|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On February 03 2022 13:05 Jockmcplop wrote:
A while ago the idea that covid came from a lab was seen as the worst kind of racist covid misinformation, peddled only by conspiracy theorists and was too dangerous for people to believe.
That view was mostly a result of reflexive opposition to everything trump says, but it's a good example if the problem with suppressing "misinformation." Common sense tells us that it was always plausible there was a lab leak, given that there's a lab that studies coronaviruses in the very place where the virus originated.
|
On February 03 2022 11:27 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 11:17 gobbledydook wrote:
Joe Rogan is definitely an asshole but you know you aren't forced to listen to him right? Just don't listen to him if you are offended. Im sure he does not, but do you think Rogan has influence on people especially young men? Could you see what people eould not want him to spread lies, hate and so on? There needs to be clear lines in the sand about what is am opinion and what id fact and have that clearly communicated to auidences. Hopefully he changes this it could be powerful if he does. If not the protests from the artists will happen people will speak with their wallets amf he will no lonher be worth the 100 million. But he will certainly still have the freedom of speech to say what he wants and record it. What people dont have is freedom of reach.
It should surely be allowed to spew lies. If it was cancel worthy to be spewing hate and lies Congress would be empty already.
|
On February 03 2022 15:17 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 06:28 brian wrote:
those aren’t appreciably different from where i’m sitting. I think it definitely is different. Typically, you have people that were never part of the target audience trying to butt in and take it away from people who are liking it. To use and older example- target audience really loves D&D and buys lots of rule books, models, and dice. If it was just market forces at work, as D&D grows less popular, then less and less games are sold until the company folds or they create a new game or two. Instead you have the cancel crowd: people that have never played the game and never intend to because they think D&D is witchcraft. And because they think it's harmful for the rest of society, they try and make sure no one else plays it either. They try and get it pulled from every store and brand anyone who plays it a Satanist. The market didn't dry up; it's being artificially suppressed by the mob.
Doesn't sound too problematic to me, but even if it is, isn't the problem there the fake news aspect of it? If D&D players really were Satanists, and D&D was their method, then it'd just be back to market forces...
|
On February 03 2022 10:27 Introvert wrote:
"Cancel culture" is more tricky to identify with major public figures like Rogan, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that when Joe Schmoe who works at the starbucks in the middle of nowhere has an old tweet and people mob his employer to get him fire that such a thing could reasonably be defined as "cancel culture."
Do you have any actual examples of this? I mean, I know cyber bullying is a problem but I don't think we should conflate the two things. Cancelling is used so widely that without talking about actual examples, I don't see how we advance here.
Let me kick it off by saying there's legitimate reasons for firing people based on what you found on the internet. Would you want either of the two girls waiting a table in your restaurant, even if they left their cup at home?
Would this be cancelling them over having taboo sex of their own free will? Or would they be legitimately fired for omitting working in a viral fetish porn video on their resume?
E: just to be clear, I don't think I'd personally mind, nor do I think these two women should be shunned from society for their unfortunate choice to eat and play with each other's poop and vomit. However, I don't think it's crazy that past actions exclude you from some jobs. And being a "star" in one of the grossest things most people have ever seen obviously counts as a past action.
|
Northern Ireland25459 Posts
On February 03 2022 16:36 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 10:27 Introvert wrote:
"Cancel culture" is more tricky to identify with major public figures like Rogan, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that when Joe Schmoe who works at the starbucks in the middle of nowhere has an old tweet and people mob his employer to get him fire that such a thing could reasonably be defined as "cancel culture."
