dear woke people... - Politics Discussion

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

The hive🐝🐝🐝 mind🧠🧠🧠 doesn’t see it that way.

If anyone disagrees with them or the views/opinions of others don’t align with theirs, it’s open season.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

Thanks. I'm hoping to hear from those in that group.
It's very confounding EXACTLY how stopping speech is NOT killing free speech?

There must be some LOGICAL explanation from those who beleive in that? Otherwise, how does it even work?

reply

[–] KiwiJim (1775) 3 months ago

Yeah unlike conservatives who are always so open to freedom of speech and ideas that are different from their own.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

Provide some examples where conservatives are against those "freedom of speech and ideas."

Btw, child grooming and indoctrination of Woke/CRT/DEI don't qualify.

reply

[–] KiwiJim (1775) 3 months ago

Check my posting history you’ll find plenty.

LIBTARD!

WOKETARD!

FAGGOT!

Lots of that sort of shouting down when I counter the ideas bouncing around in this echo chamber.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

Those are labels and titles, nothing to do with being against freedom of speech.

reply

[–] KiwiJim (1775) 3 months ago

They are not terms used to the end of “punishing people for speaking” as described in the OP?

Sounds like a bit of goal-post changing there to me.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

I asked you to provide some examples of where conservatives were against freedom of speech and you cite name calling and labels. There's no goalpost to move.

reply

[–] KiwiJim (1775) 3 months ago

Tomato tomayto

If you think there’s no hypocrisy in the OP’s statement then we will never agree. Which is fine, we don’t need to.

reply

[–] doublea (126) 3 months ago

There isn't, in fact you provided an example of people using 'cancelled' words at you that you disapprove of ... Obviously not very nice but it kind of supports their view?

There's a saying that goes "I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It." which seems to resonate more with conservatives than it does liberals.

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

Thats because conservaticves are mostly the ones responsible for hate speech, persecution and division and the only thing they can say to defend this behavior is clinging to the belief that their abhorrent views are legal and covered under free speech,

which if thats the best thig you can say about you rhetoric isnt saying much.

reply

[–] doublea (126) 3 months ago

I'd encourage you to step outside of the echo chamber for a bit. Seriously, it's beneficial for your mental health.

There's a very strong reason why the far left are losing momentum, turns out gaslighting and shaming anyone who disagrees with your world view is not productive.

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

Maybe the conversation has lost its thread and its unclear what point everyone is making , which are probably all different .

For instance I was just commenting on your bring up of the "defend your right to say it" thing , not the OPs point .

And the OP's point is pretty fucking vague if you think about it . what is "Cancelling" ?
who was "cancelled" ?
In my opinion theres no such thing as cancelling , theres just people behaving unacceptably for the modern day standards and being "democratically" voted out of favour .
but that aside ,

Can anyone think of in instance of "the left" doing a "cancel" on someone for talking ,
Once we have a specific example we can examine the OP's proposition that its " exact opposite of FREEDOM OF SPEECH?"

Does that Harry Potter woman count?

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

if you are not familiar with cancelling, you live under a rock, and I can't help you keep up with this discussion. I'm sorry about that.

reply

[–] Jinx (3877) 3 months ago

Like the Right doesn't shame anyone who disagrees with their world view 🙄 Seriously, get a clue.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

"oh noes... HATE SPEECH! You said something I disliked! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!" hahahhahaha typical

wouldn't you rather have free BAD speech, than have EVERY word locked down because it offends someone somewhere? This would mean no one could even TALK to people anymore as EACH AND EVERY WORD WILL OFFEND SOMEONE SOMEWHERE FOR SOME REASON.

Fucking snowflake spineless people not properly raised by proper parenting is to blame for all this.
"SAFE SPACE!!! I NEED, DESERVE, AND AM ENTITLED TO MY OWN PERSONAL SAFE SPACE!!!!!!
THE WORLD IS TOO SCARY!!!!"

