Conservatives be all about that cancel culture. Change my mind.

Yo, brophage, ignore that kid. No one takes him seriously; you shouldn't either.

First use the actual definition of cancel culture, rather than change it to suit your world view.

"The meme is a blatant minitruth style lie to avoid the truth, change the subject, and help you pretend to be morally superior all at once.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20ALZgd6_Ek
https://twitter.com/MelanieMusey/status/1379793301616869376
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2019/07/bulverism-and-mainstream-dominant-left.html"

The meme is accurate.

Because if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

The meme is accurate.

argumentum ad infinitum 53jw4u.jpg (click to show)

Meme is accurate

argumentum ad infinitum 55w98p.jpg (click to show)

The original meme is acccurate.

argumentum ad infinitum imgflip.com/i/3dn9d4

Hey, look, you're guilty of your own logical fallacy. So that's double standard and argumentum ad infinitum!

Original meme is accurate.

Argumentum ad infinitum, tu quoque, and misuse of fallacy.

"The shadow game gets old for most people at age five, but thanks for the lies."
You're the one lying. But keep playing along if it's for children. I'm used to supervising them and I can pick up when I'm dealing with them..

The meme is accurate.

argumentum ad infinitum and ad hominem

Argumentum ad infinitum, double-standard.

Me being confused and wondering how Romans go to Imgflip.

Argumentum ad infinitum, tu quoque, and a lie.

Argumentum ad infinitum, misuse of fallacy, and a lie.

Parroting, parrot, that parrots.

Ad hominem.

Misuse of fallacy.

"Misuse of fallacy."
False accusation fallacy.

argumentum abusi fallacia

Verbosity fallacy for "argumentum abusi fallacia" (misuse of fallacy), which is an incorrect application of the fallacy itself.

argumentum abusi fallacia, again.

argumentum abusi fallacia

ignoratio elenchi

argumentum abusi fallacia

ignoratio elenchi

Argumentum ad infinitum, tu quoque, and misuse of fallacy.

Parrot and lie.

The meme is accurate.

argumentum ad infinitum

argumentum ad infinitum

tu quoque and misuse of fallacy

argumentum ad infinitum

The shadow game gets old for most people at age five, but thanks for the lies.

"Repeating your falsehood over and over doesn't make it any more right."

I'm just using your tactics. Hope you don't mind. So, yes it does :)

So the good ol' "you too" fallacy based off of a lie.

The meme is accurate.

Except for your flawed reasoning, but I guess if you say it often enough it will magically become true.

Yup, you taught me that. You're so good at it, you know :D

The good olde "you too" fallacy and a lie, again. You have made it clear that you beat that boycott strawman to pretend to be more virtuous to the people you want to be able to attack without consequences for having a different point of view.

The Meme is accurate

No, you accidently admitted you're wrong for the second time when you said "can include" showing you not only knew the complaints about cancel culture cover things other than boycotts, but you also know that complaints about cancel culture do not automatically include boycotts.

The meme is accurate.

The meme is a blatant minitruth style lie to avoid the truth, change the subject, and help you pretend to be morally superior all at once.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20ALZgd6_Ek
https://twitter.com/MelanieMusey/status/1379793301616869376
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2019/07/bulverism-and-mainstream-dominant-left.html

This meme is an excellent display depicting why the advice you give is important.

(for those who're slow, the meme is a mischaracterization of what "cancel-culture" is.)

"true MAGA Trump Fan" Flip-flop. You never showed any evidence that True Scotsman cannot buy any of that stuff."
News flash: I wasn't talking about Scottsmen. I was talking about conservatives. Most Trumpers are conservatives. This is common knowledge. They are famous for using the word "Libtard" and are known for their false dichotomies.

"How about any proof of mass cancelling as per the definition."

