Is there such a thing as a malign trend of reputational harm and silencing around contentious political issues, or are people just reaping the righteous rewards of stating unethical views?
In case you’re in a hurry this morning I will settle this definitively right now: there is such a thing as Cancel Culture, it is socially harmful, and anyone who questions its existence or harm almost certainly subscribes to the same narratives as the cancellers.
I created this topic as a ‘thread’ to invite reader interactions (thoughts, examples, objections) but also because this is actually a pretty simple question to settle. First we must introduce the concept of the ‘Overton Window’. This is a political science term which describes the range of acceptable opinions on all live issues. Being outside of the window means that you’re not just in the minority but that you’ve moved so far away from the mainstream of political/cultural discourse that your opinions will be viewed pejoratively. They might be asinine (flat earth theories) or conspiratorial (9/11 truth) or unethical (racial bigotry) but they’re not just minority positions-they’re fairly unacceptable ones.
Fortunately for us moderates and critical thinkers no person or group can define the Overton Window. The SPLC and Hillary Clinton would badly love to have this power but it’s a matter of social consensus. Like the price of consumer goods, the Overton Window is the aggregated and organic result of millions of interactions.
It used to be that the media reflected and, in fact, partially defined the Overton Window. (I can already feel this piece growing longer than I intended… lol). Unfortunately the Overton Window has gradually shifted in many areas but the mainstream media (MSM) has been overtaken by a coterie of better-educated, wealthier, more out of touch, and more elitist people whose views were created, artificially, by (themselves insanely out of touch) academics and then transmitted through private colleges and universities. The fact that those views have now consumed most of the big and culturally-producing institutions in our society doesn’t mean that this collective has redefined the Overton Window. They’ve tried, but instead the Window has moved slowly and they’ve pulled away while pretending to reflect the opinions of normal, decent people. In a sense they now have a different Overton Window than regular working- and middle-class folks and we’ve seen this trend across the developed world.
A person who stepped outside of the Overton Window in their public statements could expect repercussions. “Cancel Culture” transcends the boundaries of that situation because people are being cancelled (having accounts frozen and reputations and careers damaged) for saying things that are subscribed to by most people. There are literally hundreds of cases of this. If you deny that it happens I urge you to simply search for yourself. 5 minutes online will suffice.
So Cancel Culture exists because it penalizes individuals for acceptable views. Some recent examples which have led to career ruination: black law students tend to have lower academic performance & trans women are biologically distinct from human females. If you’re sharp you might also realize that both of these things are objectively true, by any standard. It’s impossible to formulate a coherent picture of the world which we inhabit in which these statements are clearly false.
Cancel Culture is also inordinate. Since it punishes for true and widely-held beliefs any penalty would be unfair but the penalties are as harsh as they can possibly be. People are often not reprimanded by HR or lose a distant friend or get some irate emails (as they would if they were simply abusing drugs or sexually harassing coworkers or being generally lazy & dishonest)-they have careers ruined. One has the sense that if the cancellers had free reign the penalties would be even steeper. Certainly many trans activists would love the power to legally kill what they call ‘transphobes’ (a category which includes anyone who doesn’t fully subscribe to their unscientific and wildly unpopular ideology). They routinely accuse such people of leading to the death of trans people (including trans kids) without any coherent explanation or factual basis whatsoever.
Cancel Culture also creates damage which is irreparable. As MANY celebrities have come to learn, no apology or explanation or personal reform will suffice. Unlike any productive social system of accountability there is no path to redemption. This illustrates the cynical and power-hungry motives behind cancellation. They’re not trying to protect the marginalized or support compassion-they’re trying to eliminate enemies, by any means available. If you kill several people in a robbery you will be forgiven eventually by many people on the Left (especially if you’re black; I know that’s an unfashionable observation but I consider it fairly undeniable). Many of those same people will never forgive Candace Owens for her statements, even if Candace (a black woman) apologized and had a change of heart (which, granted, seems unlikely… lol).
These are all socially harmful and increasingly common aspects of Cancel Culture. They mark it as a separate phenomenon from a person simply losing support after making unpopular statements. It is a concerted effort by an ideological minority to impose their views upon society through stigma and institutional pressure and the boundless reservoir of cowardice and conformity. It’s not popular, it’s not organic, and it’s not proportional. It’s a bad thing and it’s a pretty recent phenomenon.
It not only hurts many people on unfair grounds; it damages our ability to talk about the most crucial undecided social issues of our day. It will ultimately backfire, leading to the ostracism of the cancellers and the shifting of their unhinged notions away from the center of public discourse.
Unfortunately we will have to witness the cancellation of thousands more sincere and decent people in silent frustration before those changes solidify. Our media landscape is shifting and the ‘silent majority’ is gaining more power (while being actively resisted by politicians and activists and big tech companies) but this is not a fast process.
“[T]he mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small…” -Friedrich Von Logau
A Locked Room is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. All content is available for free!
Share this post
Cancel Culture or Accountability?
Share this post
Is there such a thing as a malign trend of reputational harm and silencing around contentious political issues, or are people just reaping the righteous rewards of stating unethical views?
