• Current Events, Politics
    & Science

    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • CEPS Moderators: cduggles | Deru | mal3volent
  • Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

Megathread Cancel Culture Discussion

nuttynutskin

Bluelighter
Joined
May 15, 2011
Messages
10,712
What happened to believing private businesses have the right to decide who they do business with?

That used to be a widely accepted belief among the right.

A mom and pop bakery owned by Christians not wanting to bake "gay" cakes because it goes against their beliefs when there's about a million other bakeries to choose from that will is a lot different IMO than every single major internet service provider banding together to actively cancel out and ban websites because of the political opinions voiced on them. YMMV
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: AADD, H&R, TDS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
11,632
A mom and pop bakery owned by Christians not wanting to bake "gay" cakes because it goes against their beliefs when there's about a million other bakeries to choose from that will is a lot different IMO than every single major internet service provider banding together to actively cancel out and ban websites because of the political opinions voiced on them. YMMV

Well yes, it is different, but does it make a difference?

I absolutely 100% do not believe that if these private companies were doing this to left wing interests that the right wouldn't still be backing the rights of private companies. I think this difference only came into existence to justify the hypocrisy of allowing the homophobic discrimination but not right wing discrimination.

I think they're hypocrites.
 

w01fg4ng

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,729
Location
In your head
Maybe in some cases like child porn sure.
This is where the conversation is being continued here in America. It would be short sighted to end the conversation at "child porn bad, everything else good or not so bad".

Specifically, the conversation today is mostly about inciting violence. It's not something to just make a joke about and move on. It doesn't work like that. The FBI has their hands full in researching these types of violent intents and threats and for good reasons.

Not only does this subject require a decent amount of critical thinking but it deserves it. We deserve it. Oversimplifying the issue only hurts us. Let's talk about it.
 

Audiobook

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
170
This is where the conversation is being continued here in America. It would be short sighted to end the conversation at "child porn bad, everything else good or not so bad".

Specifically, the conversation today is mostly about inciting violence. It's not something to just make a joke about and move on. It doesn't work like that. The FBI has their hands full in researching these types of violent intents and threats and for good reasons.

Not only does this subject require a decent amount of critical thinking but it deserves it. We deserve it. Oversimplifying the issue only hurts us. Let's talk about it.
That's another case where I think we should look at curtailing speech. I didn't mention all situations I think we need to curtail speech or at least look at doing so.

It's not easy bc you want there to be a free exchange of ideas. But you also don't want people to get hurt as a result of other's speech.

It's not a simple issue by ANY means.
 

nuttynutskin

Bluelighter
Joined
May 15, 2011
Messages
10,712
Well yes, it is different, but does it make a difference?

I absolutely 100% do not believe that if these private companies were doing this to left wing interests that the right wouldn't still be backing the rights of private companies. I think this difference only came into existence to justify the hypocrisy of allowing the homophobic discrimination but not right wing discrimination.

I think they're hypocrites.

So regardless of anything else, you generally support companies being able to band together to monopolize free speech?
 

w01fg4ng

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,729
Location
In your head
That's another case where I think we should look at curtailing speech. I didn't mention all situations I think we need to curtail speech or at least look at doing so.

It's not easy bc you want there to be a free exchange of ideas. But you also don't want people to get hurt as a result of other's speech.

It's not a simple issue by ANY means.
Yes, I agree it's very difficult and dangerous as well to go too far in either direction.

An example of a cancel culture that has gone too far would be the storming of the capital and killing police officers and attempted killing of elected officials as well as democracy as we know it. They woke up one day and listened to Trump or Guiliani and agreed with their violent rhetoric and decided to join the Trump train headed straight to Auschwitz. Toot Toot! All aboard!!

How can they justify doing such a horrible and violent thing to the American people?

Misinformation is largely what has lead people down the wrong path. These people who stormed the capital genuinely believe that the election is fraudulent and they spread their lies to each other simply brainwashing each other into oblivion. Again, these people are oversimplifying their concerns. It's easier to just believe what your friends said to you on Facebook than it is to actually research anything.
 

Iceman1216

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
736
Location
North East - Long Island
This is the end result of Not paying attention to the rapid growth of the Cyber-world!! These are private companies that people choose to use that are run by individuals. no one is forced to use my service, I dont like you, I own and control my platform, you are gone???
This will go the way of Standard Oil and John D Rockefeller , Governments, and politicians are scared of way too much concentrated POWER!!!
Problem that I see is that Noone in political power in the World has any real understanding of this technology, or how to control it?? And control it for WHO??
 

G_Chem

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
3,051
Uh, Idk... That they all deplatformed Parler at the same time? lulz

You don’t think that happened cuz everyone was glued to their mobile devices watching it all go down in real-time and all simultaneously being disgusted with it?

I doubt with how fast everyone bailed they would even have time to “band together” and make a decision. I could see several large companies bailing then the rest follow suit but that’s just how it works.

-GC
 

Atelier3

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
4,099
The insidious part of cancel culture is the way it seems to be the thin end of the wedge of a larger move to do away the the fundamentals of justice in the Anglosphere that took 1000 years to properly evolve into the fairest (but not infallible) system in human history.

1. Presumption of innocence until proven guilty
2. The right to face your accusers
3. The importance of precedent, judgement by one’s peers, and the judicial notion of a ‘reasonable person’
4. No retrospective criminisation of individuals through new laws
5. Due process
6. The right of appeal
7. The right to redress after a miscarriage of justice
8. The standard of reasonable doubt
9. The compounding factor of intent or malice aforethought
10. Habeus Corpus

Losing any one of these increases the risk of tyranny but it seems they are all targets for activists these days.
 

Iceman1216

Bluelighter
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
736
Location
North East - Long Island
I guess I have " Contempt Pryor to Investigation" Lol Lol
The insidious part of cancel culture is the way it seems to be the thin end of the wedge of a larger move to do away the the fundamentals of justice in the Anglosphere that took 1000 years to properly evolve into the fairest (but not infallible) system in human history.

1. Presumption of innocence until proven guilty
2. The right to face your accusers
3. The importance of precedent, judgement by one’s peers, and the judicial notion of a ‘reasonable person’
4. No retrospective criminisation of individuals through new laws
5. Due process
6. The right of appeal
7. The right to redress after a miscarriage of justice
8. The standard of reasonable doubt
9. The compounding factor of intent or malice aforethought
10. Habeus Corpus

Losing any one of these increases the risk of tyranny but it seems they are all targets for activists these days.
All of these only exist in Theory , or for a Ruling Class!! BLM has shown me as a Very Privileged white person the uneven distribution of (LAW & ORDER)
 
Top