I need you to be clear as I've provided copious amounts of cancel culture on the individual and corporate level. Be specific. Your ability to communicate is sorely lacking, and I suggest taking a collegiate communication course.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Cancel%20Culture
https://www.dictionary.com/e/pop-culture/cancel-culture/
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cancel%20culture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture

"You flip flopped whom you are speaking of. Conservatives to start in the meme, then Trumpers, and now right-wing. Posting an image of a senator doesn't change that." Most Trumpers are Conservatives. It holds true.

Most dogs are animals, it doesn't work the other way, which it would need to do for your statement to work.

No, because there's a conservatives on the left as well. Most Trumpers are conservative. That statement works.

LOL, it still does work when you go the other way, which is needed for your point to be valid.

Yes it does work. Even if it doesn't, the message was conveyed as you're attempting to correct me on it. :)

The reasoning in invalid.

So, you're saying all conservatives are Trumpers? Instead of what I'm saying, where most Trumpers are conservatives? I mean, I wouldn't want to make hasty generalizations about a very specific demographic [Trumpers], so I have to take the route in saying that most of the smaller demographic identify as a larger demographic... Did you not take collegiate english?

Nope, I'm saying pretending two overlapping sets are the same is invalid reasoning.

"No, I'm telling the truth and you're ignoring things you don't like, making massive assumptions, and stacking the deck.

Also you failed to address your use of equivocation and even if that is given a pass the definition you are using is different from is different from a boycott in general and fits within my argument. You also ignored official definitions that disagree with you and are lying and pretending they do not exist, as per the Webster definition that backs up the two you wish to pretend do false."

Because there is no false equivalency. Last I checked, US Senators, US Representatives, Colin Kaepernick, Hannah Montana, and our World War 2 vets are not companies. They're people. Republicans are literally cancelling any senator or representative who voted against trump by using the government through legal means to censure what they have said against Trump. Claiming, that it's okay because the Democrats did it. Which, they didn't.

Democrat Senators and Representatives do not control Twitter, or Amazon and are completely separate from each other. If Trump was blocked it was because he violated the TOS of Twitter. Parler was shut down as it was the platform used to coordinate the Capitol Riots. Amazon refused to do business with them any more after that. So, was Amazon cancelling Parler? Or terminating service?

Since Trump has made it clear that he holds the office of the Former President (Lol, Obama, Bush and Clinton all hold that office too, I guess.) He is no longer an individual but a governmental entity. Not even legally so at that since he made up the office in the first place. So, it's not cancelling if he identifies as an office.

Anyway, since I spoke the words and made the message, I choose what definitions I am using since I own the message I send. If I explain my definitions that I am using and you refuse to acknowledge it because it doesn't suit your narrative, that's not my problem. That's your problem that you can't come face to face with your own hypocrisy. Kthnx.

So you invented yet another new definition of cancel culture and admitted to purposely not using the one used by that those are saying are hypocrites are using and your own instead. As thus you have admitted you're wrong, a hypocrite, and a liar.

So, you're choosing to wilfully ignore the verbiage that the definition provides, in essence, I'm not fitting your narrative even though the definition offers the "Or."

But, wait, haven't you cancelled Kaepernick, your Senators and Representatives? Those aren't companies, those are people. You can't boycott them. So, I guess I'm not a liar after all. You're just a hyper-partisan shill who can't face their own hypocrisy :) Cheers.

It doesn't matter if it says "or" you are still using only the part you wish to be true and ignoring the part you don't want to use. Your lying about me by making up thinks for me to think and positions to hold becomes becomes clear when you look at the definition that I used in my meme that you do not wish to admit exists.

But thanks for the butthurt.

Also
boy·cott
/ˈboiˌkät/
verb
withdraw from commercial or social relations with (a country, organization, or person) as a punishment or protest.
"we will boycott all banks which take part in the loans scheme"

noun
a punitive ban that forbids relations with certain groups, cooperation with a policy, or the handling of goods.
"a boycott of the negotiations"

2/ PEPSI
After Trump was elected, Pepsi CEO Indra Nooyi went on stage at the The New York Times DealBook Conference and described the panic her employees felt on election night.

