Author Topic: The Culture War Thread  (Read 147701 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

HardcoreRetro

  • Punk Mushi no Onna
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1500 on: October 22, 2022, 04:14:26 PM »
Like any of these "wins" it's just about feeling better about yourself. That's the point of these exposures.

Even though you did jack shit for any of these causes you pretend to support, at least you weren't culturally appropriating or whatever buzzword gets you to feel better about yourself without doing anything.

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1501 on: October 22, 2022, 04:29:19 PM »
From what I can tell littlefeather was usually a positive force for natives, so there is little to gain by exposing her.

Rachel Dolezal was president of an NAACP chapter for a year, a civil rights activist for years before that, and a teacher at a university for various african american studies, and brought attention to various race-related injustices

:dolezal

I don't have anything against native americans, or the well-documented suffering and abuses they've gone through, and also recognize the horrible backlash toward anyone who tries to speak out about this

what I am against though is how hard it is to get anyone to recognize the actual truth of situations like these, because even bringing it up gets your motives questioned

some people do have garbage motives! but that shouldn't have any bearing on whether what they're saying is true or not
Uncle

Transhuman

  • youtu.be/KCVCmGPgJS0
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1502 on: October 22, 2022, 05:00:09 PM »

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1503 on: October 22, 2022, 05:38:16 PM »
 :whoo
Uncle

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1504 on: October 22, 2022, 07:12:10 PM »
more from the wikipedia talk page:

Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Hi. The SF Chronicle OpEd, and the derivatives thereof cannot be used as statement of unquestioned fact, per WP:NEWSORG - specifically "... opinion pieces ... written by ... outside authors (invited op-eds and letters to the editor from notable figures) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact." Thanks! Hipocrite

I haven't been keeping up on which RS outlets have gotten up to speed, but... since her death, her family has been speaking up. Her sister in particular is active online now, saying their family is not Native, and that she is very hurt that her sister characterized her father the way she did. I think the family is now speaking to RS media outlets, so, there should be more solid sourcing soon. Jake Tapper from CNN maybe? P.S. Oh, look, the sisters are mentioned above. Sorry, tired and skimming. - CorbieVreccan

In order to include anything on a wikipedia article, especially one about a recently dead person, we need to follow what WP:RS are saying. Her sister is not a reliable source. Hipocrite

Well of course, we need WP:RS sources; I never said otherwise. As far as her family goes - It depends on who interviews the family, the fact-checking involved, and then where it is published. I said I assume more RS as in better sources should be coming soon. But where are the RS sources that show she is claimed by the Nations she claims? My understanding is there are none. To prove Native identity they have to show they're claimed. I've stayed out of this one because she's beloved and many don't want to believe it, and I don't have time to argue the 101 right now, but, my understanding is there are zero records connecting her family to any of the Nations. If her family isn't Native, neither is the BLP subject. - CorbieVreccan

If you find errors in the article, you should correct them - reviewing, I see it clearly stated that the claim she is of Apache and Yaqui ancestry attributed to her. Over and over, the article is clear that "she said," in specific claims. I do not see the article making a claim stronger than WP:ABOUTSELF justifies. Any WP:OR about tribes claiming or not claiming her would not be valid for inclusion in this article without a reliable secondary source. Hipocrite

Your understanding is correct; she has zero records connecting her family line (well, really, her father's, since her mom was straight 'white') to any tribe whatsoever. Furthermore, records available place her family nowhere near the tribes she claimed to descend from.
She's like a lot of the old military 'stolen valor' people, really. She relied on association with pseudo-Native groups and organizations to bolster her claim. It's really weird how news agencies are avoiding asking, you know, the actual tribes she claims to be descended from. 2603:6011:4602:B4D4:11A:57C8:26AC:589

Hi. This is a problem per WP:BLPTALK, specifically that "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices should be removed, deleted, or oversighted, as appropriate." Could I ask that you refrain from disparaging the article subject in ways unrelated to improving the article? Thanks. Hipocrite (talk)

in other words:

the article is technically an opinion piece so it's not a reliable source

for some reason her own sisters' statements are not a reliable source

but what she said about herself IS a reliable source, and stop saying mean things

 :mindblown

wikipedia is a maze of technicalities and shitty rules that can justify any truth you want to present, you just have to find the right rule to enforce your viewpoint


Quote
Quote
But the person the article is about is reliable?? Because most of the information contained in this article is from the article's subject. Funny how that logic works. 98.218.148.77

If you'd like to argue for a change in WP:RS, that's certainly possible, but this is not the right place to do it. Hipocrite

Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
'her sister is not a reliable source'
How about the tribal records brought up by the author? Or is that 'not a reliable source' either.' 2603:6011:4602:B4D4:11A:57C8:26AC:589

Tribal records would be a reliable primary source. Per WP:BLPPRIMARY, it would almost certainly not be reliable for statements about her ancestry - specifically "Exercise extreme caution in using primary sources. Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person," with the note that per WP:BDP this almost certainly applies to Ms. Littlefeather, as this material is "... contentious ... material about the subject that has implications for their living relatives and friends." Note also WP:PRIMARY, requiring that you not engage in some sort of original synthesis based on your interpretation of the primary source. Hipocrite

So why is her claim, with nothing backing it up but HER word, somehow outweighing BOTH of her sisters' word, exactly. Doesn't make much sense.
So, basically, Wikipedia has created a system, seemingly designed to allow Pretendian fraudsters to go unchallenged, not unlike the Liz Warren debacle. 2603:6011:4602:B4D4:11A:57C8:26AC:589

Sorry, I'm going to ask you again, publically, to stop disparaging the subject of the article. It is, in fact, true that Wikipedia provides extra weight to things stated by reliable sources than it does to OpEds. Hipocrite

So THE FRAUDULENT CLAIMANT is a 'RELIABLE SOURCE" because she said it first.
You understand this exact thing is why schools teach students that Wikipedia is not a useful source, right. 2603:6011:4602:B4D4:11A:57C8:26AC:589

Wikipedia has countless pages of policies to pursue core pillars of reliability, verifiability, and neutrality. Problems arise when certain people want to come in and bypass those guidelines to insert unsourced opinions, hyperbole, or preconceived notions intended to disparage the subject matter and/or fellow editors. Behaving this way does nothing but hurt your case. If you would like to provide reliable sourcing or applicable WP policies/guidelines, feel free. Otherwise, please cease hostilities. TNstingray

so even the tribal records would not be enough to make any statements about her ancestry

 :rage

I hate wikipedia so much, you can feel the smug dripping from their posts, "um actually we have a rule that prevents that"

even if they relent and this information someday gets included, these people are going to go on to do this same song and dance in countless other articles, suppressing whatever they feel like suppressing
Uncle

Potato

  • Senior's Member
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1505 on: October 22, 2022, 07:37:57 PM »
Hearing there’s other controversy with the writer and it isn’t such a neat story. but given how this keeps happening, somehow, it’s interesting. Some weeks back there was another investigation on the John Wayne anecdote as, well, embellished at best if not total bullshit.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Sacheen-Littlefeather-oscar-Native-pretendian-17520648.php

Quote
“That infuriates me,” her sister Orlandi said when told of the quote. “Our house had a toilet … And it’s not a shack, OK, I have pictures of it. Of course, we had a toilet.”
Holy shit, that's an amazing story. Makes me mad that all this shit is coming out now and not earlier.
Spud

Potato

  • Senior's Member
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1506 on: October 22, 2022, 07:40:38 PM »
Hearing there’s other controversy with the writer and it isn’t such a neat story. but given how this keeps happening, somehow, it’s interesting. Some weeks back there was another investigation on the John Wayne anecdote as, well, embellished at best if not total bullshit.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Sacheen-Littlefeather-oscar-Native-pretendian-17520648.php

Quote
“That infuriates me,” her sister Orlandi said when told of the quote. “Our house had a toilet … And it’s not a shack, OK, I have pictures of it. Of course, we had a toilet.”

