Cancel Culture ?

[TheFamilyCat]

#defund the BBC

stop paying the unjust poll tax / licence fee

Cultural Marxist.

[PeterWilton]

I think something that would help this discussion along would be if the opponent of this "cancel culture" could perhaps give examples of cancel culture in action that they feel supports their argument about how bad this supposed culture is.

There are a few different posters who seem to be against "cancel culture" so hopefully one or two of them can give us some examples so that we can better understand what it is specifically that has them so upset.

[Spiral]

I think something that would help this discussion along would be if the opponent of this "cancel culture" could perhaps give examples of cancel culture in action that they feel supports their argument about how bad this supposed culture is.

There are a few different posters who seem to be against "cancel culture" so hopefully one or two of them can give us some examples so that we can better understand what it is specifically that has them so upset.

I suspect if it could be defined this thread might not exist. The forces that impel people to lose their tiny little minds over this kind of thing are nebulous by their nature. Look at Ringo on this thread: people challenge his views, he plays the martyr because he's dumb as a bag of hammers and knows f'k all about anything. No real specificity. One thing that doesn't sit right with me is universities withdrawing invitations made to people with 'certain views' to speak on campus because of student outrage, because I think universities are a great place for that kind of discourse, but that's about the only instance I can think of where you can specifically point to a culture of censure (and censorship, to a degree) that isn't otherwise a commercial decision made by a business, consumer choice, or a decision made by an industrial organisation or institution with a reputation to preserve.

[martin_p]

So, the founder and leader of Antifa Ireland is a convicted paedophile. And rather than condemn the abhorrent maggot, you want to argue the toss about the validity of news outlets. The mind boggles.

I’m confused now I thought those on the right thought that condemning people for doing bad things was virtue signalling. Now it seems that things have completely reversed and people are attacked for not condemning things that previously it was taken as read everybody was against such as people trafficking and having sexual images of minors.

[Rileybobs]

I’m not sure I’ve ever seen anyone make so much of a fool of themselves on here, and that is some accolade.

[RingoMcCartney]

I’m not sure I’ve ever seen anyone make so much of a fool of themselves on here, and that is some accolade.

An accolade of which you still hold.

You on, now, Sir Tom Parker.

I know he’s old. Fair play, a few people make it to that age, most don’t. That’s just the luck of the draw. My point being that his fundraising could easily have raised just a few quid. He’s not done anything particularly remarkable by walking some lengths of his garden. There are people undertaking far more remarkable feats which won’t raise a fraction of this.

I disagree. I saw something today where a 91 year old is doing 91 laps of his farmhouse to raise money for the NHS. Will he raise over £25m? I doubt that very, very much. Is that because he’s not as good as Captain Tom? Or is it because the media and therefore public have already decided on their hero?

I personally don’t find a person walking some laps of their garden inspirational.

When it comes to making a fool of themselves, that's World Champions standard.

[RingoMcCartney]

I think something that would help this discussion along would be if the opponent of this "cancel culture" could perhaps give examples of cancel culture in action that they feel supports their argument about how bad this supposed culture is.

There are a few different posters who seem to be against "cancel culture" so hopefully one or two of them can give us some examples so that we can better understand what it is specifically that has them so upset.

The Guardian columnist Owen Jones took to Twitter on Sunday morning to express his view that "cancel culture" does not exist, but is rather a strategy used by those with large platforms to shut down others who criticize them.

Jones tweeted: "'Cancel culture' is public figures using their privileged platforms to complain about people using social media to criticise them, normally because of their publicly expressed views about minorities who are hugely underrepresented in public life."

While Jones garnered a lot of praise for his bold tweet, there were others who suggested that his claim was patently false. One of these people was Martin Daubney, who tweeted that he could debunk Owens' assertion with two tweets

Daubney posted two tweets, both of which featured University of Cambridge professor, Priyamvada Gopal. The first reveals a tweet by Gopal saying that "white lives don't matter. As white lives." The next one reveals a news article quoting Gopal saying: "'White Lives Don't Matter' Cambridge Professor Says She Resists "Urges to Kneecap White Men Everyday.'"

