Read on Twitter
Not going to dunk on P*ter C*ffin for evading a block to see people talking about them, because I just checked their timeline despite being blocked myself.
But they're on about "breadtube is the new iteration of the skeptics movement" and...whut
But they're on about "breadtube is the new iteration of the skeptics movement" and...whut
First off, I was pretty much neck-deep in the online skeptics' movement from 2003-2015 or so, and uh...
First time I ever heard of C*ffin was when they got targeted by Gamergate, and even then I heard about them after the fact. But, you know, maybe we ran in different circles, sure whatever.
So, let's say they're right, and Breadtube is the new iteration of the skeptics' movement.
So what?
So what?
Like, I can see an argument for it that I don't think they're making: it's a poorly-defined group loosely organized around a constellation of similar beliefs, mainly interacting in online spaces that tend to coalesce around particular prominent content creators.
In the aughts, those content creators were mainly authors (Shermer, Dawkins), magicians (Randi, Penn & Teller), and bloggers (PZ Myers, Ed Brayton, Rebecca Watson). Eventually podcasters (the Novellas, Dunning) and YouTubers (Thunderf00t, AronRa) were a big part of the mix
For Breadtube, the content creators are mainly YouTubers (HBomb, Contrapoints) and streamers (Vaush, The Serfs).
Both grow out of older movements with deep roots; the modern skeptics movement tracing its origins back to Asimov and Sagan in the 70s, Breadtube citing theory going back to Marx.
And both are beset by internecine conflicts over issues of inclusion and presentation.
For online skeptics, there were inclusion fights over atheists (Non-Overlapping Magesteria was invoked a lot, I think Hal Bidlack suggested avoiding religious talk at a TAM at one point), then feminists and "SJWs" following "Elevatorgate."
I don't think it's hyperbolic to say that Elevatorgate was the beginning of the end of that iteration of the skeptics' movement. A lot of the figures involved (Thunderf00t, Amazing Atheist) went on to form the backbone of Gamergate.
Big conflicts over presentation were the "framing" debacle spurred by Mooney & Kirshenbaum, and the "don't be a dick" fiasco. Mostly about the "Right" and "Wrong" ways to convince people of things, rarely citing any evidence.
Ironically enough.
For Breadtube, I see conflicts over including class reductionists and nazbols and recently deconverted former Nazis, and conflicts over including liberals and neoliberals and people who care about identity politics.
I see conflicts over who to target in terms of audience, where people like C*ffin will accept invites to be on stage with Nazis and will advocate reaching out to the alt-right out of class solidarity, and will dismiss and demonize anyone who might be "neoliberal."
And, you know, the other side.
So, like, sure, maybe Breadtube is the new iteration of the Skeptics' movement.
So what?
The skeptics' movement was a good idea, and did a lot of good. It was necessary, and at its best it promoted good ideas.
So what?
The skeptics' movement was a good idea, and did a lot of good. It was necessary, and at its best it promoted good ideas.
