Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolan7]

Well wait, deplatforming is when a platform drops someone.  That's separate from the "mob rule" of large groups of people criticizing a person or entity.

Someone can have their public reputation tank over a tweet, sure, even without malicious intent.  I feel like that happened more often when there were fewer easy targets.  It's also a natural element of public relations.  Public figures have always been held responsible for gaffs.  The difference is modern technology and culture encourages them, like the rest of us, to overshare.

And what Carano did wasn't just one gaff.  Her pronouns "joke" could be a gaff, that image which was clipped from an antisemitic image could be a gaff, and retweeting anti-mask and election-fraud conspiracies could be gaffs.  That's a whole lot of gaffs, which should and did result in backlash.  Her response was to compare that backlash to Nazis preparing the Jews for genocide.

I am under no obligation to shut up about how her takes are awful.  All else being equal, I'd rather not support a company that hires her.  Am I wrong to make that choice in the literal marketplace of ideas?

No one is "popular until proven bad".  If people don't like you, they don't like you.  Gina Carano has made her opinion about people like me abundantly clear with her very loud platform.  I don't have a comparable platform, and I'm not obligated to like her.

Though I don't know of her inciting violence or anything, so I'm fine with her still tweeting?  Just to reiterate, deplatforming is a completely different tier than merely being offended by someone's naked hatred of me.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The only reason the right-wing cries so much about "cancelling" is that they think they're above judgement - they're the normal people in power and everyone else are freaks who exist by their meager mercy.

This is just the same pattern as always happens with the right. They declare their devotion on to death and then fucking riot when they're mildly inconvenienced by anything. Fuck their tears. I'd be overjoyed to see your average conservative treated like their laundry list of targets, not that getting banned from twitter is even in the same universe as that.

[McTraveller]

I don't see this as a left vs right issue.  Although I agree the arguments used by the right are very hypocritical, don't throw out the fact that de-platforming is a huge power that should be checked.  I mean there's a reason that the US government had its ability to de-platform people limited by the Bill of Rights.

I guess I have a more broad take - I include the de-facto governments of the internet (the tech giants) to also be mob rule.  Don't give me the line about "they are private companies" either - they exert governmental power.  Just because they aren't called a government, doesn't make them one.  That's not even getting into the nonsense posted earlier about how some folks want to explicitly grant companies government power.

All that said, I think a very easy way to get around this is simple: SLOW DOWN PUBLISHING OF COMMENTS.  Maybe that means even to force people to have a delay - maybe even 1 hour - between when they submit a post and when it will be published.  Gone are the days when your close friends would be able to say "maybe think before you say that in public?"  Instead we have everything being "immediately public" which gives us what we have today.

[dragdeler]

-

[MrRoboto75]

Conservs want it to be okay to refuse to bake gay wedding cakes, but also want to force companies to soapbox their opinions about how we need to shoot mexicans before they cross the border.

[martinuzz]

Thinking about all this... does anyone know a good resource for debunking racist/sexist misconceptions that takes things in a dry, neutral tone and focusses on well-reasoned, well-referenced factual rebuttals? I’d be nice to just have a link to point to. I’ve found unconscious bias stuff is pretty good, but it deals with a very specific issue. That sort of thing, essentially, but for more issues.

Not exactly, but this still remains a must watch on the topic of bigotry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mcCLm_LwpE

[Rolan7]

Haha I just heard NC Senator Richard Burr (and others?) is probably going to be censured by his state Republican party for his vote. I know we've gone over how they're hypocritical about canceling, but just wow.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/15/richard-burr-north-carolina-censure-469027

[JoshuaFH]

For a party that cares more about party loyalty than literally anything else, punishing even the faintest hint of disloyalty is mandatory.

The same thing in a gang. Loyalty to the gang takes precedence over everything.

[TD1]

Burr just wanted to be in the room where it happens 

[Iduno]

Labor scandal?

The UK Labour Party had a huge antisemitism row over the treatment of alleged antisemitism within the party. This got even spicier when the UK gov adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism which included criticism of Israel's existence as a Jewish state as antisemitism, which ensured labour was going to commit political suicide as there was no way to reconcile the labour faction which held that a racial nation state was an inherently racist project and the labour faction which held that Israel was held to an unfair standard. This is piled on top of allegations of antisemitism within the party, on top of bizarre things like panels of woke gentiles deciding whether or not Jewish labour party members were antisemites. Amidst this strangeness was the mural scandal, in which the (then) labour party leader Corbyn retweeted some street art of bankers playing monopoly over the backs of a heteregenous humanity. The bankers are the rothschilds, rockefellers and morgans, and after a local Jewish councillor complained it was peddling antisemitic tropes akin to pre-war Nazi Germany, it was to be effaced. This is where Corbyn steps in to defend it, which then embroils him in the antisemitism row, where he apologises saying he didn't know it was antisemitic, whilst the artist maintains it isn't about race but class.`

You know it's a good look when saying genocide is bad is used as proof of a Jewish person being anti-Semitic. Even though it was mostly being used by the supposed left-wing party to get rid of a politician who was too far left (possibly even left of center!).