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

Nope.

Nobody is getting cancelled for calling you a faggot. Those are just name calling. Maybe you don't LIKE it, but it is not halting anyone's free speech. And I would fight to keep you having the right to call me a dick head.

Think about ALL the comedians, who have curbed their comedy due to back lash... changing their jokes out of cancel fear.... why would they do this? Because some small minority uses the internet to burn them at the stake.
Are these comedians saying bad stuff? Yep. MAYBE if we don't care for it, don't go, don't fund it.

That's how I live. I don't care what others do, and if I don't like something, I AVOID IT. It's so simple. I don't try to make others BEND to MY one and only ways. Not only is that concept stupid, but also INSANE expecting others to cave for YOUR own morals or ideas.

Now, I don't care for your responses and had you on ignore, so I won't be responding to you further. We should have never crossed paths, nor given each other the time of day.... thank the internet for our sour discourse. :)

reply

[–] KiwiJim (1775) 3 months ago

Wow, ok cool. As you will.

I’m no fan of cancel culture myself, for what it’s worth.

Goodbye guy.

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

I agree with much of your post, but I don’t think putting Kiwi Jim on ignore is the right move. While ignoring someone isn’t exactly the same as canceling, it feels like a similar need for a 'safe space,' and that just leads to echo chambers. I’ve clashed with Kiwi on more than one occasion and had some pretty heated discussions, but at the end of the day, he’s a good egg, and I vouch for him.

reply

[–] Kowalski (79076) 2 months ago

LMAO...MISTER IGNORE.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Provide some examples where conservatives are against those "freedom of speech and ideas."

You mean when Musk deleted the account on X which gave a day to day update on the movements of his private jet? (The account is now on another platform)

Or more generally, is not the 'war on Woke' one against "freedom of speech and ideas" by definition?

Or, in my neck of the woods, the phenomenon of Libel Tourism in the UK - forum shopping for libel suits. It particularly refers to the practice of the rich (and inevitably right wing) in pursuing a case in England and Wales, in preference to other jurisdictions such as the United States, which provide more extensive defenses for those accused of making derogatory statements? This has been such an issue that it has prompted new laws in the US and the UK.

Then there are SLAPPS, (also mostly the recourse of the rich in the UK) or Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation, done to prevent lawful investigations and discussions about matters of public interest, where the primary objective is to harass, intimidate and financially and psychologically exhaust one’s opponent via improper means.

https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/business-management/slapps-and-reputational-risks

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

None of that has anything to do with my inquiry; besides, Musk is not a conservative.

As of yet, you don't know what a conservative is or what an insurrectionist is, other than what you read on the internet.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Musk is not a conservative.

You asked for examples of conservatives, not Republicans. Musk officially endorsed Donald Trump as his choice for the next U.S. president and also gave the Felon-in-Chief a massive donation, he then spent election night with him. Despite Musk's previous description of himself as politically independent, it would appear that he no longer is, or is certainly on the conservative side of things (until he inevitably falls out with Trump, obviously) while it serves his purposes. But he is a good enough example of hypocrisy where freedom of speech is concerned, at least in the example cited. One might also say that Musk's cess pit X sometimes limits or prevents the spread of links to content outside itself - hardly conducive to free expression of speech or ideas is it?

so far you don't know what an insurrectionist is

Irrelevant to this exchange but, as I carefully defined to you just recently an 'a person who rises up against authority against civil authority, or an established government ' [Websters] 'a person who engages in or supports a rebellion against a government in power or the civil authorities; an insurgent' [Collins]. I awaited then to hear your definition by way of contrast, as requested. Perhaps you had forgotten that? I haven't.

I see that you didn't answer most of my examples. Evasion noted.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

Talk about irrelevant; none of that has anything to do with my inquiry. Evasion noted indeed.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

none of that has anything to do with my inquiry

Each of my examples are of conservatives clearly attempting or actually stifling freedom of speech and ideas. How is that irrelevant to your request for examples, or evading anything?

