What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The “Woke” thread (3 Viewers)

tim, this is a disaster of a thread. You've had caffeine this morning, no? You're making some really rebuttable presumptions here. Nobody's taking you that out of context. It's your own words for the most part.

 
This is exactly what struck me about this whole thing. "Who's Ted? And why is he talking? I know 'woke'. Don't tell me I'm not!"

tim, we know for years you've tried to say that political correctness is good. You haven't stopped to consider the chilling effect of large and overwhelming social approbation reactions to speech once, and you're like a bull in a china shop on this issue.

It's not your strength.
Maybe because I’m not concerned about “chilling effect” that comes from the marketplace? 
You know rock one reason I really like you is because we come from the same places. I was for years  a disciple of Ayn Rand, Hayek, Von Mises, and many of their fundamental ideas are still in my head and heart. And one of those is that the free marketplace is the best means to create social change. That’s why I used the Montgomery Bus Boycott as an example, not to call people who disagree with me racist, but to demonstrate that when people use their economic power to achieve cultural improvement that’s a good thing. Its only possibly chilling when the government takes a hand. 

 
You said exactly that:
I never told you to stop using the word “woke”. I wrote that in my experience this is the way it’s used. I also wrote that I wouldn’t like it if the left used it as well, though that hasn’t been my experience. 

 
Maybe because I’m not concerned about “chilling effect” that comes from the marketplace? 
You know rock one reason I really like you is because we come from the same places. I was for years  a disciple of Ayn Rand, Hayek, Von Mises, and many of their fundamental ideas are still in my head and heart. And one of those is that the free marketplace is the best means to create social change. That’s why I used the Montgomery Bus Boycott as an example, not to call people who disagree with me racist, but to demonstrate that when people use their economic power to achieve cultural improvement that’s a good thing. Its only possibly chilling when the government takes a hand. 
It's not just the marketplace of goods, it's that of employ. It's social status and standing as an autonomous being. It's pretty much everything. It's one's life's work.

And I disagree that all speech is commodified in some way. You keep thinking of examples, but you haven't really shown you understand what "cancel culture" or being "woke" really means in everyday life. You're sort of all over the place with this thread.

Perhaps a good thing to do is back up and define what "cancel culture" and being "woke" is, what it's applied to, how it's enforced, what the consequences of running afoul of it are before we just launch into market effects of boycotts.

 
tim, this is a disaster of a thread. You've had caffeine this morning, no? You're making some really rebuttable presumptions here. Nobody's taking you that out of context. It's your own words for the most part.
I’m enjoying it. And several people have attempted to interpret what I’ve written, incorrectly, rather than just respond to it. 

 
It's not just the marketplace of goods, it's that of employ. It's social status and standing as an autonomous being. It's pretty much everything. It's one's life's work.

And I disagree that all speech is commodified in some way. You keep thinking of examples, but you haven't really shown you understand what "cancel culture" or being "woke" really means in everyday life. You're sort of all over the place with this thread.

Perhaps a good thing to do is back up and define what "cancel culture" and being "woke" is, what it's applied to, how it's enforced, what the consequences of running afoul of it are before we just launch into market effects of boycotts.
I thought I did that in the first post. I explained how I thought the terms were commonly used. I can’t speak for how others think they’re used. 

 
I think most of us have made the most logical interpretation of the words you have actually written.  When EVERYONE misunderstands what you meant...maybe you're the one who worded it poorly.
@tonydead wrote that I want everyone to stop using the word “woke”. That’s not close to what I posted. I began this thread by offering my opinion of two words and why I don’t like how they’re used in my experience. At no point did I ever demand that people stop using them. 

 
You asked us to.

You're not woke.  You didn't even know the definition of the term nor who coined it when you decided to make a thread about it.  
It was a suggestion, made as part of an argument. Not a demand. 
As to who started it, who cares? I don’t like it. 

 
These terms, much like the older “political correctness”, are being applied to individual situations in order to suggest a larger, insidious purpose which is usually non-existent. They are also mostly used to complain about an effort to prevent rude or bigoted behavior that some of us believe should no longer be tolerated in a civil society, 
Tonight on Maddow 

 
@tonydead wrote that I want everyone to stop using the word “woke”. That’s not close to what I posted. I began this thread by offering my opinion of two words and why I don’t like how they’re used in my experience. At no point did I ever demand that people stop using them. 
You compared some arguments to arguments in opposition to the civil rights movement.  And then said you didn't mean to compare us to racists from the 1960's.  

Not your best work, Tim.