A lighter view of Ameripol:

https://twitter.com/lukeisamazing/status/1360764332569735168

[Frumple]

So hey, texas seems to be substantially without power and people are freezing to death? Something about dumbshit anti-federal power infrastructure meaning insufficient redundancy in the face of basically historic weather conditions leading to massive california-style power outages for a woefully unprepared population, from what I'm picking up? Sounds pretty damn rough.

[Duuvian]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/15/us/storm-blackouts.html

The statement said the power pool was forced to begin relying on reserve energy sources at 10:08 a.m. Central Time on Monday, and it issued the controlled outage order when the reserves were exhausted a few hours later. It said it had been steadily stepping up warnings to conserve power since Feb. 9.

Spoiler: image (click to show/hide)

My bad for not seeing the Comedy text on the "Hank Hill facepalm" search result I found, it's not to imply it's funny when Texans may be freezing cold

How does a place that includes Texas only have a few hours of energy reserves? I thought that was their thing.

On other topics, I thought I would suggest here that this guy

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/15/us/politics/adam-kinzinger-republicans-trump.html

May be a good person to keep an eye on for a Republican seeking a torch bearer on the way out of the Trumpdom. I don't know him personally of course, but he has the conservative track record you adore while having the character to oppose a demagogue. That's quite possibly a winning combination.

[Maximum Spin]

On other topics, I thought I would suggest here that this guy

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/15/us/politics/adam-kinzinger-republicans-trump.html

May be a good person to keep an eye on for a Republican seeking a torch bearer on the way out of the Trumpdom. I don't know him personally of course, but he has the conservative track record you adore while having the character to oppose a demagogue. That's quite possibly a winning combination.

The reason I'm fairly confident it isn't is that, well, the voters don't adore the conservative track record. Take abortion (please): to a first approximation, nobody cares about abortion anymore. I mean, seriously, as hard as it is to believe, it is a fact that the majority of Republican voters either do not give a shit about abortion or consider abortion as a tactical retreat they can circle back to in twenty years when the culture is different. This guy could conceivably split out the votes of the minority who do still care, although I would be a little surprised; I don't think he can serve as any kind of Schelling point for the Republican party going forward.

[Loud Whispers]

If Trump maintains the sword of damocles over the GOP's head by threatening to run independent candidacy if they don't kowtow the MAGA line it's unlikely you're going to get someone who won't want to humble themselves before Hindenburg

*EDIT

But Mr. Kinzinger soon became dispirited by a Republican Party he believed was centered around opposition to whatever President Barack Obama proposed without offering new ideas of its own.

I hope he's sincere, I genuinely despise the motiveless morons whose belief-absent hearts tell them to only ever do the opposite of whatever jellyfish opposite them is doing

[Duuvian]

The reason I'm fairly confident it isn't is that, well, the voters don't adore the conservative track record. Take abortion (please): to a first approximation, nobody cares about abortion anymore. I mean, seriously, as hard as it is to believe, it is a fact that the majority of Republican voters either do not give a shit about abortion or consider abortion as a tactical retreat they can circle back to in twenty years when the culture is different. This guy could conceivably split out the votes of the minority who do still care, although I would be a little surprised; I don't think he can serve as any kind of Schelling point for the Republican party going forward.

I would suggest there are a great deal of Trump voters who voted that way because he delivered or promised to deliver specifically x for them despite glaring inconsistencies with the gamut of their beliefs; along with always having voted Republican. A common one I hear is conservative judges; and that desire for judges is connected, besides other more business-y things, to beliefs on abortion. I don't know what percentage of the Republican party for example does not care about abortion but I do know that it at the least is a common reason given for continued support of the Republican party amongst some people I've spoken to who otherwise seem out of place there.

If Trump maintains the sword of damocles over the GOP's head by threatening to run independent candidacy if they don't kowtow the MAGA line it's unlikely you're going to get someone who won't want to humble themselves before Hindenburg

I think this is accurate if Trump remains able to hold that sword for two or more years. I think that is a big question.

EDIT: Also I had to look up Schelling point because I've never heard of it before, but it's fun to learn something officially

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_point_(game_theory)