For Many Americans, Cancel Culture Is Self-Inflicted
People not only conceal their true beliefs, but often mouth opinions they don’t hold.

Free societies emphasize the ability to voice opinions and debate with those who disagree without fear of penalty. Political systems that punish people for espousing "wrong" ideas are unfree no matter how they try to justify the constraints they impose on speech. But what happens when a society retains the forms of freedom, but its culture becomes intolerant of dissent and imposes unofficial penalties on those who stray in their public statements? Americans are finding out what it means to live that way with the resurgence of an old flaw called out early in this country's history.
"Social pressure to have the 'right' opinion is pervasive in America today," notes Populace, a social-research organization, in a report published this summer. "In recent years, polls have consistently found that most Americans, across all demographics, feel they cannot share their honest opinions in public for fear of offending others or incurring retribution."
"One important, but underappreciated, consequence of a culture of censorship is that it can lead individuals not only to self-silence, but also publicly misrepresent their own private views (what scholars call preference falsification)," the authors add.
Given the events of recent years, it's no surprise that some big disconnects are over COVID-19 responses and the management of public schools, which have become merciless battlefields.
"A majority of people say publicly that mask wearing was effective, but they don't believe it in private," Populace notes. "Whereas 59 percent of Americans publicly agree that wearing a mask was an effective way to stop the spread of COVID-19, only 47 percent privately hold that view (a 12-point gap)."
The pressures people face vary by demographic group. Americans of parenting age often feel compelled to take public stances at odds with their private beliefs as to what goes on in classrooms.
"For people between the ages of 30 and 44, the two biggest public-private gaps both relate to education. First, the vast majority (74 percent) of people in this age group privately think parents should have more influence over public school curriculums, but only 48 percent are willing to say so publicly. Second, while in public a majority (60 percent) say discussing gender identity in public schools is inappropriate for young children (K-3), in private this is not the majority view (only 40 percent privately agree)."
These varying pressures can exaggerate disagreements in weird ways, as white and black Americans feel conflicting social pressure when it comes to the opinions they voice about the treatment of race.
"About 1 in 2 White Americans (50 percent) agrees public schools focus too much on racism in the U.S., but only 38 percent agree with the same statement when granted privacy through a list experiment. The opposite effect holds true for Black Americans—despite 16 percent of Black Americans agreeing with the statement publicly, more than one-quarter (28 percent) agree privately."
Socially acceptable opinions vary based on race, age, income, partisan affiliation, educational level, and sex, but across demographic divides, many Americans feel compelled to mouth opinions at odds with their true beliefs. It's a phenomenon noted before, in totalitarian countries.
"As Milosz had himself observed about intellectuals under totalitarianism, the need for survival often involved more than just keeping your mouth shut. Tough moments could often arise where you had to make positive, public affirmations of loyalty and even enthusiasm," the late Christopher Hitchens commented in 2004 about the Polish writer and diplomat Czeslaw Milosz, who defected to the West in 1951. Milosz's The Captive Mind (1953) is a classic study of oppressive political systems.
But Milosz described societies in which dissidents could be arrested, imprisoned, or shot for challenging acceptable opinion. That's not the case in the United States of 2022. Instead of secret police, Americans face Twitter mobs, sniffy neighbors, outraged co-workers, and upset bosses. That's enough to nudge many people to conform with the prevailing views in their communities so as to avoid opprobrium. It's an unfortunate weakness, but one observed about this country long ago.
"I know of no country where, in general, there reigns less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion than in America," Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in Volume 2, Chapter 7, of Democracy in America. "In America, the majority draws a formidable circle around thought. Within these limits, the writer is free; but woe to him if he dares to go beyond them. It isn't that he has to fear an auto-da-fé, but he is exposed to all types of distasteful things and to everyday persecutions."
"Everyday persecutions" sounds like today's "cancel culture" of snubbing, firing, and deplatforming—informal means of punishing people for their opinions. The French observer saw Americans of the 1830s facing social pressures similar to those described by Populace researchers. Those pressures nudge people to edit their own views and espouse beliefs they don't actually hold.
But America is fragmented, and so the "right" opinions people feel obligated to mouth vary from community to community. So, 44 percent of Democrats publicly insist corporate CEOs should take stands on controversial issues, but only 11 percent believe that in private. In public, 39 percent of Asian-Americans say the U.S. should completely phase out use of fossil fuels, but only 13 percent privately agree. A 64 percent majority of Republicans publicly favored overturning Roe v. Wade, but only 51 percent agree in private. A 61 percent majority of political independents publicly say that whether someone is a man or woman is determined by their sex at birth, but 45 percent really believe that. And 42 percent of those 18-29 years old privately believe racism is built into the economy, government, and educational system, although 65 percent say that in public. In sometimes contradictory ways, Americans are misrepresenting what they actually believe to endorse views they don't really hold.
"This trend is concerning because of the threat that it poses to individual freedoms, community flourishing, and democratic self-government," Populace researchers note.
"The democratic republics of today have made violence as entirely intellectual as the human will that it wants to constrain. Under the absolute government of one man, despotism, to reach the soul, crudely struck the body; and the soul, escaping from these blows, rose gloriously above it; but in democratic republics, tyranny does not proceed in this way; it leaves the body alone and goes right to the soul," de Tocqueville commented in rather more evocative form.
Fixing this situation is no easy task, since there are no laws to reform, but rather a culture that needs an infusion of tolerance and people who require stiffer backbones. That leaves us to marvel at the quality of debate among people who inflict on themselves the constraints suffered by residents of totalitarian states, not out of fear of a knock in the night, but from concern over what the neighbors might think.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Ah, victim blaming!
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I have not ever thought like it would even achievable however my confidant mate got $27k only in four weeks easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail. Look extra details
going this web-page… https://incomebuzz7.blogspot.com/
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. (eas-04) I have not ever thought like it would even achievable however my confidant mate got $27k only in four weeks easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail. Look extra details:-
.