 
I thought I did that in the first post. I explained how I thought the terms were commonly used. I can’t speak for how others think they’re used. 
Yeah, but tonydead sort of provided you with the history of the word. That's always been my understanding of it. That the term "woke" started on the left (let's be honest, the black left) and became co-opted by the right as a pejorative lately. "Cancel culture," I think, also stems from the left, but it stems from Hollywood and the desire to "cancel" those shows or people's careers if they ran afoul of the laws or the customs of woke culture. In some cases, like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey, entirely appropriately, others to a lesser degree. But I believe that's where "cancel" originated, generally agreed-upon dates of 2014 and 2017 coming to the fore as its origin dates.

 
Holding people accountable for their words and actions is a good thing, IMO. People should be responsible for what they say and what they do. It seems like the politicians have co-opted this for, guess what, political purposes and have created another issue to further divide Americans, which I am against.

 
Political correctness?  Have not heard that in years.

I hear "woke" everyday if not multible times a day at work. Our one boss always says it if he informs us of something. Instead of saying now you know he always says "Now you are woke"

I never had a Popeyes Chicken sandwich until a guy at work bought me one. 

As I was raving about he said  "you are woke"  on the best chicken sammy

Is that OK?
Do grown adults actually talk like this nowadays in a non-ironic fashion?

 
Yeah, but tonydead sort of provided you with the history of the word. That's always been my understanding of it. That the term "woke" started on the left (let's be honest, the black left) and became co-opted by the right as a pejorative lately. "Cancel culture," I think, also stems from the left, but it stems from Hollywood and the desire to "cancel" those shows or people's careers if they ran afoul of the laws or the customs of woke culture. In some cases, like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey, entirely appropriately, others to a lesser degree. But I believe that's where "cancel" originated, generally agreed-upon dates of 2014 and 2017 coming to the fore as its origin dates.
You got it. 

 
How about we just try to avoid overarching terms? If you have an issue with a specific situation, just express your argument against it without suggesting it’s part of a larger plot? 
Ironic coming from the person that labels everything as racist or sexist when it involves a minority or female. If only we could discuss situations on their own without those overarching accusations and terms.........

 
Holding people accountable for their words and actions is a good thing, IMO. People should be responsible for what they say and what they do. It seems like the politicians have co-opted this for, guess what, political purposes and have created another issue to further divide Americans, which I am against.
Absolutely.  But where we draw the line is often in disagreement.  

Saying racial slurs, demeaning women, homophobic comments should not be tolerated. 

But we're in a world where a girl wears a shirt with a confederate flag as a 13 year old when she has no idea what it means.  Someone drags her Twitter history and posts it and says she's a racist and needs to be fired when she's a 30 year old doctor.  

Someone word black face at a party back in college 10 years ago as an ignorant college kid.  They have since learned of the problems with this action.  They regret it.  They would never do it again.  But someone out there has that picture.

And we're rarely satisfied with the apology or the "I was wrong."  We have to have that "We got them fired" satisfaction.

 
When a professor or broadcaster or someone similar loses their job over a comment or series of comments, sometimes that’s justifiable, sometimes it isn’t. It depends on the specific situation. All I’m asking is that we look at each of these instances based on their own merits. 
Cal Berkeley isn’t much for hearing opposing POV’s

 
tim, I agree with you.  Demonizing “cancel culture” and “wokeness” is a popular topic of outrage among my conservative friends these days.

Unless of course they are the ones doing the “canceling”.  Dixie Chicks, Colin Kapernick, Planned Parenthood, etc
There is very much a cancel culture on the right and it, too, needs to addressed along the same lines that a lot of us interested in speech and the chilling effects of group social approbation address the leftist incidents. Cancel culture on the right can be just as toxic and damaging to speech and inquiry.

 
:(

https://www.rawstory.com/jim-jordan-cancel-culture/

Jim Jordan argues 'cancel culture' is 'the number one issue for the country' despite pandemic

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) on Sunday said that so-called "cancel culture" is the "number one issue for the country" despite the deadly COVID-19 pandemic that devastated parts of the economy.

Fox News host Maria Bartiromo asked Jordan if cancel culture had gone too far after one of Donald Trump's attorneys faced public scorn over his appearance at the former president's second impeachment trial.

"We've all had it," Jordan complained. "We've all got death threats. This is ridiculous. This cancel culture is so dangerous and we have to push back."

"If we don't push back on this and stop it and stand up," he continued, "it will only get worse. So this is the number one issues for the country to address today."

"It's true," Bartiromo agreed, turning to panelist Alan Dershowitz. "How do you stop this constant bullying?"

"Cancel culture is quickly becoming American culture," Dershowitz argued. "If any lawyer is the subject of this kind of McCarthyism, I will represent you pro bono."

"I'm going to dedicate myself to making sure that the new McCarthyism of the hard left doesn't become American culture," he said.

