So, cancel culture is OK until they try to cancel me…
More or less. The difference with today is that liberal ‘cancel culture’ is starting be widespread as conservative ‘cancel culture’ has for decades. All of a sudden companies having the right to decide which views are acceptable in their corporate culture is too far because they aren’t going against the liberals like they used to. The ‘free market’ is only advocated for when conservatives can bend it to their liking.
That’s really all there is, I think. Cancel culture has always been around. The difference is that until recently, the the vast majority of those who were “cancelled” were black folks, brown folks, women, LGBT folks, other POC, etc., who dared to publicly dispute the traditional, patriarchal, and white supremacist notions that are the basis of so much of our society, culture, and institutions. Now, anyone can be canceled, and lots of wealthy folks, lots of white folks, and lots of conservatives and traditionalists really don’t like that suddenly they might face social consequences for what they say.
Anyone who thinks cancel culture is new apparently doesn’t remember what happened to Sinead O’Connor when she tore the picture of the pope. The difference now is that decisions about cancellation are no longer being made by a small group of privileged power brokers to serve the interests of their class, and that scares the shit out of them.
The “cancel culture” you were defending in that old post was damaging to society. The “cancel culture” that is happening today is generally the only thing keeping society civil in the face of rising, grievance driven authoritarianism from the right.
Yeah, I understand. But that was also a long time ago. And of course things can be occasionally lost. The point to the meme is that if you think you can delete something from the internet and expect it to be actually gone, you may be in for a rude awakening.
Today, sources like the internet archive are much more capable of storing stuff that was deleted. I have found 20 year old web pages I wrote and forgot about stored in the archives.
The really cool thing is that, unlike Geocities or Angelfire, you can sign up and start a brand new MySpace page.
I don’t have any social media or a CV/portfolio page online. As an artist, I really should. But after the 100th person told me to, I was really tempted to get a MySpace page.
Better sign up before the whackadoos that are missing Parler show up there…
Modhat: Not sure what that was about, but don’t do it again. Abusive and highly obnoxious pictures don’t belong here. Links broken.
This is just a guidance, not a warning. Nothing on your permanent record.
Er, pot, meet kettle?
I don’t object if you feel like reacting a little snippily about my quoting old posts of yours that contradict some of the opinions you’re currently expressing. But if you’re going to get personal with sneering insinuations that I spend “many hours” “frantically searching” for such posts in order to “gotcha” you, then I don’t think you have a lot of room to complain about other posters making similarly uncomplimentary “cheap shots” about you.
You realize that if someone makes a point, and instead of responding to the point you decide to go on a fishing expedition to find something in the poster’s past 20 years of messages to use against them instead, you are engaging in ad-hominem argumentation and contributing to the hostility on this board, as well as helping to create hijacks like this.
It doesn’t matter if I am a hypocrite, or if I changed my mind on something years ago - the point made ahould stand irrespective of the poster and what you think of them.
I’m just sick of it, and I’m going to call it out whenever someone tries these kinds of tactics. I’m also going to assume that the people who resort to these tactics do so because they don’t have a good response to the actual point, so seek to discredit the poster instead.
You damn us for expecting you to remain consistent to your values?
There’s no “fishing expedition” about it: I was well aware from the get-go that your current arguments against employers disfavoring Trump supporters contradict the more libertarian views that you have frequently proclaimed on this board throughout most of your posting history. I have quoted similarly contradictory earlier posts of yours elsewhere as well.
And the idea that my pointing out glaring contradictions in your expressed opinions constitutes any kind of “ad hominem argumentation” just shows that you don’t understand what an ad hominem argument is.
Anybody’s free to be a hypocrite and/or to change their mind whenever they want to, of course. But if you spend a lot of time on these boards arguing for Position A in order to persuade other posters to agree with you, and then some years later you start spending a lot of time arguing for the opposite of Position A—without bothering to explain how to reconcile those two views or what has changed in your thinking—then you can hardly blame other people for finding that your apparent inability to know your own mind negatively impacts your persuasiveness.
Feel free. But I think you may be mistaken if you imagine that your “calling out” reflects more negatively on the poster who’s criticizing your self-contradictory statements than on the poster who can’t seem to figure out which of two contradictory positions he actually supports.
Criticizing your muddleheaded thinking, which seems to follow whatever conservative talking points are currently du jour without any regard for thoughtful consistency, doesn’t preclude making direct rebuttals to your alleged “point” as well. As you can see from my post #388 in this thread, shortly following my post #386 that you’re so miffed about.
Modhat: This thread seems to have become a fight between posters. Is there anything left to discuss on Parler or should I leave it closed?
If you wish to continue the fight, try the pit please.