Going this web-page;>>> https://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
Both sides!!! The left is "woke" as all git-out!
Meanwhile, on the right, we have Alex Jones making money hand over fist on hate and lies, joined by who knows HOW many radio talk-show right-wing nut jobs. And don't forget... In order to Truly Belong to "Team R", one MUST believe that the Lizard People stole the elections from The Donald!
If The Donald can't run from jail... "Team R" will put up for POTUS... Alex Jones and Ann Coulter! Ass the "A" Team! Mark my absurd-but-probably-true words!
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but (anu--221) my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://smart.online100.workers.dev/
Plucky Squirrell sure knows how to scare people. Consolation is that christianofascisti will want to again repay (im)Palin for helping purge Alaska of libertarians by moving them to correctional forms and Spring Creek Correctional Center. Besides, God's Own Pussygrabbers need Handmaid and Harridan candidates to convince women voters that choice is evil. Once prisons are bulging with female non-criminals the polling places will again be safe for Make Allah Grate Again policies.
It is a truly pathetic article, invoking "boaf sidez," when only the left does bad things.
Woulda figured you’d be hung over AF after that shitshow you put on last night. Guess that’s the beauty of being an alcoholic, just get up the next morning and do it again.
Let me guess: booze in the cheerios?
Shorter R Mac: "NANNY NANNY BOO BOO!"
R Mac: "Look at me! I keep track of what people on this online forum do so I can rub it in their faces later! I have no life, but I have a catalog of quotes from strangers on this online forum! I'm so cool!"
Serious question: how much do you drink on a night like last night? Is there other drugs involved that causes the manic shitposting?
Serious question: Who are you trying to impress?
Poor sarc
You literally replied to your own sockpuppet account that you've outed over a dozen times bro. Who are you trying to impress?
No one. I’m legit curious what caused that frantic shitposting last night.
Borderline Personality Disorder and Histrionic Personality Disorder both feature mania and fit sarcasmic like a tailored hand-made fine Italian suit.
Who are you arguing with? I don't see any Arm-Ack... nor want to.
Look at me!
This is a particularly amusing comment from the person who tries to make every thread about himself.
He's also the guy who says I fucked your mother and homophobically asserts others give blowjobs but then criticizes other people for engaging in schoolyard taunting.
The one consistent fact of both his personal failings and policy analysis is that standards he uses to judge other people are never applied to himself or his allies.
I don't have any allies. That's the constant flaw in your anal analysis. You assume I'm on a team. So you argue against this team that you imagine I am on. But it's all in your imagination.
I don't have any allies. That's the constant flaw in your anal analysis
You like to pretend this, but if it were true you wouldn't have a problem applying the same standards to both teams. But you literally never do this. Instead you turn every discussion into an attack on one team, protecting your ally from damaging discussion. Reps do plenty of stupid shit, if you weren't protecting Dems you would be satisfied with addressing Reps when they do it. It's the constant redirect of literally every thread into an attack on the right which proves your principles.
You like to pretend you're independent so you don't have to defend the stupid shit your team does, and because you think pretending your argument is independent makes it more compelling. But everyone sees through your lies.
Instead you turn every discussion into an attack on one team, protecting your ally from damaging discussion.
I like to point out how smug Republicans and conservatives are just like the people on the left that they hate so much.
Reps do plenty of stupid shit, if you weren't protecting Dems you would be satisfied with addressing Reps when they do it.
Is that your version of BOAF SIDEZ!?!??!
It's the constant redirect of literally every thread into an attack on the right which proves your principles.
You mean my attacks on the right show my disappointment in their abandonment of all principles other than allegiance to Dear Leader.
You like to pretend you're independent so you don't have to defend the stupid shit your team does
There we go. Insisting I'm on a team so you can argue against the team.
because you think pretending your argument is independent makes it more compelling
Now you're telling me what I think.
But everyone sees through your lies.
You mean I disagree with your elaborate strawman? Yes. Yes, I do.
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
EVERYTHING IS SO TERRIBLE AND UNFAIR!!!!!!!!!!
EVERYBODY IS MEAN TO MEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IT'S ALL TRUMP'S FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hillary Clinton spent less time whinging about Trump than you have. He's been out of office for 2 fucking years and still lives rent-free in your head. You literally spend 16 hours a day, every day, 7 days a week, posting literally not one syllable here that doesn't have something to do with Donald Trump, Republicans, and an imaginary cabal of Michigan Militia living in your closet, and then you post 9 paragraph screeds and your shitty half a dozen Sqrsly copypastas when people mock you for being a retarded faggot all the time.
“EVERYTHING IS SO TERRIBLE AND UNFAIR!!!!!!” tm
I knew it would catch on.
You mean my attacks on the right show my disappointment in their abandonment of all principles other than allegiance to Dear Leader.
No, your attacks on the right show your primary interest is preventing attacks on the left. That's why when the left does something stupid your only interest is how to attack the right for it.
Otherwise you would apply your own criticism of whataboutism to yourself, but of course you don't.
Is that your version of BOAF SIDEZ!?!??!
There's never been a question that both teams do stupid shit. The objection to your BOAF SIDESISM is that you react to a failure that 100% leftist in specifics and 80-20 leftist in general (or 99-1 or 100-0, it doesn't really matter) with criticism solely of Reps. The issue is that Teams do different stupid shit, but you insist on pretending everything is split 50-50 to minimize damage to the left. You might as well work for Slate.
Insisting I'm on a team so you can argue against the team.
We can tell you're on a team because you do not apply the same standard to both teams. This is obvious and understandable. Why you feel the need to lie about it is amusing and discrediting but ultimately irrelevant.
That's funny. No, I point out how you and your buddies are exactly like the people who you hate, and the invariable reaction is to attack me as a distraction.
We can tell you're on a team because you do not apply the same standard to both teams.
