Some (more) thoughts on cancel culture
Okay, so. Let’s talk about cancel culture.
Cancel culture isn’t what a lot of folks think it is.
You can’t reasonably address the notion of what “cancel culture” is until you first address what it isn’t. Cancel culture is not saying “I don’t like the way that company does business, so I’m not going to shop there.” Cancel culture isn’t “I don’t like ( Read more... )
1) I'd certainly be happy telling people that Bob gives money to fund the execution of gay people, and that I am not okay with that.
2) If he's looked into it and found that they aren't, then there's presumably evidence that we can both look at and see, and understand if said money is actually going there or not. I'm totally up for re-evaluating whether there's been a misunderstanding - or if things have changed, or if it's unclear whether they do or not, depending on who you believe, and that people may come to different conclusions based on a reasonable reading of the evidence (see below).
3) If someone says "I'm fine with Bob giving money to fund the execution of gay people" then, yes, I would have opinions about them as a person.
To look at the bit at the bottom, fundamentally, the issue there is the "taking things out of context and putting in meaning that isn't there" - and I'm against the lack of context and insertion of meaning. The steps after all that all seem fine, when based in reality. When based on rumour and assumption they're obviously bad.
The other issue is the lack of nuance, and places where (as above) good people may come to different understandings of what actually happened. Either in a "there were only two people in the room, and they're saying different things" situation, or in a "Only a small amount of information is available to us, and it's being interpreted in different ways by different people". And in both of those situations I'd advise caution, and agree that raging mobs stringing people up is not a good thing.
Reply
Leave a comment