Hollywood stars demanding the blacklisting of Trump supporters, isn't that totalitarian or fascist?

a reply to: The2Billies

Read your own links. The first two deal with people directly contacting the persons in question via email, not asking your friends to boycott them.

The third deals with your former employer tying to prevent you from working.

None of these covers the two women in the Original Post.

originally posted by: The2Billies

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: IAMTAT
With list compiled and enthusiastically and widely distributed...the commercial boycotting and shaming will begin against any studio, producer, director, etc. which employs anyone on the list.

That is the ultimate purpose of the list.

People have the right to keep their political affilliations seperate from their professional life...sanctity of the voting booth and all.

And if they do begin blacklisting people based upon their political viewpoints, it will be decided in a court of law, guaranteed. And that court being in California, anyone want to guess which way the decision will be? If this continues, unabated, expect to see it appealed and pushed higher into the federal judiciary. Where a more fair decision can be made.

However, that said, I still support (although do not agree with) the position of doxxing and blacklisting in this manner. It is within their 1st amendment right, but, I'll let the SCOTUS be the ultimate arbiter if it even gets that far.

www.criminaldefenselawyer.com...
www.wisegeek.com...

Doxing - cyberbullying - is illegal

Blacklisting should be illegal, it is certainly immoral when done based simply on discrimination

But, show me where merely advocating for it is illegal. The act of it, yes, but not the expression of it.

There is a big difference.

Which is why I stated my post in the manner in which I did. My first line states this posiiton emphatically,

And if they do begin blacklisting people based upon their political viewpoints, it will be decided in a court of law, guaranteed.

Please re-read it and understand the difference.

a reply to: The2Billies

Doxing - cyberbullying - is illegal

Acknowledging someone attended an event isn't doxing though.

By that logic, we wouldn't be allowed to discuss who is involved with CAIR PAC, or any other Political Action Committee for that matter, and that is just silly.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: The2Billies

Read your own links. The first two deal with people directly contacting the persons in question via email, not asking your friends to boycott them.

The third deals with your former employer tying to prevent you from working.

None of these covers the two women in the Original Post.

They aren't women, unless you are saying a gay male character in a TV show is a woman.

Sorry, cyberbullying and telling people to cyberbully is illegal and immoral as well, unless it is a liberal cyberbullying a conservative, that is today's progressive way of thinking for sure.

Also, blacklisting is illegal and immoral, unless it is a liberal blacklisting a conservative, that is also today's progressive way of thinking.

It is perfectly ok in today's society to bully, and deny employment based on a single group characteristic (bigotry/prejudice) if the person bullied and not allowed to work is a conservative, I get it. Then it is not anywhere near like bullying and denying Jews the right to work in WWII. Because conservatives are evil and must be shamed/punished for incorrect thinking?????

Sorry, I don't think it is legal or moral for anyone to bully, harass, or deny employment based on a single group characteristic (race, gender, sexual orientation, even political points of view) But if you do, well......

a reply to: The2Billies

It is perfectly ok in today's society to bully, and deny employment based on a single group characteristic (bigotry/prejudice) if the person bullied and not allowed to work is a conservative, I get it. Then it is not anywhere near like bullying and denying Jews the right to work in WWII. Because conservatives are evil and must be shamed/punished for incorrect thinking?????

Why do you keep acting like conservatives are being persecuted like the Jews in WWII? It's not even close enough to compare.

Plus both sides go on the internet "demanding" someone lose their job because of something political they said. This is nothing new.... It happens all the time on both sides.... Both sides just like to call foul and act like they get the low end of the stick more often.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: The2Billies

Doxing - cyberbullying - is illegal

Acknowledging someone attended an event isn't doxing though.

By that logic, we wouldn't be allowed to discuss who is involved with CAIR PAC, or any other Political Action Committee for that matter, and that is just silly.

They want the list so they can publish it and encourage doxing.

They said as much as is reported from other sources, these are just a few, google for more. I used Yahoo news because everyone agrees on it as a source.

www.theblaze.com... .......... www.witsnews.com... ........ rashmanly.com...

