Social Media Outrage/Cancel Culture

[swampfrog]

From punchable to punched. Should be interesting watching the various narratives...

[swampfrog]

Another expansion to the outrage culture. Social justice activists take on knitting.

[Bo Diddley]

Another expansion to the outrage culture. Social justice activists take on knitting.

One of my most vocal ultra right wing relatives also knits! Coincidence? I doubt it.

[swampfrog]

One of my most vocal ultra right wing relatives also knits! Coincidence? I doubt it.

Burn her!

[frank ryan]

Another expansion to the outrage culture. Social justice activists take on knitting.

Speaking of the tone of discourse and violence. I wonder when the next member of the press will be attacked at one Trump’s rallies.

[swampfrog]

Speaking of the tone of discourse and violence. I wonder when the next member of the press will be attacked at one Trump’s rallies.

There's no doubt the tendency for confrontation to result in violence escalation seems to fueled from multiple sources. Trump being a source (among many). It's interesting looking at least one of the statements made by Cohen and how it might fuel physical violence,

"He speaks in a code. And I understand the code because I've been around him for a decade."

This is especially problematic, in addition to plausible deniability, there's the likely intentional misinterpretation by extremists. He's both child and agent of chaos.

For those prone to aggression, the barriers to acting it out seem to be eroding. It doesn't help that many are doing their best to provoke it.

[Walter Sobchak]

Let's just put it all to rest. It's a shame it happened. The kids didn't start it, but it's a shame they are being bestowed sainthood. One takeaway from this whole thing is the limited value of twitter. It's just an outrage machine all the way around.

Another takeaway... the mainstream media sucks and deserves all the scorn that has been heaped upon them.

Embedded Tweet

[snowcat]

Why I invented Titania McGrath
spiked columnist Andrew Doyle on his infamous woke Twitter character.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/12/why-i-invented-titania-mcgrath/

The obsession with victimhood from predominantly bourgeois political commentators is something I have always found inherently funny. It’s a phenomenon that has been amplified to a great extent by social media. This extremely vocal minority of activists enjoy pontificating to the masses from their online lectern, berating those who fall short of their moral expectations, and endlessly trawling through old tweets in the hope of discovering a misjudged phrase or sentiment that could justify a campaign of public shaming. In their eyes, there is no possibility of redemption. The most vicious remarks you’ll find on social media come from the racist far right and woke intersectionalists. They are two heads of the same chimera.

[swampfrog]

This is my current favorite article on this topic. Evolutionary reasoning for why the current outrage culture is emerging.

Outrage culture is simply the calamitization of the mundane. It is a process by which group solidarity can be lazily achieved by combatting non-existent crises. Whether it’s an actor fabricating a hate crime, journalists inflating the menace of a boy in a hat, or academics creating blacklists, our outrage satisfies a deep desire to unite in overcoming a common threat.

Evolution made a bet that hijacking our brain’s pain and pleasure centers to respond to social approval or disapproval would increase our odds of survival. Clearly, it paid off.

When we look for signals, we’ll often broaden our definition of the signal to make more observations fit.

Along the same lines, our increasing prosperity has led us to expand our definition of what constitutes a threat. As we grow accustomed to the marvels of modern life, we scrutinize every minor indecency. As William von Hippel suggests in The Social Leap, our adjustment to foods that don’t kill us and devices that protect us allow minor concerns to stand out in sharper relief.

Under these conditions, the mundane becomes the catastrophic. You can find some entertaining examples here, here, and here.

There are at least two reasons for why we calamitize the mundane. First, we weren’t built for comfort; we evolved for stress and conflict. Second, we have a coalitional instinct to be good group members. Plainly, we want conflict and we want allies to help us resolve it.

Outrage culture allows us to satisfy these urges. By broadening the definition of calamities, we create new problems for which we need allies to solve. Moreover, what we categorize as problems, and the solutions we propose, serve as indicators of our tribal affiliation.