It's true that I hold the right to a higher standard. I don't hold the left to any standard at all because amoral fuckwits have no standards. You and your team are supposed to have standards. Yet you constantly disappoint as you become more and more like the leftists you hate.
No, I point out how you and your buddies are exactly like the people who you hate, and the invariable reaction is to attack me as a distraction.
Yes, your juvenile assertion I'm "just like them" deserves no debate.
Omitted in the "attack me as a distraction" is your own admission you are only here to piss off other commenters. This is the key difference between my comments and yours: mine are backed up by both evidence and reality while yours is merely assertion based on nothing but your juvenile hatred and narcissism.
This is the key difference between my comments and yours: mine are backed up by both evidence and reality while yours is merely assertion based on nothing but your juvenile hatred and narcissism.
Haaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha!
Seriously? You're the one calling me a leftist and cheering on the trolls who say I molest my daughter, and you accuse me of juvenile hatred?
Dude, you're one of the most hateful people on this forum.
The fact remains that the left has no standards while the right is supposed to have some.
If you're going to represent your beloved team, you should get some standards.
Stop emulating the leftists you hate.
You're the one ...cheering on the trolls who say I molest my daughter,
Making up shit again huh? But separately why is this a problem?
Last week you claimed everyone was getting blowjobs from another commenter. Why do you think you deserve better treatment than you give others?
you're one of the most hateful people on this forum.
Holding you to your own standard is now hate? Absurd, do you even speak English?
you should get some standards.
Another comment completely devoid of substance. Amusing from someone who violates his own professed standards in every comment. Tell me more about how you fucked my mother and then whine about people getting personal. I'll give you bonus points if you do it in the same comment instead of just the same thread.
Tell me more about how you fucked my mother and then whine about people getting personal.
Exhibit A: Someone who doesn't know the difference between a generic comment like "Your mom" and something crafted to be catty.
Exhibit A: Someone who doesn't know the difference between a generic comment like "Your mom" and something crafted to be catty.
Which one of these is supposed to be "Ideas!"?
What ridiculous hair splitting. You say these things and then try to discredit others for "schoolyard taunting". And now you try to pretend schoolyard taunting isn't a big deal. It's only a big deal when others do it!
Standards are those things you apply to other people, right? The rules are always elastic enough to both permit sarc to do whatever he wants and to preclude others from doing the same things.
If I hurt your feelings when I said something about your mom then I'm sorry.
I'm not at all sorry about comparing you to the leftists you hate.
You didn't hurt my feelings and I don't care about your substanceless assertions. I'll just keep using them to discredit you by pointing out you fail the standards you hold others to.
I find it hilarious that while you act as though other commenters are terrible people you do everything they do and lie on top of it.
This is a particularly amusing comment from the person who tries to make every thread about himself.
Except that I could make a comment about the weather only to have you and your buddies descend upon my comment and make a bunch of comments about me as a person.
I don't make every thread about me. The trolls do that.
Poor sarc
Except that I could make a comment about the weather only to have you and your buddies descend upon my comment and make a bunch of comments about me as a person.
This is a lie. People didn't start commenting about you as a person until you started with them. You engage in juvenile taunts and then whine when others return them. You lie about what other people say and then act outraged if they do the same to you. You admit you're only here to anger others then cry like a bitch that other people don't address ideas.
You're literally the worst commenter on the board trying to ruin it for everyone.
I point out how the righteous right is just like the smug left that they hate.
If that makes me terrible, then I'm a bad, bad man.
Let me try this a different way. I'm not surprised when people on the left lie, cheat, misrepresent, steal, defraud and otherwise do selfish things with no regard for others. Why should I call them out for doing such things? It's not news. It's not unusual. It's expected.
I point out when you and your buddies act like the folks on the left who you would like to physically maim over politics.
I point out when you and your buddies act like the folks on the left who you would like to physically maim over politics.
Again we see sarc violate his own principles. Sarc is an individual, only other people can be lumped in with others. You do this because you know you cannot accurately claim I want to physically maim anyone over politics but you want to make the accusation anyway. What a slime.
Of course in addition to that failure you haven't pointed out that I resemble the left in any meaningful way, only by assertion without supporting evidence or logic. But that's your nature isn't it? Substanceless assertions backed up by juvenile insults all while preening that you're above trolls and personal attacks.
You say I make everything about me. I say no it's you guys who make it all about me. So you call me a liar and then spend a bunch of time talking about me.
funny
So you call me a liar
You are a liar, such as when you claimed I hoped Pelosi would die ...for her Taiwan trip wasn't it?
I say no it's you guys who make it all about me.
Here's your first comment on last night's drunken shit-thread:
sarcasmic
August.23.2022 at 5:24 pm
Flag Comment Mute User
WHATABOUT WHEN DEMOCRATS DO THE SAME THING? NOT FAIR NOT FAIR NOT FAIR NOT FAIR NOT FAIR!
You making it about the commenters.
Ideas!
Denmark donated this Mute Loser button to Reason. It turns nazis, trolls, pinheads, both kinds of socialists, anarchists and dementia victims into harmless grey boxes. Most of the anonimati flinging ordure at you are completely invisible to actual Reason readers. It's like a scene out of Fight Club.
Hey look everybody, sarcasmic agrees with his sockpuppet!
Gay people used to get fired, just a couple of decades ago.
The shoe has been on the other foot for all of not even 10 years now. Pardon them if they take the opportunity to pursue their oppreasors with vigor.
Pardon them if they take the opportunity to pursue their oppreasors with vigor.
No. No pardon. The people they are pursuing are not the same people who "oppreased" them. Those people have moved on. It's a new bunch of people in power now who have nothing to do with what you're bitching about.
Look at me! Look at me! I'm oppressed! That gives me the right to be a total asshole! In fact, it gives me the right to do just about anything!
(Didn't Hitler & Co. go on & on about how Germans were "oppressed" by the evil Jews? And, of course, Lenin & Co. went on & on about how "the rich" and "capitalists" oppressed everyone in Russia. They sure fixed them!)