It's an interesting read but the timing to release this after Littlefeather died is pretty suspect. I wonder if they couldn't just DNA test the sisters? Or maybe determining native ancestry isn't as simple as I think?

thing is, this wasn't only released after her death, here's the article's author trying to edit the info into her wikipedia article back when she was still alive, and getting lambasted for it:

https://twitter.com/void_pumpkin/status/1508615569813422080

apparently this info has been around in the background for years but of course nobody would've wanted to listen, it was just some awful right-winger trying to ruin her legacy

after all, the only time you'd ever see this kind of thing is when she'd be in the news and was relevant to the conversation, I don't think it would've made many waves cropping up at random times

by the way here's the article from before her death picking apart her John Wayne story:

https://selfstyledsiren.substack.com/p/john-wayne-and-the-six-security-men

Of course the twatter profile features this:

Quote
Asexual/Aromantic/Agender also Xenogender They/Them Xey/Xem Anom/Anomaly
Spud

BIONIC

  • Virgo. Live Music. The Office. Tacos. Fur mom. True crime junkie. INTJ.
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1507 on: October 22, 2022, 08:14:08 PM »
:wut
Margs

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1508 on: October 22, 2022, 09:48:13 PM »
wikipedia is a maze of technicalities and shitty rules that can justify any truth you want to present, you just have to find the right rule to enforce your viewpoint

so even the tribal records would not be enough to make any statements about her ancestry

 :rage

I hate wikipedia so much, you can feel the smug dripping from their posts, "um actually we have a rule that prevents that"

even if they relent and this information someday gets included, these people are going to go on to do this same song and dance in countless other articles, suppressing whatever they feel like suppressing
I've seen this a lot, the main thing is it's not actually consistently enforced. They say stuff like no primary sources but if it's an entry that nobody cares about there's probably primary sources used. Meanwhile I've seen other entries where people have put "citation needed" on things that can be sourced easily from elsewhere, like I saw on a Governor of one state that it said "as of 2022, they're the last Democratic Governor elected in [whatever state]" and someone put "citation needed" on this when you could just look at Wikipedia's own list of Governors and see there hasn't been a Democrat elected in the last five decades or whatever. Then another entry will have a whole bunch of unsourced or sourced to opinion article claims.  :lol

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1509 on: October 22, 2022, 10:06:31 PM »

Couldn't help but notice that two of the people who appeared in the reaction shots probably wouldn't be laughing today and would devote their own "comedy" show to explaining why Norm just did a genocide.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1510 on: October 22, 2022, 10:33:49 PM »
Lot of people look real stupid getting on the Kanye bandwagon for "free speech" only for it to end like this. Dropped by Balenciaga, likely about to be dropped by Adidas, apologizing, etc. Also highlights that a lot of this shit is and has always been a movement to bring hate speech into the public square. It's not about "free speech" - which has nothing to do with non-government entities anyway. It has everything to do with folks who just want to say the n-word, attack Jews, etc.

hasn't it always been in the public square and this would be more about maintaining that ability instead of shutting it down?

like just thinking of the old internet and how common it was to say f@g and r-tard casually

This is actually a great point. I def remember that era but at some point many of us (nerds, gamers, movie watchers, etc as kids) started converging on message boards. Some message boards were no rules, no holds barred wild wild west shit. As time passed the largest boards, from GAF to IGN forums, had pretty strict moderation policies/TOS on that stuff. You could get away with all types of shit on GAF but using the f-word or n-word was auto permaban shit. 4chan popped up and had entirely different approaches to these things but that shit was more of an exception than a rule.

Flash forward to 2022. Forums are largely dead, social media runs the internet. But like forums, social media has TOS. So to me the issue is not them wanting to return to the old internet...it might as well be us going back to 2002, dealing with the weirdo who just wanted to call people fegs. After that permaban he'd just go to one of the chan sites. The problem today is these people realize those off brand sites they create aren't wavy or cool. At least back in the day, chan sites basically influenced everyone else meme/humor wise. Now these losers aren't nearly as funny or creative and just want to be in the normal person pool (twitter) talking that shit. Nope lol.

As Benji supported, a big problem with your supposition is that everyone that has issues with free speech on social media is a racist homophobe.

"They just want to bring back the n-word and f-word" is peak liberal ivory tower thinking that people generally resent. This "I know better for you" mindset.

Go to Twitter right now and find a tweet you disagree and write literally,"this is fucking distinguished mentally-challenged" or "this is fucking stupid" and chances are you will be greeted with a warning of conduct of language and likely get a warning. As the tweet cap Benji posted shows, you can't say anything about anybody regardless of context. A consequence of banning stuff like cigarillo or nicca is that it's not humans doing the moderating, it's bots, and black people - the very you're trying to protect - will be banned from social media for a wide range of things from simply saying "nicca" to "he called me a nicca." The problem with policing language is that it is an endless regress where, without actual moderation, we are only left with a complete white washing of the word even when used in example. Even before social media I disagreed with the censoring of the word nicca because it gives the word power. I remember being called nicca on the playground and I still dislike any censorship of the word because it presumes that I fear being called it when it's the contrary. I write it myself here, filtered out from the Bore's own distinguished mentally-challenged word filter. I just dislike censorship as a rule.

Moreover, you speak of the old days but I know the Phoenix Dark that called overweight women "orcas". You act like you were above it, but you were just like the rest of us. Why were you allowed to say that on NeoGaf or here but a nicca can't say a lady is fat on twitter?

How do you manage to be against the book/library situation while advocating for speech censorship? They're utterly against odds. At this point you might as well be for banning Huckleberry Finn.

"They just want to call people nicca and cigarillo" is overly simplistic and binary in its thinking. This idea that if you support free speech you're a racist is dangerous as racial minorities need free speech the most. Personally, I've backtracked to 2000's internet rules. I say whatever the fuck I want here regardless of "new" internet's rules. Remember. You yourself called overweight women orcas and whales. You can claim to be better or have grown, but that's just the hypocrisy I can't stand. "We used to say this when we were younger so we are just going to disable your ability to say it because we were wrong?" It's just a power play and a method to force everyone in to your own ruleset so you can control culture and call anyone and everyone that goes against it your enemies.

Did you guys skip civics class? The first amendment has nothing to do with non government entities, and certainly not twitter. If you say something that violates their TOS, you can get banned. If you say something at work that violates your employer's HR rules, you can get fired. This has nothing to do with the first amendment, and certainly nothing to do with "censorship."

