Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear' • Hacker News Board

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#661

Post by hannasanarion » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 4:51 PM UTC

jimbokun wrote: post #473

hannasanarion wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because the number of people who participate in an action influence its justness. When 1 person decides to make a new law, that's autocracy, and it's a bad thing. When a supermajority of voters decide to make a new law, that's democracy, and it's a good thing. When a couple dozen editors, CEOs, and DJs decided to end the Dixie Chicks' careers by banning them from access to all channels of outreach to the public,…

It’s generally a very small, unrepresentative number of people on Twitter responsible for canceling someone.

If that were true, why do you care?

If it's a small unrepresentative number of people who dislike a person, group, or thing, why would anybody care?

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#662

Post by hannasanarion » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

jokethrowaway wrote: post #521

hannasanarion wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Indeed, authoritarianism in general and Nazism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc in particular always starts with speech restrictions. The idea that free speech and authoritarianism are bed fellows doesn't make sense; these are mutually exclusive. This is a myth perpetuated by selective cultural memory. The Nazis were all about "free speech" before they were in power. They frequently complained about "Free speech" when paper…

(not parent throwaway) Just because nazis used their free speech right to do their propaganda, that doesn't mean free speech caused nazism. In order to do any propaganda (whether that's for a morally good or bad cause), you need to be able to talk to people. The first thing nazis did was to revoke free speech rights. That's an example of authoritarianism and free speech being opposites.

The parent commenter was claiming that free speech prevents nazism, which any honest look at the history of authoritarianism shows to be categorically untrue.

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#663

Post by jimbokun » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 4:57 PM UTC

hannasanarion wrote: post #661

jimbokun wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s generally a very small, unrepresentative number of people on Twitter responsible for canceling someone.

If that were true, why do you care? If it's a small unrepresentative number of people who dislike a person, group, or thing, why would anybody care?

Because those small groups of people frequently cause people to get fired, for spurious or outright false reasons.

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#664

Post by tstrimple » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 5:06 PM UTC

slothtrop wrote: post #516

tstrimple wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From your article: > Shor is still consulting in Democratic politics, but he is no longer working for a firm that restricts his freedom to publicly opine. This is why claims of "cancel culture" aren't taken seriously. If he was "cancelled", but is still gainfully employed in the field of his choice and expertise what does "cancelled" really mean?

Not being fucking fired, for one. Seems like a pretty bad faith sentiment. Not everyone fares as well finding work after cancel-culture has its way.

It's always amazing to me that so many proponents of "at will employment" suddenly run into issues with it when they are the ones suffering consequences for their own actions. It's fine when trans folk are fired for simply being trans, but when a someone is fired for a racist tweet then all of our liberties are somehow at stake. People get fired all the time for terrible reasons. People fired for their social media activities aren't special in any way.

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#665

Post by IAmWorried » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 5:49 PM UTC

throwaway316943 wrote: post #639

IAmWorried wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this could extend to major public figures, but offers no recourse to the average joe who doesn't have 100 hours of talking footage online. Deepfakes require a lot of data to produce. Anyone who doesn't have this much data, you could reliably assume the content is real.

> 100 hours of talking video You mean like zoom recordings? Yeah nobody has those.

Haha, good point. I didn't even really think of that.

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#666

Post by albedoa » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 5:59 PM UTC

_-david-_ wrote: post #373

kennywinker wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When he said send in the military to do "an overwhelming show of force". The military isn't going to walk through the crowd picking out the few people smashing windows or throwing bottles. That would not be an OVERWHELMING SHOW OF FORCE. They would march on the crowds, and almost inevitably use lethal force on them. Even if the target is only the ones throwing bottles or smashing windows, the military cannot and woul…

So whn you said "He called for using military force against civil rights activists" that was not actually accurate? Cotton only said against lawbreakers right?

People who don't recognize your username assumed you were making your request in good faith.

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#667

Post by notsureaboutpg » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 6:23 PM UTC

ed25519FUUU wrote: post #411

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #83

Not sure a 66 year old can truly understand what consequences young people can face. You can be completely blacklisted not only from your works being stocked, but even all means of promoting yourself too and in the most extreme cases get blacklisted from payment processors which I'm sure will trickle down and become more common over the next few years. End of the day you have to pay the bills and if you want them pai…

I wonder what "PC" terminology we use today will be a fireable offense if uttered in the future.

