all 57 comments

[–]Questionable 59 insightful - 4 fun59 insightful - 3 fun60 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

The companies that fire people are also culpable in this matter. They have created this environment, in order to prevent collective bargaining, and constructive discourse. This is how corporations and governments maintain a culture based on indentured servitude. The issue is not with those who speak, but those who listen, and promote a society controlled by fear, and debt.

[–]yayblueberries 36 insightful - 2 fun36 insightful - 1 fun37 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I've been shocked at how much the public just lets corporations/businesses run culture and society entirely. It's not just based on indentured servitude. A company says do this/don't do this, and it suddenly becomes the golden rule in mainstream society, actual laws and actual politicians be damned. We live in a solid corporatocracy and it seems like only a few people recognize it for what it is.

[–]NaughtyUnicorn 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The issue is not with those who speak, but those who listen, and promote a society controlled by fear, and debt.

Wow, if we had gold here I would award this right now. 🥇

[–]SaidOverRed 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're saying wokism is the new anti-unionization? Wow, that's deep. I wonder what coal miners from 100 years ago would think about getting fired because you said something management found distasteful? The more they change the more they stay the same.

[–]NaughtyUnicorn 18 insightful - 3 fun18 insightful - 2 fun19 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

I wish we could divide this country in half. USA#1 and USA#2, and everyone could chose which society that they want to live in. The problem is one side would be such a mess that they'd want to come over and take what we built on the other side. It already happens with our states.

[–]King_Brutus 15 insightful - 8 fun15 insightful - 7 fun16 insightful - 8 fun -  (9 children)

That was tried back in the 1800s, created a small problem from what I recall.

[–]america_first_1776 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

Yeah, but we also tried and succeeded back in the late 1700s. Best 2 out of 3?

[–]King_Brutus 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

We just need a big ocean between the two sides of the US then.

[–]Locke 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Well California and Florida might end up across the ocean eventually and we might be better off lol

[–]america_first_1776 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Eh, whether or not an ocean is attached doesn't change whether or not a nation is truly sovereign. For example, the U.S. and Israel. I think a tall border wall with turrets on the top would be enough to establish any sovereignty.

[–]King_Brutus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It certainly doesn't hurt lol. But yes you're right.

[–]FollowTheMoney 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Make the Mississippi river wider again... or something

[–]King_Brutus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Separate all states by massive moats.

[–]FediNetizen 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

[–]JasonCarswellPirate Party 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

LOL

[–]tuesday 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

it would have to be at least 3 countries. I would like a woman only country please

[–]BettysBitterButter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm in.

[–]whistlepig 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That won't last long.....

[–]whistlepig 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Its already divided in 50 parts. The problem is that we (as a people) have allowed the central defensive organization to have too much say through the use of bribery.

[–]zyxzevn 16 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

We called it Fascism or Extremism in the old days.

But by calling it terrorism, you probably can get more support for actual legal measures against these terrorists.

[–]VRMWatercooling 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Fascism unfortunately lost all definition like Nazi & racist. Abused to the point it's meaningless.

[–]america_first_1776 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's anti-white communism. Call it for what it is. It isn't fascism. Don't use their lexicon.

[–]wicklesnarf 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

"Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences!" -Mob trying to suppress free speech

You're absolutely right that there is a fear now, even the "right" people are nervous about saying the wrong thing so opt to say nothing at all. I see SJWs cannibalizing and policing each other's speech/thoughts all the time. There is no winning, there will always be someone more offended than you.

[–]Raavan 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

People who don't like wrongthink keep saying that line. Then they call others Nazis and fascist.

Really, their statement is just a slightly watered down version of

"There is freedom of speech. But I cannot guarantee freedom after speech."

  • Idi Amin

This guy, btw, was known as the Butcher of Uganda.

As for cancel culture, I'd hate to be an employer who is spineless enough to fire an employee over shit he said on the internet. What matters to me is his performance. Now I don't know how things work in America but in my country employer has to have a valid reason to terminate an employee. I don't think judges would be too happy to hear that you fired an employee over something as insignificant as an opinion on the internet.

[–]BenjaminHG 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

What is your country, I want to live there.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree, you just can't every single person happy, even far-left sjws. I don't like that acronym anymore.