I said all types of wild shit on GAF, and got all types of bans for violating the TOS. But you know what I avoided, so I didn't take easy permabans? Calling people the f-word or r-word. Because those were auto perms. I say that as someone who literally got banned more than anyone GAF's history. Not to mention getting permabanned from resetera for making a "house in Virginia" AIDS reference, in relation to Milo Yiannopoulos's unsafe sex practices.  :doge

And I will repeat my stance on the underlining current of this. There's an army of Nazis and right wing losers who want nothing more than to use slurs, make racial IQ arguments, etc. And just as those people were largely removed from bigger forums 20 years ago, they're being removed from bigger social media outlets. I'm 100% fine with this, and it makes sense from Twitter's perspective. I'm very curious to see how the Elon Musk thing plays out and I'm surprised no one has asked him the obvious question: would Kanye have been banned from Elon's upcoming Twitter for those anti-Jewish tweets? Or is that the type of bullshit Elon plans on allowing? And what will advertisers think about that.
 :hitler
010

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1511 on: October 22, 2022, 10:42:44 PM »
I think musk will hardly run the place any differently other than banning anyone he personally interacts with

(in the same way that trump didn't pardon literally everyone who thought he would pardon them)
Uncle

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1512 on: October 22, 2022, 10:51:30 PM »
Did you guys skip civics class? The first amendment has nothing to do with non government entities, and certainly not twitter. If you say something that violates their TOS, you can get banned. If you say something at work that violates your employer's HR rules, you can get fired. This has nothing to do with the first amendment, and certainly nothing to do with "censorship."
Since I'm apparently getting roped into this through Himu when I was only responding to one aspect of what you said, I'm going to note that free speech is far more than the specifics of the law, it requires the perpetuation of a culture. I have absolutely zero problems with Twitter or anyone else being legally correct in employing their own free speech rights to control their own platform as there is no alternative. I can still advocate for a broader view on their platform and elsewhere, you all probably have long been tired of me doing this going back to when I came onto GAF but I had before then the same thing elsewhere since I came upon the internet. My time as a janny and admin on forums with thousands of active users arguably only made me more determined about this rather than convince me that we simply need the right people or AI's in charge.

Learning about the First Amendment made this even more clear to me, the language of the First Amendment has never changed, yet the Supreme Court once read it to mean you could be jailed for protesting a war or slavery and that you could be forced at gunpoint to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Even today when we have one of the most free speech Supreme Courts ever since there's seemingly eight votes to maintain all the precedent save Citizens United, we still have Alito who thinks you should be thrown in prison for lying about being in the military or protesting in the same city as a soldier's funeral. We also have the Fifth Circuit feeder court who interprets the First Amendment to mean you must publish anyone who wants to use your property to speak without recourse.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1513 on: October 22, 2022, 11:07:58 PM »
Did you guys skip civics class? The first amendment has nothing to do with non government entities, and certainly not twitter. If you say something that violates their TOS, you can get banned. If you say something at work that violates your employer's HR rules, you can get fired. This has nothing to do with the first amendment, and certainly nothing to do with "censorship."
Since I'm apparently getting roped into this through Himu when I was only responding to one aspect of what you said, I'm going to note that free speech is far more than the specifics of the law, it requires the perpetuation of a culture. I have absolutely zero problems with Twitter or anyone else being legally correct in employing their own free speech rights to control their own platform as there is no alternative. I can still advocate for a broader view on their platform and elsewhere, you all probably have long been tired of me doing this going back to when I came onto GAF but I had before then the same thing elsewhere since I came upon the internet. My time as a janny and admin on forums with thousands of active users arguably only made me more determined about this rather than convince me that we simply need the right people or AI's in charge.

Learning about the First Amendment made this even more clear to me, the language of the First Amendment has never changed, yet the Supreme Court once read it to mean you could be jailed for protesting a war or slavery and that you could be forced at gunpoint to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Even today when we have one of the most free speech Supreme Courts ever since there's seemingly eight votes to maintain all the precedent save Citizens United, we still have Alito who thinks you should be thrown in prison for lying about being in the military or protesting in the same city as a soldier's funeral. We also have the Fifth Circuit feeder court who interprets the First Amendment to mean you must publish anyone who wants to use your property to speak without recourse.

I wasn't referring to you, I'm sure you took your civics classes and passed them back in the 70s.

I'm referring to this weird argument being made by people of Himu's inclinations, that (for instance) Kanye's first amendment rights have been violated. By Twitter, IG, and now the Superthug himself, Noriega, when the Drink Champs episode was removed from youtube.
 :mindblown

010

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1514 on: October 22, 2022, 11:11:30 PM »
Lot of people look real stupid getting on the Kanye bandwagon for "free speech" only for it to end like this. Dropped by Balenciaga, likely about to be dropped by Adidas, apologizing, etc. Also highlights that a lot of this shit is and has always been a movement to bring hate speech into the public square. It's not about "free speech" - which has nothing to do with non-government entities anyway. It has everything to do with folks who just want to say the n-word, attack Jews, etc.

hasn't it always been in the public square and this would be more about maintaining that ability instead of shutting it down?

like just thinking of the old internet and how common it was to say f@g and r-tard casually

This is actually a great point. I def remember that era but at some point many of us (nerds, gamers, movie watchers, etc as kids) started converging on message boards. Some message boards were no rules, no holds barred wild wild west shit. As time passed the largest boards, from GAF to IGN forums, had pretty strict moderation policies/TOS on that stuff. You could get away with all types of shit on GAF but using the f-word or n-word was auto permaban shit. 4chan popped up and had entirely different approaches to these things but that shit was more of an exception than a rule.

Flash forward to 2022. Forums are largely dead, social media runs the internet. But like forums, social media has TOS. So to me the issue is not them wanting to return to the old internet...it might as well be us going back to 2002, dealing with the weirdo who just wanted to call people fegs. After that permaban he'd just go to one of the chan sites. The problem today is these people realize those off brand sites they create aren't wavy or cool. At least back in the day, chan sites basically influenced everyone else meme/humor wise. Now these losers aren't nearly as funny or creative and just want to be in the normal person pool (twitter) talking that shit. Nope lol.

As Benji supported, a big problem with your supposition is that everyone that has issues with free speech on social media is a racist homophobe.

"They just want to bring back the n-word and f-word" is peak liberal ivory tower thinking that people generally resent. This "I know better for you" mindset.

Go to Twitter right now and find a tweet you disagree and write literally,"this is fucking distinguished mentally-challenged" or "this is fucking stupid" and chances are you will be greeted with a warning of conduct of language and likely get a warning. As the tweet cap Benji posted shows, you can't say anything about anybody regardless of context. A consequence of banning stuff like cigarillo or nicca is that it's not humans doing the moderating, it's bots, and black people - the very you're trying to protect - will be banned from social media for a wide range of things from simply saying "nicca" to "he called me a nicca." The problem with policing language is that it is an endless regress where, without actual moderation, we are only left with a complete white washing of the word even when used in example. Even before social media I disagreed with the censoring of the word nicca because it gives the word power. I remember being called nicca on the playground and I still dislike any censorship of the word because it presumes that I fear being called it when it's the contrary. I write it myself here, filtered out from the Bore's own distinguished mentally-challenged word filter. I just dislike censorship as a rule.

Moreover, you speak of the old days but I know the Phoenix Dark that called overweight women "orcas". You act like you were above it, but you were just like the rest of us. Why were you allowed to say that on NeoGaf or here but a nicca can't say a lady is fat on twitter?

How do you manage to be against the book/library situation while advocating for speech censorship? They're utterly against odds. At this point you might as well be for banning Huckleberry Finn.

"They just want to call people nicca and cigarillo" is overly simplistic and binary in its thinking. This idea that if you support free speech you're a racist is dangerous as racial minorities need free speech the most. Personally, I've backtracked to 2000's internet rules. I say whatever the fuck I want here regardless of "new" internet's rules. Remember. You yourself called overweight women orcas and whales. You can claim to be better or have grown, but that's just the hypocrisy I can't stand. "We used to say this when we were younger so we are just going to disable your ability to say it because we were wrong?" It's just a power play and a method to force everyone in to your own ruleset so you can control culture and call anyone and everyone that goes against it your enemies.

Did you guys skip civics class? The first amendment has nothing to do with non government entities, and certainly not twitter. If you say something that violates their TOS, you can get banned. If you say something at work that violates your employer's HR rules, you can get fired. This has nothing to do with the first amendment, and certainly nothing to do with "censorship."

