Cancel culture dosen't exist

[MaryL]

So say liberal pundits and other Quislings. Lets ask Gina Curano about that...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

It doesn't? Good to hear. Now when will all those people who lost their jobs get them back?

 

[Crepitus]

So say liberal pundits and other Quislings. Lets ask Gina Curano about that...

Cancel culture doesn't exist.

Consequence culture does.

Sorry for your (and hers) luck.

 

[asaratis]

The Big 4, consisting of (1)liberals, (2)the news media, (3)Big Tech and (4)the Democrat Party will say that cancel culture doesn't exist because it's a bad thing and they are the major players in it. They would have us believe that each individual cancellation is sparked by autonomous individuals as singularities coming from a pool of millions of unconnected people and picked up like a virus by enough other people to cause a boycott of the target and all entities promoting whatever effort or career in which the target is engaged.

The Big 4 oppose freedom of speech to the point of coordinating with each other to one degree or another to suppress or promote speech and actions depending on their alignment with the liberal agenda. They are the cancel culture.

 

[Thoth001]

The Big 4, consisting of (1)liberals, (2)the news media, (3)Big Tech and (4)the Democrat Party will say that cancel culture doesn't exist because it's a bad thing and they are the major players in it. They would have us believe that each individual cancellation is sparked by autonomous individuals as singularities coming from a pool of millions of unconnected people and picked up like a virus by enough other people to cause a boycott of the target and all entities promoting whatever effort or career in which the target is engaged.

The Big 4 oppose freedom of speech to the point of coordinating with each other to one degree or another to suppress or promote speech and actions depending on their alignment with the liberal agenda. They are the cancel culture.

Exactly! Great points!

 

[Thoth001]

Poll: Plurality of voters say ‘cancel culture’ has ‘gone too far’

A plurality of voters said that “cancel culture” has “gone too far,” according to a Politico/Morning Consult poll released Wednesday.A total of 46 percent of registered voters surveyed agreed that …

thehill.com

 

[Thoth001]

So say liberal pundits and other Quislings. Lets ask Gina Curano about that...

Cancel culture doesn't exist.

Consequence culture does.

Sorry for your (and hers) luck.

That is one of the most idiotic statements I have ever seen and just down right ignorant to anything going on.

 

[Crepitus]

So say liberal pundits and other Quislings. Lets ask Gina Curano about that...

Cancel culture doesn't exist.

Consequence culture does.

Sorry for your (and hers) luck.

That is one of the most idiotic statements I have ever seen and just down right ignorant to anything going on.

Wow, you don't get out much, huh?

 

[Jets]

Of course Cancel Culture doesn’t exist.

Its called consequence culture.

The former is a puerile canard, while the latter is apropos...

 

[task0778]

Cancel culture doesn't exist.

Consequence culture does.

There should not be consequences for voicing your political opinions. Used to be the 1st Amendment protected that, now you get fired for it. And that ain't right.

 

[Crepitus]

Cancel culture doesn't exist.

Consequence culture does.

There should not be consequences for voicing your political opinions. Used to be the 1st Amendment protected that, now you get fired for it. And that ain't right.

The first amendment has nothing to do with you facing consequences for your speech. It protects you from the government restricting your speech, nothing else.

 

[asaratis]

Cancel culture doesn't exist.

Consequence culture does.

Of course Cancel Culture doesn’t exist.

Its called consequence culture.

Euphemisms don't hide the motives for directing unwarranted consequences toward individuals, groups of people, or companies that have opposing views or take "unapproved" actions.

Call it what you wish. Causing unwarranted consequences to be suffered by a target essentially removes a portion of (partially cancels) the target's effectiveness or ability to function.

In cases where individuals, groups of people or companies violate the rights of others, the negative consequences are self-inflicted. Boycotts are often well deserved.

Exercising the right to freedom of speech does NOT violate the rights of others. Suppressing that right does.

 

[healthmyths]

So say liberal pundits and other Quislings. Lets ask Gina Curano about that...

4 words in the title and you can't correctly spell dosen't
Seriously, don't you see the little red dotted line beneath a spelling error? If you don't why don't you correct it? Just a simple example of how unimportant little details are. I know it means little to you, but what it does do is demean your comment.

 

[Crepitus]

unwarranted consequences

What's unwarranted about the consequences?

 

[asaratis]

unwarranted consequences

What's unwarranted about the consequences?

That a person should lose its job, good reputation or suffer any other punishment just for exercising its right of free speech.

 

[Crepitus]

unwarranted consequences

What's unwarranted about the consequences?

That a person should lose its job, good reputation or suffer any other punishment just for exercising its right of free speech.

Nobody is interfering with their rights. They can say whatever they want. The first amendment doesn't protect them from the consequences of their speech, it just guarantees them that the government won't stop them from saying it.

 

[asaratis]

Nobody is interfering with their rights.

Bullshit. The cancel culture is interfering with the rights of many who dare to demean the liberal dogma.

They can say whatever they want.

...and should be able to do so without punishment. The cancel culture loves to punish those that step out of line.

And BTW, the first amendment does not guarantee anyone that the government won't deny them free speech. It merely says that
Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech...

If the government had absolutely not right to prohibit speech, the courts could not issue gag orders.

 

[Crepitus]

Nobody is interfering with their rights.

Bullshit. The cancel culture is interfering with the rights of many who dare to demean the liberal dogma.

They can say whatever they want.

...and should be able to do so without punishment. The cancel culture loves to punish those that step out of line.

So you want to be able to say and do whatever you want to with no consequences?

You're an anarchist.

 

[Dragonlady]

So say liberal pundits and other Quislings. Lets ask Gina Curano about that...

The woman said foolish things and she lost her job. She can be hired by anyone willing to hire someone so foolish, but she has hardly been "cancelled". But nice try.

 

[asaratis]

Nobody is interfering with their rights.

Bullshit. The cancel culture is interfering with the rights of many who dare to demean the liberal dogma.

They can say whatever they want.

...and should be able to do so without punishment. The cancel culture loves to punish those that step out of line.

So you want to be able to say and do whatever you want to with no consequences?

No. I don't want anyone punished for disagreeing with some group of assholes that thinks their way is the only correct one.

You're an anarchist.

No.

Government of the people, by the people and for the people by way of constitutional law and order, with defined crimes and appropriate punishments is a necessary evil. It is NOT a crime to disagree on any issue or to speak out against it. There should be no harmful punishment inflicted by anyone upon anyone else for speaking their mind. If I choose to punish politicians for what they promote, I simply vote for their opponents. They have the right to lie, except when under an oath to tell the truth.

(Unfortunately our congress members are immune from perjury charges while speaking in session. They can get all sorts of lies into the Congressional Record. Many are masters at the art of doing so.)

Congressional Immunity Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.