Do you have any actual examples of this? I mean, I know cyber bullying is a problem but I don't think we should conflate the two things. Cancelling is used so widely that without talking about actual examples, I don't see how we advance here. Let me kick it off by saying there's legitimate reasons for firing people based on what you found on the internet. Would you want either of the two girls waiting a table in your restaurant, even if they left their cup at home? Would this be cancelling them over having taboo sex of their own free will? Or would they be legitimately fired for omitting working in a viral fetish porn video on their resume? E: just to be clear, I don't think I'd personally mind, nor do I think these two women should be shunned from society for their unfortunate choice to eat and play with each other's poop and vomit. However, I don't think it's crazy that past actions exclude you from some jobs. And being a "star" in one of the grossest things most people have ever seen obviously counts as a past action.
I’d say it would be a good thing to keep them employed, that way every customer would bring their own cups from home, cutting costs at that franchise and doing a little to help out the environment
|
On February 03 2022 15:17 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 06:28 brian wrote:
those aren’t appreciably different from where i’m sitting. I think it definitely is different. Typically, you have people that were never part of the target audience trying to butt in and take it away from people who are liking it. To use and older example- target audience really loves D&D and buys lots of rule books, models, and dice. If it was just market forces at work, as D&D grows less popular, then less and less games are sold until the company folds or they create a new game or two. Instead you have the cancel crowd: people that have never played the game and never intend to because they think D&D is witchcraft. And because they think it's harmful for the rest of society, they try and make sure no one else plays it either. They try and get it pulled from every store and brand anyone who plays it a Satanist. The market didn't dry up; it's being artificially suppressed by the mob.
What exactly is wrong about people who do not use/enjoy a certain product still having opinions or influence on that product? People who do not use a product are still part of the market for the product.
Target audience is a marketing term, it doesn't invalidate people outside of the target audience.
Plus, what you're describing is essentially just basic social pressure, that has been a thing for as long as humans have lived together.
|
On February 03 2022 13:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 11:17 gobbledydook wrote:
Joe Rogan is definitely an asshole but you know you aren't forced to listen to him right? Just don't listen to him if you are offended. His message reaches a huge audience and he is extremely influential on a lot of impressionable young people. Choosing not to listen to him does not prevent the damage he does.
I'm certain that if we only consumed pre-sanitized information back when we were all impressionable teens, our critical thinking skills would be worse off now rather than better.
Around 15 I was listening to a lot of Immortal Technique thinking it was the cleverest shit ever and yet I'm not a homophobic conspiracy theorist.
|
On February 03 2022 19:39 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 13:22 Mohdoo wrote:On February 03 2022 11:17 gobbledydook wrote:
Joe Rogan is definitely an asshole but you know you aren't forced to listen to him right? Just don't listen to him if you are offended. His message reaches a huge audience and he is extremely influential on a lot of impressionable young people. Choosing not to listen to him does not prevent the damage he does. I'm certain that if we only consumed pre-sanitized information back when we were all impressionable teens, our critical thinking skills would be worse off now rather than better. Around 15 I was listening to a lot of Immortal Technique thinking it was the cleverest shit ever and yet I'm not a homophobic conspiracy theorist.
Teenagers becoming radicalized and holding those views after they reach adulthood is a thing.
For instance, if instead of Joe Rogan, we were talking about Islamic radicalisation through a podcast, would you still agree that it's fine and people should just use their critical thinking skills?
|
On February 03 2022 16:36 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 10:27 Introvert wrote:
"Cancel culture" is more tricky to identify with major public figures like Rogan, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that when Joe Schmoe who works at the starbucks in the middle of nowhere has an old tweet and people mob his employer to get him fire that such a thing could reasonably be defined as "cancel culture."
Do you have any actual examples of this? I mean, I know cyber bullying is a problem but I don't think we should conflate the two things. Cancelling is used so widely that without talking about actual examples, I don't see how we advance here. Let me kick it off by saying there's legitimate reasons for firing people based on what you found on the internet. Would you want either of the two girls waiting a table in your restaurant, even if they left their cup at home? Would this be cancelling them over having taboo sex of their own free will? Or would they be legitimately fired for omitting working in a viral fetish porn video on their resume? E: just to be clear, I don't think I'd personally mind, nor do I think these two women should be shunned from society for their unfortunate choice to eat and play with each other's poop and vomit. However, I don't think it's crazy that past actions exclude you from some jobs. And being a "star" in one of the grossest things most people have ever seen obviously counts as a past action.