“Our employees were all crying,” Nooyi said. “And the question that they're asking, especially those who are not white, ‘Are we safe?’ Women are asking, ‘Are we safe?’ LGBT people are asking, ‘Are we safe?’ I never thought I would have to answer those questions.”

Her story was quickly contorted by Trump supporters, who circulated false comments attributed to Nooyi claiming she had said for Trump fans to “take their business elsewhere.” In reality, Nooyi never said anything to that extent, and even congratulated the president-elect on his victory.

Nevertheless, Trump supporters called for a boycott of Pepsi.

GILLETTE
The year is 2019, and conservative culture warriors are still getting upset over innocuous, socially conscious advertising. Gillette debuted an ad in January this year that hit viewers over the head with a message challenging the outdated definition of what it means to “be a man.” The ad’s tagline: “We Believe: The Best Men Can Be.” In short, the razor company took on toxic masculinity in order to hock more product.

"Goodbye Gillette. Hello Schick #GilletteAd pic.twitter.com/AfcFE5efNq"
— warroom (@warroom) January 15, 2019

NORDSTROM
The department store announced it would no longer sell Ivanka Trump’s brand after sales of the line reportedly plummeted at the end of 2016 as the Trump name became more and more controversial.

Trump supporters accused Nordstrom of anti-Trump bias, and Trump himself accused them of treating his daughter “so unfairly.”

And so Trump supporters boycotted the luxury department store.

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE
You would think supposed manly men would never boycott the NFL, of all things, but you’d be wrong.

It all started when former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick began kneeling during the national anthem before games to silently protest police brutality in the United States.

You know you not supplying and proof that boycotting is in effect for any of that or the goal of the boycott is to cancel any of this stuff.

Let me see if I can restructure your fragmented sentence...

You're saying

"You know, you not supplying and proof..."

Okay, you're trying to tell me I should know that I am not supplying "and?" proof. Oh, you must be on a phone. "any."

"... That boycotting is in effect for any of that or the goal of the boycott is to cancel any of this stuff."

Oh... I see makes sense if I think of you on a phone. You meant to write.

"You know, you not supplying any proof that boycotting is an effect for any of that, or the goal of the boycott is to cancel any of this stuff."

So you're talking about social ostracism of individuals for their beliefs. Do you need examples of that as well? Which, proves the point of the meme?

How about any proof of mass cancelling as per the definition.

3/ I could go on. Do you want me to start listing the people that the right wing have started cancelling as individuals?

You haven't listed any actual cancelling yet. You just asserted that they are "cancelled" by Trumpers, but thanks for the right wing goal post move.

Not a goalpost move. Look at the meme again, I posted an image of a senator in there. Nice bit of selective ignorance there.

You flip flopped whom you are speaking of. Conservatives to start in the meme, then Trumpers, and now right-wing. Posting an image of a senator doesn't change that.

1/ All the things you can no longer buy if you're a true MAGA Trump Fan:

#BoycottWalmart spread among Trump supporters. The company’s offense? Third-party markets on Walmart’s website sold T-shirts with “Impeach Trump” and “Impeach 45” emblazoned on them.

Barack and Michelle Obama entered into a “multi-year agreement” with Netflix last year that will reportedly see the ex-president and first lady produce both films and series for the streaming platform. The partnership caused some MAGA fans to own the libs by proclaiming en masse that they would cancel their Netflix subscriptions for fear the new content from their nemesis ex-president would taint the other 850 original content titles now offered on the platform.

BUDWEISER
In 2017, Budweiser ditched the Clydesdales to run a pro-immigration Super Bowl ad depicting a fictionalized version of founder Eberhard Anheuser, a German immigrant, leaving his home country to brew what is now considered a quintessential American beer. The ending title card reads: “When nothing stops your dream. This is the beer we’ll raise.”
"No thanks... it's time to #BoycottBudweiser. We don't need your beer, your opinions, and your illegal immigrants."

