Society/Culture Has cancel culture gone too far?

[Gethelred]

Has he been cancelled?

 

[Chief]

Too much wokenrss and PC culture

Fascinating insight

 

[burge13]

Has he been cancelled?

Probably not. Wasn't exactly the point though

 

[Carringbush2010]

Probably not. Wasn't exactly the point though

So I assume the point was what Steve was saying about 'common sense' and 'personal responsibility'.

Fair enough, can't see the relevance to the thread though.

 

[burge13]

So I assume the point was what Steve was saying about 'common sense' and 'personal responsibility'.

Fair enough, can't see the relevance to the thread though.

And being offended isnt a big deal. Lesson some could learn

 

[Seeds]

Pauline hanson is currently facing hundreds of thousands on a court case cos she told someone to go back to another country?

Was what she said stupid? Absolutely and she should be called out for it. But wasting taxpayers money on a court case and penalising the person who said it hundreds of thousands of dollars is insane.

have we forgotton why racism is a bad thing? Its when it was used to discriminate against employment and consumption or incite violence.

none of which apply here. This is trivial school yard level teasing. Why the hell is it going to court?

 

[Chief]

She doesn't seem to be punished at the ballot box for it.

It will never be reduced if we let public figures like her get away with their racist crap.

 

[Big Papa Ted]

She doesn't seem to be punished at the ballot box for it.

It will never be reduced if we let public figures like her get away with their racist crap.

You're pretty happy to let Lydia Thorpe get away with it though tbf. (I'm sorry Chief I just couldn't help myself).

 

[Chief]

You're pretty happy to let Lydia Thorpe get away with it though tbf. (I'm sorry Chief I just couldn't help myself).

That's because you don't understand anything.

 

[Seeds]

She doesn't seem to be punished at the ballot box for it.

It will never be reduced if we let public figures like her get away with their racist crap.

So your attitude is lets criminalise it And make people pay 100s of thousands of dollars in court expenses And waste courts time?

ps. Its not only politicians who can get penalised here. Anyone who says some dumb stuff to the wrong person can get their life ruined financially by this. The penalty is extreme compared to the crime.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

So your attitude is lets criminalise it And make people pay 100s of thousands of dollars in court expenses And waste courts time?

ps. Its not only politicians who can get penalised here. Anyone who says some dumb stuff to the wrong person can get their life ruined financially by this. The penalty is extreme compared to the crime.

So you admit, it was a crime.

Interesting.

 

[Chief]

So let's link and get the facts:

Pauline Hanson denies ‘Pakistan’ tweet aimed at Mehreen Faruqi was racist | Pauline Hanson | The Guardian

Greens senator seeking $150,000 from One Nation leader, who wrote that Faruqi should ‘pack [her] bags and piss off back to Pakistan’

amp.theguardian.com

Pauline Hanson has argued in court that a tweet aimed at the Greens deputy leader, Mehreen Faruqi, was not based on her skin colour or ethnic origins.
Faruqi has filed a federal court lawsuit over a September tweet by Hanson, the leader of One Nation, who wrote that she should “pack [her] bags and piss off back to Pakistan”.
The tweet was in response to one sent by Faruqi about the death of Queen Elizabeth II in which she wrote she could not mourn the passing of the leader of a “racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonised peoples”.

So it's not a crime, but a civil wrong?

Lawyer folk?

 

[Chief]

ps. It's not only politicians who can get penalised here. Anyone who says some dumb stuff to the wrong person can get their life ruined financially by this. The penalty is extreme compared to the crime.

So if you're occupy a position with little influence and you say it to three followers, do you think anyone is coming after you?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Stealing a loaf of bread gets you convicted to a penal colony on the other sided of the world 250 odd years ago.

Seeking 150k because of a breach of the racial discrimination act is sound similar doesn't it.

We're talking about a senator who is in Australian politics, snarky insults (yeah I know this is not that) and combative rhetoric are part of the workplace.

I'm going to fairly speculate she's not really too fussed about what dumb ass Hanson said - she's just using this avenue in bad faith to stain Hanson, and get some coin on the way.

Like Hanson needs to be shown up anyway, she does that herself. I mean hanson just needs to speak and she'll shoot herself in her foot.

