For a while now, "Cancel Culture" has become the norm in Australia. Essentially, Cancel Culture feels justified in silencing the opposition over anything it perceives as being harmful to the greater good. That is why people tolerate Cancel Culture in Australia. They feel it produces a good result, so they are genuinely happy to see people getting cancelled.

What if Cancel Culture gets political?

What if, for example, the Labor Party were to consider all policies held by opposing parties to be harmful to Australia? That would enable them to feel morally-correct in silencing all political dissent. And a population, permeated by Cancel Culture, with a majority of Labor and Greens voters would feel that is ok.

This morning's news is that Andrew Bogut -- famed Australian basketball player - had a stern visit from the Victoria Electoral Commission (under Dan Andrews) because of a Tweet that said "Vote them out".

In answer to the question: When did Australia get to the point where you get a visit from the authorities for criticising them? The answer is: When the majority of Australians bought into Cancel Culture, such that it has become the norm in TV, media, politics and the way the law operates in this country.

The Melbourne AGE didn't bother reporting this story.

News.com.au did report it in the morning, but by late afternoon it was gone from their main homepage. So if you didn't read it in the morning, you'd be a mushroom.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/basketball-star-andrew-bogut-accuses-victorian-government-of-wanting-to-silence-him/news-story/d791fd6e2f8fa2d736da0bd26a7301d0

Cancel Culture is now the norm, because the highest court of Australia now operates on Cancel Culture when it justified deporting Novax because "the tennis star was opposed to vaccination against COVID-19."

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/federal-court-reveals-why-it-backed-decision-to-send-novak-djokovic-home-20220120-p59pts.html

When you read that, you can feel the groundswell of positive vibes support for what the court did, because we are now a nation that feels totally comfortable with cancelling anyone who holds an unpopular view.

It can therefore be predicted that, in any discussion under this thread - if it remains long on the forum - that there will be a lot of people who think cancelling Bogut is great, because it cancels an opinion that they themselves are against. So they will argue that cancelling Bogut a good thing.

It's just that we, as a nation, have turned the corner. We're no longer just cancelling people for unpopular ideas such as MRNA-vaccine-warnings. But now it's for a comment "Vote them out".

Cancel Culture is now officially political where the Victorian Electoral Commission gets involved in cancelling.

are you trying to turn this into a conspiracy forum?

What do you mean by "conspiracy forum"?

As I understand it from the dictionary definition, a "conspiracy" is when a group of like minded people coordinate to produce a bad result.

Does that pertain to what I wrote above? Or are you using "conspiracy" as the modern slander for anything that goes against the popular opinion?

Please answer precisely.

 Cancel Culture is a right wing trope that there is some grand left wing conspiracy to cancel them

I think that's silly.

It's only a "conspiracy" -- by the precise definition of the word -- when there is a group of people plot and conspire together to accomplish a malicious and harmful result.

I do not think it is a conspiracy.

Instead, I think it is a culture-change where large segments of society shift their thinking, so that their way of thinking becomes the normal.

For example, decades ago, many young people thought it was noble and excellent to fight for the right of the opponents to be heard. Now, there has been a culture change, where many young people think it is noble and excellent to shut down any debate by people who voice opposing ideas.

When those young people, who hold those Cancel-Culture ideas, get into their 40's and 50's and influence education and politics, the curriculum and laws change to reflect Cancel Culture.

That process takes a few generations to change a country, but I think Australia has reached critical mass of Cancel-Culture.

For example, you, cesspit, are arguing in favour of Cancel-Culture. You feel emboldened because, in 2022, that attitude is the normal. Whereas in the WW2 generation that fought for the freedom of the world against tyranny, your ideas would not have been the normal back then.