I just heard a recent and much more common example. A local politician alterated 6 mistresses a once. None of them were at work or related to the party, and they were all into it by their free will. How he managed is another question, but they found out, and "blew a whistle" to the party as revenge for being decieved. His career was over.
Nothing illegal had been going on, but the "court of public morale" still did it's work. I find things like this appalling, and there are many similar examples.
|
On February 03 2022 20:40 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 16:36 Acrofales wrote:On February 03 2022 10:27 Introvert wrote:
"Cancel culture" is more tricky to identify with major public figures like Rogan, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that when Joe Schmoe who works at the starbucks in the middle of nowhere has an old tweet and people mob his employer to get him fire that such a thing could reasonably be defined as "cancel culture."
Do you have any actual examples of this? I mean, I know cyber bullying is a problem but I don't think we should conflate the two things. Cancelling is used so widely that without talking about actual examples, I don't see how we advance here. Let me kick it off by saying there's legitimate reasons for firing people based on what you found on the internet. Would you want either of the two girls waiting a table in your restaurant, even if they left their cup at home? Would this be cancelling them over having taboo sex of their own free will? Or would they be legitimately fired for omitting working in a viral fetish porn video on their resume? E: just to be clear, I don't think I'd personally mind, nor do I think these two women should be shunned from society for their unfortunate choice to eat and play with each other's poop and vomit. However, I don't think it's crazy that past actions exclude you from some jobs. And being a "star" in one of the grossest things most people have ever seen obviously counts as a past action. I just heard a recent and much more common example. A local politician alterated 6 mistresses a once. None of them were at work or related to the party, and they were all into it by their free will. How he managed is another question, but they found out, and "blew a whistle" to the party as revenge for being decieved. His career was over. Nothing illegal had been going on, but the "court of public morale" still did it's work. I find things like this appalling, and there are many similar examples.
Can you post a link? googling 'politician 6 mistresses' and combinations of cancel, job loss, etc. is not giving me anything.
|
Northern Ireland25459 Posts
On February 03 2022 19:39 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 13:22 Mohdoo wrote:On February 03 2022 11:17 gobbledydook wrote:
Joe Rogan is definitely an asshole but you know you aren't forced to listen to him right? Just don't listen to him if you are offended. His message reaches a huge audience and he is extremely influential on a lot of impressionable young people. Choosing not to listen to him does not prevent the damage he does. I'm certain that if we only consumed pre-sanitized information back when we were all impressionable teens, our critical thinking skills would be worse off now rather than better. Around 15 I was listening to a lot of Immortal Technique thinking it was the cleverest shit ever and yet I'm not a homophobic conspiracy theorist.
Were you listening to Immortal Technique’s takes on the news though?
The information pipeline was very different back then. People don’t develop good critical thinking skills by exposure to more and more dubious information, garbage in, garbage out as they say.
We haven’t worked out the kinks yet, perhaps we will collectively, perhaps not. Judging by the regularity I encounter utterly baffling takes on almost every conceivable issue these days, I don’t think the hey just have a free for all and the good ideas will rise to the top in the Marketplace of IdeasTM is working out too well.
That said I’m a big believer in an opinion/factual information demarcation.
Rogan (or whoever) can espouse their particular opinions on whatever, my specific gripe is, whether he likes it or not a lot of people get their information from him, so if he’s platforming what purports to be neutral factual information it had better be solid.
|
@Slydie
In case of politicians it is important whtever the things he does and things he preaches are in sync. I mean if a guy is conservative focused on family values and has a mistress it is tottally different thing then him being very liberal and having a mistress. People dont want hipocrites representing them.