This doesn't really show Faruqi in a positive light, if anything it shows her as reactive and resentful IMO.

Her drive by of the queen is ok of course, yeah no worries there, that's all above board apparently, nothing to see here.

But tell someone to 'piss off back to Pakistan'?

Telling someone to go back to where they came from is of course very offensive and should carry some sort of penalty, but 150k? Certainly not.

Most people would just 'meh * off idiot, you just showed your true self ya moron' and move on.

I could go back to school years and drag up racial insults against me and bring those assailants to court, wouldn't have to work again ever and pass on a tidy sum to the next generation. But nah I'm not consumed by resentment.

I'll of course be labelled a 'hanson supporter, a bigot and a racist' by the over reactive hate consumed types on here.

Go for your life.

As much as despise Hanson and her types, this is utterly ridiculous IMO.

 

[Chief]

Telling someone to go back to where they came from is of course very offensive and should carry some sort of penalty, but 150k? Certainly not.

A judge will make that decision.

This seems a common mistake: Someone puts down a number, and the headlines and socials scream "THE LEFTIST COURTS ARE GIVING THIS MARXIST $150,000 COZ SHE GOT HER FEELINGS HURT!"

You can ask for what you want. The court decides or you settle before then.

 

[Carringbush2010]

A judge will make that decision.

This seems a common mistake: Someone puts down a number, and the headlines and socials scream "THE LEFTIST COURTS ARE GIVING THIS MARXIST $150,000 COZ SHE GOT HER FEELINGS HURT!"

You can ask for what you want. The court decides or you settle before then.

Yes I'm well aware, so is everyone else, even that dumb ass hanson, so what point are you making?

Are you claiming that seeking 150k for a breach of racial discrimination is not ridiculous or even possibly used in bad faith?

I could fairly speculate what your answer is.

 

[Chief]

Yes I'm well aware, so is everyone else, even that dumb ass hanson, so what point are you making?

My point is that YOUR comparison was erroneous.

Stealing a loaf of bread gets you convicted to a penal colony on the other sided of the world 250 odd years ago.

Seeking 150k because of a breach of the racial discrimination act is sound similar doesn't it.

Spelling it out mate:

One is a CRIMINAL process.

The other is a CIVIL process.

Starting off with that comparison muddies your whole argument.

Bringing up the colonial context gives your whole post an "victimised racist loud mouth" vibe.

 

[Carringbush2010]

My point is that YOUR comparison was erroneous.


Spelling it out mate:

One is a CRIMINAL process.

The other is a CIVIL process.

Starting off with that comparison muddies your whole argument.

Bringing up the colonial context gives your whole post an "victimised racist loud mouth" vibe.

That is YOUR opinion, and you're entitled to it.

My OPINION (which one would fairly assume would be a popular one, not an SRP BF one) is that seeking 150k for racial discrimination is ridiculous.

Virtually no one would deem hanson's discrimination as acceptable, not the point though.

And it is also inconsistent that sniping the queen, after her death, as Faruqi did is deemed ok.

Do you deem Farquqi's comments on the queen as acceptable?

 

[morningbrown]

Carringbush should probably learn what a civil case is.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

That is YOUR opinion, and you're entitled to it.

My OPINION (which one would fairly assume would be a popular one, not an SRP BF one) is that seeking 150k for racial discrimination is ridiculous.

Virtually no one would deem hanson's discrimination as acceptable, not the point though.

And it is also inconsistent that sniping the queen, after her death, as Faruqi did is deemed ok.

Do you deem Farquqi's comments on the queen as acceptable?

Is this the same queen that paid a heap of money to settle her pedophile son’s court cases?

 

[Chief]

My OPINION (which one would fairly assume would be a popular one, not an SRP BF one) is that seeking 150k for racial discrimination is ridiculous.

Shades of grey, friend.

What were the effects of that discrimination?

What is policy at this point?

What are the relative levels of reach or power?

Virtually no one would deem hanson's discrimination as acceptable, not the point though.

And it is also inconsistent that sniping the queen, after her death, as Faruqi did is deemed ok.

Do you deem Farquqi's comments on the queen as acceptable?

I don't even recall the comments. Googling....