Hitler also said "The National Government will therefore regard it as its first and foremost duty to reestablish the unity of spirit and will of our people. It will preserve and defend the foundations upon which the power of our nation rests. It will extend its strong, protecting hand over Christianity as the basis of our entire morality, and the family as the germ cell of the body of our People and State." This was right after Republican Herbert Hoover lost his bid for reelection. If it sounds like Make America Germany & Austria, you heard right.
No.
20 years ago was 2002 you innumerate faggot. Not a single faggot got fired from any position in 2002, faggot.
"Gay people used to get fired, just a couple of decades ago.
The shoe has been on the other foot for all of not even 10 years now. Pardon them if they take the opportunity to pursue their oppreasors with vigor."
They are not going after their "oppressors". They go after people who just disagree with trans theory. Hell, most people do not give two shits about gay folks. There's only one issue in that whole LGBT bullshit abbreviation, and it is that "T" one.
...AND that "laff bigins at erekshun!"
Socially acceptable opinions vary based on race, age, income, partisan affiliation, educational level, and sex, but across demographic divides, many Americans feel compelled to mouth opinions at odds with their true beliefs. It's a phenomenon noted before, in totalitarian countries.
Ergo, we are screwed.
The common element between us and identifiably totalitarian societies is extremist control of institutions and thus their ability to use those institutions to punish their political enemies.
For thousands of years, of course we fire gays, of throw them in jail. Of course everyone agrees!
Are we screwed? Or are they just pursuing their oppressors given the opportunity?
Kill yourself, soy.
Tale of Two Cities is about unequal yet apposite reprisal force earned by those who practice the initiation of force. Lake a look at how Hitler's Christian Volkgenossen fared in Czechoslovakia after May 9, 1945. National and international socialism keep Libertarian Parties from publishing their original sound platforms. So the alternation of looter Kleptocracy factions taking violent revenge comes as no surprise.
Thousands of years? Tell that to the Greeks. Or King James
Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. (or something like that)
Welcome to the 1930's.
Remember, remember, the eighth of November.
Ding. Winner.
I have to apologize, but could you please explain 8 November reference to me?
I’ve seen it before, and it’s even in the Jefferson Starship “Blows against the Empire” album.
I googled it and found 5 November and the gunpowder plot.
I also find eighth of November election day in the United States.
I cannot find the reference to “remember, remember the eighth of November”
Could you please explain it like I’m five years old?
You don't have to violently overthrow your government by blowing it up like on the 5th of November, but you can radically change the trajectory of it away from totalitarianism by voting libertarian on the 8th of November? It's a call for radical transformation through peaceful means, hence the combining of the two references? That's what it means to me anyway.
So what you're saying is, in 2020 Biden may not have been the most popular Presidential candidate in all of American history?
Don't blame me, I'm just saying what everyone else is thinking but is too afraid to say.
The rote mantra about Biden truly won the 2020 election repeated word for word across almost every media platform is, to my mind, more offputting to the idea that the election was fairly decided than most anything else.
It makes it sound as if the talking heads do not really believe it. It is just something they must say.
Stop whingeing. People say that Biden won the 2020 election because he won the 2020 election to counter those Trumpsuckers who insist that Trump won - and it the reasons that the latter group give that seem constantly to be repeated like reassuring mantras, e.g., "how could Trump lose when he got 12 million more votes that in 2016?", "how could Biden win when he was in a bunker during the campaign?" "look at the numbers who attended Trump's rallies!", "none of the lawsuits were decided on the merits", "how could all those late-counted votes go to Biden?"
I have to wonder how many Trump supporters in Congress are self-cancelling in the way that this article described.. It's not zero, for sure.
Again, it is not saying the Biden won. It is using the exact same phrasing across multiple platforms and media that raises red flags.
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22biden+truly+won+the+2020+election%22
It looks like there aren't many great matches for your search
Or are you saying that lots of people said, "Biden won the 2020 election" and that's somehow suspicious? What other form of words should they have said with no less economy?
Or maybe some people are saying that the party/government/media line that not only did Biden win in the cleanest election ever, but that questioning that statement is the worst form of seditious behavior and a Threat to Democracy. And that most of the partisan hacks who tell us to accept 2020 election results spent all of 2016-2019 in righteous resistance to the previous election.
The phrase you and Mickey Rat are missing is "most secure election in US history" and, more cogently "The DHS says..." without qualifier. No varying shades of the same truth like "Despite last-minute COVID shakeups..." or "DHS claims..." or "Independent election review boards..." or "State AGs are still looking..." just, 100% "DHS said it, no further questions." Like the DHS having its fingers on every last ballot cast, deciding whether they're secure or not doesn't itself open its own can of worms. After all, who needs Kamala Harris to certify the 2024 ballots when the President can just have the DHS do it?
That's human nature. When you think that something is true, you tend not to qualify it in regular communication. You won't find anyone who claims that Trump won qualifying that statement, "though no audits have found fraud", for example.
You want that qualification? Look at scientific papers, which are full of them.
Such a non thinker you are.
OK, so then, whether it was human nature or not, we agree that virtually every last corner of the media thought/assumed the 2020 election was the most immaculate election in history simply because "The DHS says...".
No. And it wasn't just the DHS saying it was clean.
Meanwhile, where are those qualifiers from election deniers?
Election denier might possibly be the nadir of your idiocy, shreek. As if there were some wild conspiracy theory that the election didn't take place. "Climate denier" is equally as stupid but at least has the virtue of being descended from "Climate change denier", which is actually a grammatically and logically correct turn of phrase. Of course the meta irony is that it's all an attempt to associate people you don't like with Holocaust denial, even though all of the people who deny the Holocaust and are orchestrating a global campaign to not do business with Jews are all your Marxist political allies. This is nearly as pathetic as your penchant for fucking children. It's actually that's ridiculous.
