Social Question

seawulf575's avatar

How far will we take cancel culture before we realize how silly it is?

Asked by seawulf575 (13839points) September 8th, 2020
56 responses
“Great Question” (5points)

I came across an article that says they are now looking at removing exhibits from Charles Darwin because his ship, the HMS Beagle, was supposedly on a mission of colonialism. Therefore all references to him are being reviewed to see if they are “offensive”. How much of our past are we going to erase because they don’t meet today’s standards before we finally say enough is enough?

Observing members: 0
Composing members: 0

Answers

longgone's avatar

That’s an article from the Daily Mail. They will just make things up to maximise sales.

SergeantQueen's avatar

Yeah, you know, when I was in high school and I took classes on the civil rights movement/black history, I was surprised about how much they didn’t teach us when I did research. I had never heard of the 1919 race wars or about the freedom riders until junior/senior year of HS. It is really sad when really important thing in history get removed/not talked about. We need to talk about our history in its entirety as much as possible so that we learn from things and are able to do better in the future.

We need to learn about history no matter how “offensive” or “uncomfortable” it is.

I had a hard time reading some of the stuff about the 1919 race war. It was really upsetting. But it is apart of history and is important to know. Same with the holocaust, same with slavery. These things are offensive, uncomfortable, and terrible to read about. But they need to be discussed. And positive things should also be talked about too, of course

hmmmmmm's avatar

Is it silly? While cancelling things has always been the domain of conservatives and racists, non-conservatives are also doing this now.

What have you been telling your cancel culture conservatives all these years?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

When will KKK and people carrying the “Stars and Bars” battle flag; stop marching around the Confederate Statues ? ?

Asking for some one with a high school degree.

Darth_Algar's avatar

The Daily Mail? LOL. They tend to just make shit up. It’s a tabloid, not a serious newspaper.

Dutchess_III's avatar

My first thought was it was probably made up. Then when I saw it was from “The Daily Mail” I became certain it was made up.

zenvelo's avatar

The only people who find “cancel culture” upsetting are the people who want to perpetuate some pretty awful things in our history.

People who use the phrases “cancel culture and “politically incorrect” feel like society is victimizing them for essentially being assholes.

ragingloli's avatar

Aww, and here I thought you would complain about Drumpf demanding a fox news reporter be fired for daring to report on drumpf calling soldiers suckers and losers.
I mean, that is “cancel culture”, too, right?

LostInParadise's avatar

How about this attempt by Trump to ignore the role of slavery in American history?

KNOWITALL's avatar

Darwin? Are we searching archives for ‘offensive material’ now? Seems a bit much to me.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@ragingloli – That’s the thing. “Cancel culture” has always been – and continues to be – primarily a conservative tool. They are not rejecting the concept of “cancel culture”. They’re feeling threatened that they are now the ones feeling threatened to get “cancelled” for exercising their imbalanced and unjust power and privilege.

Besides the constant calls for people to be fired, as you mention, there is the nonstop conservative calls for boycotts, including HBO, Macy’s, Univision, Gillette, Nike, Pepsi, Target, Starbucks, Keurig, Netflix, Budweiser, and Walmart. And there is constant “cancelling” of celebrities, like Sean Penn. It isn’t just the famous cancellation of the Dixie Chicks or how french fries became “freedom fries” and how French wine and anything “French” was boycotted back in 2003.

To do this while simultaneously attacking “cancel culture” is the formula that appears to work for them. They can call for the end of “cancel culture” with a straight face while being deeply committed to perpetuating “cancel culture”.

elbanditoroso's avatar

One person’s cancel culture is another person’s keen understanding of sociology and the meaning of history.

Unless you’re going to kill everyone with intelligence and historical understanding, then the cancel culture is here to stay.

History is full of nasty things and bad people. Like it or not.

Demosthenes's avatar

@hmmmmmm Yes, conservatives cancel too but those examples are all fairly silly and frivolous. There’s a difference between boycotting Starbucks over red cups and erasing history because it’s “problematic”.

hmmmmmm's avatar

^ Who is attempting to “erase history”? Hello?