I said all types of wild shit on GAF, and got all types of bans for violating the TOS. But you know what I avoided, so I didn't take easy permabans? Calling people the f-word or r-word. Because those were auto perms. I say that as someone who literally got banned more than anyone GAF's history. Not to mention getting permabanned from resetera for making a "house in Virginia" AIDS reference, in relation to Milo Yiannopoulos's unsafe sex practices.  :doge

And I will repeat my stance on the underlining current of this. There's an army of Nazis and right wing losers who want nothing more than to use slurs, make racial IQ arguments, etc. And just as those people were largely removed from bigger forums 20 years ago, they're being removed from bigger social media outlets. I'm 100% fine with this, and it makes sense from Twitter's perspective. I'm very curious to see how the Elon Musk thing plays out and I'm surprised no one has asked him the obvious question: would Kanye have been banned from Elon's upcoming Twitter for those anti-Jewish tweets? Or is that the type of bullshit Elon plans on allowing? And what will advertisers think about that.
 :hitler

I never mentioned anything about the first amendment. To me free speech is an inalienable right. After all, Twitter, although an American company is a global brand and the entire world does not have the first amendment. Therefore, Twitter and their use of free speech has nothing to do with the first amendment and everything to do with my personal viewpoint on the protections of free speech.

My problem is that the left, or more specifically corporations with that tend to push left agendas, tend to change and readily alter what is viewed as correct and incorrect speech. It is constantly changing. Regardless of the TOS, everyone uses these platforms. They are used by more than Nazis or literal ISIS recruiters. The tweet Benji posted shows you can't call someone fat on a social media platform. This shows how the left uses a war on words to control and silence what they view is wrong. I find this to be evil and encourages a very dangerous road.

Liberals such as yourself justify it because there's legitimate hateful people out there that want to take advantage of it. And hey, you're right. And I also don't give a shit. Liberty is more important than keep someone's feelings safe because they called a cheeseburger or fat or now, a groomer. The social media companies have been utterly wrong on what is correct or not correct, and have outright censored media outlets on what they can and cannot report despite the fact that years later these reports are confirmed by the very sources that denied them. Zero. Consequences. So yes, why in the hell should anyone with a brain support social media companies who control what we can say and do online? These are more than niche gamer forums, PD. Culture is centered around the internet a lot these days.

I stand by the following quote:

Quote
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Liberals can claim they are keeping us safe. Everyone else correctly sees them as flirting with fascism while calling their opponents just that.

The whole "it's a private company" thing is so absent mindedly lazy and even worse, tunnel visioned in its thinking. To think that liberals have become corporate knob slobberers. The commies were right about those fucks.

Censorship in any form is a dark road.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2022, 11:19:43 PM by Himu »
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1515 on: October 22, 2022, 11:14:06 PM »
Did you guys skip civics class? The first amendment has nothing to do with non government entities, and certainly not twitter. If you say something that violates their TOS, you can get banned. If you say something at work that violates your employer's HR rules, you can get fired. This has nothing to do with the first amendment, and certainly nothing to do with "censorship."
Since I'm apparently getting roped into this through Himu when I was only responding to one aspect of what you said, I'm going to note that free speech is far more than the specifics of the law, it requires the perpetuation of a culture. I have absolutely zero problems with Twitter or anyone else being legally correct in employing their own free speech rights to control their own platform as there is no alternative. I can still advocate for a broader view on their platform and elsewhere, you all probably have long been tired of me doing this going back to when I came onto GAF but I had before then the same thing elsewhere since I came upon the internet. My time as a janny and admin on forums with thousands of active users arguably only made me more determined about this rather than convince me that we simply need the right people or AI's in charge.

Learning about the First Amendment made this even more clear to me, the language of the First Amendment has never changed, yet the Supreme Court once read it to mean you could be jailed for protesting a war or slavery and that you could be forced at gunpoint to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Even today when we have one of the most free speech Supreme Courts ever since there's seemingly eight votes to maintain all the precedent save Citizens United, we still have Alito who thinks you should be thrown in prison for lying about being in the military or protesting in the same city as a soldier's funeral. We also have the Fifth Circuit feeder court who interprets the First Amendment to mean you must publish anyone who wants to use your property to speak without recourse.

I wasn't referring to you, I'm sure you took your civics classes and passed them back in the 70s.

I'm referring to this weird argument being made by people of Himu's inclinations, that (for instance) Kanye's first amendment rights have been violated. By Twitter, IG, and now the Superthug himself, Noriega, when the Drink Champs episode was removed from youtube.
 :mindblown

I do not support anything Kanye has done nor said. But I also think he say whatever the fuck he wants. You are using extreme examples to make a point. I laid my case clear and cut. Twitter censors more than right wingers.
IYKYK

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1516 on: October 22, 2022, 11:21:24 PM »
Liberals can claim they are keeping us safe. Everyone else correctly sees them as flirting with fascism while calling their opponents just that.

Uncle

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1517 on: October 22, 2022, 11:29:51 PM »
To extrapolate the short sightedness of PD's own argument:

He presumes that you must follow Twitter TOS. But Saudi Arabia has stock in Twitter. What if you're an Arab that makes tweets talking shit of the regime?

"PRINCE MBS IS A F.AGGOT AND SUCKS COCK, THAT'S WHY HE KEEPS HIS WIFE SECRET LIKE THE FILTHY BEDOIN CUNT HE IS. CUM GOBBLER!"

Saudi Arabia doesn't like that not one bit. They use their power and stock to censor the person because Twitter is a private company and execute them.

Sure. On paper "follow the TOS" is a good rule, but Twitter is also a public platform.

Liberals and corporations are fascist and dictator enablers. Even now while Trump is banned, there's actual ISIS members on Twitter right fucking now. It's the hypocrisy that I cannot stand.

It's interesting that the same people saying it's okay to limit speech because the TOS of social media corporations worth billions but ride for Britney Gardner, a dumb ass that got caught with weed in Russia and think she should go free.

I respect platforms like old Reddit, where they praised free speeches universality regardless of country borders, far more.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2022, 11:34:09 PM by Himu »
IYKYK

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1518 on: October 22, 2022, 11:33:38 PM »
Liberals and corporations are fascist and dictator enablers. Even now while Trump is banned, there's actual ISIS members on Twitter right fucking now. It's the hypocrisy that I cannot stand.

yes but are they following the rules? should we ban people due to off-site activities like beheading infidels, even if they haven't done anything to break the TOS?

they can quietly use arcane dogwhistles in their moonspeak language to activate sleeper agents globally, as long as the code phrase isn't "fat bitches need to put down the fork"

:idont
Uncle

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1519 on: October 22, 2022, 11:36:29 PM »
Did you guys skip civics class? The first amendment has nothing to do with non government entities, and certainly not twitter. If you say something that violates their TOS, you can get banned. If you say something at work that violates your employer's HR rules, you can get fired. This has nothing to do with the first amendment, and certainly nothing to do with "censorship."
Since I'm apparently getting roped into this through Himu when I was only responding to one aspect of what you said, I'm going to note that free speech is far more than the specifics of the law, it requires the perpetuation of a culture. I have absolutely zero problems with Twitter or anyone else being legally correct in employing their own free speech rights to control their own platform as there is no alternative. I can still advocate for a broader view on their platform and elsewhere, you all probably have long been tired of me doing this going back to when I came onto GAF but I had before then the same thing elsewhere since I came upon the internet. My time as a janny and admin on forums with thousands of active users arguably only made me more determined about this rather than convince me that we simply need the right people or AI's in charge.

Learning about the First Amendment made this even more clear to me, the language of the First Amendment has never changed, yet the Supreme Court once read it to mean you could be jailed for protesting a war or slavery and that you could be forced at gunpoint to say the Pledge of Allegiance. Even today when we have one of the most free speech Supreme Courts ever since there's seemingly eight votes to maintain all the precedent save Citizens United, we still have Alito who thinks you should be thrown in prison for lying about being in the military or protesting in the same city as a soldier's funeral. We also have the Fifth Circuit feeder court who interprets the First Amendment to mean you must publish anyone who wants to use your property to speak without recourse.