Here is another. In the UK the Conservatives introduced the Prevent strategy, a counter-terrorism programme that requires schools, universities and other public institutions to file a report on anyone who is judged vulnerable to extremism. The programme is intended to combat “extremism”, which is a subjective term with no legal definition. This ambiguity has allowed that administration to shift the parameters in line with its own interests: people have been referred for supporting environmentalism, Palestine solidarity, animal rights, Black Lives Matter and “far-left” politics.n 2020, counter-terrorism officials even labelled Extinction Rebellion as an extremist ideology, and suggested that young people who participate in planned school walk-outs should be reported to the programme. Last year, Sunak promised to bolster the strategy, and widen the definition of extremism even further to include people who “vilify” Britain, and “[root out] those who are vocal in their hatred of our country”. This is someone who has positioned himself as a staunch defender of freedom of speech: he might not agree with what you say but, by God, he will defend to the death your right to say it – unless you tweet ‘Britain sucks lol”, in which case he’s referring you directly to the counter-terrorism unit...

More wider afield. one could also admit Putin, a very conservative politician who has instituted many laws against freedom of expression and the movement of ideas in Russia (or most other dictators of the the world, come to that, all by definition conservative). Glad to help.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

Once again for the slow and dimwitted; Musk is not a ConSeRvaTivE.

|_____UK.Left-Wing______________________UK.Right-Wing___| CENTER |_____USA.Right-Wing______|

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

If Musk is not conservative then why is he so closely aligned with Trump? That's not the mark of a liberal. If you had originally said 'Republican examples' then that might have more traction. You didn't even capitalise 'conservative' earlier (but see you do now - which is it?)

And you still haven't addressed all my other examples of right-wingers working to suppress freedom of speech and ideas. Is there a problem?

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

1. Trump is not a conservative; he’s a moderate and a nationalist.

2. Someone aligning with someone else does not automatically or by default make them the same.

3. UK’s conservatives in general are “fake conservatives” (also, see chart in my previous reply).

4. Apparently, you can’t read. As I previously stated to Jim at the top of this thread: Indoctrination of Woke/CRT/DEI don't qualify.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Trump is not a conservative

The platform of the Republican Party of the United States has historically been based on American conservatism,Though many conservatives suspected Trump wasn't a real conservative for a long time before the 2016 campaign, and he once dabbled with the Democrats, he insisted he had the credentials to win over the Republican Party's right wing. “I am a conservative person. I am by nature a conservative person. I never looked at putting a label on myself, I wasn’t in politics," Trump said in 2015. "But if you look at my general attitudes in life I would certainly have the more conservative label put on me." sorry about that.

Someone aligning with someone else does not automatically or by default make them the same.

This is true but Trump above clearly describes himself as right wing what else is 'more conservative' but that?

UK’s conservatives in general are “fake conservatives”

This is just a Scotsman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Indoctrination of Woke/CRT/DEI don't qualify.

Fair enough; I missed that disclaimer, but still leaves all the other examples I have given, doesn't it?

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

Once again, you can't read ... see point #2

And the media labeling others does not equate to truth or facts. Sorry about that.

Oh, and even if someone is right wing, it doesn't mean that they are conservatives.

Someone can be right wing without being a conservative. Stop conflating everything.

Trump is not right wing, he's a centrist/moderate/nationalist regardless of your cited propaganda.

All your examples were based on some form of Woke/CRT/DEI.

Just like Jim, you failed to provide examples. And no, UK or other countries are irrelevant since my chart applies to all other countries in contrast to the USA.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Once again, you can't read ... [that] Someone (i/e. Musk) aligning with someone else does not automatically or by default make them the same.