So says the left wing absolutist, 

Wrong party dickhead

Australia’s planned anti-trolling law may silence political criticsA law intended to tackle anonymous trolls on social media is unlikely to stop online bullying, but it could allow Australian government ministers to continue a trend of suing their critics
Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2299944-australias-planned-anti-trolling-law-may-silence-political-critics/#ixzz7Ia2xh0M5

The Prime Minister pitched a new “Social Media (Anti-Trolling) Bill 2021” as a way to keep people safe online. The bill that has been proposed will do little to achieve that. It isn’t about safety at all. It is about defamation law.In some dramatic respects, it undermines the ability of people who have their reputation harmed to get a positive outcome through defamation law. https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-government-is-trolling-us-with-its-anti-troll-bill-20211202-p59e7j.html

You're such a walking meme of right wing media/internet talking points.
It's so bloody pathetic for someone who claims everyone else is a sheep led by the media.
Have a good weekend

Absolutely.

What you're describing is otherwise known as the "tyranny of the majority". ( BTW to protect against this the US has the Electoral College system whereby winning the the popular vote doesn't guarantee winning the election and that is a good thing, believe it or not )

Unfortunately as detestable as the Victorian government is ( like most left wing governments), the Liberals in Victoria are unelectable.  Fortunately,  as they seek to increase their authority, more and more people get "cancelled", and thus the seeds of their own demise  are laid, eventually.  The worm will eventually turn.  No side rules forever.

Australian Electoral Commission is tasked with the regulation of information disseminated by all sides of politics in this country....... Even Clive Palmer has to get his crappy youtube adds "approved" before he runs them. Bogut the big nob just has to refrain from giving voting advice without approval especially considering how many people he can influence..... nothing to see here, non-story... Lets not become like the mudslinging, shit talking demagogues of the US.... 
As for Novax..... I think the poor dumb meathead just believed in his own importance too much. Lucky he wasn't charged with fraud as you or I would be knowingly lying on a visa declaration to Serbia....

So let's just clarify this:

Please confirm that you believe that, every time an Australian person says on social media "Vote him out", and links to some political information -- that counts as "giving voting advice"?

What about the various statements made on this forum about Scomo and Big Ears? Are those statements equal to "giving voting advice"?

As we know, cancel culture and silencing political criticism is purely from the "left":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blLTd0Smlqk

Yep. nothing to see here though hey enzo.

I see Davide has already brought the federal liberals anti-trolling legislation up. 

I actually agree with John Smith regarding Andrew Bogut. I cannot see what he has done to receive that letter.

Question is John, to quote you, are you "brave enough" to stand up for free speech now that you know that it's not as clear as the bitchute narrative of left = tyranny / right = freedom?

I agree with you, and I retract my former statement on that point.

For me, I want truth, and if someone persuades me towards something that is more true, it is the easiest thing to shift my stance. It does not take "bravery" to move towards a better understanding.

I've come to see that in Australian politics, I've been sorely disappointed by the Liberals. I think that going to Labor/Greens would be even worse. Right now, United Australia Party (the party of Robert Menzies) seems to make a lot of sense to me.

Also, I'm old enough to remember when Pauline Hanson had a fish and chip shop, and when Hanson was the figurehead of racist White Australia. Back then, I would never have voted for her. But she has changed. In recent years, I do not see the same attitudes that made her so reprehensible decades ago. I know many Asian-Australian friends who now feel positive towards Pauline Hanson, and say that they notice the same changes in her for the better. My Asian-Australian friends, who are positive towards Pauline Hanson, they're very careful to make such comments in private).

Not that I agree with everything Pauline Hanson says. But she is no longer the same person who was when she first started.

I note that it all depends on one's framework, whether you see Pauline Hanson and Craig Kelly as heroes or idiots.

IF you cannot see that vaccines don't stop transmission and infection, and ignore that they wane after 3 months to zero, and that Israel's evidence is that even the 4th booster is not working ... if you still are enthralled with MRNA technology, in spite of indications of damage to immune system, and rising autoimmune disease .. if you still think the vaccines are superb, THEN it's understandable that you detest Pauline Hanson and Craig Kelly.

