[Discussion] Police, White Nationalists, and the Rise of Fascism

Pretty sure "Cancel Culture" existed before Rosanne was fired from "The Connors".

Merriam-Webster wrote:

cancel culture - noun

Definition of cancel culture:
the practice or tendency of engaging in mass canceling (see CANCEL entry 1 sense 1e) as a way of expressing disapproval and exerting social pressure

“For those of you who aren't aware, cancel culture refers to the mass withdrawal of support from public figures or celebrities who have done things that aren't socially accepted today. This practice of "canceling" or mass shaming often occurs on social media platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook.”
— Demetria Slyt

The Origin of 'Cancel Culture':
The term has been credited to black users of Twitter, where it has been used as a hashtag. As troubling information comes to light regarding celebrities who were once popular, such as Bill Cosby, Michael Jackson, Roseanne Barr, and Louis C.K. —so come calls to cancel such figures.

Let's call it "consequence culture" instead (via online)

Michael Jackson died in 2009
Bill Cosby's accusations started in 2004

Both predate "The Connors" significantly. (2018 first season)

RawkGWJ wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

In the 1950s, if you were accused of being a communist, you'd lose your job and more. The left didn't create "cancel culture".

You’re kind of missing the point. The term cancel culture started being used frequently on Twitter. Its probably a reference to Rosanne Barr’s more recent show being canceled as a result of some awful horrible garbage that she posted on Twitter.

Besides. McCarthyism and the red scare was more of a witch hunt IMO.

I don't care about the term. Whatever you want to call it, the idea existed long before Twitter.

Like so many other things, the internet and social media accelerated it, enabled it, and gave it a name.

The thing is, it's a pretty broad term that people tend to use in subtly different ways. Like, it's hard to blame anyone if Bill Cosby's crimes left such a bad taste in their mouths that they can't enjoy anything that features him prominently, even if that sucks for the many other talented and hard-working people who also worked on those things. Enough people feel that way, and yeah, projects tend to get canceled, roles recast, etc.

OTOH, I've also seen stuff that's only slightly less ridiculous than:

The fact that both these phenomena tend to get conflated under the term "cancel culture" makes it a little hard to have a meaningful conversation about it.

And, of course, conservatives point to the bullsh*t examples for why the whole idea is bad.

RawkGWJ wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

In the 1950s, if you were accused of being a communist, you'd lose your job and more. The left didn't create "cancel culture".

You’re kind of missing the point. The term cancel culture started being used frequently on Twitter. Its probably a reference to Rosanne Barr’s more recent show being canceled as a result of some awful horrible garbage that she posted on Twitter.

Besides. McCarthyism and the red scare was more of a witch hunt IMO.

It was a witch hunt that ruined people's lives and careers. This may help.

McCarthyism was a movement, not just a witch hunt. It resonated through the decades; where do you think Republican's tarring Democrats as "Communists" comes from?

McCarthyism is incredibly similar to the Salem witch trials, in my opinion. In both cases, things got so out of control that a mere accusation was assumed to be proof of guilt. And in both cases false accusations were made against one’s political enemies as a means to destroy the enemy’s credibility and ruin their lives. In my mind there’s a direct through-line from Salem to the red scare.

McCarthy was a lot like Trump, in that he lied about all sorts of things in his life and took cynical advantage of that in his political career. He used the Red Scare (and the concurrent Lavender Scare) to attack his political enemies, while also raising the Republican fringes as a grass-roots response (which, shortly after McCarthy's death, gave us the John Birch Society, a group of paranoid anti-Communist conspiracy theorists whose beliefs have become the Republican mainstream). I'd say Salem reflects the *tactics* of McCarthy's work, but the actual beliefs he raised trace back through Father Coughlin into the Know-Nothings and even further. Trump is a literal ideological descendant of McCarthy and has copied many of his tactics, and for Republicans who vaguely remember their parents stories of McCarthy's valiant fight against Communists and homosexuals, he must have seemed like a God-sent Messiah.

And, of course, conservatives point to the bullsh*t examples for why the whole idea is bad.

Or more often just make them up...

Lying is policy now. "Ignorance is strength."