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: The2Billies

It is perfectly ok in today's society to bully, and deny employment based on a single group characteristic (bigotry/prejudice) if the person bullied and not allowed to work is a conservative, I get it. Then it is not anywhere near like bullying and denying Jews the right to work in WWII. Because conservatives are evil and must be shamed/punished for incorrect thinking?????

Why do you keep acting like conservatives are being persecuted like the Jews in WWII? It's not even close enough to compare.

Plus both sides go on the internet "demanding" someone lose their job because of something political they said. This is nothing new.... It happens all the time on both sides.... Both sides just like to call foul and act like they get the low end of the stick more often.

You are right and both sides are wrong. It is immoral and illegal for both sides to engage in - encouraging and engaging in harassment and blacklisting.

It is just that progressive liberals, like conservatives, have a blind spot when it comes to them doing it.

This is a wake up call to progressive liberals that they are behaving exactly the way they condemn conservatives for behaving.

The moral of the thread is: Be careful, when you accuse others of doing something "heinous", don't do it yourselves, or you give "tacit" permission for others to do it back to you.

a reply to: The2Billies

And here is an example of Texas not hiring people because they wouldn't sign their name declaring they are pro-Israel.

Here it is alleged the current admin is trying to make it where employers can hire based off of religion.

It's a slippery slope both sides are willing to gamble on, then people use the worse examples to paint everyone on that side as fascists... And that's wrong. The few don't speak for the whole, and they never should. These are all nuanced topics.

I always try to preserve the rights we have, so if someone is merely proposing through speech, that is legal.... It's the implementation that can be illegal.

For instance, if your company is a left or right wing pundit company, they're going to hire anchors and writers that fit their company vision. That's an industry of optics, and they get away with it, which I think they should be able to do.

a reply to: The2Billies

This isn't cyberbullying, they aren't directly contacting anyone by email or other means, this is a broad appeal directed at the general public.

a reply to: The2Billies

I wholly agree with your comment here, and I applaud your willingness to point out that a few on both sides are guilty of such behavior.

I agree implementation (for the most part, the exception I have in my previous response) is illegal, and that should be addressed by the law.

But I don't think this particular instance is anything more than some washed up actors trying to find relevance by putting out an edgy statement they know will gain traction.

That being said, Hollywood (industry of entertainment) leans left... And I think it's safe to say they probably discriminate in a way that is hard to prove against those who lean right. Most who do lean right keep their mouth closed about it, and while that's a shame, it is what it is. I'm sure we could find right leaning industries that employ similar tactics, or could be alleged of such without being able to prove one way or the other.

Now I'm just speculating, not accusing. . . . .

But what if a group of evil leftist Hollywood actors wanted to create a list of people who support Trump in order to kill them?

I could imagine a scenario where that might be possible with some leftist actors, potentially.

And killing people is wrong and often bad.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Now I'm just speculating, not accusing. . . . .

But what if a group of evil leftist Hollywood actors wanted to create a list of people who support Trump in order to kill them?

I could imagine a scenario where that might be possible with some leftist actors, potentially.

And killing people is wrong and often bad.

Wouldn't that fall under the existing laws regarding conspiracy to commit murder?

Hardly on the same level as creating a list of political supporters for the purpose of exposing their names....don't you agree?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: The2Billies

Doxing - cyberbullying - is illegal

Acknowledging someone attended an event isn't doxing though.

You know this list, if compiled, will be out on Twitter posthaste.

Let's say the "event" is an Alanon meeting...publishing the names of people attending THAT event isn't doxing of a sort?

It's clear the attendees expect some anonymity and would be concerned for their job security if their attendance was revealed on Twitter.

a reply to: Krakatoa

But do we actually know "why" they are collecting names?

In theory, they couldn't come out and say, "Hi! We want the names of people we want to murder".

They'd have to say something different, wouldn't they?

a reply to: IAMTAT

Let's say the "event" is an Alanon meeting...publishing the names of people attending THAT event isn't doxing of a sort?