Also 6 mistresses, god damn that takes some serious multitasking. He would probably be amazing at starcraft.
|
Northern Ireland25459 Posts
On February 03 2022 20:40 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 16:36 Acrofales wrote:On February 03 2022 10:27 Introvert wrote:
"Cancel culture" is more tricky to identify with major public figures like Rogan, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that when Joe Schmoe who works at the starbucks in the middle of nowhere has an old tweet and people mob his employer to get him fire that such a thing could reasonably be defined as "cancel culture."
Do you have any actual examples of this? I mean, I know cyber bullying is a problem but I don't think we should conflate the two things. Cancelling is used so widely that without talking about actual examples, I don't see how we advance here. Let me kick it off by saying there's legitimate reasons for firing people based on what you found on the internet. Would you want either of the two girls waiting a table in your restaurant, even if they left their cup at home? Would this be cancelling them over having taboo sex of their own free will? Or would they be legitimately fired for omitting working in a viral fetish porn video on their resume? E: just to be clear, I don't think I'd personally mind, nor do I think these two women should be shunned from society for their unfortunate choice to eat and play with each other's poop and vomit. However, I don't think it's crazy that past actions exclude you from some jobs. And being a "star" in one of the grossest things most people have ever seen obviously counts as a past action. I just heard a recent and much more common example. A local politician alterated 6 mistresses a once. None of them were at work or related to the party, and they were all into it by their free will. How he managed is another question, but they found out, and "blew a whistle" to the party as revenge for being decieved. His career was over. Nothing illegal had been going on, but the "court of public morale" still did it's work. I find things like this appalling, and there are many similar examples.
Why do you find it appalling that the court of public opinion was pissed off that a politician was at a party when, presumably Covid was precluding them from doing so themselves?
If there’s anything that will, and should tank a politician’s position it’s flouting rules that others abide by, and they themselves have some role in drafting.
Or were Covid infractions not a factor here?
|
Northern Ireland25459 Posts
On February 03 2022 20:48 Silvanel wrote:
@Slydie
In case of politicians it is important whtever the things he does and things he preaches are in sync. I mean if a guy is conservative focused on family values and has a mistress it is tottally different thing then him being very liberal and having a mistress. People dont want hipocrites representing them.
Also 6 mistresses, god damn that takes some serious multitasking. He would probably be amazing at starcraft.
I’m OK with one mistress, hey we all make mistakes in the affairs of the heart, if not necessarily that specific one.
6 mistresses crosses some arbitrary line in the sand for me, into ‘probably not a moral guy’ territory.
|
On February 03 2022 20:40 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 16:36 Acrofales wrote:On February 03 2022 10:27 Introvert wrote:
"Cancel culture" is more tricky to identify with major public figures like Rogan, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that when Joe Schmoe who works at the starbucks in the middle of nowhere has an old tweet and people mob his employer to get him fire that such a thing could reasonably be defined as "cancel culture."
Do you have any actual examples of this? I mean, I know cyber bullying is a problem but I don't think we should conflate the two things. Cancelling is used so widely that without talking about actual examples, I don't see how we advance here. Let me kick it off by saying there's legitimate reasons for firing people based on what you found on the internet. Would you want either of the two girls waiting a table in your restaurant, even if they left their cup at home? Would this be cancelling them over having taboo sex of their own free will? Or would they be legitimately fired for omitting working in a viral fetish porn video on their resume? E: just to be clear, I don't think I'd personally mind, nor do I think these two women should be shunned from society for their unfortunate choice to eat and play with each other's poop and vomit. However, I don't think it's crazy that past actions exclude you from some jobs. And being a "star" in one of the grossest things most people have ever seen obviously counts as a past action. I just heard a recent and much more common example. A local politician alterated 6 mistresses a once. None of them were at work or related to the party, and they were all into it by their free will. How he managed is another question, but they found out, and "blew a whistle" to the party as revenge for being decieved. His career was over. Nothing illegal had been going on, but the "court of public morale" still did it's work. I find things like this appalling, and there are many similar examples. Your surprised people are not ok with a guy sleeping with 6 different women behind their backs?