Election denier might possibly be the nadir of your idiocy, shreek.
I thought the "Where are the election deniers qualifying *their* statements?" In the context of Mickey Rat and myself both effectively saying "The media narrative was far more creepy than the notion that the election was/wasn't fairly decided was pretty peak retardation.
The more honest and polite thing to do would be to just stumble about going "What were we talking about again?"
Was there a three year fishing expedition claiming Biden was in the back pocket of Ukraine, in spite of him pursuing policies that are VERY much supportive of Ukraine, as opposed to Trump whose policies did little to help Russia?
The differential equations that describe how the population doubled even after the LP got birth control legalized lie beyond the cognitive grasp of people who imagine superstition is knowledge and ignorance is strength. Lincoln and McClellan together got about as many votes in 1864 as Gary Johnson did in 2016, so Gary clearly got 99% of the vote, right? Furthermore, Lincoln, like Gary, wanted redneck States to quit forcing some girls to reproduce in involuntary servitude. No MAGA Trumpanzee can grasp these facts.
It makes it sound as if the talking heads do not really believe it. It is just something they must say.
I avoid major news outlets. Is it like how every story about the weather mentions climate change?
You post 20 articles a day here from DailyFail and The Guardian, not to mention your stable of 6 and a half year old Slate, Salon, HuffPo, and Mother Jones links from your Sqrsly copypasta.
>>It makes it sound as if the talking heads do not really believe it.
they don't believe it they were the front line of the circus. already had the explanation in real time why the machine shut down @2:00 a.m.
Fixing this situation is no easy task, since there are no laws to reform,
To fix this we would need to remove the Forces imposed on people to say and do things they would prefer not. Those Forces are the laws that require a person to bake a cake, or to hire or house those it would rather not. It includes drug laws and all the Affirmative Action/Forced Associations.
The landscape would eventually turn into a patchwork of like-minded people freely populating those jurisdictions that appeal to their proclivities. That would allow for a San Francisco and for a Harrison, Arkansas and everything in between. Peacefully. Recognizing the right of freedom of association.
Just a pipe dream.
Cut government bloat that creates BS jobs for libs. Cut govt regulations that create HR jobs for libs. Cut govt handouts. If libs can't eat, they can't cancel. Cut them off from the public teat.
Cancel section 230 and make Twitter act like T-Mobile or be legally accountable for what goes on their site like the NY Times is.
This is what it goes back to. "Equity," the entire Democratic party platform---it's all just a jobs program for useless people. End the entitlements, the bullshit regulations, the proliferation of programs and agencies, you end the problem.
The LP did exactly that beginning in 1972. The graph (https://bit.ly/3AunUfM) is from straight data, no seasonal adjustment, no messy ointments. Why else would the Kleptocracy stuff the platform committee with pederasts, communists, anarcho-fascists, non-passable cross-dressers, street people and inmates from the State Home For The Bewildered? The old platform increased our vote share 12% a year.
They're are laws to reform, or at least laws to enforce. It's not an accident that when a company gets to a certain size it either conforms and drives out any high level employees who might not promote this culture of fear, or they are subject to constant lawsuits and investigations from the government.
Part of the problem is that centralizing things in the government has created a high stakes environment where people feel the pressure to go scorched earth on their political opponents.
When you are across the table from someone who disagrees with you, and you are both petitioning Daddy Government for redress, a rational tactic is to make sure you are the only one who can petition the government. If the Government weren't the end-all-be-all, and the only remaining option was to work it out with the guy across the table from you, then canceling them no longer is a rational move. Instead you need to focus on compromise.
Agree. The Federal is involved too deeply in too many things.
Personally I favor repealing every amendment after the 15th; a dozen or so Cabinet Departments and then have a discussion of what we should re-submit now knowing the results of what good intentions hoped for then.
Yes, once enough of us look to the federal government to provide not only material support, but to define the ethos and behavioral code for society, we enter the win-at-all-costs stage. And we discard any support for freedoms that might allow some people to live in ways that annoy us.
I doubt the nation as it is can deescalate political conflicts and compromise. The best we can hope for is getting most people to tolerate living near each other, while the zealots push for more purity.
You have to start by being honest, and being honest means that the "both sidez" mantra is minimally, if at all, applicable.
proof positive it's maximally applicable
If the central government were far more limited in scope, this wouldn’t be a problem. One of the only things are Central government should be responsible for is interfacing with foreign countries.
We need to return institutions to their traditional role of not choosing sides in politics, which means everyone who embraced that position needs to be removed.
Some of the issues being argued are believed to be beyond politics, so arguing them isn’t politicizing them, disagreeing is. The gun debate is framed thusly. School shooting, “mourning” must include calls for gun control. That is politicization. It is common sense and we must stop this from happening ever again. To come in and assert your 2nd amendment right and defend with cool headed logic makes you a monster that’s politicizing a tragedy.
This is *not* politicization.
Color me skeptical of a study that claims to measure what people privately think as opposed d to what they say in public. I mean, I’m general I just duck conversations in order to avoid arguments, but I don’t pretend to hold different positions for the sake of being agreeable.
Mostly it’s because people can’t handle nuance. I can’t get into a conversation and expect people to grasp what I mean when I say “Masks can be effective, but mask mandates are counter-productive and worse than doing nothing.” And I don’t want to take 20 minutes arguing about it.
“Masks can be effective, but mask mandates are counter-productive and worse than doing nothing.”
Nice summary and thanks! (Well, the yet-more-complexity is it depends on WHO is doing the mask mandating!!! Government Almighty, please fuck off! Private owners of hospitals, please keep right on mandating masks for employees and visitors alike, in the treatment wing where my wife, with her suppressed immune system, gets treatments. My wife and I, as consumers, like to be able to chose a hospital that does this sort of thing, for her protection.)
Is that your "cunt" wife that left you and got full custody of your kids after you were credibly accused of child molestation, or is this the imaginary cancer-stricken wife that's been dying in the hospital and dodging COVID-infected zombies for the last 3 years, sarcasmic?