In case you’re in a hurry this morning I will settle this definitively right now: there is such a thing as Cancel Culture, it is socially harmful, and anyone who questions its existence or harm almost certainly subscribes to the same narratives as the cancellers.
I created this topic as a ‘thread’ to invite reader interactions (thoughts, examples, objections) but also because this is actually a pretty simple question to settle. First we must introduce the concept of the ‘Overton Window’. This is a political science term which describes the range of acceptable opinions on all live issues. Being outside of the window means that you’re not just in the minority but that you’ve moved so far away from the mainstream of political/cultural discourse that your opinions will be viewed pejoratively. They might be asinine (flat earth theories) or conspiratorial (9/11 truth) or unethical (racial bigotry) but they’re not just minority positions-they’re fairly unacceptable ones.
Fortunately for us moderates and critical thinkers no person or group can define the Overton Window. The SPLC and Hillary Clinton would badly love to have this power but it’s a matter of social consensus. Like the price of consumer goods, the Overton Window is the aggregated and organic result of millions of interactions.
It used to be that the media reflected and, in fact, partially defined the Overton Window. (I can already feel this piece growing longer than I intended… lol). Unfortunately the Overton Window has gradually shifted in many areas but the mainstream media (MSM) has been overtaken by a coterie of better-educated, wealthier, more out of touch, and more elitist people whose views were created, artificially, by (themselves insanely out of touch) academics and then transmitted through private colleges and universities. The fact that those views have now consumed most of the big and culturally-producing institutions in our society doesn’t mean that this collective has redefined the Overton Window. They’ve tried, but instead the Window has moved slowly and they’ve pulled away while pretending to reflect the opinions of normal, decent people. In a sense they now have a different Overton Window than regular working- and middle-class folks and we’ve seen this trend across the developed world.
A person who stepped outside of the Overton Window in their public statements could expect repercussions. “Cancel Culture” transcends the boundaries of that situation because people are being cancelled (having accounts frozen and reputations and careers damaged) for saying things that are subscribed to by most people. There are literally hundreds of cases of this. If you deny that it happens I urge you to simply search for yourself. 5 minutes online will suffice.
So Cancel Culture exists because it penalizes individuals for acceptable views. Some recent examples which have led to career ruination: black law students tend to have lower academic performance & trans women are biologically distinct from human females. If you’re sharp you might also realize that both of these things are objectively true, by any standard. It’s impossible to formulate a coherent picture of the world which we inhabit in which these statements are clearly false.
Cancel Culture is also inordinate. Since it punishes for true and widely-held beliefs any penalty would be unfair but the penalties are as harsh as they can possibly be. People are often not reprimanded by HR or lose a distant friend or get some irate emails (as they would if they were simply abusing drugs or sexually harassing coworkers or being generally lazy & dishonest)-they have careers ruined. One has the sense that if the cancellers had free reign the penalties would be even steeper. Certainly many trans activists would love the power to legally kill what they call ‘transphobes’ (a category which includes anyone who doesn’t fully subscribe to their unscientific and wildly unpopular ideology). They routinely accuse such people of leading to the death of trans people (including trans kids) without any coherent explanation or factual basis whatsoever.
Cancel Culture also creates damage which is irreparable. As MANY celebrities have come to learn, no apology or explanation or personal reform will suffice. Unlike any productive social system of accountability there is no path to redemption. This illustrates the cynical and power-hungry motives behind cancellation. They’re not trying to protect the marginalized or support compassion-they’re trying to eliminate enemies, by any means available. If you kill several people in a robbery you will be forgiven eventually by many people on the Left (especially if you’re black; I know that’s an unfashionable observation but I consider it fairly undeniable). Many of those same people will never forgive Candace Owens for her statements, even if Candace (a black woman) apologized and had a change of heart (which, granted, seems unlikely… lol).
These are all socially harmful and increasingly common aspects of Cancel Culture. They mark it as a separate phenomenon from a person simply losing support after making unpopular statements. It is a concerted effort by an ideological minority to impose their views upon society through stigma and institutional pressure and the boundless reservoir of cowardice and conformity. It’s not popular, it’s not organic, and it’s not proportional. It’s a bad thing and it’s a pretty recent phenomenon.
It not only hurts many people on unfair grounds; it damages our ability to talk about the most crucial undecided social issues of our day. It will ultimately backfire, leading to the ostracism of the cancellers and the shifting of their unhinged notions away from the center of public discourse.
Unfortunately we will have to witness the cancellation of thousands more sincere and decent people in silent frustration before those changes solidify. Our media landscape is shifting and the ‘silent majority’ is gaining more power (while being actively resisted by politicians and activists and big tech companies) but this is not a fast process.
“[T]he mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small…” -Friedrich Von Logau
Just because the efforts of cancellers sometimes fail (or backfire) doesn’t negate the existence of the concept. Many people would love to cancel Dave Chappelle and some want to physically hurt him.
Thanks for reading!
A Locked Room is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. All content is available for free!