My only gripe with this piece is the idea that the activist class has actually taken over the Democratic Party.
If this were true, I think at least one demand by the activist class would have been met by now. I would say that the Democrats are very interested in vocally appeasing the activist class, but are antagonistic to actually legislating anything they want. Otherwise we would have been getting "Biden Bucks" since last January, an emergency action would've at least temporarily made healthcare free and universal, and probably Build Back Better would already be passed.
Feb 11, 2022Ā·edited Feb 11, 2022Liked by Freddie deBoer
Noah Smith recently re-posted a blog post to the effect of "the state isn't the only one who can limit your freedom." His forward noted that it was intended as a shot at the right, who engage in the delusion that the employee-employer relationship is somehow free and consensual. He stated that it now read like a critique of the left, with idea that's it not censorship if a corporate monopoly does it.
"Of course the Republicans and their anti-CRT and book burning bills are a disgrace."
Anti-CRT and book burning are two different things. CRT as an underpinning of school curricula is the real disgrace, and libs are just mad that we're finally putting a spotlight on the racial hysteria they're poisoning our children with. The voters agree with me.
One point to add to your closing is that this is also another social signal to hold your tongue. I have stopped believing lockstep with my fellow NYT-NPR liberals for the past few years, but with few exceptions, any time something comes up around which I am not a 100% Orthodox Mainstream Good Guy Liberal, I bite my tongue. Honestly, I just don't want to lose my relationships.
I am sure it is the same way among non-Trump conservatives in their circles. I really don't think mainstream liberals understand that there are people around them with the best of intentions but who are terrified of being excommunicated from their very real life tribe.
Freddie, I agree with you that the Rogan controversy can easily lead to a chilling effect. The one thing I note, however, is what you say about the left's new views on free speech, i.e, that censorship only applies to state action.
I'm a little older than you, but I remember in the mid-1980s until probably the early 2000s, that such an argument was made by not a few people on the right. Some even argued that the First Amendment only prohibits the FEDERAL government from abridging press and speech rights and from establishing a state religion.
While I disagree with that thinking (although in a free market society, I accept the reality that private businesses can make their own market decisions,) I think it's very much a matter of turnabout being fair play. Now that the right has more than a little skin in the free speech game, suddenly they have an expansive view of free speech and press. It's like the prisoner condemned to die suddenly "finding God."
"Many liberals are pretty much entirely opposed to free speech as a concept and have developed a whole weird set of made up facts about it.". By "liberals" did you mean 'woke'?
People like Jonathan Chait, Stephen Pinker, Jonathan Haidt, as far as I can know, call themselves 'liberal' but they will object to this particular accusation.
Honestly don't see how "free speech" as a concept survives this, even with a "conservative" takeover. Censorship is useful and powerful, free speech is a difficult, sometimes contradictory, and often unpopular commitment that can be dashed in a moment of weakness.
To conflate "wokeness" with health misinformation and to then base a whole opinion piece on that error is disingenuous at best. How on earth is people taking a stand against misinformation "wokeness"?
I honestly didn't even know who Joe Rogan was before this controversy. I did know that Spotify is a lousy, homogenizing music streaming platform that rips off artists.
Eh you should head over to Rod Dreherās blog today. He can rail against censorship and cancel culture in on breath and then pivot to trying to get a guy fired for liking to get his kink on in the next.
The amount of hypocrisy this debate generates is mind boggling.
Correct if I am wrong isn't it the opposition to Rogan came mainly From Medical establishment on the ground that he is adovcsting/selling covid medicines unsupported by science? If that's the case, why should he get a pass during a pandemic that is still going ?
Iām also trying to remember back when conservatives would start letter writing campaigns and threaten to boycott advertisers because there was a gay character on Maud or The Golden Girls or whatever. Or boycotting Disney for hosting Gay Days.
Was that regarded as censorship back in the day, or were letter writing campaigns and boycotts thought to be legitimate political speech?
From the bottom of my heart, thank you again, Freddie. The Rogan stuff is so depressing. Ever since Trump won in 2016, the left-of-center has slowly been losing its goddamn mind. It's been one moral panic after another.
With every controversy where I find myself not in lockstep with mainstream liberal opinion, I only grow more depressed and alienated. Since 2020, I've slowed way down on posting on Facebook because I'm utterly fucking terrified of getting mobbed by angry liberals over a "problematic" statement and losing friends. Holding my tongue on the Joe Rogan stuff is just the latest example. So I go underground in private forums instead. That provides a soothing lifeline. I suffer from depression and I'm very conflict avoidant. Woke politics are poison for someone like me.
The good news is that I work at a job that requires no commitments to wokeness at all. In Summer 2020, I thought we were in trouble, but DEI statements have slowed way down since then. Still, I worry that all it takes is one disgruntled SJW to get me fired. I don't share that same anxiety if some MAGA freak calls me a libcuck or whatever.
Thanks again Freddie and thank you to all the regulars here. I don't know where I'd be without you guys.
This is a good post. But, I think Rogan and others can be limited by private industry for particularly egregious inaccuracies. Like for most journalistic operations, accuracy should be a prime directive, and policing blatant disregard for accuracy is good and responsible.
Clearly, other agendas can be secretly validated at the same time, which is a problem. But I donāt want my platform to support hosts or participants who ātalk shitā that includes pretty massive departures from reality. Hard to police that standard, but I donāt mind erring with that as the goal.
