Sorry, the sarcasm in the second sentence maybe didn't come through: the Iranian government very obviously bears substantial responsibility.
Funny Events of the "Woke" world
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
"Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" sounds an awful lot like something I've heard people of a...certain political bent say a lot in the last few years to defend harassment or worse of people who say things they find offensive. Rushdie's situation is just that taken to an extreme.
"Those who are fine with someone's employer censuring bad behaviour must also be fine with attempted murder" is quite a stretch.
So we ARE regarding murder in the name of religion as "woke"... because it sounds like it.
And thus "woke" becomes even more of a meaningless boogie word than it already was.
I mean, it's a fairly common saying that the greatest award a journalist can get is murdered by the CIA
It doesn't need to be deep. "Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" is a spectrum - at the one end there's being told off or getting downvoted on Reddit or other similarly mild things and at the other end is stuff like being assaulted for wearing a political slogan, being stabbed for writing a book, etc and at the far extreme of that end is a price on your head or a fatwa or similar.
Honestly, I don't think that's a very deep or interesting perspective.
How far down that scale someone is willing to consider "acceptable" varies wildly, and for many depends on whether or not that particular bit of speech offends them in particular. Hence people who will support assaulting someone for wearing the wrong political slogan but consider mean social media comments to be dangerous harassment when aimed at people they agree with. Because if people didn't have double standards they'd have none at all.
Pushing the idea of "It's freedom of Speech not freedom from consequences" and the idea of "Speech that offends justifies violence back as the speech itself is violence" rhetoric rather is lol.
and now put the rest of the context round that small extract.
Because without context you could have just said.
" Not really sure"
Funny how you don't have an actual counter argument but rely on the same kind of PR short clip to try and frame any kind of narrative. You don't actually have a counter argument just the same old stale PR tricks and sophisry that I'd hope people with sense are starting to
Oh look you totally telling me and everyone else what I believe and admitting to doing it without evidence.
Because it shows how hollow the woke crowd are. A show with diversity that's just there, they don't care. A show pushed heavily by certain media and personalities and some grand moment in activism? Suddenly they're yelling about it on twitter and getting mad despite having previously written the DCEU off as "That shitty Toxic place that's not Marvel" pretty much
Woke ideology is a lie though lol. One of the biggest lies going.
Pretty sure some-one tried to attach Dave Chapelle on stage not long ago and it was framed by some as a brave move. Same with when Vito went to the Dave Chapelle Netflix protest and him and his friend got attacked.
So we already went from 'the "woke" claims freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence' to 'the "woke" claims speech that offends justifies violence'. Based on how many cherry picked twitter posts are you deciding this is "woke" rhetoric?
Framed as brave by who?
Yeah, because those two obviously didn't go there to troll and stir up trouble. No, not at all.
I like to use Vincent Vega for this sort of thing: “Tony probably didn’t expect Marcellus to react the way he did, but he had to expect a reaction”. And that’s just a less poetic way of Newton’s own “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”. Now that’s an immutable force of the universe, but as human beings we have the capacity to react as we choose. Ranging from not at all to grossly overreacting and when measured against mere writings, violence is a gross overreaction. Now Sir Salman Rushdie is by all accounts an educated man, and I doubt he penned the Satanic Verses thinking “No way this will make waves”; but even if he expected, he did not then or now deserve assassination or other violence.
"Woke" has been distorted into a parody of itself by status-quo warriors who absolutely lose their shit when someone not exactly like them tries to stand in the spotlight.
Yes, it's quite a "stale PR trick" to quote your own words at you. Very underhanded, very sneaky.
I encourage anyone else reading along to go back to the original post for full context. Don't let me take it out of context to make it sound bad! Read the unadulterated version, where political opponents are likened to a "locust horde", and the project should "burn" because our hero knows they must only like it to push an "agenda".
No. It doesn't show the woke crowd is hollow
It shows the woke crowd doesnt exist
The show 'pushed' nothing most other shows wouldn't push
You've made up an ideology that doesn't exist
Don't worry, we've know this for years and are just waiting for you to catch up
So, to be clear, I was asking for evidence before making a decision
I thought that was a good thing. Because you didn't provide this
I dont know. You didnt provide enough information in your first to decide one way or the other
I don't know. You didnt provide enough information in your first post to decide one way or the other
That twitter thread didn't give me enough information to find out if this is do to with Vox or Polygon. I'm assuming its an employee problem but I pretty sure the thread didnt say anything like that
Do we really have to say 'is not freedom from appropriate consequences'?
Because apparently we have to spoon feed you
I'll try to remember just for you so you dont get offended
Yes, and so are a million and one similar statements. Brevity is usually the enemy of precision, that's why every sentence of the Constitution has a ton of subsequent court cases and precedent establishing what they really mean. Implicitly, the statement is obviously "Freedom of speech is not freedom from [proportionate/legal] consequences". (Plus additional quibbling about what proportionate really is). Applying a sort of reductio ad absurdam to attack it just isn't very useful.
And there clearly is utility in it, because some people seem to think free speech means they can say what they like and no action against them should occur, such as being dropped by their platform or advertisers. That is clearly unreasonable, because it is in effect a constraint on the freedom of others.
I lost much respect for Moviebob over the years but I don’t see what’s wrong with the argument.
A certain section of culture warriors all insisting that they’re just worried about creator rights and then loudly cheering when a soulless businessman trampled all over creators for a tax cut is indeed very suspect.
Oh, it's not just that. To view for instance the recent kerfuffle between Disney and Florida, they'll take down the soulless businessmen if they're not ideologically pure, too.