This I would agree with but didn't say it was. With Musk is a mixed picture and not as clear cut as you imply. He has described himself politically as "half Democrat, half Republican" and "I'm somewhere in the middle, socially liberal and fiscally conservative". If 'socially liberal' he has still definitely criticized COVID-19 lockdowns, public transportation, and labor unions. He has also promoted conspiracy theories, and made controversial statements that have led to accusations of sexism, antisemitism, support of white pride and transphobia. He appears to have drifted to the right in recent years (In June 2022, Musk voted for Mayra Flores in a special election, stating it was the first time he ever voted Republican) An extended, and I think fair, assessment of Musk's politics and how it has evolved can be found here:

"All in all, it’s hard to reconcile Musk’s actions in 2022 with his claims of centrism. "

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/elon-musk-twitter-deal-politics-b2345301.html

I agree.

The point with Musk is that as one who is in favour of freedom of speech and ideas, he suppressed it on at least one occasion. And you still haven't explained why he would, if a liberal, associate so closely with Defendant Donald and his party..

Trump is not right wing,

Trump's political positions are generally viewed by as right-wing populist.

Someone can be right wing without being a conservative.

So what? That does not mean that many right wingers are not conservative.

All your examples were based on some form of Woke/CRT/DEI.

This is not true of either libel tourism, SLAPPS or the Conservatives Prevent strategy. In the case of the first two, the legal actions are not the work of liberals, or libertarians and certainly nothing to do with Woke/CRT/DEI.

you failed to provide examples. And no, UK or other countries are irrelevant

Your original request was merely to provide some examples of where conservatives were against freedom of speech, with no restriction. I have given several examples. Are you moving goalposts now?

my chart applies to all other countries in contrast to the USA.

|_____UK.Left-Wing______________________UK.Right-Wing___| CENTER |_____USA.Right-Wing______|

Your chart is irrelevant since you have you not er, just insisted that 'not all conservatives are right wing', while at the same time as asking for some examples where conservatives are against "freedom of speech and ideas." ?

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

Neither Trump nor Musk are right wing nor conservatives regardless of how others label them or how their positions are viewed.

To far left radicals, anything that doesn’t align with their views is considered right wing or conservative, but that doesn’t make it so.

I did provide restrictions, and why would any other country outside the USA be relevant to my inquiry since I’m here in the USA. You’re the outsider.

You still haven’t provided any examples to my inquiry so there’s no goalpost to move.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Neither Trump nor Musk are right wing nor conservatives regardless of how others label them or how their positions are viewed.

Thank you for your opinion and I can see why you may wish to insist on it, but as I have detailed, and linked to, other opinions are available. Also in the case of Trump, I quoted him just above actually saying he was conservative.

To far left radicals, anything that doesn’t align with their views is considered right wing or conservative, but that doesn’t make it so.

And vice verse, naturally. It can be seen on this board all the time.

I did provide restrictions

Pertaining to the geographic you didn't. But if you really want to move goalposts, that is your privilege. It was interesting that you ruled out the 'war on Woke' etc btw, perhaps because that would have been a prime example to hold against your assumptions.

You still haven’t provided any examples to my inquiry

Please see my examples of Libel Tourism (some from US citizens it may be noted) SLAPPs (ditto) and the Conservative's Prevent strategy.

Here some reading for you

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/09/fox-news-trump-libel-defamation-nyt-sullivan/671330/

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

It's not an opinion, it's an obvious fact that you fail to see since you're a radical leftoid and an outsider that relies on fake news, propaganda and internet scriptures.

Your examples still fall under my set restriction. Nothing to do with my requested examples.

Trump is a centrist, a moderate and a nationalist. He's not right wing no matter how much propaganda you cite. Facts are Facts. Cope with it.

And Musk is not a conservative regardless of who he aligns with.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

It's not an opinion, it's an obvious fact

Libel Tourism, SLAPPS and Prevent are real and simply do not represent fake news or propaganda and represent perfectly good factual examples to offer where conservatives are against those "freedom of speech and ideas." Trump is actually on record as calling himself a conservative as I showed while Musk has certainly moved to the right. Sorry, but there it is.

since you're a radical leftoid and an outsider that relies on fake news, propaganda and internet scriptures.