Gopal received a promotion from the University of Cambridge after tweeting "white lives don't matter." and "abolish whiteness" Meanwhile, David Starkey was forced to resign in disgrace from the same institution for his comments on slavery.

Both developments follow Cambridge University's recent statement following criticism against Gopal. "The University defends the right of its academics to express their own lawful opinions which others might find controversial and deplores in the strongest terms abuse and personal attacks," the institution stated. "These attacks are totally unacceptable and must cease."

Twitter user Fraser Myers used Owens' own tweet again him, showing that Owens had previously reached out to the University of Oxford to confirm that the Deputy Director of External Affairs and International Strategy would be "fired by the end of the day."

In early June, students at UCLA demanded that the university fire two professors for bending to the whims of students amid the death of George Floyd. The first professor was Gordon Klein, who refused to grant students' wishes that they be treated special because of their skin color. The second professor, W. Ajax Peris, was targeted by students for reading aloud MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail," which includes repeated instances of the n-word.

[Rileybobs]

An accolade of which you still hold.

You on, now, Sir Tom Parker.







When it comes to making a fool of themselves, that's World Champions standard.

To be fair you embarrassed yourself plenty with your hypocritical virtue signalling on that particular thread. But you’ve excelled yourself on this one.

Funny that you knew I was referring to you though. Maybe you do have some self awareness after all.

And his name is not Tom Parker, which if you really weren’t virtue signalling I’m sure you’d know.

[RingoMcCartney]

To be fair you embarrassed yourself plenty with your hypocritical virtue signalling on that particular thread. But you’ve excelled yourself on this one.

Funny that you knew I was referring to you though. Maybe you do have some self awareness after all.

And his name is not Tom Parker, which if you really weren’t virtue signalling I’m sure you’d know.

I wonder if its anything to do with the fact that the previous 6 or 7 posts that you're clearly responding to either, exclusively , include a direct quote from me , or refer to me Sherlock!

There's nothing "remarkable" in my conclusions.

Enjoy the trophy.

[martin_p]

Who’s Tom Parker?

[Rileybobs]

I wonder if its anything to do with the fact that the previous 6 or 7 posts that you're clearly responding to either, exclusively , include a direct quote from me , or refer to me Sherlock!

There's nothing "remarkable" in my conclusions.

Enjoy the trophy.

It’s a fact that my previous 6 or 7 posts are responding to you? Really? Keep digging lad.

Thanks for the trophy though, I don’t feel any delight in winning an argument against an opponent of your caliber, but it’s nice to see you admitting defeat for the first time I can remember.

[RingoMcCartney]

Autofill Android Elvis

[martin_p]

Autofill Android Elvis

Good point.

[Bfcboyo]

Propose their wisdom, the british people at your peril.

We are all feckd .

[RingoMcCartney]

It’s a fact that my previous 6 or 7 posts are responding to you? Really? Keep digging lad.

Thanks for the trophy though, I don’t feel any delight in winning an argument against an opponent of your caliber, but it’s nice to see you admitting defeat for the first time I can remember.

Rather than me digging. You may want to take up reading. I didn't say your previous posts. I said the previous posts. Jeez!

I'll try again. The 6 or 7 posts that that you're clearly responding to either, exclusively , include a direct quote from me , or refer to me. So it isn't rocket science to deduce that you're referring to me.

Keep polishing.

[AndrewJB]

The Guardian columnist Owen Jones took to Twitter on Sunday morning to express his view that "cancel culture" does not exist, but is rather a strategy used by those with large platforms to shut down others who criticize them.

Jones tweeted: "'Cancel culture' is public figures using their privileged platforms to complain about people using social media to criticise them, normally because of their publicly expressed views about minorities who are hugely underrepresented in public life."

While Jones garnered a lot of praise for his bold tweet, there were others who suggested that his claim was patently false. One of these people was Martin Daubney, who tweeted that he could debunk Owens' assertion with two tweets

Daubney posted two tweets, both of which featured University of Cambridge professor, Priyamvada Gopal. The first reveals a tweet by Gopal saying that "white lives don't matter. As white lives." The next one reveals a news article quoting Gopal saying: "'White Lives Don't Matter' Cambridge Professor Says She Resists "Urges to Kneecap White Men Everyday.'"