I wasn't referring to you, I'm sure you took your civics classes and passed them back in the 70s.

I'm referring to this weird argument being made by people of Himu's inclinations, that (for instance) Kanye's first amendment rights have been violated. By Twitter, IG, and now the Superthug himself, Noriega, when the Drink Champs episode was removed from youtube.
 :mindblown

I do not support anything Kanye has done nor said. But I also think he say whatever the fuck he wants. You are using extreme examples to make a point. I laid my case clear and cut. Twitter censors more than right wingers.
How is it an extreme example, it's arguably the biggest case to cite right now. And nearly the entire right wing realm was riding for Kanye's "right" to say whatever he wants as if it was a first amendment case (it's not). Twitter doesn't allow hate speech and shitting on Jews meets that criteria.

I've got zero issue with Twitter's TOS but then again I'm not a right wing creep or Nazi. It's not censorship. In order to use their platform you've got to adhere to some basic rules, and a major one essentially boils down to "chill out on denigrating marginalized groups." I realize that's a bridge too far for many on the right, hence the anger.

Even Parlor would have banned or suspended Kanye for those type of comments. Speaking of which, will Kanye remove that site's current TOS now that he's (allegedly) the new owner? If so, Parlor goes back to square one: getting removed from the app store.  :lol
010

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1520 on: October 22, 2022, 11:39:26 PM »
I never mentioned anything about the first amendment. To me free speech is an inalienable right. After all, Twitter, although an American company is a global brand and the entire world does not have the first amendment. Therefore, Twitter and their use of free speech has nothing to do with the first amendment and everything to do with my personal viewpoint on the protections of free speech.
Twitter, being an American company, only has to follow American law. Congress unanimously during Obama passed a law that Americans do not have to listen to courts in other countries if those courts enact anything more stringent than American First Amendment protections. The EU has something similar to Section 230, but only Section 230 is broad enough and interpreted to near bulletproof status and that's why those companies want to be here not anywhere else.

The social media companies have been utterly wrong on what is correct or not correct, and have outright censored media outlets on what they can and cannot report despite the fact that years later these reports are confirmed by the very sources that denied them. Zero. Consequences.

...

The whole "it's a private company" thing is so absent mindedly lazy and even worse, tunnel visioned in its thinking. To think that liberals have become corporate knob slobberers. The commies were right about those fucks.

Censorship in any form is a dark road.
It's fine to argue against the culture of this, I myself do, but you're using the language of people who want the government to censor instead. I infinitely trust Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk to err on the side of free speech more even if imperfectly than I ever would the state. Even Twitter's culture change post-Dorsey hasn't been too bad, I actually have no idea what the Blue Checks fear about Musk. They were all enjoying themselves on the Twitter he wants back. Most Twitter bannings trigger their automated system, the famous bans have never been "censorship" of ideas but behavior. Trump was obstinately banned for promoting federal crimes (I think this is shaky, Facebook has admitted it's only a temp ban and Twitter has also indicated they may lift the ban in the future) and Alex Jones was banned because he refused to listen when they told him to stop harassing specific people. There are tens of millions of conservative accounts on Twitter posting just fine, never getting banned except occasionally when they trip the system something that happens just as often (maybe more from what I've seen) from lefties posting their murder fantasies and hate screeds thinking these can't be easily reported even if they avoid the system. Recently they've kept trying to ban libsoftiktok who gets it reversed because the reports are bad faith and don't actually fit violations of the TOS. I could easily get hundreds of left Twitter accounts banned just out of spite to prove a point because I actually have read the TOS and know how to write a report explaining how their many many tweets would fit a pattern.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1521 on: October 22, 2022, 11:40:19 PM »
After 2016 Liberals lost their fucking shit and dropped any modicum of rationality. Trump broke their brains and now they support anything and everything that limits speech or any views they deem déclassé. They can't take it - the fact that they lost, fairly I may add, to Donald Trump. Cue the misinformation campaigns, and Democracy Dying In Darkness, and you can't say that all because they cannot accept the failure of losing to a fast food addict with a spray on tan.
IYKYK

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1522 on: October 22, 2022, 11:42:57 PM »
I've got zero issue with Twitter's TOS but then again I'm not a right wing creep or Nazi. It's not censorship. In order to use their platform you've got to adhere to some basic rules, and a major one essentially boils down to "chill out on denigrating marginalized groups."

is it genuinely codified that it's ok to denigrate non-marginalized groups? that's kind of fucked

you can recognize that it's their right to run their platform any way they like while also advocating for more consistent rules, or looser rules, and none of that has to involve US law or the first amendment at all, it can just be based on a personal value for free speech

it's probably even better to let people hang themselves publicly and show everyone who they really are, than to train them how to skirt around carefully and have plausible deniability
Uncle

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1523 on: October 22, 2022, 11:49:11 PM »
I could easily get hundreds of left Twitter accounts banned just out of spite to prove a point because I actually have read the TOS and know how to write a report explaining how their many many tweets would fit a pattern.

I'm not rich but I've got a small nest egg, name your price
Uncle

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1524 on: October 22, 2022, 11:50:25 PM »
I think the biggest question here is how much power should one corporation wield on platforms that we all use?

According to liberals, all of it.

Where is the line?

I'm sorry, but after seeing the line constantly change I am at this point a free speech absolutist. Liberals continually show their weakness. They wah, beat their chests, and point fingers but at the end of the day who was that wanted to censor the likes of Ben Shapiro at college campuses rather than torching his ass? Liberals and progressives. And now ten years later, because they were unable to defeat them with words they aim to censor what they can say, except now it's not what they can say but what all of us can say. If progressives had more cojones maybe they wouldn't have a supposed far right growth to begin with? It's always the same thing with them. Pretend they're not saying it rather beating them down. Pretend the problem will go away and just STOP SAYING THAT!!!!

LMFAO

Pathetic corporate cum guzzlers trying to control behavior.



IYKYK

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1525 on: October 22, 2022, 11:50:46 PM »
I've got zero issue with Twitter's TOS but then again I'm not a right wing creep or Nazi. It's not censorship. In order to use their platform you've got to adhere to some basic rules, and a major one essentially boils down to "chill out on denigrating marginalized groups."

is it genuinely codified that it's ok to denigrate non-marginalized groups? that's kind of fucked
Yes, Twitter has written their TOS/guidelines so it matches the language of "protected classes" in civil rights law rather than targeted denigration of a personal characteristic. It's one reasonable complaint from cishet white males (and increasingly white women) that they can't report these because Twitter rejects them by default as they are not a protected class.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1526 on: October 22, 2022, 11:51:33 PM »
To extrapolate the short sightedness of PD's own argument:

He presumes that you must follow Twitter TOS. But Saudi Arabia has stock in Twitter. What if you're an Arab that makes tweets talking shit of the regime?

"PRINCE MBS IS A F.AGGOT AND SUCKS COCK, THAT'S WHY HE KEEPS HIS WIFE SECRET LIKE THE FILTHY BEDOIN CUNT HE IS. CUM GOBBLER!"

Saudi Arabia doesn't like that not one bit. They use their power and stock to censor the person because Twitter is a private company and execute them.

Sure. On paper "follow the TOS" is a good rule, but Twitter is also a public platform.

Liberals and corporations are fascist and dictator enablers. Even now while Trump is banned, there's actual ISIS members on Twitter right fucking now. It's the hypocrisy that I cannot stand.

It's interesting that the same people saying it's okay to limit speech because the TOS of social media corporations worth billions but ride for Britney Gardner, a dumb ass that got caught with weed in Russia and think she should go free.

