BEYOND CANCELLATION

The End of Cancel Culture and the Dawn of Meaningful Conversation

“Cancel culture supports a simplistic worldview and promotes the idea that a person is no better than the worst choice they ever made. The ‘demand for purity’ and lack of tolerance for ambiguity are unrealistic…The world is messy ... People who do really good stuff have flaws.”

At first glance, one might presume the above quote came from a conservative pundit at Turning Point or a soundbite taken from a DailyWire podcast. So it may be a shock this comment originated from none other than former President Obama in October 2019. Regardless of what side of the fence he may sit on now, before 2020’s heightened binary politicization, our former progressive president worried about the collateral damage the Cancel Culture trend would produce in a democratic society. 

Now, if you asked someone what the term “cancel culture” means, the answer can leap to extremes depending on their political ideology. To a far-left progressive, “cancel culture” doesn’t even exist except as perhaps a call to hold people in power accountable. To a far-right conservative “cancel culture” is a veritable cancer that can only be obliterated with legal seed radiation. 

What if both of these extremes are wrong?

I believe when cancel culture started—and you can read about its origins with Black Twitter here —it worked as an expression of agency, a personal choice to withdraw attention from an individual or a corporation whose values offended someone.

This intention seems rational. However, as the years have gone by, “canceling” someone has become a knee-jerk, seemingly unrelenting pile-on attack without discourse, or a chance for meaningful dialogue. Any gain from a so-called cancellation is short-lived, and unfortunately only really affects the non-celebrity, smaller businesses—not the powerful.

This tactic also just cements ideological echo chambers. 

Calling out the elite (whether that be a powerful corporation or celebrity) for accountability en masse can provide powerful support to combating sexism, racism, and exploitation. We’ve seen this with the positive aspects of the #MeToo movement, namely holding powerful men accountable by demanding legal trials to ascertain guilt and punishment. 

Target has since been canceled by both the politically right (for promoting LBGTQ+ books and trans-gendered clothing in children’s sections) and the left because even though it sells such merchandise, it has donated to questionable candidates and groups that rally against the political movement.  

However, the more insidious side of Cancel Culture is zealously religious. The pendulum has swung so far that any whiff of possible “wrongthink” or “wrongdoing” equates to the proverbial social electric chair for the accused. There is a presumption of guilt, and the sinner is shamed without consideration for remorse or explanation.

This generates blind conformity and fear, not progress.

We can all probably name what constitutes the “scarlet letters” of our current climate—and just like Hester Prynne, a good portion of these branded individuals have good intentions and may not be the villains in the story after all. Perhaps, like Hawthorne’s protagonist, some are unsung heroes.

We can also look back through historical examples to find forms of Cancel Culture with the Ancient Greeks in their practice of ostracism (though exile required a popular vote). The early Catholic Church had a public shaming requiring some sinners (if the sin was deemed public like apostasy or adultery) to participate in an open confession before the whole congregation (unlike private confessions to a priest). That said, there was forgiveness, and a welcoming back into communion after the sinner repented. 

Many brilliant (excommunicated) academics have made the comparison between the “new woke mob” and its religious overtones. Example: Atonement is hard to come by if you find yourself on the opposite side of a heated topic— like the movement to assert transgender rights, or if you openly discuss the cost/benefit analysis of the Covid lockdowns or the mRNA vaccine. 

Shutting down conversation and denying meaningful discussions (especially when propped up by government coercion as we’ve discovered with the Twitter files) for our most controversial topics is not only dangerous—as it siphons everyone off into their corners and thus deepens the already growing divide—it’s downright totalitarian. Labeling people who question the “science” of topics like transgenderism as disinformation agents or worse, transphobic Nazis, does nothing but cement detractors further away from establishing any sympathy for the LBGTQ+ community.        