Hi Tulpa!
“Dear Abby” is a personal friend of mine. She gets some VERY strange letters! For my amusement, she forwards some of them to me from time to time. Here is a relevant one:
Dear Abby, Dear Abby,
My life is a mess,
Even Bill Clinton won’t stain my dress,
I whinny seductively for the horses,
They tell me my picnic is short a few courses,
My real name is Mary Stack,
NO ONE wants my hairy crack!
On disability, I live all alone,
Spend desperate nights by the phone,
I found a man named Richard (Dick) Decker,
But he won’t give me his hairy pecker!
Dick Decker’s pecker is reserved for farm beasts,
I am beastly, yes! But my crack’s full of yeasts!
So Dear Abby, that’s just a poetic summary… You can read about the Love of my Life, Richard Decker, here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/11/farmers-kept-refusing-let-him-have-sex-with-their-animals-so-he-sought-revenge-authorities-say/#comments-wrapper
Farmers kept refusing to let him have sex with their animals. So he sought revenge, authorities say.
Decker the hairy pecker told me a summary of his story as below:
Decker: “Can I have sex with your horse?”
Farmer: “Lemme go ask the horse.”
Pause…
Farmer: “My horse says ‘neigh’!”
And THAT was straight from the horse’s mouth! I’m not horsin’ around, here, no mare!
So Richard Decker the hairy pecker told me that, apparently never even realizing just HOW DEEPLY it hurt me, that he was all interested in farm beasts, while totally ignoring MEEE!!
So I thought maybe I could at least liven up my lonely-heart social life, by refining my common interests that I share with Richard Decker… I, too, like to have sex with horses!
But Dear Abby, the horses ALL keep on saying “neigh” to my whinnying sexual advances!
Some tell me that my whinnying is too whiny… Abby, I don’t know how to fix it!
Dear Abby, please don’t tell me “get therapy”… I can’t afford it on my disability check!
Now, along with my crack full of yeasts… I am developing anorexia! Some are calling me a “quarter pounder with cheese”, but they are NOT interested at ALL, in eating me!!! They will NOT snack on my crack!
What will I DO, Dear Abby?!?!?
-Desperately Seeking Horses, Men, or ANYTHING, in Fort Worth,
Yours Truly,
R Mac / Mary Stack / Tulpa / Mary’s Period / “.” / Satan
There it is! I asked you to post it last night, but you passed out in the middle of your manic frenzy.
I almost wish you actually had a wife that was dying. But then you're a narcissistic sociopath, so you wouldn't actually give a fuck anyway.
Nuance requires an intellectual approach. If not for emotional reasoning, tribal ideology, media exaggeration, and political manipulation, some people might be able to do that on a good day.
This.
I actually have other stuff to do today.
Like shitposting here.
Bring ON the shitpostings!!! 5-4-3-2-1... SHITPOST!
(All about how Government Almighty LOOOOVES us More Than We Can Ever Know, and FAR more than we love ourselves, would be a good place to start.)
It’s more than that. Many people don’t believe the facts relevant to a debate. For example, many do not believe me when I say that Fauci lied, twice.
Fauci has lied more than twice today.
Does that mean that the Trumpistas on these comments don't mean it, and they're just trying not to get canceled by the conservative mob?
TRUMPISTAS! ARGH!!!!!!’ I’M SARC AND I’M DRUNK AS FUCK AND I’M A TROLL BUT ALSO WHY IS EVERYONE EXCEPT DEE SO MEAN TO ME!!??? ANYONE WANT TO GUESS HOW MANY THREADS I’M GOING TO SHIT ON TODAY? TRICK QUESTION, HOW MANY THREADS WILL THERE BE?!
Someone's got problems.
The first step to recovery is recognizing that you have a problem. Which one did you have in mind? The alcoholism, the drug addiction, the homelessness, the welfare dependency, the misogyny, or the child molestation?
Get a room.
Gender identity discussion in K-3.
That’s the hill to die on?
Reason really, really, really, really, really, really, REALLY wants to be able to discuss blowjobs and rectal prostate stimulation with 5 year olds.
Yeah I read coverage of this poll a few days back. I didn't go deeply into it, but this is probably one of those surveys where you really want to see the questions, know how they're phrased, see who they asked.
The fact that this is one of the questions might lead us to believe that they're looking to touch contemporary issues more than do good, enduring science.
This is all based on surveys by volunteers age 16 or over. 43% in public say racism is being discussed too much in schools, but in private it's only 33%? Absurd on its face. Without seeing the 'list' of questions used or how they were phrased to reach this conclusion (without asking the question directly) or who was answering them, the entire article seems suspect. Data is from online surveys from yougov.uk where anyone over the age of 16 can sign up and say anything they want. '....the people we survey are those we have proactively recruited via other carefully-selected websites......As with any polling company, we cannot completely guarantee that not a single respondent will lie or play silly games....'
I saw data from an organization doing a political survey that said they had to contact something like 50,000 people to get 1,500 responders. In Florida the ration was 1:90. They’re not getting random samples.
You aren't allowed, legally, to survey on cell phones. And nobody answers their phones anymore anyway.
Basically, a phone survey is only going to get older Boomers who still have landlines and still answer them during dinner time.
Surveys typically find lots of public support for false and unsubstantiated claims by left wing politicians and repeated 24/7 by their media propagandists (who hate Trump and Republicans) at NY Times, WaPo, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, NBC, CBS, ABC, Google, Twitter, Facebook, You Tube, Reason, etc.
Are you daring to challenge the holy doctrine, held by people who are totally, absolutely, completely dedicated to Democracy! and goodness for all people-kind (and animals, too)?
This is weak in many ways. In all societies people feel pressured to conform. That's just basic sociology. The basic facts of living in social groups. There is no utopia where people feel free to say what they think.