Gopal received a promotion from the University of Cambridge after tweeting "white lives don't matter." and "abolish whiteness" Meanwhile, David Starkey was forced to resign in disgrace from the same institution for his comments on slavery.

Both developments follow Cambridge University's recent statement following criticism against Gopal. "The University defends the right of its academics to express their own lawful opinions which others might find controversial and deplores in the strongest terms abuse and personal attacks," the institution stated. "These attacks are totally unacceptable and must cease."

Twitter user Fraser Myers used Owens' own tweet again him, showing that Owens had previously reached out to the University of Oxford to confirm that the Deputy Director of External Affairs and International Strategy would be "fired by the end of the day."

In early June, students at UCLA demanded that the university fire two professors for bending to the whims of students amid the death of George Floyd. The first professor was Gordon Klein, who refused to grant students' wishes that they be treated special because of their skin color. The second professor, W. Ajax Peris, was targeted by students for reading aloud MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail," which includes repeated instances of the n-word.

Gopal had a lot of people calling for her to be cancelled, people ignorant of her meaning. Thankfully the university stood with her against cancel culture.

[Rileybobs]

Rather than me digging. You may want to take up reading. I didn't say your previous posts. I said the previous posts. Jeez!

I'll try again. The 6 or 7 posts that that you're clearly responding to either, exclusively , include a direct quote from me , or refer to me. So it isn't rocket science to deduce that you're referring to me.

Keep polishing.

Apologies, I struggle to comprehend incoherent writing.

[RingoMcCartney]

Apologies, I struggle to comprehend writing.

And, apparently, write.

[RingoMcCartney]

Gopal had a lot of people calling for her to be cancelled, people ignorant of her meaning. Thankfully the university stood with her against cancel culture.

Aah , one of the Far Left's oldest and well used favourite techniques.

It's not racist. We know its not racist as we're the ones saying it's not racist.

Academic quotes Martin Luther King - Marxists call for him to be sacked, "by the end of the day"

Left wing academic spews blatant anti white hate speech. - excuses , followed by promotion.

You couldn't make it up!

[martin_p]

Aah , one of the Far Left's oldest and well used favourite techniques.

It's not racist. We know its not racist as we're the ones saying it's not racist.

Academic quotes Martin Luther King - Marxists call for him to be sacked, "by the end of the day"

Left wing academic spews blatant anti white hate speech. - excuses , followed by promotion.

You couldn't make it up!

Yes you could.

[RingoMcCartney]

Yes you could.

No need

[martin_p]

No need

But you did. The ‘sacked by the end of the day’ tweet doesn’t relate to the academic quoting Luther King.

[RingoMcCartney]

But you did. The ‘sacked by the end of the day’ tweet doesn’t relate to the academic quoting Luther King.

Not interested in another splithairsathon.

Anti white racist hate " I Resist the "Urges to Kneecap White Men Everyday.'" - promotion.

The Left are offended - "sack 'em"

[martin_p]

Not interested in another splithairsathon.

Anti white racist hate " I Resist the "Urges to Kneecap White Men Everyday.'" - promotion.

The Left are offended - "sack 'em"

I love it when you call the truth ‘splitting hairs’. It’s one of my favourite of those little things you do to keep us all amused

Tell us the one about how leaving the EU will stop human trafficking, it’s another cracker!

[Spijed]

Not interested in another splithairsathon.

Anti white racist hate " I Resist the "Urges to Kneecap White Men Everyday.'" - promotion.

The Left are offended - "sack 'em"

I see you haven't replied to my post about Claire Fox, unless of course you agree with her comments.