— MAGADauntlessDiamond (@diamondgirl2222) February 2, 2017

STARBUCKS
Trump’s 2017 immigration ban garnered an intentional response from the Seattle-based coffee company. Starbucks announced it would hire 10,000 refugees within five years as a direct countermeasure to Trump’s policy.

"When .@Starbucks puts refugees before Americans safety Time for me to #BoycottStarbucks
Sales will drop from me alone! Stick 2coffee please! pic.twitter.com/kwKX49tCOB"
— 🇺🇸MAGA-licious🇺🇸Mama🇺🇸 (@tteegar) January 30, 2017

OREO
Trump declared that he would not be “eating any more Oreos” after Mondelez International, the parent of Nabisco, which produces Oreos, announced it would move some of its Chicago operations to Mexico. Trump claimed the move would cost 2,000 American jobs; the actual number was closer 600. Accuracy aside, the president’s supporters obliged, even joining in on an impassioned chant of “no more Oreos” at the president’s behest during a rally in Las Vegas, Nevada.

No true Scotsman huh? But I'm not a Trumper so none of that really matter to me.

The meme says "Conservatives." You don't need to be a Trumper. Most Trumpers identify as conservative.

"true MAGA Trump Fan" Flip-flop. You never showed any evidence that True Scotsman cannot buy any of that stuff.

Urban dictionary - the wiki-dictionary-pedia. Lol.
I love the second definition because it includes the word "Companies" Thank you for that. Proves my point of the original meme.
Oooh, Merriam Webster too!
": to withdraw one's support for (someone, such as a celebrity, or something, such as a company) publicly and especially on social media"
Not just peopel, but comapnies too! Which Republicans do by "Boycott."

Republican Hypocrisy level when critiquing "Cancel Culture" : 100%

Nope, you need to use the same definition as the person your saying is hypocritical or your using a equivalation fallacy. Your also misusing the word boycott basically ignoring everything that makes you wrong and trying to shoehorn the definition into a hole it doesn't fit in.

You supplied the definitions. Cancel culture applies to companies. Which is what Conservatives/Republicans/Trump supporters are big on. Cancelling companies via boycott. Which honestly, you can't even do that right because you buy their stuff just to burn it. Total facepalm moment.

There is also no such thing as an equivalation falacy. When you come in trying to call people out on things for their fallacies, strains credulity on the notion that you actually took an english class at all at the college level.

Your* response also tells me your* lack of knowledge or willingness to google the shit that comes out of your mouth (like diarrhea from burritos at a truck stop,) So, how can one trust that you know what you're talking about with regard to politics or even something as simple as cancel culture when you don't know the difference between your and you're, and you write something as dumb as "equivalation fallacy."

Write all you want. I can't take you seriously.

Misspelled that fallacy,https://www.txstate.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definitions/Equivocation.html

But thanks for flying into a rage while failing to see why the evidence supports my meme and how boycotts are different while failing to back you own position.

Choosing to not buy from a company is very different than trying proactive steps to force them out of business. You wish to hyperfocus on that one part while ignoring the parts of the defection that doesn't fit is not intellectually honest, and neither is insulting a replacement for reasoning.

Misspelled? No, misspelling is when you get prefix, root and/or suffix correct but fail to place the letters correctly. You simply didn't know what it was called. Misspelling is like "Equivacation." If you didn't spell it correctly, tell me, where's the L in Equivocation? Do you need to retake primary school? Is English even your first language?

Well thanks for pretending to know what happened when you would have no way to know and getting it wrong thus showing you biases and blatant intellectual dishonesty. You also got how you can misspell on a keyboard or with autocorrect wrong.

Also nice deflection from the rest of the post.

You have autocorrect on a keyboard? Your keyboard autocorrects to something that's incorrect? Grasping at straws friend.

I already addressed your points. You simply repeated your statement in a different way.