That being said, when asked about abstract topics there is no surprise that people will differ their answers in different contexts. What does it mean to teach too much about racism? Has anyone worked out in their mind what the right amount should be? Should CEOs take stands in public? Most honest people would say...it depends. We can always fall back on the old Nazi example. If only the business leaders stood up to Hitler...But then when it comes to other topics we don't want businesses to weigh in.
And what does "discussing gender identity" in school entail? How am I supposed to answer that. If your child's teacher is same-sex married are they supposed to avoid talking about their spouse, something hetero teachers do all of the time? Or do we mean they should not have intentional curricula that discuss the matter? And when discussing actual facts of the world how are teachers supposed to talk about same-sex relationships? Or is marriage and relationships a taboo subject altogether for young children? These are not easy positions to work out in one's mind and so it is not difficult to see how responses will vary on surveys.
If your child's teacher is same-sex married are they supposed to avoid talking about their spouse, something hetero teachers do all of the time?
You can always tell when someone is merely repeating left wing talking points. In reality hetero teachers almost never talk about their spouses to students.
If they do, it's just sort of in passing. I remember my 1st grade teacher talking about her husband briefly, and I remember it because she left second semester to have a baby so we got a sub.
I knew my 5th grade teacher's wife. He was my favorite teacher and it was a small community, and still all I knew was she was a nice lady who helped out at the Halloween carnival every year.
Can't say as I ever heard a word about any of my other elementary teachers' families. I'm sure they might have mentioned them. as did classroom aids, but totally in passing and nobody cared.
It actually is possible to be married (to a boy or a girl) and NOT have to explain the dirty details to everyone, everywhere.
+1000
OK groomer
This is a shreek sock btw. Don't engage it in any way other than to point out that he's a pedophile who got banned from Reason.com for posting hardcore child pornography links.
If cancel culture were just worrying about what the neighbors might think, nobody would care. But as you know, it's more than that. People get fired from their jobs, asked to leave volunteer organizations, have CPS called on them etc for voicing a "wrong" opinion, or sometimes for having voiced ten years ago an opinion that was acceptable then but isn't now. Yes, in the USSR the government threw dissidents in the gulags, but the social control went far beyond that. If you spoke against the party line, you lost your job, your apartment, your friends because they rationally feared being seen with you. The same kind of things that we call cancelling in the US today, except in the US it's done by a sort of self-organized enforcer brigade that nominally has no connection to government. Something does need to be done about it, but it's not obvious what.
Wrong. It's actually a coordinated and top-down organized enforcer brigade financed by a small group of about 2 dozen multibillionaires and their labyrinthine web of NGOs acting at the behest of and in full coordination with the governments of not just the United States but every Western nation.
if you look closely at their skulls, you can see where they retract and hide the antennae they use when the coast is clear to perfectly coordinate all their thoughts and actions
"But what happens when a society retains the forms of freedom, but its culture becomes intolerant of dissent and imposes unofficial penalties on those who stray in their public statements?"
Uh, people behave exactly how they have since the dawn of civilization--and probably before.
If anyone thinks that human nature is anything but emotional motivated reasoning, partisan tribalism, and petty self-centered behavior they are a naive idiot. We can dress up cultures in any sort of philosophical decor, including ideals about liberty (and really any suggested universal principles), but people will do what feels right to them at that moment.
Sure, with enough conditioning and propaganda, the herd will tend towards directed goals, but push too hard and they will stampede, i.e. populism. The best group behavior comes from apathy and detachment, not activism.
Self-cancelling is far more common than cancelling others.
The exceptions seem to be few, and typically limited to colleges canceling a speaking event, and on occasion someone getting fired from a company. Far more common are authors stopping publication of their books, or people choosing to resign and go on an apology tour.
Show some backbone to these nasty puritans and they'll soon back down.
Puritans never back down. They have faith.
In truth more than half the economy already discriminates for leftist politics and that percentage is only going to increase until we address it. People who believe it should not be meaningfully opposed support that outcome. We've already seen this migrate off campus so their original justification that this is a few campus nuts has already been proven wrong. If they really opposed it they would have changed their mind when their assertions were proven false.
Coming from the fucking clown who said Kyle Rittenhouse was a cold blooded murderer in the first degree who should be in prison for the rest of his life, and supported Gab, Parlor, Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos and Laura Loomer all getting kicked off of their web hosting, domain registrar, payment processor, every app store, and having their bank accounts closed in the same week.
Yeah it is really brave of you to demand people (whom you no doubt disagree with) speak up and get canceled.
What are you going to do to protect these people?
I notice that folks like Brandy, Chemjeff, Mike, and others couldn't get at all exercised about vaccine mandates. So when people spoke up and were fired from their jobs, Brandy did shit.
I like to say what I think and watch snowflakes melt.
Wait wait wait.
Are you trying to suggest that peer pressure influences how we express ourselves in public? Does anyone else know about this?
I've NEVER heard that! And I don't think that you're allowed to insinuate about dark, dangerous ideas about stuff-and-stuff like that! I can see you through a scanner, darkly, by the way!
STOP DARKING!!! (Butt I don't mean that in a racist way, either.)
I guess we shouldn't be surprised that sarcasmic has never read A Scanner Darkly and has no clue what other work the title is referencing.
Can you please just drink yourself back into a coma and go pass out, faggot?
What utterly hilarious WIT! (Did yer mama help you write it?)
My mama is as dead as your fake wife, sarcasmic. Maybe you should see if Jovial Bob Stine has published a new edition of How To Be Funny since 1978.