[Damo]

I suspect if it could be defined this thread might not exist. The forces that impel people to lose their tiny little minds over this kind of thing are nebulous by their nature. Look at Ringo on this thread: people challenge his views, he plays the martyr because he's dumb as a bag of hammers and knows f'k all about anything. No real specificity. One thing that doesn't sit right with me is universities withdrawing invitations made to people with 'certain views' to speak on campus because of student outrage, because I think universities are a great place for that kind of discourse, but that's about the only instance I can think of where you can specifically point to a culture of censure (and censorship, to a degree) that isn't otherwise a commercial decision made by a business, consumer choice, or a decision made by an industrial organisation or institution with a reputation to preserve.

what about the guy who was arrested and dragged through the courts for teaching his gifriends dog to nazi salute? There's examples on this thread if you and the person you have replied to, care to read it.
I understand its difficult, as its turned into a meeting of minds between ringo and the group of people who bait him on every political thread, but its there in black and blue

[Spiral]

what about the guy who was arrested and dragged through the courts for teaching his gifriends dog to nazi salute? There's examples on this thread if you and the person you have replied to, care to read it.

Interesting you bring that up. I can't be arsed looking back for the thread when it happened but I'm almost certain I posted on here when the nazi pug guy was tried. I thought it was bull$hit, and if I remember correctly I posted a link to a legal opinion that argued that when prosecuting under the communications act (I believe that was the law under which he was prosecuted but I stand to be corrected), consideration must be given to context, and clearly the judge thought the context was not a valid reason not to sentence him. But strictly speaking, by the letter of the law, this wasn't a violation of his right to free speech, it was an obscene communication that did it for him. I think it's still a grey area, but I think the courts read the communications act (which prohibits obscenity, but I'm not au fait with the exact legalese) to treat social media posts as a form of publishing, not speech, and putting that specific case under the umbrella of 'cancel culture' is as tenuous as putting a prosecution for an obscene, unsolicited telephone call in the same category.

Edit-can't find the thread (probably deleted knowing this forum) but I found the comments I linked from...of all people, Keir Starmer, back when he was DPP, announcing the forthcoming issuing of new prosecutorial guidelines for breaches of the communications act which better protect free speech. As a former human rights lawyer it's safe to assume this is a right he's sincerely devoted to upholding.

https://www.scl.org/news/2563-dpp-s-gui ... osecutions

This is what a few others have said on here, though. The moment you attempt to actually define 'cancel culture', put it into focus, dissect it, it falls apart a little bit, and you're left with just a hollow buzzword.

[PeterWilton]

what about the guy who was arrested and dragged through the courts for teaching his gifriends dog to nazi salute? There's examples on this thread if you and the person you have replied to, care to read it.
I understand its difficult, as its turned into a meeting of minds between ringo and the group of people who bait him on every political thread, but its there in black and blue

I believe you're referring to Count Dankula who was nobody until he made his Nazi Pug video. That video is how he became famous which is sort of the opposite of what is commonly referred to as "cancel culture".
As for his prosecution, he was prosecuted under laws passed by previous generations and convicted in a court that was probably not being run by a millennial, or even gen X, leftie Liberal.

The guy also got hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations to cover an £800 fine so I'm sure he's doing fine during his "cancellation".

With regards to your second paragraph, I have in fact read the thread and noticed some transphobic comments in your posts while decrying how JK Rowling was close to being cancelled, but I'll be honest, I didn't take your posts seriously because I was expecting there to be something much more substantial in any complaint than "hey, this woman is transphobic. Let's not buy her books anymore".

And since you're probably going to protest, yes referring to trans women as "men" and "trans fellas" is transphobic, intentionally or not.

[PeterWilton]

The Guardian columnist Owen Jones took to Twitter on Sunday morning to express his view that "cancel culture" does not exist, but is rather a strategy used by those with large platforms to shut down others who criticize them.

Jones tweeted: "'Cancel culture' is public figures using their privileged platforms to complain about people using social media to criticise them, normally because of their publicly expressed views about minorities who are hugely underrepresented in public life."

While Jones garnered a lot of praise for his bold tweet, there were others who suggested that his claim was patently false. One of these people was Martin Daubney, who tweeted that he could debunk Owens' assertion with two tweets

Daubney posted two tweets, both of which featured University of Cambridge professor, Priyamvada Gopal. The first reveals a tweet by Gopal saying that "white lives don't matter. As white lives." The next one reveals a news article quoting Gopal saying: "'White Lives Don't Matter' Cambridge Professor Says She Resists "Urges to Kneecap White Men Everyday.'"

