin's coverage of Sports on that episode with the football player. The latter? Telling someone like Seanbaby or James Rolfe to go back to their old frameworks would be insane, specially at mid-40's and possibly with decades of going with the flow, doing several changes on their personal lives. I don't even think the imageboard dwellers would even want that, specially since during the Twitch Culture episode he didn't seem to notice that the "thigh high, cat eared" aesthetic was also earnestly embraced by the more unsavory bigoted sides and wasn't purely just for political progressives.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 11:50
|
|
|
Was mostly really tedious fighting over aesthetics with no concern for material reality. It's the liberals who desperately want to go back to that. Where the problems aren't healthcare or homelessness but that video games have tits in them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 12:00
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:dogmatism is bad for the group being dogmatic, not in any moral sense but purely pragmatically because it means that you're increasingly unable to keep up with events yeah, but the "cancel"ing of bennet wasn't an activist move, though. no one organized against him, except for his coworkers at the nyt, who have a much more vested and material interest in removing shitheads from management positions. the whole thing was organic and individual, everybody loving hated him and made noise to that effect, and he was removed. even if its very likely that his replacement won't change the course of the entire masthead, if they make any change to the better then that means all of those individuals, who wasted no real organizational power or resources, had some sort of collective hand on a lever of change. like they're both terrible cowards, but again completely conflating warren and biden for that metaphor is the exact same weird black and white dogmatism you're arguing against. when theres two bad things, we can acknowledge that one is worse than the other
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 12:43
|
|
|
Absolutely nobody is in favour of unfettered free speech and taboo subjects have always gotten you hounded out of polite society. As Zizek puts it, I don't want to live in a society where talking heads are "Just raising questions" about the use of punitive rape and monstrous torture practices on the evening news every night, that poo poo should get you blacklisted from everywhere. Hoes are just mad that the line of play has moved over something they don't like - it's no longer taboo to aggressively defend trans rights or be mean to elite journalists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 12:53
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:https://twitter.com/wectnews/status/1277643423131095040 Congratulations!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 13:01
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Was mostly really tedious fighting over aesthetics with no concern for material reality. It's the liberals who desperately want to go back to that. Where the problems aren't healthcare or homelessness but that video games have tits in them. Which Felix is using as a springboard for a case for him. Despite that kind of stuff flourishing before and during Obama's legislature. i say swears online posted:financial times owns and is a better materialist rag than any street corner pamphlet That actually caused a small drama over here when they praised Antonio Costa and Bloco da Esquerda's handling of the economical crisis. From papers that earnestly tried to pin the Amazon Fires affecting the Indigenous people living in there as this "socio-cultural issue that might have to change habits and cultural diet" and not "Holy poo poo, they're loving killing them en masse". Kunster has issued a correction as of 13:17 on Jul 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 13:13
|
|
|
Varinn posted:yeah, but the "cancel"ing of bennet wasn't an activist move, though. no one organized against him, except for his coworkers at the nyt, who have a much more vested and material interest in removing shitheads from management positions. the whole thing was organic and individual, everybody loving hated him and made noise to that effect, and he was removed. i don't see any fundamental ideological divergence between warrenism and bidenism - they're different takes on the same basic coalitions of interests, with warren more leaning towards highly educated people and the administrative state and biden leaning more on the financial industry and religious civil society. there's a significant difference between those positions when you're talking about the president of the united states, but not when you're doing op-eds for a newspaper - and this is the *best* case imaginable. it's not something worth buying into the NYT business model to achieve imo this isn't really integral to the larger point, though, which is that the price of cancel culture-style activism is imo clearly bigger than any benefit one can expect to glean from it
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 13:14
|
|
|
cancel culture is when people get mad at you on Twitter. Bernie Sanders has the correct understanding of cancel culture. https://twitter.com/imnotowned/status/1285932328108339200?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 14:00
|
|
|
crepeface posted:wait, is that the thing they covered on TrueAnon a little while ago? yeah, but You Can't Win did an even more in depth episode on it
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 14:08
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:https://twitter.com/wectnews/status/1277643423131095040 whats wrong snowflake lost his safe space in the ivory tower and cancelled himself
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 14:15
|
|
|
Hurt Whitey Maybe posted:cancel culture is when people get mad at you on Twitter. Bernie Sanders has the correct understanding of cancel culture. AH: It's this thing that happens on Twitter. On what? AH: Twitter. On the internet. Surely you know what the- Three hours later AH: Okay, so you know maple trees. Of course. AH: And the way you can commune with reality through the Maple Syrup Network Obviously AH: Well ordinary mortals do that with computers. Okay now you've lost me again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 14:28
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Its also why the Financial Times is one of the best news sources out there, because capitalists are making actual financial decisions based on their reporting and so they have to reflect actual reality somewhat. If you think actual capitalists are using FT to make their decisions you have a particularly acute case of Podcast Brain.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
total ignorance of twitter is an enviable position to be in
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 16:26
|
|
|
Varinn posted:this seems deeply pessimistic and oversimplified, and kind of a bad example. like, yeah, obviously the new york times as a broad entity is never going to actually align with leftist ideals, but there is absolutely space for it to be less lovely with someone other than james bennet helming the op-ed department. bennet made the call on the cotton op-ed! the nyt didn't throw some rando under the bus or anything. I’m laughing at this, derisively
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 16:37
|
|
|
The new york times, the amerikkkan der stumer, is not going to have woke gritty opinions because the person in charge of the editorials is different. Its fun to point and laugh at the mild humiliation of james bennet, an evil man who should be thrown in a pit. But the worst part of the Times isn’t even its editorials, it’s the reporting, which is even worse because it purports to be objective. So when the times writes a paragraph about how romani people are swarthy thieves who deserve ethic cleansing, and puts in the reporting section(they actually did this), that’s actually much worse than putting it in the editorials. Firing james bennett is good but does nothing to change this
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 16:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:16 |
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Its also why the Financial Times is one of the best news sources out there, because capitalists are making actual financial decisions based on their reporting and so they have to reflect actual reality somewhat. i mostly listen to their Daily News Briefing, and it's pretty obvious how much the writers long for some sort of alternative to neoliberalism. but their suggestions are sort of gibberish quote:In the event, the rise of populist nationalism followed this attempted restoration. With his protectionism and bilateralism, promise to preserve social security and initial (since forgotten) emphasis on rebuilding infrastructure, Donald Trump became leader of his party because he was not a traditional free-market Republican. With his commitment to levelling up poorer regions and favourable references to Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, Boris Johnson has also indicated a new direction of travel. These leaders have buried Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2020 16:55
|
|