 
:(

https://www.rawstory.com/jim-jordan-cancel-culture/

Jim Jordan argues 'cancel culture' is 'the number one issue for the country' despite pandemic

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) on Sunday said that so-called "cancel culture" is the "number one issue for the country" despite the deadly COVID-19 pandemic that devastated parts of the economy.

Fox News host Maria Bartiromo asked Jordan if cancel culture had gone too far after one of Donald Trump's attorneys faced public scorn over his appearance at the former president's second impeachment trial.

"We've all had it," Jordan complained. "We've all got death threats. This is ridiculous. This cancel culture is so dangerous and we have to push back."

"If we don't push back on this and stop it and stand up," he continued, "it will only get worse. So this is the number one issues for the country to address today."

"It's true," Bartiromo agreed, turning to panelist Alan Dershowitz. "How do you stop this constant bullying?"

"Cancel culture is quickly becoming American culture," Dershowitz argued. "If any lawyer is the subject of this kind of McCarthyism, I will represent you pro bono."

"I'm going to dedicate myself to making sure that the new McCarthyism of the hard left doesn't become American culture," he said.
Bartiromo/Gym/Dersh in agreement.  

Makes one's decision easier, no?  

 
There is very much a cancel culture on the right and it, too, needs to addressed along the same lines that a lot of us interested in speech and the chilling effects of group social approbation address the leftist incidents. Cancel culture on the right can be just as toxic and damaging to speech and inquiry.
I think the entire narrative is politically motivated to fire up the right’s base.  Are there anecdotal instances where people go to far?  Absolutely.  The incident at Middlebury College a few years ago comes to mind.  But there isn’t a vast conspiracy against the right to silence their views. And that’s the narrative that Tucker, Hannity, Rush, etc feed their base, playing into the victim hood complex we see on the right.  

And let’s be clear, people aren’t being fired from jobs or smeared on social media because they state that due to their conservative economic beliefs they support a 34% federal tax rate on income over 400k, or that they are opposed to a local land use decision, or want a local ordinance changed that affects the building code.  People are facing these consequences in large part because of social views that are arcane and out of touch with society.  I believe that’s a good thing.  

 
:(

https://www.rawstory.com/jim-jordan-cancel-culture/

Jim Jordan argues 'cancel culture' is 'the number one issue for the country' despite pandemic

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) on Sunday said that so-called "cancel culture" is the "number one issue for the country" despite the deadly COVID-19 pandemic that devastated parts of the economy.

Fox News host Maria Bartiromo asked Jordan if cancel culture had gone too far after one of Donald Trump's attorneys faced public scorn over his appearance at the former president's second impeachment trial.

"We've all had it," Jordan complained. "We've all got death threats. This is ridiculous. This cancel culture is so dangerous and we have to push back."

"If we don't push back on this and stop it and stand up," he continued, "it will only get worse. So this is the number one issues for the country to address today."

"It's true," Bartiromo agreed, turning to panelist Alan Dershowitz. "How do you stop this constant bullying?"

"Cancel culture is quickly becoming American culture," Dershowitz argued. "If any lawyer is the subject of this kind of McCarthyism, I will represent you pro bono."

"I'm going to dedicate myself to making sure that the new McCarthyism of the hard left doesn't become American culture," he said.
This illustrates how grifters will always be hopping on the intellectual gravy train and undermining the ever-present problem that cancel culture has wrought by trying to co-opt it to their own nefarious ends. We should not let them do this. It undermines perfectly legitimate gripes and concerns to have over the cancel culture and wokeism. Forget Jordan and Trump and the right's narrative. This stuff exists and is a problem, though as wikkid points out, there is a "deck chair" element to it.

 
People are facing these consequences in large part because of social views that are arcane and out of touch with society. 
This is probably comforting to believe, but a lot of the stories that end up tied to this topic tend to involve views or behavior that's either totally innocent, firmly within social norms, or at least in that broad, grey, "contestable" zone.  For example, if you try explaining to a normal person why some people are mad at JK Rowling, it would be hard to do without them thinking that you're making stuff up.  The same thing goes with people who get in hot water for cooking the "wrong" food that somehow belongs to some other group or something.  Most of these people aren't Richard Spencer, and it's lazy to pretend otherwise.

 
tim, I agree with you.  Demonizing “cancel culture” and “wokeness” is a popular topic of outrage among my conservative friends these days.

Unless of course they are the ones doing the “canceling”.  Dixie Chicks, Colin Kapernick, Planned Parenthood, etc
How times change. I am old enough to remember when the “Say no to cancel culture” crowd were burning Nike items they bought and calling for Colin Kaepernick to be blacklisted from the NFL.