Here you are just falling back on tired right wing tropes - and moreover addressing me, not what I say.

Your examples still fall under my set restriction

You will have to explain what my examples have to do with woke, Critical Race Theory or diversity, equity, and inclusion - which were your exclusions.

Trump is a centrist, a moderate

LOL Other views are easy to find, notably from Trump himself as we have seen. Even J D Vance once compared him to Hitler, remember? Trump's views on, say, immigration are not 'moderate'. This sees to exercise you a lot when I only originally mentioned the Orange Offender as someone Musk has aligned himself to. You know, the next Republican President? The party associated with conservatism, especially on social policies?

He's not right wing no matter how much propaganda you cite.

That's no problem since you have told me that not all conservatives are right wing, and your original line was about conservatives As I have quoted to Trump has explicitly said that it what he is. Facts are Facts. Cope with it.

And Musk is not a conservative

As I said above, his is a mixed picture and not as clear cut as you imply. It’s certainly hard to reconcile Musk’s actions in 2022 and later with his claims of centrism. His views have been described as becoming more right-wing and conservative over time and have been controversial, as already said; being accused of sexism, antisemitism, support of white pride and transphobia while against organised labour and 'woke' - all highly typical of the right wing. It would definitely be hard not to see him as conservative on economic matters.

reply

[–] tvfan (14553) 3 months ago

Even J D Vance once compared him to Hitler, remember?

Hitler was as far left as it gets. And yes, wokepedia lies about Hitler being right wing.

The leftists were too ashamed and desperate to associate fascism with Communism so they moved Fascism/Nazism from the left of the spectrum to the right at the end of WW2.

Fascism/Nazism fall under Statism/Collectivism; both leftist ideologies, always have and always will be far left regardless of how much they lie about it.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Hitler was as far left as it gets

Oh dear.

With that level of political insight on display, there's not more I can say. So that's all from me here.

reply

[–] chilone (18316) 3 months ago

You're wasting your time arguing with skavau.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Especially as he left, weeks ago...

reply

[–] chilone (18316) 3 months ago

And like the phoenix, has emerged from the flames...

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 3 months ago

Because your pants are on fire?

reply

[–] Thaisticks (3292) 3 months ago

Of course it is--it is also our right to do it. Reading these posts is a much better experience without the vileness accompanying the few of who revel in it. You forget that without responsibility (doing right by others) FREEDOM can cause a lot of pain, and people have even been imprisoned for speech inciting violence, here in the USA, that free-est of all lands, donchya know? (It's a very moot point how damaging a punishment it is to be canceled on MoviChat, lol.)

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

it's a right to your free speech yes, and I will never block that. but, we have legit laws to protect against violence - not social justice, actual real laws.

and if you cancel/slam/degrade/get fired/ socially hang someone for something YOU find offensive that others do not, how do you know your speech will not offend someone else next?

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

Wokeness has completely destroyed the Left. There was a time when the Left was the strongest defender of free speech.
In 1977, a group of Nazis wanted to march through Skokie, Illinois, a predominantly Jewish neighborhood full of Holocaust survivors. Naturally, the residents were furious, and the city blocked the march, citing it as hateful and harmful. The ACLU stepped in to defend the Nazis, arguing that stopping the march violated their First Amendment rights. What’s important to note here is that many of the ACLU lawyers defending the Nazis were themselves Jewish, some having lost family in the Holocaust. But these were true Leftists. They believed in freedom of speech and the American way, so they stood up for the Nazis, not because they agreed with them, but because of principle. The case went to the Supreme Court, and the Nazis won the right to march. To the extent that I consider myself a Leftist, it’s this kind of Leftist — an Old-School Leftist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie

reply

[–] Thaisticks (3292) 3 months ago

You seem to be implying that the ACLU would not defend them today. This props up your belief that "the left" is not as aggressive in fighting discrimination as they used to be, citing the right's bogeyman-of-the-day , "wokeness," as the cause. So you are attributing to them a made-up position caused by a made-up agent-- how very convincing! (Not!) (Oh, and I don't believe that "the left" is completely destroyed, but saying so sure makes you sound