I supplied *actual* dictionary definitions. Hell, even you did. You supplied them and you're disagreeing with all points except the one that fits your definition. That's confirmation bias. You'd rather take urban dictionary which is a crowd-sourced website, like wikipedia, rather than use the actual definitions.

See why I can't take you seriously?

No, I'm telling the truth and you're ignoring things you don't like, making massive assumptions, and stacking the deck.

Also you failed to address your use of equivocation and even if that is given a pass the definition you are using is different from is different from a boycott in general and fits within my argument. You also ignored official definitions that disagree with you and are lying and pretending they do not exist, as per the Webster definition that backs up the two you wish to pretend do false.

"Nope, I'm saying pretending two overlapping sets are the same is invalid reasoning."

Right, so what percentage of conservatives in America who identify as Republican do not support Trump?

Now you have three overlapping groups. You need to address the fullness of all the groups, not just part of one group.

I don't need to, the point has been made. The fact that you're here trying to break it apart, ignoring the intended message when it was already made speaks volumes to how much you took offense that the rightwing/conservatives/trumpublicans are just as guilty of cancel culture. Except, they can't face their own hypocrisy so they have to deflect to other issues rather than deal with it. Like you have so clearly demonstrated here with over 20 posts trying to refute my claim.

Thank you for being my poster child, couldn't have done it without you :D

Nope your point has not been made, rather you changed the meaning of what people mean to manufacture a contradiction and are trying to judge different people as a collective even when they do not have the same beliefs and at every turn twisty and turn to avoid the flaws in your thinking and insult me to cover for it.

Ah, welcome back! I see you're here to continue the exercise in futility. Very well, I'll happily oblige.

I have satisified all interpretations of all those sites you listed on both the individual and the corporate level. You're trying to say no, I didn't. I say you're wrong. That is fact. You don't want to face the truth that I putting down.

What you've done is taken my meme out of context, and applied it to your own individual context as for all of the items or examples listed in the meme are American products (with the exception of CLimate change and the WHO). It can be implied (especially with the eagle and the American flag) that I am referring to American conservatives.

So instead of gaslighting me about demographics, maybe you should try to learn about the targeted/intended audience. I don't see any bagpipes on this, or kilts, or anything else for that matter, to represent "Scotsmen" as I think you referred to.

So. Yeah. Feel free to fail more. Your troll is bad because it failed from the start. You just kept desperately searching for ways to make it true, when it isn't. GG

No, you utterly failed to satisfy all interpretations of even one, as I showed with Jim crow laws fitting your preferred definition and yet falling outside your argument. You have not addressed any of the other definition and as such have reached the level ​of lying.

What you call taking out of context is your failure to address the term as it is frequently used and thus you contradict you assertion of that you "satisified all interpretations". You even admitted to using your own definition and thus not addressing the term as used.

And what you call gaslighting me pointing out your repeated use of a invalid reasoning. Also see https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman as you clearly do not know what the term means.

The funny thing is, memes are *all* about logical fallacy, and you're trying to say [Image]. So, good for you? The message was made, and received.

But, to humor you:

Many conservatives in America identify as Republicans. Of that demographic, a great majority of them identify as Trump supporters. Of those, a statistically practical entirety of them decry cancel culture. The irony, is that they participate in cancel culture themselves.

When we look at cancel culture, there are two examples to follow, the individual and the corporate.

Corporate:
When a buyer cannot fire a business for their moral standpoints, they simply stop buying the product in the hopes that they will go out of business and cease to exist as a corporate entity.

Individual:
When an individual takes controversial standpoints, people may call for their resignation. Usually, if a company fails to do relieve that individual of their position within that company, the buyers will escalate their tactics and call for a boycott.

Case in point, Kaepernick was denounced for how he kneeled in the NFL to protest police brutality. After he was not kicked from the team (in spite of not throwing a ball since Jan 1st 2017 until dated time of Sept '19 (haven't checked since), some fans grew angry and decided to boycott the NFL. This boycott failed.