'Unhinged and insensitive': Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi blasted over 'toxic' Queen tweet

Comments made in the wake of Queen Elizabeth II’s death by Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi have been slammed as “insensitive” and “ignorant”.

www.skynews.com.au

They are even more innocuous than I thought:

“Condolences to those who knew the Queen,” she wrote on Twitter.

“I cannot mourn the leader of a racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonised peoples.

“We are reminded of the urgency of Treaty with First Nations, justice & reparations for British colonies & becoming a republic.”

/\ None of this is even untrue.

The Queen is dead. You cannot defame the dead. Hanson would not be a party to an action between the Queen and Faruqi anyway.

These comments have nothing to do with Hanson apart from her need to virtue signal to her racist base.

So, are you trying to cite provocation as a defence for Hanson's racist comments?

Note that nobody else's comments are being actioned. Other people have called the comment insensitive, unhinged, pig-ignorant, embarrassing even for a second-year arts student, nihilistic, historical revisionism, toxic, "appaling", unseemly, poorly-informed, ahistorical (which it certainly isn't), an "inappropriate intervention" (oh how ironic), flies in the face of objective evidence (it doesn't), "not the day to play politics" (when IS the day?) and much more.

Only Hanson went racist. Big surprise.

 

[Seeds]

So if you're occupy a position with little influence and you say it to three followers, do you think anyone is coming after you?

It can still happen if one of those followers is someone who is highly litigious, deeply offended or thinks they can make money out of it.

It would be better if it was criminal rather than civil with a set 150 dollar fine everytime like minor speeding offence rather then the current approach where it mostly has no penalty but could come with a multi thousand dollar penalty if it's said to the wrong person. Penalties should be determined by the action not whether or not a person is offended. And penalties should fit the seriousness of the crime.

 

[Chief]

It can still happen if one of those followers is someone who is highly litigious, deeply offended or thinks they can make money out of it.

Does it?

Has it?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Shades of grey, friend.

What were the effects of that discrimination?

What is policy at this point?

What are the relative levels of reach or power?




I don't even recall the comments. Googling....

'Unhinged and insensitive': Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi blasted over 'toxic' Queen tweet

Comments made in the wake of Queen Elizabeth II’s death by Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi have been slammed as “insensitive” and “ignorant”.

www.skynews.com.au

They are even more innocuous than I thought:



/\ None of this is even untrue.

The Queen is dead. You cannot defame the dead. Hanson would not be a party to an action between the Queen and Faruqi anyway.

These comments have nothing to do with Hanson apart from her need to virtue signal to her racist base.

So, are you trying to cite provocation as a defence for Hanson's racist comments?

Note that nobody else's comments are being actioned. Other people have called the comment insensitive, unhinged, pig-ignorant, embarrassing even for a second-year arts student, nihilistic, historical revisionism, toxic, "appaling", unseemly, poorly-informed, ahistorical (which it certainly isn't), an "inappropriate intervention" (oh how ironic), flies in the face of objective evidence (it doesn't), "not the day to play politics" (when IS the day?) and much more.

Only Hanson went racist. Big surprise.

You're trying to justify suing for 150k for a racially motivated comment. Ok, no surprise coming from you.

You're also trying to justify Faruqi's comments were ok, coz, 'the queen is dead, you can't defame the dead' lol, again no surprise.

Willing to bet you'd think differently if Faruqi had passed and the queen tweeted 'can't support someone who was an irrational progressive and willingly displays disdain for the monarchy'

Would've been better for Faruqi not to use the queens death for a drive by comment though, and not comment at all, but hey she's a pollie and resorted to dirty politics on socials.

You'll know I'm no fan of the hanson, Faruqi or the queen, for hanson to throw a racially motivated comment like that is worthy of comdemnation and even a penalty, Faruqi's comments about the queen were not necessary and baited dumb ass hanson hook, line and sinker.

Either either, in no known universe is pursuing such a heavy penalty is valid, regardless if it's legal recourse.

 

[Carringbush2010]

And being offended isnt a big deal. Lesson some could learn

For some being offended is though, genuinely are, regardless of how innocuous to most that may seem.

I'm going to fairly assume that you believe that some use faux offence, or even go looking for offence, in bad faith, to cancel in the court of public opinion.

I'm going to agree with you, but I don't think it's widespread, just msm and social media painting 'offence' as the popular belief, when in the real world it isn't.