“I call on Chancellor Javier Reyes and the University of Massachusetts administration to denounce the Canary Mission and publicly state its defense of student activists who are doxxed on the website,” writes Owen Ray.
Speech is being discouraged and student’s futures threatened
I find it funny that leftists are suddenly against cancel culture. With that said, I’m against cancel culture even in these circumstances. I find it difficult to sympathize with the people being targeted here, but my principle remains that a private individual should not experience mass harassment or lose his job for expressing views which, however offensive, are not related to that job.
I admit I would have a hard time interacting, even in a professional capacity, with someone I knew held such views. (I’m surprised by that - I thought I was almost unphasable.) I can see why that would play a role in a company’s hiring decisions. I’m not sure how to reconcile that (and the general principle that as a private individual, I don’t have the obligation to interact with someone I don’t like) with my belief that a culture of protecting free speech requires that people’s careers won’t be destroyed for what they might say outside of work.
Leftists have ever been for (so-called) “cancel culture”? Since when?
According to this survey by the Pew Research Center, liberal Democrats are much more likely to consider “cancel culture” to mean “actions taken to hold others accountable” and conservative Republicans are much more likely to consider it to mean “censorship of speech or history”.
So you only associate with your fellow Klan members?
Suddenly I’m much less certain that people getting fired for “racism” were actually being racist. But I’m not lonely - I think you’ll find that your position regarding this issue is actually much less popular among the general public than it is in certain specific spaces (such as Lemmy).
As of January 2019, the site had profiles of 1,853 individuals and 563 professors. Canary Mission targets Arab and Muslim students and faculty in particular. Blacklisted individuals have reported being questioned by employers, graduate schools, and the FBI about their support for Palestinian rights after Canary Mission reached out. They have been put on leave, been denied bank accounts, and received death threats.
The FBI did question some people on that website, but not necessarily because of that website. For example, they questioned one person on that website because of his Facebook post:
We are all RESISTANCE ! We are all #hamas !
Note to FBI: views expressed in quotations do not necessarily reflect those of FlowVoid, its subsidiaries, or its employees
I find it funny that leftists are suddenly against cancel culture. With that said, I’m against cancel culture even in these circumstances. I find it difficult to sympathize with the people being targeted here, but my principle remains that a private individual should not experience mass harassment or lose his job for expressing views which, however offensive, are not related to that job.
I admit I would have a hard time interacting, even in a professional capacity, with someone I knew held such views. (I’m surprised by that - I thought I was almost unphasable.) I can see why that would play a role in a company’s hiring decisions. I’m not sure how to reconcile that (and the general principle that as a private individual, I don’t have the obligation to interact with someone I don’t like) with my belief that a culture of protecting free speech requires that people’s careers won’t be destroyed for what they might say outside of work.
That’s as far as I need to go nowadays. Everything after is not worth reading.
Leftists have ever been for (so-called) “cancel culture”? Since when?
So you won’t associate with anyone that doesn’t like white supremaicst settler-colonialism? So you only associate with your fellow Klan members?
According to this survey by the Pew Research Center, liberal Democrats are much more likely to consider “cancel culture” to mean “actions taken to hold others accountable” and conservative Republicans are much more likely to consider it to mean “censorship of speech or history”.
https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/05/19/americans-and-cancel-culture-where-some-see-calls-for-accountability-others-see-censorship-punishment/
Suddenly I’m much less certain that people getting fired for “racism” were actually being racist. But I’m not lonely - I think you’ll find that your position regarding this issue is actually much less popular among the general public than it is in certain specific spaces (such as Lemmy).
This isn’t cancel culture:
I admit that being questioned by the FBI and denied bank accounts is pretty unusual, but the rest of that sounds like normal cancel culture.
Cancel culture is boycotting for accountability, this is blacklisting.
I think it’s accountability when you agree with the boycott and blacklisting when you don’t.
Individuals can’t blacklist, only organizations and institutions. Individuals boycott.
The FBI did question some people on that website, but not necessarily because of that website. For example, they questioned one person on that website because of his Facebook post:
Note to FBI: views expressed in quotations do not necessarily reflect those of FlowVoid, its subsidiaries, or its employees
Source?
Edit: I genuinely would like a source.
https://theintercept.com/2018/06/24/students-for-justice-in-palestine-fbi-sjp/
Thanks.
Hah, that’s a little more spicy than the standard “Israel made Hamas do it”.