What was all this then?..
In Cleese’s sketches, he made hitler out to be a fool, a madman, an idiot.
In the debate, this professor made hitler out to be a racist and anti-semite. Poe’s law and all, his portrayal wasn’t really mocking, it was pretty much straight up regurgitating his views. Those who find those views reprehensible enough to believe that no one would ever say them seriously could take him to be mocking them. Those who hold those views however, just see someone standing up and saying what they believe.
It is absolutely fair for his speech to be criticized. Maybe they went a bit far with the “blacklist” word, but I’m also not entirely sure what that actually means in that context. It is absolutely their right to not invite him back, and it’s their right to mention to other venues about how poor a judgement he showed in his choice of presentation. If they actually put pressure on other institutions to not let him talk at those, that would be wrong, but, my understanding is that they would have little or no leverage to enforce such a thing.
Keep in mind, also, that this Keir Bradwell person is not faculty or staff of the university. He’s a student with a middling position in one of probably hundreds of student groups on campus. John Cleese is a massively well known and influential person. The power dynamic is entirely in Cleese’s favor, and this was little more than bullying on his part. Using his platform to shut down the speech of others, he’s the one in a position to be censoring and blacklisting people. If Bradwell had demanded that no one let Mr Graham-Dixon make another presentation, no one would care. If Cleese had demanded that no one give a talk to the debate society, then they would no longer have any guest speakers.
This turned what could have been a reasonable conversation about what should be acceptable repercussions for showing poor judgment in one’s public performances into a demonstration of the powerful crushing the speech of the less powerful. Next time, when someone shows up to recreate the speeches at the Nuremberg rally, no one will dare to criticize them, for fear of drawing the ire of powerful and influential celebrities and being canceled by them.
(Looks nervously as the enormous list of banned posters on this board)
I always appreciate these cautionary tales: Careful with your words good people, you don’t want to be mistaken for racists!
Pardon me for saying, but, fuck that noise. If some people are determined to ascribe the worst meaning and intent where none is warranted, the racists aren’t the fucking problem.
Mod humor. 
Great so just say whatever you want to then, and other people can say what they want in response. Problem solved and you can put down the cross.
Nah, being mistaken for a racist is not that big a deal anymore.
Being mistaken for “woke” OTOH, that’s what gets you canceled.
Reap what you sow, I guess.
Blacklisting is not when you refuse to invite someone back to a venue anymore. Blacklisting is when you use your position and leverage to prevent anyone from inviting them.
They did not have the leverage to do any such thing. He, a 22 or so year old student used a word that he didn’t fully understand the history of.
While it is apparently perfectly fine for an art history professor to use the words that hitler used in mocking and disparaging minorities, it is apparently beyond the pale for a university student to use a word improperly.
I’m not entirely sure what that is supposed to mean.
I guess what you are saying here is that if you are concerned about racist speech, then you should be crushed underfoot by the powerful?
The powerful have been “cancelling” the weak since we had speech. It is a brief moment in time we live in where the weak can actually make their voices heard. That is unacceptable to the powerful, who don’t take well to being criticized, and they will use their power and influence to silence these voices, as Cleese is doing here.
But good on you for standing up for the powerful and their ability to silence the weak, I guess.
The powerful have been sowing the silence of the weak forever, but your criticism is only for the weak, never even thinking that the powerful should or would reap what they have sown.
Thank you for illustrating my earlier point in never granting the benefit of the doubt to anyone and simply assuming the worst possible motives, sans supporting evidence.
What @k9bfriender said, what you forget here is that because of the relentless use of he word as a slur is that even the minorities that started using the term have decided to stop using the term, hence the result, it is mostly the ones using it as a slur the ones that remain, the intention of the slur is what remains: to discourage others from becoming more just towards minorities. Even unintentionally.
I wonder if it’d been different if they’d said, “Dude. This is supposed to be a convivial, lighthearted debate society with drinking, not a place where we make people sit around listening to Hitler re-enactors. Read the fuckin room. If you’re going to turn the event into such an enormous fuckin downer, we’re not going to invite you back.”
Because that’s what I think they were getting at, only they couched it in Zoomerspeak, and some fogeys are like consitutionally incapable of responding to Zoomerspeak other than in full condescension “kids these days” mode.
In the video, Keir Bradwell and the majority of students seem to be enjoying themselves. Perhaps Keir received some pressure or even bullying from someone powerful to “blacklist” the professor.
Uh, and here I thought I pointed earlier in a different thread to you and others about what linguists and others reported about the evolution and the usage of the word, I even noticed that because of what the right and misguided media did, the use now for the term is to identify the actual sheep that can be convinced to repeat right wing propaganda with no reflexion or willful ignorance.
Notice that there is no need for the speaker to be racist, it also identifies the ones that one should avoid for being so, so gullible.
I love all the ageism in here. That’s enlightened, isn’t it?
Hang on. When someone uses the word “woke” that’s bad and they are guilty of some sort of implied racism, regardless of context and intent. But when this guy used the word “blacklist”, he’s just a 22 year old who doesn’t understand history.
Not necessarily racism, extreme gullibility will do.
It’s just us Boomers not understanding Zoomersprecht.
You can say in your own words what your defense of the powerful means or why you are doing it. But make no mistake, that is what you are doing.
But, who is granting any benefit of the doubt to this college kid who has become embroiled in this whole thing? People are doing nothing but assuming the worst possible motives on his part. Doesn’t that make you guilty of exactly what you are decrying?