BUT IF there's any credence in danger signals in the emerging evidence against the vaccines (that wasn't apparent a year ago), THEN maybe Pauline Hanson and Craig Kelly are like the modern Winston Churchill's crying from the pre-WW2 political wilderness, when the entire political establishment called Churchill an idiot for warning about Nazi Germany.

By the way, regarding Cancel Culture .... if you've read this far ... let me say ... it's not that I wasn't around this week.

Just ask the likes of Scott Macintye, Colin Kaepernick, yassmin abdel magied etc etc about ‘cancel culture’….

Besides a despot from the third world, is there any leader who has cancelled more people than Donald trump and the maga wing?

his life is based on firing people and extracting revenge  on those who don’t follow him. 

Do you think there are two sides to this story, and if so, are you aware at least how the other side explains it?

This maxim holds true: a person who has made a choice has beforehand studied both/all available options to make the choice. But an indoctrinated person has only heard one side, and assumes that is the sole perspective.

I propose to answer your question in detail, but before I do, I need to know if you are a truth-seeker or a happily-indoctrinated person?

It's political. It's weaponised by both sides of the spectrum. It shouldn't be.

Bingo. 

You are the most tiresome poster I've had the displeasure of reading on this forum and that's saying something because there have been some almighty flogs over the years.

Apparently the post wasn’t just an everyday person  posting their opinion or political belief. But a coordinated strategy  on behalf of someone/an entity for political purposes, so subversive political advertising. 

It's hard to believe Enzo and his ilk can rant and rave about 'the left' and yet somehow manage to  stick their collective heads up their arses when shit like this goes down.

Just baffling.

Here's a prime example of Cancel Culture censorship. A spectator at the Australian Open forbidden for wearing a T-Shirt for Chinese tennis player Peng Shuai. (You would know what happened to her?)

Headline: "Australian Open: Security orders woman to remove shirt featuring message supporting Peng Shuai"

https://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis/australian-open-security-orders-woman-to-remove-shirt-featuring-message-supporting-peng-shuai/news-story/af49c0ee20576677296d1853dc13d9b8

Do not think this is just about cancelling people that you think should be cancelled. Censorship doesn't work that way. Censorship is a blanket that smothers all contentious debate in society. That is why our forefathers understood clearly the importance of fighting for your Opponent's rights to be heard. Because, if our Opponents are shut down, soon we will be shut down.

Look and review the comments on this forum. The people here do not have any understanding that, if you gleefully rejoice at the system shutting down your Opponents, you are unwittingly complying with censorship that will eventually also shut you down one day.

Through the comments on this forum, it appears many of you are in your forties. That's the age group generation that took hold of this Cancel Culture ideology, and are now in positions of authority where they can enforce censorship.

There is probably no turning back. It's been said that, once this ideology takes root in the general population, it will take 2 generations to re-educate the people towards a freedom mentality. For example, when was the last time anyone in your social circle touted the truth that we should fight for the right of our Opponents to be heard. Or is it not more common, in Australia Media, to read articles explaining why it is ok to shut down certain people. Those are indications that Australia has turned the corner into a new ideology, and we are not longer the freedom-loving larrikins of the WW2 era. A new bunch, with a different ideology, is now running the shop.A

A free society does not consist of some people allowed to speak, and some shut down. You try to explain that to the average Aussie, and they don't get it. Instead, you'll hear them explain why shutting down people in certain circumstances is good.

I myself strongly disagree with the religious views of people outside my own beliefs. But I strongly affirm a level playing field where everyone is free to express their views. May the best ideas win. That's my approach. I oppose a system that shuts down my Opponents. I do not benefit if my Opponents are shut down, because that means they were shut down by force, not through persuasive reasoning.

p/s if you haven't seen any of my posts on the other thread for a week .... wonder why?

apart from your conspiracy laden ramblings there is nothing wrong with a moving toward a progressive society that is underpinned by equality and equity

the 50's Liberal Party fweedumb utopia you talk about was myopic and racist

Every society has pluses and minuses. Were you there in those days? There are people from that generation who don't have a racist bone in their body.