I respect platforms like old Reddit, where they praised free speeches universality regardless of country borders, far more.

What the fuck are you even talking about. A woman was just arrested in Saudi Arabia for making tweets that ran afoul of their government. That's a separate issue than Twitter banning/suspending someone for using the f-word.

Speaking of which
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2022/08/09/ex-twitter-employee-convicted-of-sending-private-data-to-saudi-government/?sh=16ee0d2fd062

Twitter has no control over how governments will react to tweets from users who live in countries that actually stifle or ban free speech (you know, unlike the US). Sharing sensitive data with authoritarian governments in order to help them arrest users would be bad. Thankfully that's not something that Twitter officially does. So again, what are you talking about.

Trump was banned for clearly violating the TOS multiple times, culminating in him orchestrating a violent riot. Twitter bans (literally) hundreds of thousands of ISIS accounts yearly.

"Public platform" lol, who is the conservative here again. It's a private website/app a lot of people use. Follow the rules and you'll be fine. Don't follow them and you get banned. That's how websites/app operate.
010

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1527 on: October 22, 2022, 11:52:36 PM »
I think the biggest question here is how much power should one corporation wield on platforms that we all use?
Twitter owns Twitter.

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1528 on: October 22, 2022, 11:54:03 PM »
I think the biggest question here is how much power should one corporation wield on platforms that we all use?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/05/05/10-facts-about-americans-and-twitter/

Quote
Around one-in-five U.S. adults (23%) say they use Twitter.

Quote
A minority of Twitter users produce the vast majority of tweets. Among U.S. adults who use Twitter, the top 25% of users by tweet volume produce 97% of all tweets, while the bottom 75% of users produce just 3%, according to an analysis conducted over a three-month period in 2021.

thus 6% of the population are responsible for 97% of all tweets
Uncle

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1529 on: October 22, 2022, 11:55:33 PM »
I think the biggest question here is how much power should one corporation wield on platforms that we all use?

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/05/05/10-facts-about-americans-and-twitter/

Quote
Around one-in-five U.S. adults (23%) say they use Twitter.

Quote
A minority of Twitter users produce the vast majority of tweets. Among U.S. adults who use Twitter, the top 25% of users by tweet volume produce 97% of all tweets, while the bottom 75% of users produce just 3%, according to an analysis conducted over a three-month period in 2021.

thus 6% of the population are responsible for 97% of all tweets

My ire isn't just Twitter. Facebook jail is just as much a thing.
IYKYK

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1530 on: October 22, 2022, 11:56:55 PM »
I think the biggest question here is how much power should one corporation wield on platforms that we all use?
Twitter owns Twitter.

No Benji, it needs to be taken over by the government in order to ensure fair use for all Americans. This is the conservative position.  :doge
010

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1531 on: October 22, 2022, 11:58:31 PM »
The GOVERNMENT?!

I trust them even less than corporations.

Keep trying to pigeon hole me.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1532 on: October 23, 2022, 12:05:09 AM »
I never mentioned anything about the first amendment. To me free speech is an inalienable right. After all, Twitter, although an American company is a global brand and the entire world does not have the first amendment. Therefore, Twitter and their use of free speech has nothing to do with the first amendment and everything to do with my personal viewpoint on the protections of free speech.
Twitter, being an American company, only has to follow American law. Congress unanimously during Obama passed a law that Americans do not have to listen to courts in other countries if those courts enact anything more stringent than American First Amendment protections. The EU has something similar to Section 230, but only Section 230 is broad enough and interpreted to near bulletproof status and that's why those companies want to be here not anywhere else.

The social media companies have been utterly wrong on what is correct or not correct, and have outright censored media outlets on what they can and cannot report despite the fact that years later these reports are confirmed by the very sources that denied them. Zero. Consequences.

...

The whole "it's a private company" thing is so absent mindedly lazy and even worse, tunnel visioned in its thinking. To think that liberals have become corporate knob slobberers. The commies were right about those fucks.

Censorship in any form is a dark road.
It's fine to argue against the culture of this, I myself do, but you're using the language of people who want the government to censor instead. I infinitely trust Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk to err on the side of free speech more even if imperfectly than I ever would the state. Even Twitter's culture change post-Dorsey hasn't been too bad, I actually have no idea what the Blue Checks fear about Musk. They were all enjoying themselves on the Twitter he wants back. Most Twitter bannings trigger their automated system, the famous bans have never been "censorship" of ideas but behavior. Trump was obstinately banned for promoting federal crimes (I think this is shaky, Facebook has admitted it's only a temp ban and Twitter has also indicated they may lift the ban in the future) and Alex Jones was banned because he refused to listen when they told him to stop harassing specific people. There are tens of millions of conservative accounts on Twitter posting just fine, never getting banned except occasionally when they trip the system something that happens just as often (maybe more from what I've seen) from lefties posting their murder fantasies and hate screeds thinking these can't be easily reported even if they avoid the system. Recently they've kept trying to ban libsoftiktok who gets it reversed because the reports are bad faith and don't actually fit violations of the TOS. I could easily get hundreds of left Twitter accounts banned just out of spite to prove a point because I actually have read the TOS and know how to write a report explaining how their many many tweets would fit a pattern.

Hm, that's fair. I don't report anyone. Say whatever the fuck you want. So the lopsidedness is a culture difference between the lefties attempt to censor and the righties (and adjacent) just not giving a fuck about reporting?
IYKYK

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1533 on: October 23, 2022, 12:20:08 AM »
Hm, that's fair. I don't report anyone. Say whatever the fuck you want. So the lopsidedness is a culture difference between the lefties attempt to censor and the righties (and adjacent) just not giving a fuck about reporting?
Twitter leans heavily to the "left", there's been similar surveys to what Uncle posted that all confirm this. The Democrats on there are more to the left than the party base, many of the conservatives are more socially liberal/libertarian and/or conversely oppose things like free trade, etc. The most active users lean even more to the left than the Twitter population as a whole and they're responsible for an overwhelming amount of the activity. This alone would give them more dominance on the platform. I do think there has been a cultural thing, large sections of Twitter openly talk and brag about how many people they block and how they'll block anyone who says something they dislike and use block lists with many thousands of users they've never heard of. There are "fact checkers" on there notorious for blocking anyone who points out they're wrong and then blocking anyone who likes or follows the person who pointed out they were wrong. Tons of people talk about blocking people for "their safety" and it almost always means they said something stupid that got attention. I have to conclude these types of people are more likely to report things assuming that anything they dislike is a death threat because they often also whine about how Twitter ignores their constant reports. Usually I see conservative Twitter more apt to respond directly. Black Twitter similarly seems to respond rather than report or block and there are other similar subcultures in which public discussion is actually valued. I'm not sure if it's a "leftie" thing, though they do seem to more likely subscribe to Repressive Tolerance in my opinion, it may just be a socialcultural thing in their circles with no political or theoretical basis to it.

Blue Checks are doubly protected because they have special views that allow them to only see replies from other Blue Checks and people they follow. For "their safety" they can literally not ever see replies from the masses. Lots of non-Blue Checks complain that they don't have access to this and it makes them unsafe on Twitter because their publicly posted (not privately, which Twitter allows) stupidity gets challenged and blocking everyone else preemptively is an obvious non-starter if you want to accrue followers.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2022, 12:24:58 AM by benjipwns »

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1534 on: October 23, 2022, 12:22:21 AM »
Culturally, Benji, when did liberals shift from corporate critics to corporation lovers? Or were they always like this and I'm conflating liberal with progressive? Sometimes it's easy to get them mixed up so I apologize if I am. Of course there's Clintonian politics in the mix too.