[–]Popper 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

well the reason is due to fear which is terrorism yes. But not so much fear of being killed but fear of losing money. But why losing money, due to who controls our media. Besides cancel culture though, the BLM who loot and riot and flat out kill people lately like Jessica Whitaker, this is direct terrorism done to make white people afraid for our lives.

[–]america_first_1776 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Agreed. Do not use their lexicon. "Cancel culture" is a phrase that the makers of the anti-white narrative made for themselves to obfuscate the fact that their actions are anti-white. So the only caveat I'd make to your statement is that this is ANTI-WHITE terrorism.

[–]tuesday 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

er, the women that Yaniv targeted were ethnic minorities and also recent immigrants.

[–]Tripwaiver 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It's not terrorism tho and calling it that is just as stupid as left wingers calling any right winger a literal nazi.

[–]Drewski 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed, I'm against cancel culture but this is hyperbole.

[–]africant 3 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

this

[–]insta 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

These people think you misgendering someone is violence but getting people fired for positions Bill Clinton ran on in the 90s.

Also doesn't matter what your job is. They'll pretend it's about "protecting your subordinates" but we all should remember that dude who made gorilla noises towards the BLM protests and lost his job as a landscaper. If you're a racist you shouldn't even be allowed to hold a working class job.

[–]wecandobetter 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

At some point, when the tangible retaliation for speaking your mind becomes too great, you do not speak at all. And that's when you know genuine free speech is lost as a cultural value. We sailed over that waterfall full steam years ago.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

What's the context here?

[–]Raavan 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Skai Jackson 🤮🤮

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I wasn’t aware of this one so I looked it up. The only people who’d be mad at what she’s doing is racists. I support her actions.

[–]Raavan 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Oh no, not racists on the Internet! What ever will the black community do if some random guy says 'nigger' on the internet!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Looks like you’re one of those guys and you’re salty. I’m living for it.

[–]Raavan 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Your cause for living seems quite shallow man.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It’s a figure of speech genius. And I’m no man, man.

[–]christnmusicreleasesIndependent[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Twitter for one.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Okay, I can see that.

[–]bagano1 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Sometimes, it's justified, like with that tech CEO and the Asian family, or Nick Cannon. Sometimes, it isn't, like with Drew Brees.

[–]wecandobetter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I view canceling anyone with utmost suspicion, because the basis of what's 'justified' is wildly subjective, and the goal posts constantly move (as we're noticing this week).

[–]RamenNoodlz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Brees thing was more ignorant/tone deaf than any sort of malice...but you gotta remember, when your face is a brand, anything you say/do affects more than just yourself.

[–]RamenNoodlz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Actions have consequences and life isn't fair...I figured people would have learned this by now...lawd.

[–]christnmusicreleasesIndependent[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

[–]RamenNoodlz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Meh, both sides are blowing this out of proportion. I mean this has affected how many people? 50? 100? Seems like there's some underlying thoughts that are being covered by this faux outrage.

[–]tuesday 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

it's affecting half the population and soon, will be affecting the other half as well. If you personally refuse to consider having sex with a biological male person with full intact genitalia who's never had any kind of hormone treatment and has never don't anything at all to look like a real woman-- if you won't date someone like that then you are a BIGOT (according to the trans activists) and deserve all the abuse they throw at you. including getting you fired from your job and unable to find new employment in your field.

That is their attitude, not mine.

[–]RamenNoodlz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Like I said, your argument holds no water. You cherry pick one crazy opinion and paint a whole swathe of the population and parade around claiming it as facts now, kinda like the media does with their bias. It wasn't true when you said it, and it won't be true in the future.

[–]wecandobetter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You're so right, ACTIONS have consequences. But words are not actions, although the line has been thoroughly blurred between the two. "Saying _____ is literal violence!!" screeched the mob.

[–]RamenNoodlz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Speaking is an action, go to your boss and tell him to go fuck himself and see what happens. If you don't run around spewing hate, you won't get cancelled.

[–]dazedandsubdued 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

your opinion might change when you realize that one of your own views that you define as benign, neutral, sane..even important...has been declared "hate speech."

[–]RamenNoodlz 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Can you give me an example?

[–]serously_chill_guy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If you hate free speech then move to North Korea or China. They don't have cancel culture there.

[–]whistlepig 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's like when they confuse "fraud" with "speech" in order provoke an attack on free-speech. ie.. the old "not ok to yell 'fire' in a movie theater" argument. Classic double-speak.