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

No, the ACLU of today would not defend them. Like so many other institutions, the ACLU has been corrupted by wokeness. Fortunately, there is another organization that would take up the cause: FIRE. They are the modern-day equivalent of what the ACLU once was, fighting for the protection of unpopular and hateful speech. Because as long we have hate speech we have freedom.

reply

[–] SemiAnimus (3266) 3 months ago

"...as long we have hate speech we have freedom."

This is the often uncomfortable but unabashed truth.

reply

[–] Thaisticks (3292) 3 months ago

FIRE has 42 lawyers and a budget of 37 million, and was founded in 1999. The ACLU has a budget of 309 million and 500 lawyers and is currently defending 134 free speech cases. They are unparalleled in their defense of free speech--though they have nothing to do, in any of their cases or their publications, with "wokeism."

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

Way to miss the point.

reply

[–] Thaisticks (3292) 3 months ago

Way to spout nonsense. Do you have an ACLU friend, instead of some imaginary "woke" genie, who is telling you what you claim (that they would not defend the Nazis)? I thought not. This board is famous for cons making stuff up out of whole cloth. Prove your point or go troll elsewhere-- everything about you is way too dull to be lecturing other people about "points."

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

The ACLU's descent into Wokeness is well-documented, but I'll highlight a few examples from Glenn Greenwald to make the point clear.

Here's an article by Glenn Greenwald, which delves into the organization's history and the changes in its culture over time. You can read it here: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-ongoing-death-of-free-speech. This piece, from 2020, predates much of the woke Black Lives Matter bullshit, yet even then, Greenwald was already critiquing the ACLU's shift toward progressivism.

In this follow-up article from 2021, Greenwald critiques the ACLU for its silence on online censorship, citing their reluctance to alienate their woke activist donors: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/aclu-again-cowardly-abstains-from

Additionally, the Washington Monthly published an article discussing how the ACLU supports schools forcing teachers to use students' preferred pronouns. This stance reveals the organization's opposition to free speech when it comes to issues involving transgender students. The article defends the ACLU’s position while criticizing Greenwald for supporting teachers' right to speak freely: https://washingtonmonthly.com/2021/10/26/why-the-aclu-is-right-and-glenn-greenwald-is-wrong-on-schools-addressing-transgender-students/

reply

[–] Thaisticks (3292) 3 months ago

Glenn Greenwald's reputation is in tatters, and how is making schools call a child by the name he prefers a stain on the ACLU?

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

Glenn Greenwald is one of the most respected and accomplished journalists of his generation. The only people who fail to see this are part of the woke establishment — which, as the recent election results show, has lost all credibility. No one takes them seriously anymore, except for muppets like you.

And the ACLU’s position is a stain on its reputation for two reasons: first, it supports compelled speech, which goes against the very essence of free speech. Second, it denies teachers the right to express their beliefs. If a teacher disagrees with trans ideology, they are not allowed to speak truthfully and are forced to say something they don’t believe and know to be untrue. This not only undermines their freedom but also betrays the principles the ACLU once claimed to uphold.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

this is the CANCEL or change of exactly what I am talking about.

out of FEAR, some organization no longer does the right thing.
SOMETHING (woke? leftist?) made them take that stance.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

I use IGNORE to eliminate people I should have never crossed paths with like in real life. People don't always get along.
Like a Hell's Angels Biker and an Amish person - sort of obvious clash, no reason to waste time entertaining it. :)

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

I could totally imagine a Hell's Angel getting along with an Amish Chad.

reply

[–] Information-Police (4896) 3 months ago

How's are those Bud Lite and Target boycotts going?

