For one thing, the ones you want canceled are mostly not “pro-Hamas,” they’re just failing to condemn the attack on Israel. That’s different from endorsing the attack. Still inexcusable in my book, but it’s a distinction that is important in understanding what’s going on. They are on the side of the Palestinians in this conflict (the rig…
For one thing, the ones you want canceled are mostly not “pro-Hamas,” they’re just failing to condemn the attack on Israel. That’s different from endorsing the attack. Still inexcusable in my book, but it’s a distinction that is important in understanding what’s going on. They are on the side of the Palestinians in this conflict (the right side, in my view), but they incorrectly think that means that nothing done to Israel is ever wrong just because Israel is an oppressor. This, of course, is just as wrong as believing the IDF bombing campaigns in Gaza are justified as a response to Hamas even though Israel has no real plan other than vengeance and killing thousands of civilians.
If there was a segment of the left that were merely pro-white and refused to condemn terrorist attacks on people of color like the Charleston church massacre, would the left tolerate their presence within their social circles or would they get canceled and isolated?
In 1978, the ACLU took a controversial stand for free speech by defending a neo-Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie , where many Holocaust survivors lived. The notoriety of the case caused some ACLU members to resign, but to many others the case has come to represent the ACLU’s unwavering commitment to principle. In fact, many of the laws the ACLU cited to defend the group’s right to free speech and assembly were the same laws it had invoked during the Civil Rights era, when Southern cities tried to shut down civil rights marches with similar claims about the violence and disruption the protests would cause. Although the ACLU prevailed in its free speech arguments, the neo-Nazi group never marched through Sk
Do you maybe want to try again? “Pro-white” and “pro-the Palestinian people who have been living in an open-air prison after being kicked out of their ancestral homes” are not remotely the same.
I agree that the murder of civilians should be condemned, and it is wrong of the people on the left who failed to do so. However, I don’t see you condemning the murder of a Palestinians and the theft of their land by illegal settlers in the West Bank. No one is perfect, and someone need not be shunned simply because of a failure to condemn.
For one thing, the ones you want canceled are mostly not “pro-Hamas,” they’re just failing to condemn the attack on Israel. That’s different from endorsing the attack. Still inexcusable in my book, but it’s a distinction that is important in understanding what’s going on. They are on the side of the Palestinians in this conflict (the right side, in my view), but they incorrectly think that means that nothing done to Israel is ever wrong just because Israel is an oppressor. This, of course, is just as wrong as believing the IDF bombing campaigns in Gaza are justified as a response to Hamas even though Israel has no real plan other than vengeance and killing thousands of civilians.
If there was a segment of the left that were merely pro-white and refused to condemn terrorist attacks on people of color like the Charleston church massacre, would the left tolerate their presence within their social circles or would they get canceled and isolated?
Nothing new here, but ….
In 1978, the ACLU took a controversial stand for free speech by defending a neo-Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie , where many Holocaust survivors lived. The notoriety of the case caused some ACLU members to resign, but to many others the case has come to represent the ACLU’s unwavering commitment to principle. In fact, many of the laws the ACLU cited to defend the group’s right to free speech and assembly were the same laws it had invoked during the Civil Rights era, when Southern cities tried to shut down civil rights marches with similar claims about the violence and disruption the protests would cause. Although the ACLU prevailed in its free speech arguments, the neo-Nazi group never marched through Sk
Do you maybe want to try again? “Pro-white” and “pro-the Palestinian people who have been living in an open-air prison after being kicked out of their ancestral homes” are not remotely the same.
I agree that the murder of civilians should be condemned, and it is wrong of the people on the left who failed to do so. However, I don’t see you condemning the murder of a Palestinians and the theft of their land by illegal settlers in the West Bank. No one is perfect, and someone need not be shunned simply because of a failure to condemn.
Also, isn’t cancel culture meant to be bad?