Socialists are absolutely right about liberals and their use of capitalism for their interests. At least conservatives don't hide who they are. I disagree with the socialist ideology but they seem to be absolutely correct on liberals.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2022, 12:27:33 AM by Himu »
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1535 on: October 23, 2022, 12:31:11 AM »
I googled this topic and found this socialist reddit. Damn, I disagree with socialist politics because of my anti-collectivism streak but I at least respect socialists. I can't respect liberals.

Quote
When corporations adopt a liberal aesthetic, liberals like to point to that as evidence that their ideology is improving the world. The reality is that the liberals are simply taking control of the fascistic corporations, and while they may “talk the talk”, they still are not ethical.

Quote
One of the most depressing things about modern politics is how easy it is to co-opt genuinely progressive (in the economic sense) movements via divide and conquer.
"Don't demonize the 1%! Some of us are probably lesbians of color!"

Quote
There will already be a chorus of people rightfully noting that liberals were never against corporations. However, if you're looking for a theory as to why American "liberals", particularly the social justice kind, shifted attitudes from the 90s to now on corporations comes from the conflict-based view of sociology that their social justice critique was predicated on.

When the left was perceived to be on the losing end of the culture wars, corporations were seen as indulging in the populist, regressive taste of the masses (because admittedly they were and always will). Social justice groups saw corporations, particularly media corporations, as dangerous defenders and curators of the white male supra-culture. The social justice critiques of these times then were not against corporations and centralized power in principle as much as they were against the white male coded nature of them. Yes, these same critics would allude to anti-capitalist critiques, but with the primary fixation being the role of capitalism in supporting white, male supremacy.

Two things happened though. First, corporations realized there is profit to be made from the disposable income and woke views of the next generation of yuppies. Second, the woke realized that the risk averse nature of corporate entities and the imperative under modern capitalism to reach the widest audience possible in pursuit of ever smaller profit margins meant corporations, as well as those NGOs that had been subsumed by corporatization (e.g. universities), could be influenced by moral panic and pressure campaigns. There are a host of parallel trends that explain why this former change was so successful that would be a longer post.

These two trends resulted in corporations' rational self-interest for profit becoming married with becoming curators of the new cultural status quo: woke-ism. For those that opposed corporations because of their white male centered nature, and not out of a principled rejection of centralized power, there was no longer a reason for opposition. Companies could churn out safe inclusion of new identities and allusions to progressive cultural ideas, while not having to actually relinquish their power. Additionally, as the mess that is the American electoral system continued to erode people's belief in voting and legislation as the means for civil right protection, companies were seen as a new fifth estate for protecting the new status quo against reactionary forces. It was the actions of private companies we had to suddenly rely on for trying push Georgia and others to abandon trans bathroom bills.

tl;dr When it was transgressive to be progressive, the line toe-ing of corporation was regressive. Now that its transgressive to be something other than woke, the line toe-ing of corporations is useful to maintaining the new hegemony.

https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/comments/uck2tr/when_did_liberals_become_procorporation/

I disagree with their politics but I feel like I could go and hang out and chat with a socialist. Libs tho  :kobeyuck :gurl
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1536 on: October 23, 2022, 12:50:09 AM »
IYKYK

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1537 on: October 23, 2022, 12:52:31 AM »
I think it has to do with many people who self-proclaim for being on the left actually just mean they support the Democrats. And then it's a team sport which means it's about winning. That's why we have the endless content of them being hypocrites, they didn't come to their positions though reasoning they came to their positions by following a "winning" crowd. I admittingly love pointing out that people who started putting ACAB in the profiles and talking about hating cops around 2020 all seem to love a super punitive state that endlessly harasses its citizens and threatens to jail or kill them for disobeying without any care for their legal rights, they just don't like it when it happens to people they think are on their side. Then it's a serious social problem that needs to be addressed now through something revolutionary without evaluating whether it's a good idea. They didn't become ACAB because they suddenly converted to non-violence or true beliefs about the militarization of the police or fair trials with constitutional rights respected or whatever, they mostly just came to identify the police as an opponent. If the cops "win" then their side "loses" and this includes anyone they decide is on the side of the cops like Kyle Rittenhouse. And what do you do to enemies and those who help your enemies in anyway? Use the force of the state to crush them relentlessly, it's what they'd do after all! We're at war, play it tactical.

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1538 on: October 23, 2022, 12:58:30 AM »
If the cops "win" then their side "loses" and this includes anyone they decide is on the side of the cops like Kyle Rittenhouse.

and inherent in that same decay is that the other "team" will notice the demonization of Rittenhouse and rush to recruit him and get him on the speaking circuit so that their side can win

the other side says see, he's a right wing grifter, he was planning on doing this all along, when he was just a fucking nobody who ended up as the latest game ball like so many others
Uncle

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1539 on: October 23, 2022, 01:04:56 AM »
"We keep establishing rules with loopholes almost perfectly written for bad faith sociopaths yet they keep getting exploited by malicious actors for their personal gain! This is why we need more of those rules, tougher enforcement and harsher penalties! Especially against traitors who undermine things!" :social

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1540 on: October 23, 2022, 01:10:23 AM »
I think it has to do with many people who self-proclaim for being on the left actually just mean they support the Democrats. And then it's a team sport which means it's about winning. That's why we have the endless content of them being hypocrites, they didn't come to their positions though reasoning they came to their positions by following a "winning" crowd. I admittingly love pointing out that people who started putting ACAB in the profiles and talking about hating cops around 2020 all seem to love a super punitive state that endlessly harasses its citizens and threatens to jail or kill them for disobeying without any care for their legal rights, they just don't like it when it happens to people they think are on their side. Then it's a serious social problem that needs to be addressed now through something revolutionary without evaluating whether it's a good idea. They didn't become ACAB because they suddenly converted to non-violence or true beliefs about the militarization of the police or fair trials with constitutional rights respected or whatever, they mostly just came to identify the police as an opponent. If the cops "win" then their side "loses" and this includes anyone they decide is on the side of the cops like Kyle Rittenhouse. And what do you do to enemies and those who help your enemies in anyway? Use the force of the state to crush them relentlessly, it's what they'd do after all! We're at war, play it tactical.
I'd disagree on ACAB there. We're talking about a few separate groups. On one hand you have a group of anarchists and Marxists who oppose the capitalist state in of itself as much as they oppose its police. On one hand you've got black activists who aren't full blown Marxists but are fully invested in Defund The Police ideals on government budget priorities. Then you have liberals, many of them who are white, who don't really agree with any of this shit but throw it in the twitter bio. Because the worst thing for them is not being in tune with whatever the latest movement is. These are the same people who call the police on homeless people in San Francisco.

The amount of people actively dedicated to ACAB and/or Defund movements is pretty small. They're pretty loud on twitter, of course.
010

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1541 on: October 23, 2022, 01:17:49 AM »
The Rittenhouse thing was pathetic. All this talk of dude being NAZI!!!!! :stop and I watched the video and he was attacked by a maniac and physically assaulted with a skateboard. Then once dude pulled his gun on him for no reason and found out. All the hubbub to rush to call this kid some Nazi. Hopefully he puts CNN and other outlets out of business.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1542 on: October 23, 2022, 01:20:37 AM »
If the cops "win" then their side "loses" and this includes anyone they decide is on the side of the cops like Kyle Rittenhouse.

and inherent in that same decay is that the other "team" will notice the demonization of Rittenhouse and rush to recruit him and get him on the speaking circuit so that their side can win

the other side says see, he's a right wing grifter, he was planning on doing this all along, when he was just a fucking nobody who ended up as the latest game ball like so many others

This is why the best option is for Democratic president/Republican congress and Democratic senate or Republican president with a democratic Congress and Republican Senate. Both sides are about their "sides" and not America. Force the two cunts to pass good legislation and not their stupid fucking bullshit.
 