Cancel culture has been around for a long time in subversive social circles, particularly black and queer spaces due to the self-protective and self-selecting nature of preservation as targeted minorities. (And it was Black lgbtq+ folks that the rest of queer culture appropriated from in that regard, so including that in this description is a bit misleading, but something at least white lgbtq+ people and allies can more easily recognize. It's one of the key factors for why so many lgbtq+ poc choose not to identify/associate with "mainstream" queer culture. THAT is a whole other thread onto itself, though).

The defensive infighting among radical liberals is a large-scale model of a similar trend within POC/queer spaces to self-isolate for protection via cancelling bad actors that infiltrate self-generated safe spaces as a means of protection, as these are historically groups that have suffered a significant amount of trauma at the hands of the majority. The sideways-punching and eating of our own is often a trauma response from that and can be (and often is) misapplied.

Much like drag, rap music, blues, (or, if you would like a similar trajectory within games culture reference, "ethics in games journalism") once these social habits make it into the mainstream sphere, it's co-opted by problematic white people leveraging it in order to maintain dominant existing power structures in the status quo, and re-writing the social narrative to be included as a victim. White tears, etc.

"Cancelled" has entered the same linguistic world as "woke." The people who generally use it now are either out of touch, or are co-opting it in attempts to realign themselves in the social hierarchy or play the victim/marginalized card from a position of power. Hence it leaving the vernacular of those actually being harmed post-haste so the people who created and utilized these terms as a means of protection can now identify questionable actors.

It was also used in the Republican Party, since the 80's, to purge moderates. That was pretty much the biggest effect of the Moral Majority, to primary anyone who disagreed with the New Republican Order. Gingrich and the Bushes and the Tea Party, the Trumpists and now QANON, they all have sharpened the axes a bit further each time.

Now it's to the point where they are trying to cancel liberals by denigrating "cancel culture". Irony abounds.

Amoebic wrote:

The defensive infighting among radical liberals is a large-scale model of a similar trend within POC/queer spaces to self-isolate for protection via cancelling bad actors that infiltrate self-generated safe spaces as a means of protection, as these are historically groups that have suffered a significant amount of trauma at the hands of the majority. The sideways-punching and eating of our own is often a trauma response from that and can be (and often is) misapplied.

This makes intuitive sense to me. Thank you for sharing this perspective.

McCarthy drank himself to death at age 48 after getting censured.

hbi2k wrote:
Amoebic wrote:

The defensive infighting among radical liberals is a large-scale model of a similar trend within POC/queer spaces to self-isolate for protection via cancelling bad actors that infiltrate self-generated safe spaces as a means of protection, as these are historically groups that have suffered a significant amount of trauma at the hands of the majority. The sideways-punching and eating of our own is often a trauma response from that and can be (and often is) misapplied.

This makes intuitive sense to me. Thank you for sharing this perspective.

I want to extrapolate from this a bit more, because I'm not sure I'm 100% comfortable in saying the response can be misapplied and I feel I may have used the wrong word. Perhaps I mean it can be more severely or harshly metered. I think it's common for it to be seen as yet another betrayal because it happens so often, even when the betrayal can be unintentional. It is normal to cut ties from the things that harm us. It's also normal for folks to unintentionally harm. The repeated nature of being harmed means cutting people off and out entirely is a common practice when they exhibit harmful behaviors. That self-preservation is a direct result of power imbalance, and not a means to sow division so much as a need for self-preservation.

Amoebic wrote:
hbi2k wrote:
Amoebic wrote:

The defensive infighting among radical liberals is a large-scale model of a similar trend within POC/queer spaces to self-isolate for protection via cancelling bad actors that infiltrate self-generated safe spaces as a means of protection, as these are historically groups that have suffered a significant amount of trauma at the hands of the majority. The sideways-punching and eating of our own is often a trauma response from that and can be (and often is) misapplied.

This makes intuitive sense to me. Thank you for sharing this perspective.