So it is wrong to generalise.

Equality means equality for all, not just equality for those who hold the majority opinion.

Can you give me one example of something I said that you regard as a "conspiracy"? I don't use that word, so it's not clear to me which of my ideas you regard as a conspiracy (defined as a group of people plotting and communicating together to bring about harm to others).

Remember, when there is no communication and interaction, there can be no conspiracy.

You need to use the word "conspiracy" precisely. Don't use the word "conspiracy" as an insult to those you disagree with.

Condition of entry is that spectators not engage in commercial or political messaging. This is not an example of cancel culture. (Even if I agree with the messaging and think the CCP are a bunch of pricks.)

Try again.

I guess at the end of the day it’s like trying to have a responsible discussion with religious people. No matter what you say they can and will always resort to make believe. 

No I will NOT confirm that I believe that every person's statements on social media is voting advice  let alone is equal nor should be scrutinised in the same way... You or I for example can go back and forth until we are black and blue in the face about who other forumites should vote for and the AEC would give two fifths of a flying f#ck about what we say. The insinuationn here with Bogut is, as tsf puts it above, that it is a political party election campaign message and as such needs to  be declared... We have parliamentary procedural rules in this country, even if  some don't like them. If it is not  a party message and just the opinions of a meat head then fine,  but it is in their remit to at least have a conversation with him..., "Cancel culture" and "wokeness" vs "fascists" and "right wing nut jobs"   Jesus Christ its become such a lazy argument, its killed true political conversation.. I  suspect you know this and are pushing this bullshit conservative nuvo- Macarthyism shtick for a laugh  but others take this extremely black and white mate and go chasing the reds under their beds...... what's your end game? Just "searching the universe for the truth huh?????

I agree with the sentiment but it is not universally applied... 

Every ideology has tell-tale characteristic traits. A person's ideology leads to them behaving in a certain way.

Therefore, the key to not being deceived by others is: focus on traits, and ignore the labels that people give.

In an evil malicious world, many labels can just be thrown out of malicious spite, whereas the traits are unmistakable.

Example: an animal is barking. One person labels it as a "fish", another calls it an "elephant", another calls it a "dog". How do you tell who's telling the truth? If you go by the labels given by the people, you'll be deceived. But if you look at the data of the characteristic traits, you can easily tell it is a dog because it is barking.

This is not as obvious - because the VAST MAJORITY of people are swayed by labels given by others, and they do NOT study traits. That is why the vast majority of people can be swayed by cleverly-crafted news reports. When people trust a news source, they generally do not question or test the labels that the news source uses.

Ok, let's proceed.

Without using labels, let's list the characteristic traits of people that support totalitarianism:

1. silence all opposition on major issues, tolerate opposition on minor issues;
2. use government agencies to enforce the silencing of opposition;
3. shutting down access to communications (print media, telecommunications) by the opposition, so that the opposition's message cannot be spread by media (print or electronic)

Now that we have first focussed on traits -- rather than labels -- the next thing is to ask: who is doing the above three things in society? (Ignore labels. Look at traits.) The people who have the above three traits, who are they?

This is how you can un-mask the totalitarian ideologues in society - ignore labels, examine traits.

Often, the real totalitarians are hidden, because they use deceptive-labels.

Often the ones who are acting totalitarian, are the ones labelling others as being totalitarian.

Who is banning people's social media accounts? What political spectrum do those people come from? Who is doing the censoring?

Once you focus on traits --- and ignore labels that the spin-propaganda experts devise -- suddenly the lightbulb goes on.

I am guessing that never before in your life has anyone taught you to: focus on traits and ignore labels. That is because the prime tool of propaganda is false-labels. Through history, propaganda has always been effective because most people fall for it. Are you a "most people"? Ignore the labels you give yourself. Test your own traits.