Gopal received a promotion from the University of Cambridge after tweeting "white lives don't matter." and "abolish whiteness" Meanwhile, David Starkey was forced to resign in disgrace from the same institution for his comments on slavery.

Both developments follow Cambridge University's recent statement following criticism against Gopal. "The University defends the right of its academics to express their own lawful opinions which others might find controversial and deplores in the strongest terms abuse and personal attacks," the institution stated. "These attacks are totally unacceptable and must cease."

Twitter user Fraser Myers used Owens' own tweet again him, showing that Owens had previously reached out to the University of Oxford to confirm that the Deputy Director of External Affairs and International Strategy would be "fired by the end of the day."

In early June, students at UCLA demanded that the university fire two professors for bending to the whims of students amid the death of George Floyd. The first professor was Gordon Klein, who refused to grant students' wishes that they be treated special because of their skin color. The second professor, W. Ajax Peris, was targeted by students for reading aloud MLK's "Letter from Birmingham Jail," which includes repeated instances of the n-word.

I found it hard to believe she said that in a serious manner so I looked it up and, as expected, she was making a joke about being a hero for resisting that "urge" in reply to someone else who joked about being a hero for similar reasons. This is probably why when you Google the quote no respectable news outlet reports it. Only fascist-leaning websites.

And I don't blame you for not understanding what she means when she said "white lives don't matter. As white lives." I didn't either until she explained it, and I agree with her. The whiteness of those lives doesn't matter. To white supremacists this is, of course, an outrage. How dare a lesser human claim that their superior race doesn't matter.

But let's say she really wasn't making a joke, and let's say she really was saying the lives of white people don't matter. So what? How can you be for free speech and against this mythical "cancel culture" and yet demand action be taken against this woman who has done nothing but use her freedom to speak?

It seems to me that you don't actually care about free speech, or even "cancel culture". It seems to me that people on the right only care about protecting the rights of people they agree with when they incorrectly accuse people they don't agree with of trying to restrict those right by exercising their right to freesom of speech to criticise people for their vies and organise boycotts against their economic and ideological interests.

If the left are violating their rights by criticising them then surely you are violating the left's rights by criticising them too. Or is it one rule for the left and another for the right?

[AndrewJB]

Aah , one of the Far Left's oldest and well used favourite techniques.

It's not racist. We know its not racist as we're the ones saying it's not racist.

Academic quotes Martin Luther King - Marxists call for him to be sacked, "by the end of the day"

Left wing academic spews blatant anti white hate speech. - excuses , followed by promotion.

You couldn't make it up!

I’m not far left. Calling me or anyone here that just makes you sound hysterical.

I and quite a few others have pointed out to you that the term “cultural Marxism” is anti-Semitic, and yet you persevere with it.

It’s both funny and sad how extreme rightwing terminology has been infiltrated into, and accepted by conservative discourse. “Blood and soil” is another example. Like how Golden Dawn have a symbol very similar to, but not quite a swastika (probably for legal reasons). It’s because the far right just can’t let go of the past. You see it in the US with people waving the Confederate flag, and you see it here with people wanting to scapegoat immigrants (im an immigrant by the way).

Someone less kind than me would point out your side lost in 1945, so just get over it.

[Damo]

Interesting you bring that up. I can't be arsed looking back for the thread when it happened but I'm almost certain I posted on here when the nazi pug guy was tried. I thought it was bull$hit, and if I remember correctly I posted a link to a legal opinion that argued that when prosecuting under the communications act (I believe that was the law under which he was prosecuted but I stand to be corrected), consideration must be given to context, and clearly the judge thought the context was not a valid reason not to sentence him. But strictly speaking, by the letter of the law, this wasn't a violation of his right to free speech, it was an obscene communication that did it for him. I think it's still a grey area, but I think the courts read the communications act (which prohibits obscenity, but I'm not au fait with the exact legalese) to treat social media posts as a form of publishing, not speech, and putting that specific case under the umbrella of 'cancel culture' is as tenuous as putting a prosecution for an obscene, unsolicited telephone call in the same category.

