The Soc Jus Mob Eats Everything In Its Path -- Including Its Own
Welcome to "Shut-up-land," where nothing about anything of substance can be said; where debate is no longer permitted.
It's the world we're increasingly living in.
Kenan Malik writes at Pandemonium:
Canadian writer Jonathan Kay, former editor of the Walrus, who resigned after a controversy over his support for cultural appropriation, recently observed, 'censorship has been crowdsourced'.This process has made the debate about censorship neither more rational nor more democratic. To the contrary, as Kay observed, 'the very writers, publishers, poets, musicians, comedians, media producers and artists who once worried about being muzzled by the government are now self-organizing on social media... to censor each other.'
It's in fact worse than that. Because, having taken the power of censorship away from the Lord Chamberlain, we have given it, instead, to self-appointed gatekeepers who have become arbiters of what is and is not acceptable.
Take the debate over Exhibit B. It was, as you may remember, a show that used the 19th-century freakshow or 'human zoo' as the starting point for an exploration of slavery, colonialism and racism. Designed by South African Brett Bailey, the show featured 12 'tableaux' in which motionless performers are exhibited as artefacts. It was to have been staged by the Barbican Centre in 2014 but was closed down because of protests from those who deemed it racist.
In the wake of the controversy, there was a debate between Stella Odunlame, one of the artists taking part in the show, and the sociologist Kehinde Andrews, a critic. The show, Odunlame wrote, 'forces us to examine the darkest corners of our mind. It is brutal, unforgiving and unapologetic. I decided, as an educated black artist, that it told a story that should be shared with the world, but sadly that will no longer be the case.' To which Andrews replied that, even though he had not actually seen the show, he knew it was racist, and that 'black artists do not have the authority to define what is and is not acceptable'.
Just think of the logic of that argument. Black artists do not have the authority to define 'what is and is not acceptable'. But black sociologists apparently do. What Andrews is really saying is 'You don't have the right to define what is and is not acceptable because I have defined myself as the person who makes that decision.'
Put like that, few would accept the moral logic of the claim. Yet, that is essentially the moral logic underlying crowdsourced censorship.
Over the past thirty years the belief has become entrenched within the liberal mainstream that, in a plural society, it is both moral wrong and politically problematic to offend other cultures or faiths or communities. But what is often called offence to a community is actually a debate within that community (as well as outside of it).
My tweet from Tuesday:
It's just so bizarre that, at a time physically safer than any other time in human history, people get so irate that there would be CONVERSATION! with people whose views not everybody finds palatable. https://t.co/mBlLQwj3n2
— Amy Alkon (@amyalkon) September 25, 2018
Mailk via ifeminists
Sorry that this didn't publish Tuesday night. I hit publish. The server must have been napping, and I didn't check!
Amy Alkon at September 26, 2018 5:57 AM
The Revolution always eats its own. Just ask Maximilien Robespierre, Ernesto Rivera, Ernst Rohm, or Leon Trotsky.
Once the Revolution attains power, the goal is no longer revolution, but power. The die-hard revolutionaries must then be "retired."
This time it will be even worse. The bloodthirsty mob has Twitter.
Conan the Grammarian at September 26, 2018 6:13 AM
SJWs are just getting crazier and crazier -
https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184
Snoopy at September 26, 2018 8:05 AM
Your a bad person Snoopy and you should feel bad too for posting that pile of tripe. That was so retarded I got about half way through and my head exploded. Now I have to go to the head store and get a new one.
Ben at September 26, 2018 8:46 AM
Ben, did your head spin around first and then explode, or just explode?
I don't think it got to the Billy Madison level of crap, but this quote is funny and may help your pain.
I R A Darth Aggie at September 26, 2018 10:47 AM
Ben, I'll see if I can get you a discount on a new one!
But seriously, she's not just some random person - there are over 200,000 likes and she has over 68,000 followers (and 2 sons, who are going to require years of therapy).
Snoopy at September 26, 2018 10:50 AM
I know Snoopy. That's what made it so horrible. Especially all the people chiming in about how great and logical her argument was. If this was just some isolated loony like the Time Cube guy it would be funny.
IRA, it was the vibrate side to side and then pop like a balloon one.
Ben at September 26, 2018 11:14 AM
"Mr. Madison, what you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
Damn, I didn't know Crid was in a movie!
mpetrie98 at September 26, 2018 12:28 PM
It appears that every sjw wants the world to live by their feelings or be denied the right to exist.
Jay at September 26, 2018 2:44 PM
Damn, I didn't know Crid was in a movie!
A movie with Crid would contain zero action, have only one set, be excessively wordy and utterly humorless.
Patrick at September 26, 2018 10:49 PM
> A movie
I haunt you.
Crid at September 27, 2018 12:18 AM
Leave a comment