Both parties are the largely the same except for their own brand of horseshit. Guns are to the Democrats what abortions are to Republicans for instance and both are re re about their particular issue. Saw some of the Florida debate and the dumb dumb Dem said Rubio isn't protecting floridans because of open gun laws and then went on to say he's strict on abortion. Both suck shit.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2022, 01:33:36 AM by Himu »
IYKYK

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1543 on: October 23, 2022, 01:22:26 AM »
The amount of people actively dedicated to ACAB and/or Defund movements is pretty small. They're pretty loud on twitter, of course.
Those aren't the people I'm talking about, they're often quite good on these things even if I disagree on some solutions and they generally discovered the institutional problems with the police before 2020. Some of the best testimonies about the problems during the 2020 movement were from people who started closer to events like Ferguson and studied and did activism already and realized how wrong it was all going becoming some kind of anti-Trump social trend. Almost never saw them in the mass media and they're often attacked by ACAB persona types for not demanding radical changes immediately on Twitter while doing nothing else.

Twitter especially seems to promote taking the most extreme position in any debate to show you're the most radical as winning a debate, so you can just scream at criminal justice reformers about how they don't want to immediately abolish the police and your progressive bonafides are cemented even if you're spending the rest of your time posting about how the guilty shouldn't be allowed lawyers or how refusing to testify should make you automatically guilty or how the police should have the right to inspect anything they want or how we should bring back the death penalty for every crime or...

Hopefully he puts CNN and other outlets out of business.
Rittenhouse is highly unlikely to prevail in those cases. I would advise him to forget trying to be some kind of conservative star by attacking the free speech of people they don't like and just go to college like he intended.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2022, 01:43:51 AM by benjipwns »

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1544 on: October 23, 2022, 10:46:26 AM »
After 2016 Liberals lost their fucking shit and dropped any modicum of rationality. Trump broke their brains and now they support anything and everything that limits speech or any views they deem déclassé. They can't take it - the fact that they lost, fairly I may add, to Donald Trump. Cue the misinformation campaigns, and Democracy Dying In Darkness, and you can't say that all because they cannot accept the failure of losing to a fast food addict with a spray on tan.
It started way before 2016. Trump just picked up the shattered pieces of the Tea Party, various libertarian movements, people who voted for 'change' and got none and other fringe groups.

The 'birth' of the modern left in the west is probably Occupy Wall Street following the big anti-war protests. When the anti war protests didn't achieve anything the left mostly retreated from traditional politics and poured more money and effort into NGO's and activism. When the big "occupy wall street" day came they realized that the government could not meet their demands because they had very few ideas beyond concepts like inclusivity and equality. At the same time corporations were drinking the 'purpose' kool Aid. The idea that your business does not just exist to make money but should have higher aims thus they donated heavily to these NGO's and activist groups to show that they were doing 'the right thing'. The NGO's obviously hired corporate consultants to expand and run their operation. For NGO's the purpose was no longer to achieve their aims but to grow their influence and keep their operation running.

By the time the 'left' or rather centrists returned to power they realized that government resources were depleted by austerity, privatization, brain drains and cuts. At the same time they needed more and more help from outside corporate consultants to turn political activism into a product people could consume. While corporations turned to those same consulants to give brands 'purpose'. It was inevitable that the two sides would meet and government would decide to use the corporations to achieve their aims as opposed to rebuilding the depleted public sector (as Obama originally intended). The NGO's set the goals, the government creates the policies to support those goals and the corporations create the solutions and implement the policies.

This system only works if the NGO stays funded, the politician can pass legislation (although they're starting to circumvent this by public pressure fueled by the activist press) and the corporations are able to provide and implement the solutions.
The corporations are the weakest link because they can deal with the other side as well and they can drop or change 'purpose' with little to no backlash after all they own the press. Not to mention the right will protest against the government and the NGO's (George Soros, Bill Gates, GreenPeace etc.) while the left will protest against the right wing politicians. Neither will target the corporations.

The goal of the left is to transform the corporations in line with their values, much as they had done with universities and they are pretty succesful in doing so.
On the right the idea is that the NGO's have abandoned small donations and grass roots activism for corporate donations and government subsidies (which is 100% true). So Flynn, Bannon and others are creating right wing grass roots movements so the NGO's lose their public support. Once Trump, DeSantis or someone else turns the screws on the likes of George Soros and Bill Gates their public support will have evaporated.
 
« Last Edit: October 23, 2022, 10:55:57 AM by Nintex »
🤴

HaughtyFrank

  • Haughty and a little naughty
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1545 on: October 23, 2022, 11:12:46 AM »
The great delivery war just keeps going :lol

https://twitter.com/flieldy/status/1583873886281936896

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1546 on: October 23, 2022, 12:26:11 PM »
well maybe I'll just die then  :hmph
Uncle

Pissy F Benny

  • Is down with the sickness
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1547 on: October 23, 2022, 12:35:18 PM »
what are the odds that whatever disabilities "ash" has are made up or wildly exaggerated?
(ice)

Uncle

  • Have You Ever
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1548 on: October 23, 2022, 12:59:31 PM »
what are the odds that whatever disabilities "ash" has are made up or wildly exaggerated?

https://linktr.ee/Ashl337_

FTM with onlyfans and a second NSFW twitter account
Uncle

Pissy F Benny

  • Is down with the sickness
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1549 on: October 23, 2022, 01:00:45 PM »
the most disabled :salute
(ice)

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1551 on: October 23, 2022, 10:31:52 PM »
010

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1552 on: October 23, 2022, 10:40:44 PM »
https://twitter.com/285Slim/status/1584317781369327616
So Slim Corleone is saying that anybody who earns one penny less than you should just fuck off and die? :social


benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member

Polident Hive

  • Member
Re: The Culture War Thread up
« Reply #1555 on: October 24, 2022, 08:20:36 PM »
Ye’s getting dropped from all sorts of brands while doubling down on podcasts. Seeing the time stamps for his latest appearance, well…

Quote
OUTLINE:
0:00 - Introduction
0:11 - Engineering
11:05 - Kim Kardashian
12:51 - Sex and the future of humanity
22:57 - Happiness
25:33 - The Holocaust
1:14:43 - Fashion

1:30:15 - 2024 US election
1:34:55 - Humor
1:37:04 - Media and antisemitism
1:49:07 - Trusting people
1:52:21 - Accountability
2:02:20 - Legacy
2:03:12 - Advice for young people
2:16:13 - Regret

 :wut

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1556 on: October 24, 2022, 08:29:18 PM »
That last segment should be where someone reads him back all the craziest things he said in the first two hours.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1557 on: October 24, 2022, 09:09:53 PM »

HaughtyFrank

  • Haughty and a little naughty
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread up
« Reply #1558 on: October 24, 2022, 10:24:27 PM »
Ye’s getting dropped from all sorts of brands while doubling down on podcasts. Seeing the time stamps for his latest appearance, well…

Quote
OUTLINE:
0:00 - Introduction
0:11 - Engineering
11:05 - Kim Kardashian
12:51 - Sex and the future of humanity
22:57 - Happiness
25:33 - The Holocaust
1:14:43 - Fashion

1:30:15 - 2024 US election
1:34:55 - Humor
1:37:04 - Media and antisemitism
1:49:07 - Trusting people
1:52:21 - Accountability
2:02:20 - Legacy
2:03:12 - Advice for young people
2:16:13 - Regret

 :wut

Jeez

https://twitter.com/barubin/status/1584683208519856128

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Culture War Thread
« Reply #1559 on: October 24, 2022, 11:40:27 PM »


 :dead