Edit-can't find the thread (probably deleted knowing this forum) but I found the comments I linked from...of all people, Keir Starmer, back when he was DPP, announcing the forthcoming issuing of new prosecutorial guidelines for breaches of the communications act which better protect free speech. As a former human rights lawyer it's safe to assume this is a right he's sincerely devoted to upholding.

https://www.scl.org/news/2563-dpp-s-gui ... osecutions

This is what a few others have said on here, though. The moment you attempt to actually define 'cancel culture', put it into focus, dissect it, it falls apart a little bit, and you're left with just a hollow buzzword.

I'm happy to try and define it again. And to try and give an explanation as to why its become a buzzword the past few years.
You mentioned commercial decisions and consumer choice earlier. Well its one thing when a business chooses to distance themselves from a person, but it becomes cancel culture when a group of people actively lobby a business to take action when one of its employees for example, post or say something distasteful, but not illegal.
Another example, which I posted further up the thread was when Graham Linehan was thrown off twitter, and will undoubtedly never work in his chosen profession for posting some unsavoury, but not illegal comments. It has nothing to do with his ability to do his job, and I'd imagine it didn't bother enough people to make the stuff he does fail. The reason is that some people disagreed with him and actively lobbied to have this happen. Rowling posted similar comments and wasn't cancelled because the people who lobby and berate people into these decisions, held her in higher esteem due to her previous good character. Another example is Terry Christian. He tweeted that he hoped a good virulent strain of flu would kill lots of elderly (also a protected characteristic)brexit voters. He remains on twitter and still appears on various media channels, despite covid19 making his wishes come true. He hasn't been cancelled because the people who lobby and berate people into these decisions probably agreed with him.
With regards to Dankula, well I'm guessing the police didn't happen upon his crappy video and decide to go and knock on his door. And I'd be surprised if anyone reported it because they were genuinely offended. More likely he had previously upset some people who wanted him to be cancelled.
Those are just 3 examples of people who ended up in the limelight due to cancel culture. There are countless others who have been sacked, had their names, phome numbers and addresses plastered all over social media because they said something that some people didn't like. I'm also not defending any of them. You pay your money, you take your chances. My comments on here are just my views that having people cancelled is a pretty sh*tty way to conduct yourself in person or on the internet. Its also breeding a generation of people who either think the way social media wants them to, or keeps their thoughts and words to themselves to avoid the wrath of the baying mob. Either way it does nothing for free thinking or discourse.
Oh and the reason its become a buzzword, is due to this becoming so prevalent since the rise of social media

[Damo]

I believe you're referring to Count Dankula who was nobody until he made his Nazi Pug video. That video is how he became famous which is sort of the opposite of what is commonly referred to as "cancel culture".
As for his prosecution, he was prosecuted under laws passed by previous generations and convicted in a court that was probably not being run by a millennial, or even gen X, leftie Liberal.

The guy also got hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations to cover an £800 fine so I'm sure he's doing fine during his "cancellation".

With regards to your second paragraph, I have in fact read the thread and noticed some transphobic comments in your posts while decrying how JK Rowling was close to being cancelled, but I'll be honest, I didn't take your posts seriously because I was expecting there to be something much more substantial in any complaint than "hey, this woman is transphobic. Let's not buy her books anymore".

And since you're probably going to protest, yes referring to trans women as "men" and "trans fellas" is transphobic, intentionally or not.

Screenshot_20200820-033041_Gallery.jpg (700 KiB) Viewed 2660 times

[PeterWilton]

Screenshot_20200820-033041_Gallery.jpg

I like to debate against the best form of an argument. So I'll wait until you come back with something better than network rail taking down a poster to show me how awful and real "cancel culture" is.

And while I wait I'm going to look up Colin Kaeperniks stats for the last few seasons.

[NottsClaret]

I think it’s actually a good example from Damo. Network Rail pulling a poster celebrating a successful female author because she carefully joined the debate around feminism and transphobia is pretty much what I consider to be ‘cancel culture’.

If it’s not that, maybe someone can specify it more clearly and we can all work out exactly what we’re talking about.