My only gripe with this piece is the idea that the activist class has actually taken over the Democratic Party.
If this were true, I think at least one demand by the activist class would have been met by now. I would say that the Democrats are very interested in vocally appeasing the activist class, but are antagonistic to actually legislating anything they want. Otherwise we would have been getting "Biden Bucks" since last January, an emergency action would've at least temporarily made healthcare free and universal, and probably Build Back Better would already be passed.
Noah Smith recently re-posted a blog post to the effect of "the state isn't the only one who can limit your freedom." His forward noted that it was intended as a shot at the right, who engage in the delusion that the employee-employer relationship is somehow free and consensual. He stated that it now read like a critique of the left, with idea that's it not censorship if a corporate monopoly does it.
"Of course the Republicans and their anti-CRT and book burning bills are a disgrace."
Anti-CRT and book burning are two different things. CRT as an underpinning of school curricula is the real disgrace, and libs are just mad that we're finally putting a spotlight on the racial hysteria they're poisoning our children with. The voters agree with me.
One point to add to your closing is that this is also another social signal to hold your tongue. I have stopped believing lockstep with my fellow NYT-NPR liberals for the past few years, but with few exceptions, any time something comes up around which I am not a 100% Orthodox Mainstream Good Guy Liberal, I bite my tongue. Honestly, I just don't want to lose my relationships.
I am sure it is the same way among non-Trump conservatives in their circles. I really don't think mainstream liberals understand that there are people around them with the best of intentions but who are terrified of being excommunicated from their very real life tribe.
Freddie, I agree with you that the Rogan controversy can easily lead to a chilling effect. The one thing I note, however, is what you say about the left's new views on free speech, i.e, that censorship only applies to state action.
I'm a little older than you, but I remember in the mid-1980s until probably the early 2000s, that such an argument was made by not a few people on the right. Some even argued that the First Amendment only prohibits the FEDERAL government from abridging press and speech rights and from establishing a state religion.
While I disagree with that thinking (although in a free market society, I accept the reality that private businesses can make their own market decisions,) I think it's very much a matter of turnabout being fair play. Now that the right has more than a little skin in the free speech game, suddenly they have an expansive view of free speech and press. It's like the prisoner condemned to die suddenly "finding God."
"Many liberals are pretty much entirely opposed to free speech as a concept and have developed a whole weird set of made up facts about it.". By "liberals" did you mean 'woke'?
People like Jonathan Chait, Stephen Pinker, Jonathan Haidt, as far as I can know, call themselves 'liberal' but they will object to this particular accusation.
Honestly don't see how "free speech" as a concept survives this, even with a "conservative" takeover. Censorship is useful and powerful, free speech is a difficult, sometimes contradictory, and often unpopular commitment that can be dashed in a moment of weakness.
To conflate "wokeness" with health misinformation and to then base a whole opinion piece on that error is disingenuous at best. How on earth is people taking a stand against misinformation "wokeness"?
I honestly didn't even know who Joe Rogan was before this controversy. I did know that Spotify is a lousy, homogenizing music streaming platform that rips off artists.
Eh you should head over to Rod Dreherās blog today. He can rail against censorship and cancel culture in on breath and then pivot to trying to get a guy fired for liking to get his kink on in the next.
The amount of hypocrisy this debate generates is mind boggling.
Liberals spent so much time staring into the conservative abyss, the abyss looked back into them.
Correct if I am wrong isn't it the opposition to Rogan came mainly From Medical establishment on the ground that he is adovcsting/selling covid medicines unsupported by science? If that's the case, why should he get a pass during a pandemic that is still going ?
Iām also trying to remember back when conservatives would start letter writing campaigns and threaten to boycott advertisers because there was a gay character on Maud or The Golden Girls or whatever. Or boycotting Disney for hosting Gay Days.
Was that regarded as censorship back in the day, or were letter writing campaigns and boycotts thought to be legitimate political speech?
From the bottom of my heart, thank you again, Freddie. The Rogan stuff is so depressing. Ever since Trump won in 2016, the left-of-center has slowly been losing its goddamn mind. It's been one moral panic after another.
With every controversy where I find myself not in lockstep with mainstream liberal opinion, I only grow more depressed and alienated. Since 2020, I've slowed way down on posting on Facebook because I'm utterly fucking terrified of getting mobbed by angry liberals over a "problematic" statement and losing friends. Holding my tongue on the Joe Rogan stuff is just the latest example. So I go underground in private forums instead. That provides a soothing lifeline. I suffer from depression and I'm very conflict avoidant. Woke politics are poison for someone like me.
The good news is that I work at a job that requires no commitments to wokeness at all. In Summer 2020, I thought we were in trouble, but DEI statements have slowed way down since then. Still, I worry that all it takes is one disgruntled SJW to get me fired. I don't share that same anxiety if some MAGA freak calls me a libcuck or whatever.
Thanks again Freddie and thank you to all the regulars here. I don't know where I'd be without you guys.
This is a good post. But, I think Rogan and others can be limited by private industry for particularly egregious inaccuracies. Like for most journalistic operations, accuracy should be a prime directive, and policing blatant disregard for accuracy is good and responsible.
Clearly, other agendas can be secretly validated at the same time, which is a problem. But I donāt want my platform to support hosts or participants who ātalk shitā that includes pretty massive departures from reality. Hard to police that standard, but I donāt mind erring with that as the goal.