I'd want my representative to be someone with some integrity (in so far as that is possible in this day and age). Someone sleeping around with 6 different women behind their backs does not strike me as a person of integrity.
The key here is 'deceived'.
|
On February 03 2022 21:44 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 20:40 Slydie wrote:On February 03 2022 16:36 Acrofales wrote:On February 03 2022 10:27 Introvert wrote:
"Cancel culture" is more tricky to identify with major public figures like Rogan, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that when Joe Schmoe who works at the starbucks in the middle of nowhere has an old tweet and people mob his employer to get him fire that such a thing could reasonably be defined as "cancel culture."
Do you have any actual examples of this? I mean, I know cyber bullying is a problem but I don't think we should conflate the two things. Cancelling is used so widely that without talking about actual examples, I don't see how we advance here. Let me kick it off by saying there's legitimate reasons for firing people based on what you found on the internet. Would you want either of the two girls waiting a table in your restaurant, even if they left their cup at home? Would this be cancelling them over having taboo sex of their own free will? Or would they be legitimately fired for omitting working in a viral fetish porn video on their resume? E: just to be clear, I don't think I'd personally mind, nor do I think these two women should be shunned from society for their unfortunate choice to eat and play with each other's poop and vomit. However, I don't think it's crazy that past actions exclude you from some jobs. And being a "star" in one of the grossest things most people have ever seen obviously counts as a past action. I just heard a recent and much more common example. A local politician alterated 6 mistresses a once. None of them were at work or related to the party, and they were all into it by their free will. How he managed is another question, but they found out, and "blew a whistle" to the party as revenge for being decieved. His career was over. Nothing illegal had been going on, but the "court of public morale" still did it's work. I find things like this appalling, and there are many similar examples. Your surprised people are not ok with a guy sleeping with 6 different women behind their backs? I'd want my representative to be someone with some integrity (in so far as that is possible in this day and age). Someone sleeping around with 6 different women behind their backs does not strike me as a person of integrity. The key here is 'deceived'.
Donald Trump became president, so I guess it highly depends on the values of a politician's constituents.
|
I find the focus on LGBT issues excessive.
I believe studies showed there are approximately 3% LGBT people. We don't fuss over the lives of any other group with similar obsession.
Why are people so worried that 3% of the population is going to cause doomsday?
|
On February 03 2022 22:15 gobbledydook wrote:
I find the focus on LGBT issues excessive.
I believe studies showed there are approximately 3% LGBT people. We don't fuss over the lives of any other group with similar obsession.
Why are people so worried that 3% of the population is going to cause doomsday?
Well, clearly, if you don't take action now, all children in the future will be LGBT through social contagion. /s
|
On February 03 2022 22:15 gobbledydook wrote:
I find the focus on LGBT issues excessive.
I believe studies showed there are approximately 3% LGBT people. We don't fuss over the lives of any other group with similar obsession.
Why are people so worried that 3% of the population is going to cause doomsday? Because hating on blacks or latino's is made harder and harder by social pressure and discrimination laws.
The entire idelogy needs an 'other' to hate on, to blame for everything that is perceived to be wrong in the world. When the previous enemy stop being a viable option they move on to the next.
LGB are coming less socially acceptable to hate on so increasingly the pressure moves to hating on Trans. Until they lose that battle as well and being trans becomes more acceptable, and then they will find a new marginalized group to hate on.
|
On February 03 2022 13:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 03 2022 11:17 gobbledydook wrote:
Joe Rogan is definitely an asshole but you know you aren't forced to listen to him right? Just don't listen to him if you are offended. His message reaches a huge audience and he is extremely influential on a lot of impressionable young people. Choosing not to listen to him does not prevent the damage he does.
What's Joe Rogan's message as you see it and what's the damage he does?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