I'm torn on this one. Nine times out of ten, I'm for more individual freedom. If they're just attending a political conference, and just paying 1,000 dollars a plate, than I think they should be able to be protected by anonymity laws (which are unfortunately deteriorating due to both sides of the aisle trying to tit for tat each other). If they're going there and making a contribution towards the campaign other than buying the admittance ticket... it gets a little trickier.

I'm all for anonymity and freedoms, but it does get a little tricky when you want transparency with elected officials and who they associate with. It might make certain decisions by those in power more open to skepticism of why that call was made.

But back to OP, I don't think anything will come from this attempt, I maintain it was just two former B lists trying to get their name back out there. If it did materialize, they'd certainly be breaking or at least flirting with some laws.

a reply to: The2Billies

Hollywood stars demanding the blacklisting of Trump supporters...

Seriously? Do you always make crap up to get faux-outraged about:

Debra Messing:

Please print a list of all attendees please. The public has a right to know.

No call for "blacklisting". Just for outing them as Trump supporters. We could discuss the implications -- good and bad -- of such transparency, but you'll have to walk back your fake news first.

Eric McCormack:

Hey, @THR, kindly report on everyone attending this event, so the rest of us can be clear about who we don't wanna work with. Thx.

Again, just a call for transparency... so that Mr. McCormack (and presumably others) can exercise their RIGHT to freedom of association. If Mr. McCormack chooses not to work with his political enemies, he has that right. No one has to agree or like it, but I will damn sure stand up for EVERYONE'S right to choose who and what they contribute their time, labor and money.

...isn't that totalitarian or fascist?

Nope. Only if/when government does it -- As another illustrious poster has already stated. These two mediocre actors are just individuals speaking for themselves. They are not government officials and have no official power or authority. They're just talking trash.

If anyone is displaying a totalitarian or fascist ideology, it would be YOU for suggesting these two do not have the right to free speech and freedom of association, and/or other associated rights.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krakatoa

But do we actually know "why" they are collecting names?

In theory, they couldn't come out and say, "Hi! We want the names of people we want to murder".

They'd have to say something different, wouldn't they?

Yes. They could say its a list for marketing purposes too. The important point is if they state publicly it is for an illegal act, then they could be charged with conspiracy to commit that illegal act.

The post list-creation action itself is an entirely different thing, however.

Very interesting take here:

Seinfeld actor John O'Hurley says he is 'embarrassed' for Will and Grace stars Debra Messing and Eric McCormack over their Trump comments and accuses them of using a bully pulpit

Hurley, who is a well-known conservative, said he hoped that he might be able to discuss his political difference with Messing and McCormack, personally.

'It's very difficult to be a conservative in Hollywood. Even though there are many of us, you do feel you are an island fighting the storm... all viewpoints must be observed and respected,' he said. 'At the same time we are supporting free thinking, we also have to support free receptors – people that will allow other ideas to infect them. Some of the best convos I've ever had on Seinfeld... were with Michael Richards who thinks totally different than I do. I couldn't wait to present him with an issue because I was always interested in his perspective.'

'Bryan Cranston... is the complete opposite of me. We can sit for hours and discuss an idea... not with the premise of trying to convince each other,' O'Hurley continued.

I love that. Mr. O'Hurley would probably make a great ATSer and become one of our ATS gems. We wouldn't find him in the echo chambers. He'd be one discussing and dissecting and expanding on various issues, with the same intellect and grace that he portrays in this interview.

We desperately need more of that -- both on ATS and in the world at large.

a reply to: Boadicea

And deciding who to work with is a personal choice... Nothing wrong with that on an employee level. It gets a bit trickier if you're the employer, but even then there are some exceptions.

Sadly, the court of public opinion can be above any law. If anyone remembers, there was a female pornstar who refused to have intercourse with men who did gay porn, because of her fear they were more susceptible to HIV and AIDS.... Twitter roasted her, and she ended up committing suicide.

a reply to: The2Billies

Its definitely fascist, but it certainly doesnt surprise me. It could be a very effective tactic and I expect to see it deployed for 2020. All of this will get a lot worse and employers even now vet people on the basis of social media postings on Farcebook and Twitter.

But of course........it can work both ways, cant it.