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

Pretty good. Bud Light has lost about 30% of its value, fired the woke bitch who came up with the Dylan Mulvaney campaign, and completely reversed course. Target has also backtracked and will no longer carry any LGBTQ products aimed at children. Now, company after company, fearing the same kind of backlash, are moving away from wokeness — severing ties with the Equal Rights Campaign, a woke LGBTQ organization, and dropping all their DEI nonsense.

reply

[–] robocat893 (16251) 3 months ago

So what? Anheuser-Busch InBev is a worldwide multi billion company. A 30% sales drop in one product means nothing except to titillate you dummies. Do you even realize that Anheuser-Busch InBev sell many other products and not just Bud Light? Also I went to Target last Saturday and they were packed. So much boycotts.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

can you touch on the OTHER four parts mentioned in curiousmind's reply? what about those?
beyond the 1 part about Anheuser Busch.

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

Yes, I’m well aware of all that. It doesn’t change the fact that these companies are reversing course. It looks like they’ve learned their lesson. It’s open season on Wokes, and no one wants to be the next target (no pun intended).

reply

[–] robocat893 (16251) 3 months ago

I'm woke! I just got out of bed not long ago. 🛏️ 🤣

reply

[–] Jinx (3877) 3 months ago

Could you give an example of what you are referring to by canceling because as far as I know you are talking about people being punished by society for saying or doing something stupid/gross and that is unavoidable.

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

I'd love to see some clarifying on these right wing "leftZ iZ libtards HUr hur ... cos woke " threads , but if you ask for it you receive a standard get out clause :
"You are not intelligent enough to keep up , I cant help you "

See above where I asked simply for an example of the " cancelling, and punishing people for speaking" that he referred to in the OP

canceling because as far as I know you are talking about people being punished by society for saying or doing something stupid/gross and that is unavoidable.
Exactly right
It has always happened , how could it not ? sure the standards for what qualifies as stupid & gross change over time and this is probably whats confusing these cavemen.

"Cancelled" is a really bad descriptor too , many people are still on board with whatever the "culprit" has said or done

Objectionable people are simply less popular - its like a law of nature

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

Why is SOCIETY PUNISHING anyone?

Isn't that why LAWS exist?

reply

[–] Jinx (3877) 3 months ago

What on Earth . . . ?

That's what society DOES and has always done. You are part of a communal species, the animal kingdom does this as well. There are social rules as well as laws that keep order in a group.

It's too bad if you don't like it. That's life!

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

Society has never had, until very recently, the internet to allow totally fucking stupid morons to have any voice with any power.

Now we get random morals calling the shots and the perspective changes daily and the goal posts constantly shift.

With laws, the goal post stays put. And takes a long proper time if they need to move.

The point of my thread is to understand how people that want to make the world a better place do so by restricting freedom.
Instead of answering my very direct question I am reading many people dancing around answering it. "What's canceling" "point out examples" Jesus people, we've all been the same planet the past decade open you eyes.

I should have expected these results posting in politics. :)

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

How can you truly not see that cancelling, and punishing people for speaking is the exact opposite of FREEDOM OF SPEECH?

Translation:
"I want to say nasty objectionable things and have people still like me."

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

Why are you inventing words in my mouth instead of answering the direct question?

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

Because I cant think of any instances where what you are suggesting has occurred , hence my request for an example earlier.
If anybody has been so-called-cancelled it was probly for something more serious like being a sex pest.

And even then it doesent remove your free speech so or I'm still not sure what your point is

"Free speech has consequences" you're free to say whatever the hell you like with your free speech - but OBVIUSLY depemnding what you say you might not get likes

BUT , you're still free to say it again .

bottom line:
Nobodys free speech is taken away , cancelled or not , so what are you talking about?

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

apologies. my question presupposes that others are paying attention to things that are happening in the world.

