Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

'The woke have no vision of the future' and the 'similarities between woke militants and the Bolsheviks who seized power in 1917'

What is "go woke go broke" (a right wing threat/hope) meant to mean if not "cancelled"? Or (again) is it ok when you do it?

Apparently the phrase was originally coined by author John Ringo.

 
Apparently the phrase was originally coined by author John Ringo.


You've exposed yourself again, you fucking stupid cunt. John Ringo is a total fucking wingnut. He happily attaches his name to crap like this. Note how his swivel-eyed op-ed is being approvingly reproduced by psychopathic Randroids.

Fuck off.
 
Apparently the phrase was originally coined by author John Ringo.

You haven't addressed my point tho have you? that you and others on the right using that stupid phrase is cancel culture, or an attempt at it
It's clear you dodged it til just now but what you got to say about that?
 
Structural imperatives that restrict people's life chances because of their class, sex or race and ruin many don't merit comment when it comes to bemoaning social marginalisation and economic ruin, I see. Everyone else can go hang but God forbid David Starkey loses a sinecure.
 
Structural imperatives that restrict people's life chances because of their class, sex or race and ruin many don't merit comment when it comes to bemoaning social marginalisation and economic ruin, I see. Everyone else can go hang but God forbid David Starkey loses a sinecure.

Exactly.

Civilisation and free speech is under threat from some students and twitter obsessives. My god. How will the entrenched wealth and power withstand this potent onslaught. They even got David why can't I say racist things Starky cancelld. The humanity!...
 
Some of these people are old enough to remember when the likes of Aldo Moro, Hanns Martin Schleyer and Airey Neave were being cancelled by soi dissant Leftists. You'd think they'd be a little bit more grateful for the relative peace and quiet of a Twitter row.
 
Some of these people are old enough to remember when the likes of Aldo Moro, Hanns Martin Schleyer and Airey Neave were being cancelled by soi dissant Leftists. You'd think they'd be a little bit more grateful for the relative peace and quiet of a Twitter row.

Well, exactly. How credible are these rape threats, anyway?

And Alastair Stewart got off very lightly, all things considered.
 
For balance - here’s CNN defending cancel culture and taking on one of Trumps tweets:


Fast-forward to 2020 for another example of how claims of cancel culture often warp reality.

"One of (the left's) political weapons is 'cancel culture' -- driving people from their jobs, shaming dissenters and demanding total submission from anyone who disagrees”.


This isn't to suggest that there aren't instances of overblown policing by those on the left.
err, except they're not. They're saying it's pretty much 99% a right wing myth.
Note to all; out of sheer clumsiness and laptop issues, I accidently 'liked' the idiotic post to which I respond here. I formally retract that, and apologise to all.
Marty1, your twattery knows no bounds.
 
err, except they're not. They're saying it's pretty much 99% a right wing myth.
Note to all; out of sheer clumsiness and laptop issues, I accidently 'liked' the idiotic post to which I respond here. I formally retract that, and apologise to all.
Marty1, your twattery knows no bounds.

You can undo that if you wish. Just click on the "Like" button again.
 
Don't think there is anything that needs the Illuminati to be invoked about saying there are billionaire types responsible for many of our problems, have massive influence and are selfish greedy cunts.

Which is why I found the comment by 8ball to be puzzling. If I didn't know better, I'd have thought it was "criticising billionaires is anti-Semitic" kind of nonsense.
 
'Cancel culture' is a bit of a clumsy term for all of this (alliteration usually trumps accuracy in these matters).

When it comes to choosing not to buy products from certain companies, it amounts to exactly the same thing as a boycott, does it not? With all the drawbacks and limitations that implies.
 
When it comes to choosing not to buy products from certain companies, it amounts to exactly the same thing as a boycott, does it not? With all the drawbacks and limitations that implies.

Sure, in terms of particular companies.

I've usually seen it used when internet attacks (sometimes involving some form of Twitter feed archaeology as opposed to something recently said) have resulted in people losing their jobs, or loss of sponsorship etc. out of a fear of a backlash against the sponsoring company/employer (which would likely involve boycotts among other things).
 
Sure, in terms of particular companies.

I've usually seen it used when internet attacks (sometimes involving some form of Twitter feed archaeology as opposed to something recently said) have resulted in people losing their jobs, or loss of sponsorship etc. out of a fear of a backlash against the sponsoring company/employer (which would likely involve boycotts among other things).

If someone posts something objectionable in public (e.g. Twitter), then how is it an "attack" for another member of the public to bring attention to it again later?
 
Back
Top Bottom