[Bfcboyo]

I think it’s actually a good example from Damo. Network Rail pulling a poster celebrating a successful female author because she carefully joined the debate around feminism and transphobia is pretty much what I consider to be ‘cancel culture’.

If it’s not that, maybe someone can specify it more clearly and we can all work out exactly what we’re talking about.

Totally agree with this and would love to add examples i can think of but won't comment further as I've had 4 bans in 2020 on here and none previously , well maybe 1 on the old CM.

[evensteadiereddie]

Good. It looks like you've learned your lesson.

[martin_p]

I think it’s actually a good example from Damo. Network Rail pulling a poster celebrating a successful female author because she carefully joined the debate around feminism and transphobia is pretty much what I consider to be ‘cancel culture’.

If it’s not that, maybe someone can specify it more clearly and we can all work out exactly what we’re talking about.

There’s plenty of examples, Neil Oliver, the subject of another thread is one. There were calls for him to stand down as president of the National Trust for Scotland because he’s against Scottish independence. Morrissey album posters were taken down in Liverpool because people complained about them who don’t share his views.

But it’s not a new phenomenon, I remember being a student in the late 80s and avoiding opening an account with Barclays for something to do with South Africa (I think), there were student campaigns to encourage others to do the same. But it seems to be more prevalent now and for less and less serious ‘crimes’. I absolutely support a person’s right to say they’re no longer buying stuff from a particular artist or shopping at a particular store and saying why, it’s the vilification of those that don’t follow suit that I find disturbing.

[TheFamilyCat]

I think it’s actually a good example from Damo. Network Rail pulling a poster celebrating a successful female author because she carefully joined the debate around feminism and transphobia is pretty much what I consider to be ‘cancel culture’.

If it’s not that, maybe someone can specify it more clearly and we can all work out exactly what we’re talking about.

It's an interesting one. Why is a poster celebrating the birthday of one of the city's most successful residents "political"? It is as if everything she has achieved has to be forgotten because she has been accused of transphobia.

I guess that Network Rail probably couldn't be arsed with the grief that would likely come their way but maybe a better option would be to leave their poster and tell the world that it is a celebration of her achievements and not an endorsement of her views.

[Bfcboyo]

Good. It looks like you've learned your lesson.

All 4 bans via the easily offended usual whingers I suspect .


He's done an eye roll at me , ban him for life!

[AndrewJB]

A newspaper revealed the names and photos of the country’s top judges, calling them enemies of the people.

[4:20]

The guy also got hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations to cover an £800 fine so I'm sure he's doing fine during his "cancellation".

Mark Meechan (Count Dankula) donated £800 of his own money to a charity and refused to pay the fine. The authorities took £800 out of his bank account to pay the fine. The money he raised (£180,000ish) was to pay for his appeal which went through various stages. He was left with £48000 which was then put to the public in a vote to decide its fate, either take the appeal to the ECHR or donate to charity. Continuing the appeal won the vote.
Mark Meechan has documented all the monies raised, non went to himself or to cover the fine.

[Damo]

I like to debate against the best form of an argument. So I'll wait until you come back with something better than network rail taking down a poster to show me how awful and real "cancel culture" is.

And while I wait I'm going to look up Colin Kaeperniks stats for the last few seasons.

Thought so

[elwaclaret]

A Serious historians job is to dig into primary evidence to reassess established understanding.... it is their very role. They use primary sources not generally available to the mainstream, from newly released archives and go through a five year vetting process of their piers before findings are published.... working up to journal publication, which is usually a couple of years before open publication. To dismiss the views of any top historian on the back of A media Witch-hunt is both dangerous and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the field.... it is the same historians that have driven the awakening of the realities of empire, that are now being slandered openly because they dare question other areas of PERCEIVED but accepted “Truth”. If anyone have read Oliver’s (or Starkey’s) papers I would be interested in their opinions o& their findings.... if like me you have not... I will reserve my position on their findings until I have access to their sources.

Serious historians do NOT make random claims without serious primary evidence... or they do not last long in the field.... you have to evidence every punctuation mark..... whatever the subject. As someone preparing a paper I can assure you the level of Supportive evidence required is quiet incredible.... those who dismiss those views out of hand are idiots.