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Demosthenes

Indeed. Few people know this, but back in the 1930’s-40’s there was this really bad guy with a really stupid mustache who managed to seize control of Germany. This really bad guy then orchestrated the systemic murder of millions of people. We ended up going to war to stop this bad guy. Thing is, after we won and the bag guy was dead, we didn’t put up any monuments to him or name any schools after him. We even tore down all the monuments of his reign that he’d had built. And because we did everybody just kinda forget about him. We erased history and now almost nobody knows that the really bad guy with the really stupid mustache ever even existed.

seawulf575's avatar

Okay, for all the source snobs in the crowd, how about this or this or this or this. Or maybe you could do your own research instead of making smarmy comments about the source without verifying anything about it.

seawulf575's avatar

@zenvelo “The only people who find “cancel culture” upsetting are the people who want to perpetuate some pretty awful things in our history.” Soooo….Charles Darwin and his research are some pretty awful things? So you suddenly don’t believe in evolution?

seawulf575's avatar

I guess my thought when I heard this is the same when I hear them wanting to get rid of things named “Jefferson” or “Washington” or other such names. All that those wanting these changes can see is how horrible it was because at some point they owned slaves. Yet I still don’t see the call to do away with the Democrat Party since they were THE source of much of the oppression of blacks in this country. As soon as that idea is brought up, the excuses start coming out .

Demosthenes's avatar

@seawulf575 My problem with cancel culture is it says “only the bad things matter”. Only the bad that Jefferson and Washington and Darwin did is what should be in our minds. When we commemorate these men, we’re saying “the bad things they did are perfect and I approve of slavery”. What happened to the good, their accomplishments? If you want to talk about the bad too, that’s fine. But canceling isn’t widening the conversation, it’s eliminating these people from the conversation in the first place.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@Demosthenes: “My problem with cancel culture is it says “only the bad things matter”. Only the bad that Jefferson and Washington and Darwin did is what should be in our minds.”

Again, a complete fabrication that only exists in the minds of conservatives.

I think you need to start to investigate the concept of celebrating people . Why is it so important that certain people be commemorated in ways that others are not? And why is it that you can’t find the words to describe the “good” that these people have done, rather than erect statues and try to deflect any criticism? You have been living in safe spaces, with your heroes in their own safe spaces. When exposed to criticism at all, the tears flow.

How is it that talking more about history is considered “erasing history” by conservatives? Why does more information threaten the mythology of the culture?

seawulf575's avatar

@Demosthenes Exactly. It is as racist as it gets to try reducing everything to race. Most of what they are squawking about all happened hundreds of years ago. It has changed significantly since then. Take the 1619 project as a perfect example. 400 years ago. We weren’t even a country then and wouldn’t be for another 150 years. At that point we were a British colony. When we DID declare independence, it was less than 100 years for us to make slavery illegal. We were probably the first nation in the world to do that. And hundreds of thousands of Americans lost their lives in a war to put the matter to rest. But don’t let facts get in the way of race baiting. Which brings me back to the Democratic party. We fought a bloody war to stop slavery. Who was fighting to keep it? The Democrats. After we won the war and slavery was abolished, the blacks were still oppressed for another 100 years. Who were the key oppressors and who fought to keep them separate from whites? The Democrats. Atrocities were committed during this time, all by Democrats, and yet for some reason they are exempt from protest to have their name stricken from historical records. That statement alone says the entire dialogue is nothing but a political ploy. Time to drop it.

seawulf575's avatar

@hmmmmmm“I think you need to start to investigate the concept of celebrating people ” so why negate all the good things that Jefferson or Washington or Darwin did instead of trying to focus on a bad part of their lives? Face it, you are trying to justify hatred.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@seawulf575: “so why negate all the good things that Jefferson or Washington or Darwin did instead of trying to focus on a bad part of their lives? Face it, you are trying to justify hatred.”

I’m saying that this is literally your position. If you can’t handle the full history of someone, then you throw up your hands and say that people are only focusing on the bad.

Saying that I only want to focus on the bad over and over doesn’t make it so. You are engaged in a very dishonest practice.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@seawulf575 – That whole thing is how you get to the most absurd of propaganda terms: “anti-Americanism”. If we were discussing US history or foreign policy and I brought up the actual actions of the US, you would claim that I was only focusing on the bad things and not the good. I suspect that the realization that there actually are lots of bad things has you concerned that your beloved heroes and mythology are fiction.

seawulf575's avatar

@Darth_Algar Yep, we erected statues to Confederate heroes. Guess what? It was part of the idea behind healing the damage the Civil War did. People don’t just turn on and off like light switches. But you do realize that Robert Lee didn’t really like slavery? He was a good general and his home was in Virginia (the South), but wasn’t really keen on slavery. He even want to use blacks as soldiers and to work towards gradual and complete emancipation. Yet all the fools can see is that he supported those that wanted to keep slavery. So why is it we don’t malign the Democratic Party? They were the south, they were the oppressors. At least why don’t we push them to change their name because it has to be at least as offensive as Lee or Jefferson or Washington or Darwin.

seawulf575's avatar

@hmmmmmm Actually, it isn’t me that can’t handle the whole history of people. It is those that are fighting to reduce their accomplishments to one small piece of their history. Let’s just dig into this a little. The Democratic Party was the oppressors for most of this country’s history. Why aren’t you protesting to get rid of them or make them change their names? Why aren’t you embracing their whole history?

hmmmmmm's avatar

sigh

Yes, I am familar with Dinesh D’Souza, and I’m not going to spend much time discussing this again. It’s embarrassing. For you.