We are now all familiar with the tale of J.K. Rowling and her famed tweet questioning the transgender narrative. We then saw the aftermath: book burnings, boycotts, and the anniversary special that flashed a disclaimer regarding the absent creator of the world they were exploring and admiring. Most disappointing, but not surprising, were Daniel Radcliff and Emma Watson’s betrayal. While many actors had differing opinions, the two leads came out swinging against the very person they once called “auntie”.

On the other hand, some colleagues defended Rowling’s right to her opinion, namely Ralph Fiennes and Helena Bonham Carter. “It’s been taken to the extreme, the judgmentalism of people. She’s allowed her opinion, particularly if she’s suffered abuse. Everybody carries their own history of trauma and forms their opinions from that trauma, and you have to respect where people come from and their pain…You can’t ban people. I hate cancel culture. It has become quite hysterical and there’s kind of a witch hunt and a lack of understanding,” Helena stated. 

If you are willing to take the time, The Free Press has a wonderfully produced and thoughtful podcast series exploring this controversy. I highly suggest investing opening your heart and mind to both sides of the argument. 

The Free Press’ founder Bari Weiss is no stranger to cancel culture herself. Now considered a classical liberal, she was once a progressive dream, a Jewish lesbian and Columbia grad who reported for the legacy left’s New York Times.

She famously exited the NYT with a resignation letter that read: "Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions."

Of course, many canceled individuals are fired or bullied out of their once-prominent positions. Numerous nurses and doctors were let go during the COVID chaos for questioning protocol or refusing to get the mRNA vaccine. And years later, while their lives may have been destroyed, their objections have been legally redeemed. 

Many esteemed university professors have also been fired for not towing the narrative line, whether that be questioning the elimination of all Western Culture classes or supporting controversial speakers on campus. One of the most famous ex-professors of psychology may officially lose his Canadian license for public comments made against the government and its transgender policies. Jordan Peterson is now fighting an order by the court to take “re-education” classes. Sounds like a soft introduction to communist utopia.

Then, there’s the comedians. The fact that the whole profession is based on crossing the proverbial uncrossable line should give them a pass. Comedians are supposed to say the unsayable! But alas, those court jesters who once were hired by the King to call out hypocrisy have been sent to the politically correct guillotine. 

The problem with canceling the famous who have some independent power and wealth is that it doesn’t necessarily fulfill the mob’s intention —to shun and remove the “oppressor”. In fact, sometimes this just gives these individuals more fanfare. 

At the very least, it places them into the “other” category and affords them a platform where now only one side hears their story. Again, take Jordan Peterson who is currently part of The Daily Wire bundle, or Roseanne Barr who after being kicked off her own show, started an independent podcast just picked up by Musk’s X and probably doesn’t reach the wide spectrum of audience on the left that she once could with her past sitcoms and comedy specials. 

Looking forward, the more that the canceled keep projecting their voices and do not apologize for their opinions, the braver others will be when confronted. Dave Chapelle doubled down, even celebrating his “cancellation” with a Grammy and a new special despite Netflix protests and controversy over the renaming of his alma mater’s theater (which he helped fund). Grammy-winning R&B singer, Chrisette Michele followed up her explanation tour with an unapologetic TEDx Talk after singing for the Trump inauguration. Even one of the first big public shaming victims, Monica Lewisnky is claiming back her time in a new campaign. 

For a lot of us (some quieter than others out of fear) this politically correct movement that has been bubbling up since the ‘90s has hit its zenith. We know if this cultural movement continues on its current trajectory we could softly fall into the Orwellian nightmare where “right speech” is governed by a Ministry of Truth.

Hyperbole or not, I believe we all have trauma, and we desire to place the blame for that trauma on someone other than ourselves. We want others to be punished. And perhaps that is natural. But I also believe we’ve become exhausted by these tantrums and are now looking for a more holistic approach to ease our pain. We know deep down healing doesn’t happen by cutting off communication or stifling someone else’s free speech.

It usually means reaching across the aisle, having truthful conversations, and just listening to divergent ideas.