 
How times change. I am old enough to remember when the “Say no to cancel culture” crowd were burning Nike items they bought and calling for Colin Kaepernick to be blacklisted from the NFL.
Cancel culture existed long before Kaepernick, both left and right. It especially originated with the far-out concerns of campus students at liberal universities in the late '80s when divestiture movements were par for the everyday course of righteous indignation offerings.

 
:lmao: And some truth to the matter, too.
i told you suckerism would supplant capitalism, shorty. capitalism had it as long as it actually made things. now that monetization has replaced production, the cons are controlling what keeps the rats dancing & fighting in their cages and are, as we speak, atomizing the touchpoints of Revolution so they can package it back to us as the most crucial, immediate AND happenin' thing on the planet right now. how influential!

 
I think the entire narrative is politically motivated to fire up the right’s base.  Are there anecdotal instances where people go to far?  Absolutely.  The incident at Middlebury College a few years ago comes to mind.  But there isn’t a vast conspiracy against the right to silence their views. And that’s the narrative that Tucker, Hannity, Rush, etc feed their base, playing into the victim hood complex we see on the right.  

And let’s be clear, people aren’t being fired from jobs or smeared on social media because they state that due to their conservative economic beliefs they support a 34% federal tax rate on income over 400k, or that they are opposed to a local land use decision, or want a local ordinance changed that affects the building code.  People are facing these consequences in large part because of social views that are arcane and out of touch with society.  I believe that’s a good thing.  
Way to skew things as usual.  No, people are getting fired because they voted for Donald Trump.  I'm sure you do think that's a good thing.  That's the problem though.  No one should be fired because they voted for Trump, for Biden, or for anyone else.

 
Cancel culture existed long before Kaepernick, both left and right. It especially originated with the far-out concerns of campus students at liberal universities in the late '80s when divestiture movements were par for the everyday course of righteous indignation offerings.
I don't recall anyone using the term in the 80's and hadn't heard it myself until a few years ago - and I am not alone (from a 2020 article):

https://www.insider.com/cancel-culture-meaning-history-origin-phrase-used-negatively-2020-7

[...] The phrase was popularized only in the past few years. Now it's everywhere.

"Cancel culture" came into the collective consciousness around 2017, after the idea of "canceling" celebrities for problematic actions or statements became popular [...]

 
Cancel culture existed long before Kaepernick, both left and right. It especially originated with the far-out concerns of campus students at liberal universities in the late '80s when divestiture movements were par for the everyday course of righteous indignation offerings.
You could go back to the Hollywood blacklists from the 1940s (?) if you wanted to trace this further back.  Both "sides" have been guilty of this kind of illiberalism at various times in US history.  It just so happens that it's mostly a lefty thing right now, but give it 10 years and the shoe could easily end up on the other foot.  Can you imagine the damage that a competent Trump-like figure could do with this sort of thing?

 
I don't recall anyone using the term in the 80's and hadn't heard it myself until a few years ago - and I am not alone (from a 2020 article):

https://www.insider.com/cancel-culture-meaning-history-origin-phrase-used-negatively-2020-7

[...] The phrase was popularized only in the past few years. Now it's everywhere.

"Cancel culture" came into the collective consciousness around 2017, after the idea of "canceling" celebrities for problematic actions or statements became popular [...]
The culture itself began happening in modern form in the late '80s when campuses tried to get universities to divest from South African and other holdings, not the terminology.  "Cancel" as a term to go with culture, as I relayed earlier, started around 2014, according to Vox, the NYT, and others. It really hit stride in 2017 with the #metoo movement, especially as pertained to Hollywood.

 
You could go back to the Hollywood blacklists from the 1940s (?) if you wanted to trace this further back.  Both "sides" have been guilty of this kind of illiberalism at various times in US history.  It just so happens that it's mostly a lefty thing right now, but give it 10 years and the shoe could easily end up on the other foot.  Can you imagine the damage that a competent Trump-like figure could do with this sort of thing?
Yeah, you're essentially right. The blacklists were designed to affect employment and investment, so that would certainly qualify. You got '40s right, by the way.

 
When a professor or broadcaster or someone similar loses their job over a comment or series of comments, sometimes that’s justifiable, sometimes it isn’t. It depends on the specific situation. All I’m asking is that we look at each of these instances based on their own merits. 
I don't disagree with this part.  However, I think I disagree with you on how common it is or what % of the time a firing would be justified.  

At my most optimistic, I think this is on the lines of #metoo.  Its an overcorrection to something that might have been unchecked for too long, but in the long run it will calm down and normalize.  

I get the feeling that this is causing  a rift in both parties.  I am getting there, and I've encountered several people who are normally 100% left that are also tiring of what they see as excessive correction of language and ideas. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top