Later thoughts. Back the the quote from your correspondent:
>" cancel culture is not about moral suasion or transforming the moral universe of the aggressor. It is about power, and stripping them of their platforms that allow them to spread such views. "
That identifies one of the goals - direct deplatforming of an ongoing source.
Later thoughts. Back the the quote from your correspondent:
>" cancel culture is not about moral suasion or transforming the moral universe of the aggressor. It is about power, and stripping them of their platforms that allow them to spread such views. "
That identifies one of the goals - direct deplatforming of an ongoing source.
But cancel culture has other facets as well. For example, Majdi Wadi was a Palestinian Muslim businessman (selling middle eastern food) in Minneapolis, supporting a mixed race community and Black Lives Matter, when somebody discovered some terrible racist and homophobic tweets by his daughter from many years previous when she was a mixed up teenager. She (who had radically changed since that time) was by then marching with BLM protestors; she apologized profusely and denounced the sentiments of those old tweets; her father fired her and apologized, tried to find a path towards redemption. (As mentioned previously, cancelling is not primarily about moral growth or redemption, but about gaining "power over").
But the company got pretty well cancelled, losing their contracts, being kicked out of a lease, had to move for safety, lay off 69 employees, etc. In this case, there was no platform being used to spread wrongthink - indeed there was no platform (the company wasn't a media company and had never been used as a platform) and no current or ongoing bad things happening on any other platform - just some long buried immature and wrongheaded tweets from a teenage daughter. Cancelling was punitive, and retributive, and disproportional, and was in no way protecting people from ongoing wrongdoing or harm. (See Bari Weiss' substack for more)
So "shutting down the ability for person to engage in ongoing bad speech or behavior" is not the only purpose of cancel culture or of flexing power. Sometimes it's just to intimidate and show the world how much "power over" a narrative or group has.
"Cross us, no matter whether there is real harm or not, and we can get you fired, get leases canceled, get contracts cancelled, get businesses damaged or closed, and make your family afraid by publicizing your names and sponsoring protests at your home and business"
And if the attempt to flex that cancellation power fails (as in the case of folks like Joe Rogan/Spotify and Dave Chappelle/Netflix), boy does that grind their gears. Not just because somebody might still have a platform for future unapproved speech, but perhaps even more so because they hate to have the limits of their power to destroy demonstrated, even in exceptional cases like these. (They can still destroy lesser folks).
"For example, Majdi Wadi was a Palestinian Muslim businessman (selling middle eastern food) in Minneapolis, supporting a mixed race community and Black Lives Matter, when somebody discovered some terrible racist and homophobic tweets by his daughter from many years previous when she was a mixed up teenager."
Yep, I mention this story in the article. It's such a perfect example of everything wring with this brand of "justice". And positively dystopian that he actually fired his daughter over the tweets in a desperate attempt to save his family business. How anybody involved, from the people on social media applying pressure, to the leaseholders and other business who reacted by disavowing the company, felt as if they were doing the right thing is totally beyond me.
Again, this is just evidence that this isn't about doing the right thing at all. In no moral universe I want to live in was that the right outcome.
Othering based on self-righteousness is a brain high (I'd love to know the chemistry involved) that makes the humanity of the person being othered invisible to the person othering them. This pattern is insidious. It can make people who otherwise appear normal and compassionate into monsters. I've had first-hand experience with this phenomenon. No appeal will sway them from seeing things a certain way. They are right. And that's that. It's the hardest rock I've ever banged myself against. I've twisted myself into pretzels trying to reach someone on the other side of othering. And I never was successful in convincing them that they were hurting me and that I didn't deserve their enmity. I had to remain the scapegoat in order for their worldview to stay intact.
Perhaps you've exposed some of the truth of this phenomenon when you tie it to revenge. When we deliberately seek to harm someone out of malice, it is frowned on by society. But, if we can gin up a good enough excuse as to why we must harm, then it's not malice, it's justified and legitimate. And, what greater excuse than that of "I was or am a victim. Someone hurt me so therefore, I am pushing back." Who can argue with someone standing up for themselves? “'Cancel culture' may have started out in good faith (much like Christianity) but it has since morphed into something gross and ugly.” - Nicole Chardenet
Maybe the whole thing is about legitimating revenge.