[martin_p]

A Serious historians job is to dig into primary evidence to reassess established understanding.... it is their very role. They use primary sources not generally available to the mainstream, from newly released archives and go through a five year vetting process of their piers before findings are published.... working up to journal publication, which is usually a couple of years before open publication. To dismiss the views of any top historian on the back of A media Witch-hunt is both dangerous and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the field.... it is the same historians that have driven the awakening of the realities of empire, that are now being slandered openly because they dare question other areas of PERCEIVED but accepted “Truth”. If anyone have read Oliver’s (or Starkey’s) papers I would be interested in their opinions o& their findings.... if like me you have not... I will reserve my position on their findings until I have access to their sources.

Serious historians do NOT make random claims without serious primary evidence... or they do not last long in the field.... you have to evidence every punctuation mark..... whatever the subject. As someone preparing a paper I can assure you the level of Supportive evidence required is quiet incredible.... those who dismiss those views out of hand are idiots.

I’m not sure what this has to do with the blatantly racist statement Starkey made. Oliver is an archeologist rather than a historian.

[elwaclaret]

I’m not sure what this has to do with the blatantly racist statement Starkey made. Oliver is an archeologist rather than a historian.

If you can place anything from Starkey (in full context) as RACIST rather than questioning accepted perceptions of what happened I will be very surprised. Not saying you are not right Martin, but frankly I would be amazed if Starkey is a racist. Also as I’m sure you are aware historical research works hand in glove with archeology all the time.

[PeterWilton]

Thought so

My apologies. Was that honestly your best effort? A poster was removed and that proves cancel culture is real and damaging?

[PeterWilton]

I think it’s actually a good example from Damo. Network Rail pulling a poster celebrating a successful female author because she carefully joined the debate around feminism and transphobia is pretty much what I consider to be ‘cancel culture’.

If it’s not that, maybe someone can specify it more clearly and we can all work out exactly what we’re talking about.

If that's what qualifies as a good example of "cancel culture" from the left then I really don't think we have a problem. I mean come on. Gay and trans people are being driven to suicide by a society that tolerates hate towards them. Trans people are being tarnished as predatory just because they want to use the bathroom they're most comfortable using. Some are even being attacked and killed. But you expect me to think that the real problem with all this is that Network Rail took down a JK Rowling poster.

Honestly, I'm finding it hard to take this discussion seriously any more of this is the best argument you guys can put up.

[Damo]

My apologies. Was that honestly your best effort? A poster was removed and that proves cancel culture is real and damaging?

Yes pal. Because thats the only example of cancel culture posted on this thread and not just a quick reply to your comment about JK Rowling.
You can go back to debating the best form or argument now, whatever that means. With your eyes closed and your fingers in your ears, shouting "la la la la la" in a loud voice

[PeterWilton]

There’s plenty of examples, Neil Oliver, the subject of another thread is one. There were calls for him to stand down as president of the National Trust for Scotland because he’s against Scottish independence. Morrissey album posters were taken down in Liverpool because people complained about them who don’t share his views.

But it’s not a new phenomenon, I remember being a student in the late 80s and avoiding opening an account with Barclays for something to do with South Africa (I think), there were student campaigns to encourage others to do the same. But it seems to be more prevalent now and for less and less serious ‘crimes’. I absolutely support a person’s right to say they’re no longer buying stuff from a particular artist or shopping at a particular store and saying why, it’s the vilification of those that don’t follow suit that I find disturbing.

You seem to be falling for it. Nothing what the right are calling "cancel culture" is new, and none of it is anything the right don't do every bit as often, and often far more violently than the left.

It's the new "snowflake". They are guilty of the exact thing they're criticising others for. It kind of like they're trying to signal how virtuous they are.

[martin_p]

If you can place anything from Starkey (in full context) as RACIST rather than questioning accepted perceptions of what happened I will be very surprised. Not saying you are not right Martin, but frankly I would be amazed if Starkey is a racist. Also as I’m sure you are aware historical research works hand in glove with archeology all the time.

In what context is the phrase “there wouldn’t be so many damn blacks” acceptable, whatever the discussion.