John Muir is Canceled. Whos's Next?

[Nepperhan]

racially motivated

You’re wrong. Check LBJ’s upbringing. I’ll let it go at that so we don’t deflect the thread.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

ThinkingSapien:

gam197:

meltzerboy2:

I do not interpret this as “anti-gay sentiment”

You may not but everyone else does.

Here, you’ve enlisted the unverified support of everyone else to artificially support a position as popular.

There is alarge segment of the USA who do not like anti gay speech.

Ah, the goal post has shifted away from how one might evaluate King’s statement to the existence of people that have a certain position on speech that receives a certain evaluation. Have you abandoned the assertion that “everyone else” interprets his words as anti-gay sentiment?

I do not want Muir to go

Referenced to him are still around. You appear to by speaking from the position that all references to Muir have been purged from the historical record when nothing of the sort has occurred.

but if we

Is there anyone here that is a part of the club’s decision maker? Best I can tell, “We” have not done anything.

What is it that “we” did? Are you falsely attributing the actions of a private organization to a larger group?

a standard

What is this unidentified standard?

It does not matter where the statue is.

It does matter. Decisions on private property are private decisions unless they violate the law. Decisions for public property may be constrained by the public and by the First Amendment.

I think the episode was called “Groundhog Day”

I remember one where they send a message to Data. The only message they could send was the number 3.

it has to be everyone’s goal

No it doesn’t. People have no such obligation. Nor is there anything to enforce this non-existent obligation. What you are presenting here is a value judgement. You may find others that share it. But not everyone will.

but since I do not get that choice

You have a choice. But this forum might not be the place where that voice will have the most influence.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I think the episode was called “Groundhog Day”

Found the episode I was thinking about. It is called “Cause and Effect.”

 

[JonNC]

You’re wrong. Check LBJ’s upbringing. I’ll let it go at that so we don’t deflect the thread.

You deflected with your attack on Reagan.
Read what LBJ said in the aftermath of the GS
If you want me to assume LBJ’s motives were not of race, I want you to assume Reagan’s were not, either.

 

[Nepperhan]

If you want me to assume LBJ’s motives were not of race, I want you to assume Reagan’s were not, either.

Reagan was against civil rights legislation; LBJ was for helping poor folks. See the difference?

 

[JonNC]

Reagan was against civil rights legislation; LBJ was for helping poor folks. See the difference?

Read what LBJ said about securing the black vote, but of course, good Democrat that he was, he used the n word.

He helped them right into inter generational, dependence on government, poverty and destruction of the black family.

 

[Nepperhan]

Read what LBJ said

Many, many times I have read. So what? Conservatives have an ‘aha!’ moment over this but it means nothing.

 

[JonNC]

Many, many times I have read. So what?

Do, a little bit of prejudice is okay from a Democrat.

Conservatives have an ‘aha!’ moment over this but it means nothing.

Yep. It all means nothing.

 

[JanR]

We would all be much better off if the cancel culture would cancel itself.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

ThinkingSapien:

I do not interpret this as “anti-gay sentiment”

You may not but everyone else does.

Here, you’ve enlisted the unverified support of everyone else to artificially support a position as popular.

There is alarge segment of the USA who do not like anti gay speech.

Ah, the goal post has shifted away from how one might evaluate King’s statement to the existence of people that have a certain position on speech that receives a certain evaluation. Have you abandoned the assertion that “everyone else” interprets his words as anti-gay sentiment?

I do not want Muir to go

Referenced to him are still around. You appear to by speaking from the position that all references to Muir have been purged from the historical record when nothing of the sort has occurred.

but if we

Is there anyone here that is a part of the club’s decision maker? Best I can tell, “We” have not done anything.

What is it that “we” did? Are you falsely attributing the actions of a private organization to a larger group?

a standard

What is this unidentified standard?

It does not matter where the statue is.

It does matter. Decisions on private property are private decisions unless they violate the law. Decisions for public property may be constrained by the public and by the First Amendment.

I think the episode was called “Groundhog Day”

I remember one where they send a message to Data. The only message they could send was the number 3.

it has to be everyone’s goal

No it doesn’t. People have no such obligation. Nor is there anything to enforce this non-existent obligation. What you are presenting here is a value judgement. You may find others that share it. But not everyone will.

but since I do not get that choice

You have a choice. But this forum might not be the place where that voice will have the most influence

Your responses get longer and longer. People do not feel they have a choice and many like myself are sick of the cancel culture that takes away only certain statues and only certain historical figures depending on whom they think should go and whom they think should stay.

I for one agree with JanR and wish the cancel culture would cancel itself and be gone.

 

[meltzerboy2]

It might be a passing fad just like the #MeToo movement which I don’t recall hearing so much about anymore, after destroying many people’s lives and careers. Both are part of the Woke movement, I believe, which Obama actually spoke against. These movements are essentially the territory of youth, who eventually grow up and have to face the harsh realities of life.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

People do not feel they have a choice and many like myself are sick of the cancel culture that takes away only certain statues and only certain historical figures depending on whom they think should go and whom they think should stay.

I think there might be more sympathy for a situation that came from more than a private organization deciding to change the icons they use. Organizations remove and add icons to their brands regularly. Both real and fictional people are included in that.

But the use of the phrase “cancelled” as it has been used in recent threads has become so broad and non-specific that it could include someone taking down a picture in their house of someone that nolonger impresses them.