LET ME GOOGLE THAT FOR YOU:
https://www.quora.com/Who-were-canceled-by-cancel-culture-for-dumb-reasons
(one of MANY MANY lists online to find)

"If real world laws are not being broken (unlike Diddy etc) there is zero reason to CANCEL or cut down people via SOCIAL JUSTICE. REAL justice should be the only decider"
If I say something you don't like, and you rally the internet against me, guess who could be next: YOU

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

more examples are the way many many comedians have had to alter their stand up routines.

they used to be able to pick on enerybody for jokes - harsh as they may seem, they were still funny, and no violence occured.
Now, they all fear losing money due to offending.... THAT is cancel culture curtailing free speech, is it not? Comeidans can no longer stand up and say whatever the fuck they feel like because "Oh boo hoo someone might get offended (What?? By a fucking COMEDY ROUTINE???) and call it out on the internet where a billion people rally up and stomp them out"
How about this: AVOID going to fucking comedy shows if you are easily triggered.

There's a million things on this planet that OFFEND ME every singl day and not once, NOT ONCE have I tried to CLEANSE them from my view. That is not on me, and "I LET OTHER PEOPLE DO WHAT THEY WANT TO" and not LET it offend me. I don't RAMPAGE to CHANGE them. unlike some out there.

because.... *I* am actually tolerant

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

Thanks for the link , one of those replies has a list of 6 examples , Kevin heart being one.

but
"Comeidans can no longer stand up and say whatever the fuck they feel like because "Oh boo hoo someone might get offended"

They certainly can , nobody is stopping them - their free speech is intact.
They just might not sell as many tickets because more people these days feel its unacceptable to rag on faggots then previously.

All the people who want to listen to such humor are free to attend such shows

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

luckily, the majority is clapping back at all the pointless stifling and we are getting back to having fun, with less worry over WORDS killing someone.
- bad ad campaigns are learning
- peopel sounding off REGARDLESS of consequences
- DEI fading away

ricky sums it up well
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/D57R8d0UgmM

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

Rickys great , and always very keen to explain how jokes can be offensive .

his "meet us halfway , lose the cock" bit on trannies was funny

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 months ago

"They just might not sell as many tickets because more people these days feel its unacceptable to rag on faggots then previously."

Quite the oversimplification don't ya think?

"They certainly can , nobody is stopping them - their free speech is intact."

Tell that to Chris Rocks face. He might not be actively silenced but if he thinks he's going to get cold-cocked everytime he makes a joke, he may as well be silenced.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

That sounds like consequences..... FOR TELLING JOKES.

let me repeat that for the slow people:

CONSEQUENCES...

FOR TELLING JOKES.....

Jokes!!!!!! Really???Come on! What the fuck, people

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

Yeah but its not a law thats been passed , its just *some* people dont wanna hear those sort of jokes.
Those people are not stopping those that do want to hear, or stopping them being told.

In the UK there was a whole generation of old school comedians who kinda faded from the forefront of comedy in the early 80s when "Alternative comedy" arrived
People realized there was more to comedy than "mother in law" jokes, which were the steadfast of the previous era

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 3 months ago

SOME PEOPLE maybe should avoid comedy and comedy clubs instead of getting offended.

Luckily, we have clean, hilarious, safe, non-offensive humor now like a dog with an expression, or a bunny with a pancake on its head. SOOO HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!! GREAT humor.

reply

[–] filmflaneur (3062) 2 months ago

clean, hilarious, safe, non-offensive humor now like a dog with an expression

Wait a minute, isn't he the next President?

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 months ago

.

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

"I want to say nasty objectionable things and have people still like me."

Exactly. Is that too much to ask?

reply

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 3 months ago

Well , you might wanna "manage expectations" on which people and pick your audience carefully : )

reply

[–] curiousMInd101 (4578) 3 months ago

Well I don't give a fuck about the feelings of woke people — I view them as subhuman. My focus is on reaching normal people who aren’t pussies and can appreciate a bit of edge.

reply