Apparently cancel culture is not Green, but blue

[Jacob Morres]

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpiralDynamics/comments/ot1kqx/please_do_not_mistake_blue_for_green_just_because/

I found this post interesting and wanted to hear y'all's thoughts @Leo Gura

 

"

Green is more rare than we think. Most people, including myself, tend to think green is yellow. When people first start thinking of spiral dynamics they tend to simplify it to:

Blue = religion Orange = capitalism Green = The far left/ cancel culture

This is a really bad misconception. Cancel culture is a BLUE value. Censorship is a BLUE value. Closing down the conversation is a BLUE value. Just because someone is liberal does not mean they are green. Blue comes in any form of finding the “One true way”. For many this is religion. For MANY others it is politics, “following the science”, socialism, Marxism, ect.

The MAIN CORE (!!!!!!!!) value of green is relativism, which is a huge jump from the other stages. Most people think relativism is yellow, because it “can see all the other stages”. That isn’t yellow, it’s green

(Yes, green can be “intolerant” of others, but they are not intolerant of people just for having different idealogies. Basically green is not totally unreasonable like blue tends to be)

Example: if a stranger walks up to you and picks a fight about wearing a mask, that is not green. That’s blue. Green may push values / post on social media but they don’t pick fights with strangers.

“Cancel culture” is alllll blue. Green tends to see things as “products of capitalism” and “products of religion” or “products of a sexist culture” and are usually sympathetic and want to help the other grow and “get to their level of understanding” (in a nice way). Blue is more drawn to tearing others down in effort to virtue signal / develop sense of morality. (cancelling everyone or calling everything a sin)

Just thought I’d share my thoughts. I think steortypes were rrly wrong when it comes to green, because people just thought blue had to be conservative Catholics. But blue can have any mindset."

[Leo Gura]

The problem is that "cancel culture" is now a badly misused term.

Cancel culture is not always dogmatic. For example, #MeToo I would say is Green.

I think Green is not above censorship. Green will censor things which violate it's moral standard of equality, justice, and compassion towards all. So Green will tend to censor stuff like Nazism and that is not the same as Blue censorship of porn or McCarthyism. Green will censor open racists and sexual abusers and the like.

Green has some sense of relativity, but a truly deep grasp of relativity is a Tier 2 skill. Green is not fully relativistic. Green still prevelges itself.

I think it is wrong to only place censorship at one stage. There are difference stages of censorship. There are also different stages of ideology. It is a mistake to place all ideology into one stage.

[thisintegrated]

Blue doesn't start "movements" like Green.  Blue doesn't think big picture like that.  Greens are the ones most likely to get offended at incorrect use of pronouns or whatever.

[Thought Art]

I need to work on my fear of pissing off green aha

I consider myself stage green but I am always afraid of making a mistakes around them

[Eph75]

Blue shadow in green stage, forcing conformity through radical measures. A lot of young people being pushed fast towards/into green have huge shadows. Online phenomena adopting value sets not grown into the stage in a tradition sense, faking it until making it becomes real, and deep shadows remain. 

There being a tendency to move through SD stages in an hopscotch fashion, touching down with one foot in some stages while having both feet firmly into the mud of other stages, the strong "stereotypical" greens that we see who give cancel culture a face are the progression of "stereotypical" blue, and thus not surprisingly have stronger blue shadows than orange ones. 

Same theory implies stronger red shadows in orange extremes, individuality and power abuse, and even as the battling of lingering achiever mentality when reaching yellow. 

Edited August 3, 2021 by Eph75

[Reciprocality]

For there to be a meaningful correlation between the set stage and the assumed predicate you must to the substance of the latter find exactly what constitutes the definition of the former.

Because stages sometimes consists of ideas that are unknowingly not to the exclusion of another it is easy to confound them and make loose predictions of the mindset upon which actions are caused. It is even easier to distinguish them by bad deduction, as in distinguishing them where they are (again) not to the exclusion of the other.

The predicate subsists in a world as a reaction against certain things, this SD model can help you understand its natural progression by finding on which basis it reacts.

Because you refrain from being specific and clear in the post i must either think in variables or assume what you mean. For the pupose of this thread i should engage with the latter of them.  

Where blue is best defined as the ethic of conservation and expansion of unified tradition green is open for subsets of things beyond what its group can directly be enriched by yet hostile to whatever retards the potential for this openness.
Blue reacts against things to the betterment of what is external to it be it of any cost to itself, green must not, in content some blue and green people can be in agreement but in structure they can not to the extent the model is valid and you have understood it. 
Blue does not mean you have to be nationalistic, you can be blue and worldcentric but not whereby there is no entity outside what they define as the world that must negate its growth. (as such they may desire a world government to the detriment of wild-life and aliens.)

So back to the assumption, i assume by cancel culture you mean for example the one whereby men ought not speak on issues concerning women for they signify by their very being the patriarchies of the past or present, and if they do they must be canceled for in correlation to the maxim as mentioned before there is a conservation of identity as opposed to openness for things outside it. As i also defined green as opposing whatever retards the potential for acceptance of the things that do not cause direct growth for itself, it should be obvious why the two worldviews will sometimes overlap in content, and equally apparent why when both are transcended they will not (overlap) in structure.

Can a green person fighting for the rights of the disenfranchised end up fighting for the conservation of its identity instead? Yes indeed, this is a cycle subjected to subsets of each progressive generation and ends up being a big reason that 1. the higher ideals fails there and then and 2. that progression in decades thereafter stagnates. I mean look at TYT.

There is still work which needs to be done in canceling certain voices that makes it very hard for certain others, but it is a responsebility to see when and where more so then to conform to who.

@Jacob Morres