Both are part of the Woke movement, I believe, which Obama actually spoke against.

 

[gam197]

think there might be more sympathy for a situation that came from more than a private organization deciding to change the icons they use. Organizations remove and add icons to their brands regularly. Both real and fictional people are included in that.

But the use of the phrase “cancelled” as it has been used in recent threads has become so broad and non-specific that it could include someone taking down a picture in their house of someone that nolonger impresses them.

Private groups get lots of pressure on them, just think of all the threads on products like Aunt Jemima’s pancake syrup or Eskimo pies. John Muir is not a nobody but was important in that he was one of the first conservationist. There is a great deal of pressure being placed on univerisites and organization to comply and “expunge” historical figures because they were imperfect people like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington or Christopher Columbus yet little pressure to get rid of Martin Luther King Jr.

I think most people realize what the word cancel means. Martin Luther King Jr. has yet to be cancelled. His statues are still up, last time I checked.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Martin Luther King Jr. has yet to be cancelled.

Martin Luther King was murdered.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

Martin Luther King Jr. has yet to be cancelled.

Martin Luther King was murdered

So was John F Kennedy but that did not stop him prior to his murder stating

Kennedy once said of a donor who hadn’t backed his campaign but still wanted to be an ambassador: “I’m going to f*** him. I’m going to send him to one of those boogie republics in Central Africa.”

But, when it came to others, Kennedy sometimes punished even those who supported him to the hilt. Singer Sammy Davis Jr. strongly backed JFK in the 1960 campaign, even agreeing to postpone his wedding to a white actress to avoid alienating white voters. Burt Boyar, Davis’s biographer, notes that when Davis finally got married, after Kennedy’s election, Kennedy rewarded him by disinviting him from attending the inaugural.

Another figure who made some very questionable statements but there is a giant pavillion in Massachusetts dedicated to the life of President John F Kennedy Jr. Neither John F Kennedy or Martin Luther King Jr. has been cancelled.

Malcolm X was anti semitic yet they made a movie about that man’s life. T

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I just find it odd that a person that was murdered is labeled as “not being cancelled yet.” It looks even stranger when juxtaposed to the professor who was said to have been “cancelled” because the school decided to do a full investigation before responding to an incident reported by a student.

You do realize that there were people that did not like what King said and was trying to accomplish, harassed him, beat him, arrested him, and eventually killed him.

Does this not meet the criteria for your usage of the word “cancelled?”

If it does not, then why not and why does the still-employed professor meet the criteria?

 

[gam197]

I just find it odd that a person that was murdered is labeled as "not being cancelled yet. It looks even stranger when juxtaposed to the professor who was said to have been “cancelled” because the school decided to do a full investigation before responding to an incident reported by a student.

You do realize that there were people that did not like what King said and was trying to accomplish, harassed him, beat him, arrested him, and eventually killed him.

Does this not meet the criteria for your usage of the word “cancelled?”

If it does not, then why not and why does the still-employed professor meet the criteria?

What does murder have to do with cancelled. Abraham Lincoln was murdered but some of his statues have been torn down so his historical legacy is partially being cancelled. Now if all that statues of Martin Luther king Jr were torn down and the John F Kennedy Museum was spray painted red and destroyed, they’d both be in the process of being cancelled and we’d be on the same page.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

What does murder have to do with cancelled.

Cancel - verb

• To bring to nothingness
• To neutralize another’s strength
• To destroy

Murder has these effects. If someone murders a person to silence them and stop their speech with which one finds disagreement, this appears to be a form of being cancelled. Do you disagree?

Now if all that statues of Martin Luther king Jr were torn down

There’s another long-established word for what you are describing. It is “iconoclastic.” From the base words “icon” meaning image, likeness, or representation, and “clast” meaning destroy.

People that are “iconoclastic” are called “iconoclast.” Iconoclasts that seek to destroy the image of another, often for religious or political reasons (though not limited to these).

The earliest known usage of this word is from about the 8th century to refer to people who sought to stop the veneration of religions icons.

 

[gam197]

gam197:

What does murder have to do with cancelled.

Cancel - verb

• To bring to nothingness
• To neutralize another’s strength
• To destroy

Murder has these effects. If someone murders a person to silence them and stop their speech with which one finds disagreement, this appears to be a form of being cancelled. Do you disagree?

Now if all that statues of Martin Luther king Jr were torn down

There’s another long-established word for what you are describing. It is “iconoclastic.” From the base words “icon” meaning image, likeness, or representation, and “clast” meaning destroy.

People that are “iconoclastic” are called “iconoclast.” Iconoclasts that seek to destroy the image of another, often for religious or political reasons (though not limited to these).

The earliest known usage of this word is from about the 8th century to refer to people who sought to stop the veneration of religions icons.

So now it becomes a discussion about semantics.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

So now it becomes a discussion about semantics.

Word usage has been in question for over two threads.

Shared and agreed upon word usage is important for the exchange of thoughts and ideas. Without it, two people may not understand each other. Even worse, they may misunderstand each other, both thinking they now share a position!

If you have any legal professionals or engineers in your life, ask them about this. For such people are sometimes occupational in a position in which they must pay close attention to word usage.

That said, having observed your usage, it appears that the various people that have taken action to silence others through intimidation and death over the past several hundreds of years could be said to be “cancelling” people.