Later thoughts. Back the the quote from your correspondent:
>" cancel culture is not about moral suasion or transforming the moral universe of the aggressor. It is about power, and stripping them of their platforms that allow them to spread such views. "
That identifies one of the goals - direct deplatforming of an ongoing source.
But cancel culture has other facets as well. For example, Majdi Wadi was a Palestinian Muslim businessman (selling middle eastern food) in Minneapolis, supporting a mixed race community and Black Lives Matter, when somebody discovered some terrible racist and homophobic tweets by his daughter from many years previous when she was a mixed up teenager. She (who had radically changed since that time) was by then marching with BLM protestors; she apologized profusely and denounced the sentiments of those old tweets; her father fired her and apologized, tried to find a path towards redemption. (As mentioned previously, cancelling is not primarily about moral growth or redemption, but about gaining "power over").
But the company got pretty well cancelled, losing their contracts, being kicked out of a lease, had to move for safety, lay off 69 employees, etc. In this case, there was no platform being used to spread wrongthink - indeed there was no platform (the company wasn't a media company and had never been used as a platform) and no current or ongoing bad things happening on any other platform - just some long buried immature and wrongheaded tweets from a teenage daughter. Cancelling was punitive, and retributive, and disproportional, and was in no way protecting people from ongoing wrongdoing or harm. (See Bari Weiss' substack for more)
So "shutting down the ability for person to engage in ongoing bad speech or behavior" is not the only purpose of cancel culture or of flexing power. Sometimes it's just to intimidate and show the world how much "power over" a narrative or group has.
"Cross us, no matter whether there is real harm or not, and we can get you fired, get leases canceled, get contracts cancelled, get businesses damaged or closed, and make your family afraid by publicizing your names and sponsoring protests at your home and business"
And if the attempt to flex that cancellation power fails (as in the case of folks like Joe Rogan/Spotify and Dave Chappelle/Netflix), boy does that grind their gears. Not just because somebody might still have a platform for future unapproved speech, but perhaps even more so because they hate to have the limits of their power to destroy demonstrated, even in exceptional cases like these. (They can still destroy lesser folks).
"For example, Majdi Wadi was a Palestinian Muslim businessman (selling middle eastern food) in Minneapolis, supporting a mixed race community and Black Lives Matter, when somebody discovered some terrible racist and homophobic tweets by his daughter from many years previous when she was a mixed up teenager."
Yep, I mention this story in the article. It's such a perfect example of everything wring with this brand of "justice". And positively dystopian that he actually fired his daughter over the tweets in a desperate attempt to save his family business. How anybody involved, from the people on social media applying pressure, to the leaseholders and other business who reacted by disavowing the company, felt as if they were doing the right thing is totally beyond me.
Again, this is just evidence that this isn't about doing the right thing at all. In no moral universe I want to live in was that the right outcome.
Othering based on self-righteousness is a brain high (I'd love to know the chemistry involved) that makes the humanity of the person being othered invisible to the person othering them. This pattern is insidious. It can make people who otherwise appear normal and compassionate into monsters. I've had first-hand experience with this phenomenon. No appeal will sway them from seeing things a certain way. They are right. And that's that. It's the hardest rock I've ever banged myself against. I've twisted myself into pretzels trying to reach someone on the other side of othering. And I never was successful in convincing them that they were hurting me and that I didn't deserve their enmity. I had to remain the scapegoat in order for their worldview to stay intact.
Perhaps you've exposed some of the truth of this phenomenon when you tie it to revenge. When we deliberately seek to harm someone out of malice, it is frowned on by society. But, if we can gin up a good enough excuse as to why we must harm, then it's not malice, it's justified and legitimate. And, what greater excuse than that of "I was or am a victim. Someone hurt me so therefore, I am pushing back." Who can argue with someone standing up for themselves? “'Cancel culture' may have started out in good faith (much like Christianity) but it has since morphed into something gross and ugly.” - Nicole Chardenet
Maybe the whole thing is about legitimating revenge.
Outside the Wall
All alone, or in two's
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands
The bleeding hearts and the artists
Make their stand
And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad bugger's wall
—Pink Floyd, The Wall