To think there is a worrying trend to cancel folk for opinions and thoughts

[ConnieLinggusThe69th]

I'm not saying I agree with the opinions of Roald Dahl (I dont) but I understand if people want to cancel folk for their actions - don't like cancel culture but that seems reasonable somewhat to react to someone's actions

But why the fuck are we extending cancel culture to the thoughts that someone expressed? He hardly evangelised his anti semitic beliefs- he simply held them... but chose to write fiction books... the impact he left on the world was some good stories for most people

Just read they were putting a sign up to apologise for his beliefs in the Roald Dahl museum - he's dead now, how can you apologise post death for someone else's thoughts?!

There are tens of thousands of people out there who have had their accounts closed. Some may be for good reason, like fraud or whatever. But many are because of their beliefs. A parents group for gender critical people was refused a bank account because like 90% of people they objected to the trans evil being inflicted on their kids.

banks should judge people on facts, ie how much money they have and how they use the accounts. No on what they think of fashionable beliefs, how many MN people think a man can become a woman by putting on a frock and wanting access to rape crisis centres?

@AgathaSpencerGregson

It simply isn’t true that companies are free to withdraw services on any grounds they like. The EA 2010 prohibits discrimination by service providers on grounds of protected characteristics including belief. The extent to which that protects Farage in these circumstances is a matter of debate but please let’s move away from the incorrect premise that banks are free of constraint in this area. they are also bound by regulatory duties to act with integrity and treat customers fairly, as well as the act referred to above.

I didn't state they could withdraw service on "any grounds they like".

Your post stated that withdrawal of services by coutts was “just capitalism” and “a company exercising its rights.” No awareness or acknowledgment at all that coutts’ rights are far from untrammelled here and that there is room for debate over whether they have exceeded them. That needed a correction and it’s been given one.

And it’s probably worth you reading Catherine Bennett in the observer this morning, just to make sure you’ve a proper understanding of whose side you’re on here.
rather you than me. Ugh

We're picking sides? I'm not on anyone's "side" 😳

Yes, you do right to backtrack. I would too.
especially as it’s also come out that coutts were too good for Farage but apparently happy to take the money of the former PM of Qatar - seemingly quite a lot of it ….
but yeah, just capitalism 😂

@AgathaSpencerGregson

Yes, you do right to backtrack. I would too. especially as it’s also come out that coutts were too good for Farage but apparently happy to take the money of the former PM of Qatar - seemingly quite a lot of it …. but yeah, just capitalism 😂

No backtracking here. Following your reasoning through, though, wouldn't the former PM of Qatar be as undesirable as Farage, politically? (I'd have thought, anyway.) Doesn't your post just show Coutts simply prefers moneyed customers?

We know that already. What it shows is “the company exercising its rights” you’re going in to bat for here are a bunch of complete hypocrites.
but hey, you do you.

Companies now have to follow ESG requirements. Environmental, Social and Governance Responsibilities. It can lead to some woke decisions, but overall it is a really good thing.

Is it nonsense? If I worked in a Roald Dahl museum, I might want to make it very clear that while the museum celebrated his children's books, his fiction-writing, it in no way condoned his anti-semitic views. No harm in being clear about that.

@OCaptain

"Following your reasoning through, though, wouldn't the former PM of Qatar be as undesirable as Farage, politically? (I'd have thought, anyway.) "

+++++

The former PM of Qatar Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani helped finance weapons to several Syrian rebel groups including Islamic Jihad.

I have an immense dislike for Farage, his lies, his out of his depth opportunism,outright hypocrisy and the damage he has caused to the UK but HBJ is in a different league on the undesirable scale.

I realise that you also disagree with Farage's views but until he breaks the law then he is entitled to them.

I'm not familiar with this. How and why is it a good thing overall? Will happily be educated!

@AgathaSpencerGregson

We know that already. What it shows is “the company exercising its rights” you’re going in to bat for here are a bunch of complete hypocrites. but hey, you do you.

One more time, as you seem to have some trouble understanding this: I do not support the bank. I don't support Farage or any of their customers. I have no side here and am not "going in to bat" for anyone. I do think a private company has the right to conduct business as they see fit within the law. Pubs can ban you from spending money and time there if you're disorderly; how is this different (apart from scale)?

Roald Dahl wasn’t cancelled! The entire premise of this thread is absurd, mawkish, and incorrect. The noted anti semite and misogynist who put well known anti semitic tropes into his book The Witches is still going to be published and read. But His publishers and the heirs who profit from sales of his books have chosen to remove or alter some of the more egregious bits which would offend or harm readers and (more importantly) buyers of his work. Because they want to protect the value of their intellectual property.

These and other editorial decisions get made all the time for purely economic, or moral, or cultural reasons—-all of them are the privilege and prerogative of the owner of the property and taken to protect the value if the property.

You’re still defending the decisions which the CEO herself has apologised for. Please, stop insulting my intelligence.
as for the final question; if you’re unable to understand the difference between pubs and a heavily regulated bank, I honestly despair.

@AgathaSpencerGregson

You’re still defending the decisions which the CEO herself has apologised for. Please, stop insulting my intelligence. as for the final question; if you’re unable to understand the difference between pubs and a heavily regulated bank, I honestly despair.

🙄

I used to work for a bank. Trust me, I understand. It was an example of how private organisations have the ability to stop customers from using them, no matter what kind of services they are. This isn't new.
And I am not defending anything, least of all Coutts, FGS.

Because nominally it means businesses are considering more than just profit in their decision making.

In reality it depends on how they are considering ESG issues and why they are doing so. For example, a company considering ESG from an impact materiality viewpoint (how the company impacts on people, places, and the planet) because senior management want to improve the companies sustainability performance will have a better outcome than one considering it from a financial materiality viewpoint (how people, places and the planet impacts a company's profitability) because their investors demand it.

People get “cancelled” sll the time for things that make their bosses or politician’s uncomfortable! People were arrested in the UK for coming out to protest the MET over the abysmal treatment of women or for holding up “not my king” signs. In the US teachers snd librarians recieve death threats and under government control the threat of fines, job loss, and prison for sharing books or ideas about African American history or LGBTQ history.
OF course under Trump and the conservative Supreme court LGBTQ people have no right to services offered to the general public and women have no right to medication if their pharmacists disagree. So viewpoint discrimination is nothing new. Its just when upper class white guys get the short end of the stuck that there is all this hysteria. My withers are wholly unwrung for Farage.

Archeology is a perfect way to unravel fiction from reality.
Greta got fined which is great for publicity and a result for society who find her annoying - follow the finances and those puppet masters are revealed.

I don;'t think this is about Farage. Thousands of people have had accounts closed without explanation (not least because some of the complex laws do not allow "tipping off" but also because the banks find it easier not to explain). Sometimes it is simply because they were born in the wrong country or have a parent in the house of lords. There are a lot of different pieces of legislation. I have been against some of these rules for over 10 years most of all because of closure without an obligation to give reasons and without a right to reply which breaches natural justice.

What puppet masters?

Your determined to make this another thread about your hero Nigel aren't you?

An annoying brat teen gets global media coverage-children's fund🤔woke funding

WTF are you talking about?

Are you from opposite land?