While the left readily admits to being part of cancel culture, they ignore negative connotations and instead, re-label it as "Accountability Culture," Implying that one should be held accountable to things that they say or do. Whereas the right-wing will make the same actions, while at the same time, calling cancel culture toxic.

Yep. Definitions are satisfied here. By all means, continue to be my little poster boy bitch and whine and complain how it isn't. I've never seen someone so willing to prove me right. Again. And again. And again.

You still not using it how the right does and ignoring most definitions and instead hyperfocusing on boycotts even when your preferred definition covers more than boycotts.. But thanks for resorting to insults and defending your use of fallacy over valid reasoning.

No, I am using it correctly. Just not how you want me to use it. :)

I didn't say you used it wrong, just you're not using it how the right does, so you're not talking out what the right believes. But rather something you created in the place of such beliefs.

No, I am using it how it is commonly used :)

Actually no, as it commonly covers much more than just boycotts. And even if you were, it would change that you are failing to talk about what the right believes and your own creation instead.

Cancel Culture: https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2021/03/22/what-is-cancel-culture/?sh=449f6c58bd55
“A highly punitive approach to disagreement or perceived transgressions, based on strict fidelity to ideology (usually progressive) that elevates performative outrage over dialogue, factual inquiry, or respect for values such as free speech or fair process. It rejects the value of ideological diversity. It is often exercised by powerful corporations, editors, academic administrators, or unaccountable attackers operating through anonymous social media platforms. It rejects the distinction between offense and harm, between disagreement and discrimination, and between words and actions. It often reduces complex issues to a binary view such as one can only be “anti-racist” or “racist.” It rejects the importance of a person’s intent in making a statement and refuses to take into account how long ago a statement was made, the person’s age at the time they made it, or whether the statement in any way reflects a person’s current thinking.”

The examples I've used fit within this definition.

I am using it correctly, just not the way you want.

Except for they don't. Boycotting isn't even close to this. liemore

Except it does.
readmore.

Nope, nothing about boycotting in the article quote. liemore

"LOL, calls for boycotting doesn't even come close to fitting that statement. But nice goal post move." Yes it does :)

Repeating your falsehood over and over doesn't make it any more right.

"It rejects the value of ideological diversity. It is often exercised by ... unaccountable attackers operating through anonymous social media platforms."

An example of this is calls to boycott.

Feels good to win an argument.

LOL, calls for boycotting doesn't even come close to fitting that statement. But nice goal post move.;

(Continued Chain)"No, I'm telling the truth and you're ignoring things you don't like, making massive assumptions, and stacking the deck.

Also you failed to address your use of equivocation and even if that is given a pass the definition you are using is different from is different from a boycott in general and fits within my argument. You also ignored official definitions that disagree with you and are lying and pretending they do not exist, as per the Webster definition that backs up the two you wish to pretend do false."

"you're ignoring things you don't like..." What am I ignoring? I've acknowledged your definitions. All of them. You're trying to focus on one particular answer that focuses on one particular aspect of Cancel Culture from one specific source that doesn't include what I am talking about. You're the one ignoring.

Websters Definition:
Definition of cancel culture - Noun
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cancel%20culture
: the practice or tendency of engaging in mass canceling (see CANCEL entry 1 sense 1e) as a way of expressing disapproval and exerting social pressure

Cancel
transitive verb
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cancel#h1
entry 1e:: to withdraw one's support for (someone, such as a celebrity, or something, such as:

------> a company) <----

publicly and especially on social media

I think I know what happened, you didn't click the link telling you to look at this. You know what that's called? Confirmation bias. You're laden with it. You saw what you wanted, didn't do any further research.

Point being, my meme talks about how the Right-wing is guilty of cancel culture as they cancel companies. They do it. End of story :) You don't have "definitions" that say otherwise.

No, you're simply ignoring the parts of the definition that you don't like. You also now pretending to know what I did and think as matches what you wish to be true rather than the facts, see the very first definition that I gave you in the meme that shows you are lying about my position.