No one should feel entitled to shame another. Shame is only destructive, and that's why is used as a tool for manipulating others. Life shouldn't be lived according to what entitled others think about how it should be lived. Shame and guilt are emotions that cause trauma, no wonder many people suffer from it in a very demanding society
In cancel culture, the real question isn't whether naming and shaming is right or wrong but what purpose it serves. It provides easy social validation and a sense of moral superiority through group identity. By joining the attack on someone, often anonymously, people can feel righteous without needing to understand the issue or take responsibility. This behavior is driven by resentment and the satisfaction of tearing others down, not by constructive dialogue or accountability. It’s more about quick, effortless moral posturing and social approval than building something positive.
Cancel culture is inflated because those who can set tribal sentiments in motion can harvest notoriety and dark publicity. You might not feel positively but at least you know someone exists and if the other side decided that one minorities negativity means it’s a positive for their minority.
McCarthyism is such a false comparison. It wasn't the shaming that did the damage, it was the very real institutional persecution and blacklisting. The shaming of "cancel culture" is a mild annoyance compared to McCarthyism.
Shame is really a scale of guilt, which is the basis of judgement, to which there is no end. In fact the function of guilt is projection no matter the subject or direction. It's a toxic idea of the nature of life, living beings. In guilt, no one is spared of it's wrath in its scheme of extension. It is the most dangerous idea in the universe. But it is also NOT TRUE! One is NOT sinful nor can sin be brought to reality, that it would somehow be a violation of reality. I would argue one is inherently innocent no matter the belief otherwise. To others is to judge oneself. I had heard it said that the world is literally a guilt trip. Is quite a radical statement, I cannot fathom at present. But one might consider guilt/fear to be inextricably linked forever were it real. But there is no doubt it is believed and sworn to. It can and will be overcome in every mind because illusions cannot last.
Naming and a Shaming is not a positive effective way to bring about social change; dialog, debate, education, protest are more effective tools for social change than humiliation and shame.
Pot calling the kettle black? Shaming is effective when the person shaming is not projecting their own actions. People can start by not being hypocritical.... otherwise it's just bullying.
I think he steps over himself in the first 4 minutes. Having the reggae shows/production etc damaged would have indirectly hurt a lot of people who were not joining in with the rhetoric. This heavy-handed means of policing other people/groups/cultures is too blunt.
The other thing to consider, and I think Sophie covers this well, is who is given the authority to decide who is canceled and for what? Example - People were canceled during COVID for knowingly taking risks that could spread a virus. This suggests that AIDS could lead to the same reaction. Of course it couldn’t (and shouldn’t) but that is my opinion and a mob rule could think very differently, which makes for a disturbing thought.
And finally, he invokes law as a measure for people like Schofield. He isn’t saying those who make the laws decide who can or can’t be shamed, right? Right?
Chirs-td4rb ... Touche'! Insecurity is behind negativity. Teach your children the right and when they are grown they will still do the right. Teaching at least the basics of psychology in school my be the best thing for both the individual and society. Universal Sovereign Citizen
Such a pathetic and (brutally) ignorant proposition. Sophie’s opening sums it up: who the hell decides who (and why, and how, and when) should be punished? Self entitled guardians of the truth? In the name of ‘progress’? Shame on you.
Sophie Scott-Brown is just telling the opposite of what you claim. She is against gatekeeping. It's obvious you can't grasp a rhetoric and that you just don't like her. One a side note I used to DJ with Shut Up & Dance. Now who is policing who? It's you it seams !
You will note that all speakers here aren't part of a disfranchised group. Please keep speaking in the name of the recurrently targeted or silenced. Like bigots academics, they have no idea how it's like.