I think just today (or yesterday), Twitch had to backtrack on a statement celebrating "Womxn's History Month"

For the understanding of the 90% of people who didn't take Gender Studies in an elite coastal university (like I did), the term "womxn" used to be radical and super PC, a way to "reclaim" the word "woman" and both remove the word "man" (yes, as silly as it sounds, serious academics did this) and signify that "woman" as a term was more inclusive than just biological gender, including transgender people as well.

Nowadays, apparently the term "womxn" which was invented and used solely by extreme feminists is problematic and using it can lead to your public shaming on Twitter. Why? Because if you use "womxn" to signify that you are inclusive of non-biological women, then you are implying that the term "women" is not enough for non-biological women, and therefore, you are "othering" them and therefore you are transphobic.

https://twitter.com/Twitch/status/1366543370257002496

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#668

Post by notsureaboutpg » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 6:26 PM UTC

heterodoxxed wrote: post #354

dogman144 wrote: post #113

If you talk to someone who works/worked in publishing or the creative arts scenes (MFA programs, etc.), you'll see that KI is likely specifically addressing that crowd - his industry. I think a lot of the general populace is aware of the dynamics that he's talking about, but in publishing it's another world/level. Interesting example that's the norm in the space: the story "I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter…

| that's an insane dynamic to create in What do you think Twitter would have looked like in 1956 when James Baldwin published Giovanni's Room ? Is the problem "cancel culture" (a nebulous term which means little) or simply the result of giving everyone on earth a place to complain?

The problem is giving everyone a place to complain AND assuming their complaints are all valid just because they genuinely feel aggrieved.

The people who care about pronouns are less than 5% of American society. They are far wealthier, more educated, and more privileged than the rest of Americans, and there's no reason everyone else should have to tiptoe around in fear of them.

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#669

Post by xirbeosbwo1234 » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 6:45 PM UTC

tryonenow wrote: post #461

xirbeosbwo1234 wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we have people pretending it's new so they can drum up outrage and gain power. Because we have people playing the victim after being fired for being intolerable to work with. Most importantly, we have politicians adopting authoritarian attitudes as a reaction to it. Private companies have a right to "cancel" whomever they want, whether that takes the form of banning someone from a website or of canceling a co…

>Because we have people pretending it's new so they can drum up outrage and gain power. Because we have people playing the victim after being fired for being intolerable to work with This is the mindset at fault. This idea that intolerance is objective, when clearly it isn't. This idea that certain ideas, regardless of their merit, are simply intolerant and must be met with collective, unilateral intolerance, which t…

The US constitution gives an absolute right for private individuals to say whatever they want, whether this takes the form of "collective authoritarianism" or "rabid, authoritarian mobs attacking individuals for dissent" or "loud minorities dictating corporate action with a specific political slant."

The government cannot make decisions based on the content of speech. Period. Couching massive censorship that would require undoing the foundations of the country as support of freedom of speech is ironic indeed.

You can complain about cancel culture as much as you want. I would probably agree with you on a lot of it. However, when Ted Cruz talks about cancel culture in an attempt to coerce websites into changing their moderation policies, that is a different matter entirely.

(I am writing, again, from an entirely American perspective.)

Re: Sir Kazuo Ishiguro warns of young authors self-censoring out of 'fear'

#670

Post by loveistheanswer » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 6:56 PM UTC

kennywinker wrote: post #380

loveistheanswer wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MLK was hated by most and persecuted by the FBI as an evil communist because he spoke out against the war machine, and called for a radical revolution of values. Semmelweis was locked in a mental prison and beaten to death for suggesting that doctors should wash their hands. Socrates was sentenced to death for questioning the state. Jesus was crucified for challenging the established religious order. Giordano Bruno w…

You gave five examples of state violence to maintain existing social order. “Cancel culture” is not being done by the state. I agree, ideas can cause upheaval, and there will be resistance to those ideas. But have you considered that your resistance to the idea of holding people to account for their actions and words might be a resistance to a social change? I’ve heard a lot about cancel culture, but most of it has b…

>You gave five examples of state violence to maintain existing social order. “Cancel culture” is not being done by the state.

Isnt "the state", made up of people? To the person getting punished, why would they care who it is doing the punishing when the end result is the same?