>>Social pressure to have the 'right' opinion is pervasive in America today
always equally if not more easy to ignore it all and be one's self.
social pressure isn't always a bad thing..... some things should have people ostracized from society. you think 6yr olds are sexy, you should keep that shit to yourself..... and push it deep deep deep, lest you act on that depraved notion and more drastic action is warranted.
where that social pressure starts to go past the point of social benefit, is when it becomes a matter of two warring tribes taking positions for little reason more than the "other" tribe has staked the opposing position. instead of maintaining social unity, the unity is only maintained within the tribe, with the express purpose of blocking overall social unity with the other tribe.
for example, we once were close to the understanding that racism is bad, until one tribe pushed it too far and tried to say just being white makes you racist..... and all of the sudden the other tribe has people clamoring to outdo each other for just how close they can get to screaming "white power" without using those words. i could give more examples, but this is probably enough to trigger the idiots who will ignore the point and focus on exactly one half of that statement.
Lmfao. Holy fucking shit, the guy who got bounced for posting hardcore child pornography at Reason.com actually just typed this.
You needn't worry, shreek. The radical left is pro-groomer and pro-pedo now. You don't have to hide it.
so triggered, you had to pretend i was someone who apparently got booted who knows when...... just to have an easy straw man to attack.
So pathetic. You had to bust out one of your oldest and most well-known sockpuppets...... just to get someone to respond to you. This must be as thrilling for you as the first time you ever watched a 6 year old boy get sodomized.
can't argue with what they say..... just claim they are some sock puppet with absolutely no evidence. you are pathetic.
Oh, are you using they/them pronouns now, kiddie fucker?
By the way as soon as you manage to construct something approaching an argument I'll happily refute it. White supremacists hiding under your bed and cancel culture good because TEH CHILDRUN is not an argument. It's barely even a tautology.
provide proof i am..... whoever the fuck you are trying to claim i am..... or shut the fuck up.
Instead of secret police, Americans face Twitter mobs, sniffy neighbors, outraged co-workers, and upset bosses.
In the highly progressive Bay Area where I used to live, I suspect there is a lot of husbands being silent about their true opinions of when around their wives. There are a lot of adolescent girls in the area deciding that they are gender fluid. A typical pattern is that the progressive mother is vocally encouraging of their daughter's new identity, and the dad is conspicuously silent.
men who want to love their kid and not fight with the wife? OH THE HORROR!!!! this pressure must stop!!!!
Spoken like a true nutless faggot, shreek. True to form.
that's right.... real men beat their wives and chain less than perfect children in the basement.
Coming from a guy who actually fucks little kids, the sad attempt at a false dichotomy based on TEH CHILDREN is pretty fucking rich, shreek.
Maybe there's a middle ground between being a henpecked nutless loser faggot who acquiesces to his wife because he's a pathetic submissive bitch petrified of conflict and being a spousal abuser.
really digging in on the BS lie, i see.
Why'd you break your all-lowercase 4chan formatting for "BS", shreek? Did you forget which persona you were wearing again, kiddie fucker? Or did you "wife" as you to capitalize it and you had to comply because you're such a pathetic emasculated little pussy bitch?
or..... maybe you are just full of shit.
Just presenting an observation for what it is.
i get it. just saying it does not sound all that evil. it sounds a lot like being a grown up.
Right, an entire society of people just randomly all woke up one morning and decided to start censoring their own opinions for no reason whatsoever you fucking clown.
"Silence like a cancer grows"
and
"Everybody goes along to get along."
Lots of folks go with the flow—at least periodically….
lol
Lootveek fon Maeces opined that Christian National Socialism wasn't as bad as Bolchevism. JFK said Hitler "had in him the stuff of which legends are made." His daddy wanted the Brits to surrender and accept Germany's Catholic Leader. Social pressure exerts measurable force, as we saw in 1955.
I reject the assertion that the Germans built and operated gas chambers for killing people (during World War II).
If I express this view in just about any company I keep or am liable to find myself in, I risk not only vociferous rejection, but quite likely a sound beating in the bargain.
You BET I censor myself - to save my own hide.
I think this is the Overton Window.
Popular joke from the Soviet era:
—Comrade Rabinovich, do you have an opinion on this matter?
—Yes I do, but I don’t agree with it.
Another one: two Soviet guards patrolling outside the Kremlin one cold night. The first one says to the second one, "Comrade, what are you thinking about?" The second one says, "the same as you, comrade, the same as you". Replies the first one, "in which case you are under arrest!"
Cowardice is the first symptom of collectivism.
Dissemblers gonna dissemble.
Some of 2chili's examples seem counterintuitive. Unless I'm reading it wrong people state men are men and women are women publicly but in private they're all "gender is just a social construct"? Shouldn't that be the other way around?
"self-silence"?????
Yeah; Don't ever remember doing that...
Do remember being silenced on every single main-stream platform though for muttering curse words like Individual Liberty, Justice and U.S. Constitution. The last one seemed to be the biggest censor subject on the internet.. Must be illegal not to worship the Nazi-Regime.
Fixing this situation is no easy task, since there are no laws to reform, ...
Except that's not true at all. Adding political belief/viewpoint and political affiliation to the protected classes considered under the myriad anti-discrimination laws would easily fix the problem.
Of course, your neighbor might still hate you for supporting such-and-such a candidate or cause but your employer (current and future) couldn't ruin you financially for it.
Yes, if you're naive enough to believe that writing laws against X magically stops X from happening.
In actual fact, anti-discrimination laws are worse than worthless. Like rent control and minimum wage, they usually have the opposite effect of what they nominally intend to achieve.
Social pressure to have the right opinion is pervasive in every authoritarian country, and if you don't conform to the social pressure, your life will be destroyed.
How do you think Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia worked?
Buying a home in the United States appears to be one of the hardest ways to invest overseas. This article mainly aims to highlight the strong relationship between citizenship and the exercise of property rights, as well as to analyze the national legal requirements for foreigners interested in buying real estate in the United States. Detailed https://www.pilc.law/tr/amerikada-ev-almak/
"Fixing this situation is no easy task"
What is to be fixed? Wouldn't it be more concerning if Americans' public and private views were in lockstep? Certainly if one values independence, autonomy and individuality.
People self cancel because they are afraid of being fired or ostracized or be targeted by the government (see woodchipper incident for example of the latter)