I can’t speak as to the nature of whatever is going on with Patreon, but I will say this: none of the major companies that you claim are “getting woke” are caving to social pressure, they are simply trying to appeal to a wider audience, and thus make more money. This is perfectly legitimate. Does Marvel adding black representation really detract that much from the movies? Furthermore, what exactly is so bad about political correctness? Most of the time it basically translates to “Don’t be a dick to people”. Finally, I would guess that when you say that Patreon is banning right-wing users, I doubt it is simply because they are right-wing. Most likely, they are banning people who post hate speech, or are advocating violence against nonwhites, or other Nazi-ish stuff. I hope we can all agree that removing those things is a good thing.
Boy, you most certainly haven't been paying attention these days. And, by the sounds of it, you also didn't watch the video. Let's take the points in order.
but I will say this: none of the major companies that you claim are “getting woke” are caving to social pressure, they are simply trying to appeal to a wider audience, and thus make more money.
This is the simplest point. Track record shows that the act of getting woke alienates half the potential market these days. Therefore, when they make the decision to do some woke messaging it is either the case that they are not aware of this track record because they are not getting the full picture, or they are taking a gamble that the woke messaging will appeal to the crowd this message appeals to more than it will alienate the crowd it will alienate. The gamble here would be that the alienated crowd would still buy the product while they get more customers from the crowd it appeals to, or possibly they believe their customer base has very few members of the crowd this would alienate.
There is a term, "get woke, go broke," and it applies to the companies that loose on this gamble. So far, I have heard of cases like Nike where their woke messaging caused them to break even on the result, loosing about an equal amount of business to the business they gained for their woke messaging with Collin Capernic. And, I have also heard cases where "get woke, go broke" very much applies in that they lost a huge chunk of revenue after "getting woke." However, these cases often also have other mitigating factors such as these companies that started to "get woke" already loosing money for other reasons.
Overall, it is a nebulous subject as to whether or not this kind of woke messaging is something that will kill a company, but I have also seen no actual sign of this woke messaging stuff being beneficial for a company either and there are a lot of people who make noise and stir up negative word-of-mouth across the internet on companies that "get woke." That kind of negative messaging is not the kind of headache I would want as a company CEO.
Does Marvel adding black representation really detract that much from the movies?
This is a fairly serious case of not quite knowing what you're talking about as well. Most of the anti-woke criticisms toward Marvel revolve around them changing already existing characters, such as turning Thor female or having Gene Grey brainwash Ice Man into becoming gay in X-men. That's the kind of stuff that distracted from the product and SERIOUSLY upset fans. And, yes, it lost a LOT of money when they made those moves.
Black representation, so far, has been done in the form of just creating entirely new black characters to add to the roster. And, no, I am not aware of anyone who has been really upset about it aside from Miles Meralis as an alternate-universe Spiderman. That's the only case, but they largely did it right due to the fact that 1. They strongly emphisized the point he was an alternate universe version to the extent where every single last one of the Spiderman rogues gallery has an alternate version for the Miles Meralis universe, and 2. He was a new character, not a perversion on an already existing one. As such, the audience only needed a little bit of time to get used to the idea of Miles Meralis and they didn't just warm up to him, but he became a beloved part of the Spiderman multiverse to the point that these days just about every rendition of Spiderman needs to at some point hit a point in the plot where inter-dimensional travel becomes a thing so Peter Parker can meet Miles Meralis.
Most of the time it basically translates to “Don’t be a dick to people”.
Yeah, no. Just no. If this is what you think political correctness translates to, then you REALLY have not been paying any attention at all to the cases of blatant censorship that has been going on under the guise of "political correctness."
The accurate characterization of "political correctness" is "don't criticize this politically-oriented ideology."
"Political correctness," FYI, is a term that originally came out of the Soviet Union, and was called out in the works of George Orwell. It means, "words and opinions that are not correct politically." AKA, against the party. And, in the Soviet Union, being politically incorrect, or rather, speaking out against Stallin, got you either killed or thrown into a Gulague (but I repeat myself.)
"Political correctness" these days has been used as an excuse to shut down things like questioning the idea of a wage gap, pointing out that the best research on the subject has only 2% of the wage difference between men and women unaccountable by explanations such as working longer hours, more education, traveling for work, or otherwise just working a different job entirely. The 72 cents on the dollar statistic comes from comparing all women's wages to all men's wages without accounting for even the fact men and women often choose different careers.
Pointing out the rate of so-called "trans kids" who regret their decision to change genders and realize they made a mistake because they were just confused kids getting bad messaging (It's over 50%, FYI. In individuals under 18, this rate is FAR higher than the 5% or so of people over 18 who transition who regret it.)
And, most disturbingly, pointing out that some women lie about being raped.
All of these are very serious issues that warrant serious discussion, but these are the kinds of subjects that get shut down under the banner "politically incorrect" these days. The only reason you would ever characterize it the way you did would be if you have simply not been paying attention at all.
And now, finally.
Finally, I would guess that when you say that Patreon is banning right-wing users, I doubt it is simply because they are right-wing. Most likely, they are banning people who post hate speech, or are advocating violence against nonwhites, or other Nazi-ish stuff. I hope we can all agree that removing those things is a good thing.
Again, watch the attached video at the top. Just like my point with the politically incorrect stuff, that's not what's going on at all and it's a LOT more complicated than that. I'm not so certain about the current rash of mass banning, but the first 3 famous cases at least did not fit that bill at all.
Furthermore, the issue has never been the banning, it was the "Without notice" insta-ban part. Especially considering the fact Patreon is a money-handling service, that sort of thing is the kind of thing that should be reserved only for actual criminal activities such as child pornography or the funding of violent criminal activity. These people they banned were more along the lines of just people who said the kinds of things I referenced in the "politically incorrectness" portion.
The real issue though is that the bans were all explicitly in disagreement with Patreon's terms of service. When they banned Lauren Southern, the terms of service explicitly stated that you would get a warning first and yet she was banned without notice. Then, they explicitly promised they would never do it again. Yet, they then went and did the exact same thing to Carl Benjamin.
In Carl Benjamin's case, it was even worse, because they banned him for a word he said 2 years previous on a live-stream that was not and never was on Patreon. Patreon's terms of service at the time also stated they would not ban you for things said off platform. And, as stated above, it also STILL said they would give appropriate 3 strikes worth of warning first, and this was after they had stated they would never ban without notice again after the Lauren Southern case.
You can state your case for whether or not Nazi-ish stuff ought to be allowed anywhere, but the one thing we want around even less than Nazi-ish stuff is a company that's able to just snap it's fingers and take away your income without warning. That's even worse than someone talking some offensive BS.