But I will say this – go put up statues of pro-slavery Democrats and let me know how that works.

Also, you’re not going to get me to defend the Democratic party, so save your Dinesh party trick for a different audience.

seawulf575's avatar

@hmmmmmm nice side-step. You are the one that was lecturing me about embracing the whole history of someone instead of just some fairy tale version. Yet when challenged to do the same with the Democratic party, you side-step. That tells me all I need to know. You say you aren’t going to defend the Democratic Party, but then…you just did.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@seawulf575: “nice side-step”

You realize that I’m not a Democrat, and see the Democratic party as an existential threat to me and my family’s existence, right? Wrong audience for this complete BS.

Your claim that putting up statues of Democratic slaveholders and racists would be met with global celebration needs a test case. Dear lord, I can’t believe I am engaging in this.

Blondesjon's avatar

I’m pretty sure that even when we kill Piggy, by dropping a rock on his head, it’s not going to sink in.

LostInParadise's avatar

@seawulf575 , Let’s wait to see what the museum does before getting worked up, although it is good to see you defending Darwin.

Quote from one of your links:
“We will use this research to take a detailed look at our collection and our history so we can tell the full story of the origins of the collection and the people represented in the museum.”

This suggests that the museum will place the voyages in a historical context,

seawulf575's avatar

@hmmmmmm Yet for some reason you will not publicly denounce the Democratic Party. Why is that? They have a horrible history, they pose an existential threat to you and your family’s existence…yet you won’t go so far as to saying that, for the same reasons confederate statues should be taken down, the Democratic Party should be either dismantled or renamed. You had no problem at all lecturing me on how I should view things, yet you aren’t willing to publicly go there yourself.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@hmmmmmm Just to clarify, 72 Reps joined the Dems to pass the legislation for removal in the capitol.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/republicans-join-democrats-vote-remove-confederate-statues-capitol.html

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise You do understand why they are looking at the whole Darwin thing, right? I has nothing to do with his contributions to the world, it has to do with the fact that the ship he used was used to expand colonialism. So, ipso-facto, he must be guilty as well. All the museum is doing at this point is trying to find some way of politically avoid having to demolish his memory.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@seawulf575 ” When we DID declare independence, it was less than 100 years for us to make slavery illegal. We were probably the first nation in the world to do that.”

Nope. The British did it several decades before us. And they didn’t have to fight an internal war to do so. If you want to talk about history then I suggest you learn it.

Oh, and as far as Lee goes – for someone who supposedly didn’t like slavery he sure owned enough of them.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@seawulf575: “Yet for some reason you will not publicly denounce the Democratic Party.”

Ummmm…as almost everyone here can confirm, 90% of my comments are publicly denouncing the Democratic party.

@seawulf575: “They have a horrible history, they pose an existential threat to you and your family’s existence…yet you won’t go so far as to saying that, for the same reasons confederate statues should be taken down, the Democratic Party should be either dismantled or renamed.”

Ummmm…again, I’m not sure if you’re new here, but the dismantling of the Democratic party would benefit the world. And that’s all I fucking talk about here, which pisses everyone off. But make sure you understand – my loathing of the Dem party is primarily because the only reason the racist, fascist uber right-wing Republican party can even exist is because it has the Dem party as the frontline to fight the left.

This has nothing to do with some Dineshian reasoning about the history of what the party represented and all that bullshit. It has to do with what it fights for right now.

And for fuck’s sake – please read words and comprehend them. If people took to the streets to tear down all of the Democratic party leaders who owned slaves and fought for the right to whip black people, I would support that. Remind me again how this has anything to do with slavery and statues?

And no – your attempt at this embarrassing Dem party history Dinesh thing is not informed by your internal justice meter or rage. It’s an attempt to tap into your default “hypocrisy” position, which would mean (to you) that if can confuse people into thinking that some kind of hypocrisy is going on (it’s not), it will somehow let you off the hook for your support for awful things and people.

I have some news for you: Your heroes have done lots of shitty things, and your country has done unspeakable things throughout its entire history. If you can’t absorb these “bad” things along with the “good”, you are by definition refusing erasing history.

I’m sorry that the walls of your safe space have started to crumble ever so slightly. But keep your chin up. You’ll be ok.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@hmmmmmm “Ummmm…as almost everyone here can confirm, 90% of my comments are publicly denouncing the Democratic party.”