I want to extrapolate from this a bit more, because I'm not sure I'm 100% comfortable in saying the response can be misapplied and I feel I may have used the wrong word. Perhaps I mean it can be more severely or harshly metered. I think it's common for it to be seen as yet another betrayal because it happens so often, even when the betrayal can be unintentional. It is normal to cut ties from the things that harm us. It's also normal for folks to unintentionally harm. The repeated nature of being harmed means cutting people off and out entirely is a common practice when they exhibit harmful behaviors. That self-preservation is a direct result of power imbalance, and not a means to sow division so much as a need for self-preservation.

I'd amend "harm" to "harm or perceived harm."

I talked to some folks who were really bothered by the whole "bean dad" thing a while ago, and it seemed the more bothered they were, the more likely it was that it was reminding them of some traumatic personal experience.

They weren't being "harmed" by reading a silly exaggerated story of a man being kind of an asshole over a can of beans, but because they conflated him with someone in their life who maybe DID harm them, they got to experience a feeling of control in censuring him the way they weren't able to do in whatever memory was being evoked.

I'm not amending my statement. If you are harmed by something, it is doing you harm. Qualifying it with assumptions like perceived negates that person's own agency around what harms them and I'd like to not be associated with that.

Amoebic wrote:

If you are harmed by something, it is doing you harm.

True, and when someone has been traumatized, they are often hypersensitive to potential threats to the point where they will perceive something harmless as if it were harmful. It's a pretty classic and uncontroversial bit of human psychology.

And when you think about it, that's perfectly rational. If you are accustomed to being surrounded by threats, the cost of a false-negative is much higher than that of a false-positive. Someone sets off some fireworks in your neighborhood and you wake up with a PTSD flashback because you've been shot at, and you lose sleep. Someone fires a gun and you sleep through it because you think it's fireworks, maybe you get shot to death. Same theory.

That doesn't mean the fireworks are as harmful as the gun.

Picking your personal nit to death can do harm to an overall point though. Especially when it involves repeatedly explaining common knowledge that's tangential to that point to begin with.

It is a testimony to white privilege and Asian American fear that these assailants have not ended up beaten to death by angry mobs yet. Imagine, for a moment, if these were white grandmothers being suckerpunched. There would be lynchings.

Paleocon wrote:

It is a testimony to white privilege and Asian American fear that these assailants have not ended up beaten to death by angry mobs yet. Imagine, for a moment, if these were white grandmothers being suckerpunched. There would be lynchings.

What happened?

It may be a testimony to white privilege (or white blindness) that I haven't even heard about Asian women getting punched?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-a...

The research released by reporting forum Stop AAPI Hate on Tuesday revealed nearly 3,800 incidents were reported over the course of roughly a year during the pandemic. It’s a significantly higher number than last year's count of about 2,600 hate incidents nationwide over the span of five months. Women made up a far higher share of the reports, at 68 percent, compared to men, who made up 29 percent of respondents. The nonprofit does not report incidents to police.
Player Hater wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

It is a testimony to white privilege and Asian American fear that these assailants have not ended up beaten to death by angry mobs yet. Imagine, for a moment, if these were white grandmothers being suckerpunched. There would be lynchings.

What happened?

Which occasion?

Elderly Asian Woman Assaulted; Fights off Attacker in San Francisco

Woman Hit with Metal Pipe in Latest Manhattan Hate Crime - the assailant was heard saying "I came here to f&%$ up Asians."

And the Alanis Morrissette Award goes to:

Asian-American Woman Attacked on her way to a Rally against Asian-American Violence

MOD
As a general reminder, we don't condone violence against anyone here, no matter how despicable their acts may be.

Player Hater wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

It is a testimony to white privilege and Asian American fear that these assailants have not ended up beaten to death by angry mobs yet. Imagine, for a moment, if these were white grandmothers being suckerpunched. There would be lynchings.

What happened?

I believe it's in reference to a douchebag who went on a rampage and attacked several elderly Asian women in San Francisco a few days ago, including 75-year-old Chinese grandmother who got decked in the eye. She fought back and put him in a stretcher.

EDIT: Sometimesdeehausered.

I just got done telling someone else that I just can't anymore. The whole American ethic of "rugged individuality" basically boils down to aggressive, in your face, selfishness. Folks just being sh*tty because they can and the more privileged, the more sh*tty they are. Americans are f*cking exhausting and I need a break from them.

I have a clear case of America fatigue.