Our outrage endears to those in our in-group. It is a flag to rally around and an enemy to defeat; a common cause built around a non-existent crisis. Only by banding together can we combat the threat of risqué Christmas music and white girls in cheongsams. Outrage is a destructive drug that satiates our primal desire for group solidarity.

[SeattleUte]

I agree. We have it too good in the US.

[wuapinmon]

When we look for signals, we’ll often broaden our definition of the signal to make more observations fit.

I see this in Christians all the time. You look for signals and can square any heinous, horrible, or evil act with God's Will through torturing the situation to make it fit. A child gets raped and murdered? God's will be done. The Beltway Sniper kills a father of six? God needed him beyond the veil, and this will teach those kids some lesson that only God knows they need.

You can make some truly awful shit be God's will if you look hard enough for signals that match your narrative.

[creekster]

I see this in Christians all the time. You look for signals and can square any heinous, horrible, or evil act with God's Will through torturing the situation to make it fit. A child gets raped and murdered? God's will be done. The Beltway Sniper kills a father of six? God needed him beyond the veil, and this will teach those kids some lesson that only God knows they need.

You can make some truly awful shit be God's will if you look hard enough for signals that match your narrative.

Did that make you feel better? Because that's all those people are trying to do, feel better when faced with awful things. It doesn't mean it's God's will or that they truly believe that God willed those things, and I think you realize that.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Did that make you feel better? Because that's all those people are trying to do, feel better when faced with awful things. It doesn't mean it's God's will or that they truly believe that God willed those things, and I think you realize that.

Yeah, that was an awfully cynical post.

[Walter Sobchak]

Did that make you feel better? Because that's all those people are trying to do, feel better when faced with awful things. It doesn't mean it's God's will or that they truly believe that God willed those things, and I think you realize that.

Look, wuap's Bishop has been saying some real mean things lately. So back off buster!

[wuapinmon]

Did that make you feel better? Because that's all those people are trying to do, feel better when faced with awful things. It doesn't mean it's God's will or that they truly believe that God willed those things, and I think you realize that.

Theodicy is a real thing, and I've been bullied by those who wield it like a cudgel--and I do not react well to bullying, as I'm sure you all know after a decade of my being in your group. And, no it didn't make me feel better. Max Weber shared your opinion, and Peter Berger took it a step further in The Social Construction of Reality in which he posits that our entire social order in the modern age (meaning human civilization, during or after the paleolithic) arose as an attempt by groups of people to make sense of all the bad shit that happens in the world, especially that which seems "unfair" or "undeserved." We even see it dealt with the New Testament in Matthew 5:45, "For He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."

The nihilist answer to this question is that you didn't exist for most of eternity until only recently, and it will soon go back to being that way again. There is no unseen hand at work. Life's a bitch and then you die.

Most people reject, outright that this is all there is, and that life is brief, brutal, and pointless. Therefore, Berger's attempt to give sense meaning to our world. Hence the belief in a higher power. Hence the interpretation of that power's will towards us. We want to make sense of this world, have it all mean something. This comforts most, because the alternative is depressing.

It reminds me of George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life. He wishes he'd never been born and his town of Bedford Falls is shown to be a crime-ridden awful place called Pottersville full of poor people and misery, with one fat cat (Potter) in control of all the capital. He is shaken from his self-pity and wishes for his old life back, and goes back to Bedford Falls to save everyone and get the angel Clarence his wings "the bell rings."

The shitty part about that film is that Pottersville is the world we actually inhabit, in a global sense. Bedford Falls is an ideal that cannot be reached, save by a few (e.g., First World vs Third World). In essence the film is a theodicy of capitalism. It could all be great if we all were just a little altruistic instead of greedy. It's a perfect post-war theodicy attempting to rouse Americans to the selflessness that prevailed during the War, and stave off the greed that was coming into society once the specter of death and national annihilation were diminished.

So, it doesn't make me feel better to point out the signals that are interpreted in the Name of the Father. I take no joy in signaling this behavior as self-serving delusion. I'm no better in dealing with my own shit; I just don't ascribe my dad's horrific death to God's Will. My dad died because shit happens, not because God or any other deity zapped him.