I will confirm this.

seawulf575's avatar

@hmmmmmm Why would anyone want to tear down statues? The given reason is that they remind people of slavery and that is bad. Why are they looking at getting rid of Darwin exhibits? Because his ship was used for colonialism. In both these cases, the reason is so narrow-minded as to be ludicrous. But if people want to go that route…tear down statues because they remind people of slavery and oppression of blacks, then let’s go whole hog. Every one of those statues was of a Democrat. Democrats led the war to keep slavery. They led the charge, after losing that war, to keep oppressing blacks…to treat them as 2nd class citizens. They formed the KKK. They passed Jim Crow laws. They stood in school doorways to keep blacks out. They have done more to oppress blacks than any single person that had a statue made of them. Yet you aren’t embracing the idea that they are a reminder of slavery or oppression. You are not, despite all your tough words, willing to actually make that call. You lectured me to embrace the whole history of a person….the bad and not just the fairy tale good. You won’t do that with the Democratic party. Oh, I’m sure you think you do, but you can’t even put them in the same category as a 100 year old statue. You tried lecturing me that I was not embracing the bad and then tried telling me that you don’t stress the bad. You do see the illogic here, right?
What you don’t see, or are unwilling to drop away from your leftist support long enough to admit, is that I see things like Thomas Jefferson as a slave owner. By today’s standards that would be horrible, but by the standards of his time, it was acceptable. BUT, unlike you, I don’t stop at that small piece of his history because that is what my Marxist groups tell me we need to focus on. He went on to write a Constitution for our nation where he stressed that all men are created equal. This set the stage for the abolishing of slavery. He took a stand that could have cost him his home, his livelihood, and his life, but was willing to take those steps. I see a guy that was pretty special, despite the fact he had what someone these days says is a black mark…no pun intended. Out of the two of us, I am the one that is trying to get you to see the WHOLE history instead of just one piece of it. But you won’t. You are willing to support tearing down statues, but not the group they represent.

si3tech's avatar

As far as the gullible will allow it. Pretty far now.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@Darth_Algar: “I will confirm this.”

Gracias

janbb's avatar

I don’t like the term “cancel culture” and think major re-evaluations are in order in many areas. However, I do agree with you @seawulf575 that if the result of the evaluation in the Natural History Museum is to dismantle the Darwin exhibits and his contributions to science that would be going far too far. Perhaps they will decide to put in some commentary about the British colonial expansion of the time and the mercantile nature of the expedition but that should not take away from Darwin’s accomplishments or even his biography.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I can not find any reputable news site that confirms this rumor.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Dutchess_III

Yep. All of Wulfie’s cited sources are, themselves, rather dubious – Russia Today, the Evening Standard (owned by Russian billionaire and former KGB agent, Alexander Lebdev), or merely repeat what was said by other sources. Although one of the articles he linked did somewhat contradict the claim by stating that the idea the NHM were removing Darwin-related exhibits was entirely speculative.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, they always are. he has mentioned several times that he prefers right leaning news sites. I never understood that. Why would anyone want to get their news from a biased source whether it’s left leaning or right leaning?

Darth_Algar's avatar

Well no news source is going to be completely free of bias. Some are better than others in trying to simply report the facts as known. Others will lean more heavily towards opinion-editorial content. The problem is that many people fail to make the distinction between op-ed content and hard news.

Dutchess_III's avatar

They don’t even try. They just go with whatever validates their world view with total disregard for the truth.

seawulf575's avatar

@Darth_Algar ” The problem is that many people fail to make the distinction between op-ed content and hard news.” That is a specialty of CNN, MSNBC, and the other outlets that you all deem to be “reputable”.

Darth_Algar's avatar

I’ve never considered or claimed CNN or MSMBC reputable. I can only surmise which orifice you’ve pulled that assumption out of.

seawulf575's avatar

Oh, I’m sorry. Huffington Post? Vox? Salon? Please…you are so ready to attack a source instead of dealing with the content…so help me understand what you view to be a “reputable” source.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Russian Daily, Moscow Examiner and Volgograd Times.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@seawulf575 Here we go again with the sources. This has to be at least the 15th thread.

Every site has a bias rating, PBS and Associated Press are generally thought to be the least biased and even they are left-leaning center. Good luck.

Dutchess_III's avatar

PBS and AP are good sources. So is the BBC and the Washington Post.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III Agreed. I check BBC at least every other day, I like it. I believe that’s how I first heard of Covid last December, too.

seawulf575's avatar

@Dutchess_III WaPo? Ask Nick Sandmann how he likes them. I bet he LOVES them and their “fair” reporting. It made him millions.

@Darth_Algar How about it, stud? You have been real vocal about how bad sources are without actually addressing the content, but you are completely silent on what you consider a “Good” source.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

Mobile | Desktop


Send Feedback   

`