I think it has a very practical and easy to understand meaning. Anyway, the thread is about cancel culture. So will obviously involve discussion of incidents which don’t end in the specific outcome that fits your definition of being cancelled. Not everyone the mob tries to cancel will end up getting cancelled.
Cancel Culture
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
I don't know if this is cancel culture, or what cancel culture really is.
But, the self-importance of tweeting something like that is amazing.
But, the self-importance of tweeting something like that is amazing.
It is not only self-importance. She is a professor at Caltech and a Director of Research at Nvidia. Also the person who changed the name of NIPS to NeurIPS after the people voted to keep the name NIPS.
She is important, which is why it makes this problematic.
It’s everything that is wrong with Twitter. Seeing it as some kind of battlefield where you use your army of followers to “change minds”. Which obviously never happens. Vindictive shit like this just makes the differences more entrenched and the participants more bitter and angry.
Asking your followers to bully people who don’t agree with you is never a good look.
Unfortunately this is the society we live in.
Unfortunately this is the society we live in.
That's the thing that bothers me, don't these followers have their own free will? That's where I have an issue with the definition of cancel culture that you are using, it's essentially based on the idea that while you are a sentient being others aren't, they just follow mindlessly someone else.
That's why I said that she shared her bias, you may agree or disagree with her but she is free to express it and we are free to eventually sanction her own behaviour too.
Actually, that’s a fair point. Although I do think people behave a bit differently (i.e. nastier) en masse than they do as individuals. A tendency which is exacerbated by the anonymity of online interactions
She's basically doing a Milo Yiannopoulos. Don't think the people defending her here were too cool with it when he was sending his twitter army out to troll and bully people.
To behave like that on twitter you do have to either have a screw loose or be a massive narcissist.
To behave like that on twitter you do have to either have a screw loose or be a massive narcissist.
He's male and alt-right = bad. She is female and alt-left = good.
For a lot of people (both here and on Twitter) it is as simple as that. The capacity to think has been long delegated.
I think we can all agree that alt-right = bad
The alt right is the rebranded version of the far right while the alt-left isn't a thing.
I'd be interested to know what you think the mirror version is and why this woman is a part of it.
It just hit me that you expressed surprise.
I am talking about these dogmatic beliefs that you either 100% agree with me or you are the enemy. In the alt-left, the enemy is called as 'sexist, racist, misogynist, fascist etc', in alt-right it is a 'communist, cultural Marxist etc'.
In both cases, the goal is the same, remove any individual thinking and everyone follows the same line of thinking.
Don't get me wrong, I think that Anima's intentions are right, I just think that the way how she approaches things is totally stupid and gets more harm than solves anything. I also think that this type of mentality directed by Silicon Valley is going to create a monster. I think that alt-right has already done so (though right-wingers might argue that the intention there is good too).
Is alt right even a thing? Wasn’t it just a few twats on places like 4chan trying to be edgy, rather than any kind of proper movement?
Whatever, it’s not hard to see that there are two sides taking part in the culture war on Twitter. I assume Facebook too but avoid that place like the plague (have avoided Twitter too, for the last few months and feel better, mentally, without it)
Whatever, it’s not hard to see that there are two sides taking part in the culture war on Twitter. I assume Facebook too but avoid that place like the plague (have avoided Twitter too, for the last few months and feel better, mentally, without it)
Heh. Wasn’t so much surprise at you making a good point as me being surprised that I agree with a point made by someone I’m arguing with!It just hit me that you expressed surprise.
Both sides eh?
Okay I'm not actually interested at all after reading it. I think you're getting goals and methods mixed up for a start.
If that's what you think pogue then maybe you should post less authoritatively in these types of topics, because... Of course it's a fecking thing
Fecking hell...
Yesterday
Also
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Also
The alt right aren't going to take over the american state but they are clearly more than shit posters.
I’m far from an authority on any of this. Not sure where you got that impression. Especially in response to a post which is a question!If that's what you think pogue then maybe you should post less authoritatively in these types of topics, because... Of course it's a fecking thing
Fecking hell...
I got the impression that alt right was a thing - mainly in the lead up to Trump winning the election in 2016 - but it wasn’t a phrase that made much sense any more. We’ve moved on from alt right edgelords being ironic arseholes on the internet to straightforward, extreme right wing ideologies taking to the streets. Trump winning the election means the far right have come out into the open.
I was hoping that someone who was an actual authority on this stuff might clear that up.
Last edited:
Genuinely don’t know what point you’re making here. If you are making a point.
You seem to be framing the culture war as something that both sides are equally to blame for rather than one "side" being bigots and the other "side" just being people who are trying to stop bigotry. Like maybe they should declare peace and problem solved?
Not at all. My own politics is to the left so I obviously find myself agreeing with the ideology of one side over the other. Where I do find some similarity between the two is in the tactics used to bully and chide the opposition in online “debates”. For example the orchestrated Twitter pile-on being discussed since this thread was bumped.
Why this bothers me is the impression it gives to anyone who might be less convinced than you or me about who are the good guys here.
Or more correctly, one side seeing bigots and racists everywhere, and politicizing issues that have nothing to do with racism, sexism and bigotry to advance their agendas. I agree that the alt-right are bigots.
The main difference is that the alt-right is a few years ahead. Alt-left is now at the level where far-right was before the Tea Party. No figureheads and central control, but slowly getting there.
Careful with your language then because you could be accused of accomplishing the same outcome through different methods.
Careful @Pogue Mahone , you might need soon to do some self-reflection and correct your behavior in order to become acceptable. Careful!
Shit am I cancelling him.
Ok, fair enough. But don’t you think glossing over the fact that left wing Twitter (or wherever) is absolutely infested with irritating, self-righteous twits is ignoring a fairly important problem? By all means support their ideology but can’t we also call out their tactics if we see them as problematic?
EDIT: And it goes without saying that irritating, self-righteous twits - who also happen to he fascists - are also a problem!
Is it an important problem in the great scheme of things? I'm not convinced.
Edit: It feels like a useful diversion for the right to me. And left wing people angry at bigotry have had to deal with people disagreeing with their methods without engaging with their cause in any meaningful way for longer than since Twitter was around.
Oh I agree. It’s not a huge problem. I do think it’s something that lefty Twitter should be working on though. To me, that capacity for self-reflection and improvement is one of the many reasons why left-wingers have always been able to take the moral highground. Be a pity to let that slide.
The fundamental difference is that the far left is known as the far left with all the negative connotations that go with it while the alt right is the rebranding of the far right and white supremacists without the negative connotations, the later part only being true initially since then a lot of people have understood what happened.
WTF? How alt-right doesn’t have negative connotations? It is a synonym for far-right, white suprematism, bigotry and racism.
You may want to read until the end of the post.
The same shit happens when there's a bit of disorder in protests. Highlight the bad, to delegitimise the cause.
Absolutely think that left wingers should self reflect on how we make our arguments - and when im talking to my proper lefty mates I will challenge them on things but it's a folly to think that any such efforts can ever been successful to the standards that we would be held to. So I'd rather not waste too much energy on talking about it and certainly not add legitimacy to right wing pearl clutching when the causes themselves are what's important.
At least we now know that Revans idea of canceling is a bit whack.
As you wish. Apparently an important leader on her field posting names of people she blocked (for liking other tweets or by mistake) to her 40k followers asking them to either help her to educate them or cancel them, while saying that some of them are dangerous alt-right people, and all are males has nothing to do with cancel culture and sexism. Nothing at all.
What is cancel culture to you?
I was referring to your little comment implying that Pogue might be about to get canceled.