I was listening to 'Boycott Me' by Mischief Brew (below) and it set my mind to wandering. It quickly went from Boycott Me to boycotts and from there to 'cancel culture' and before I knew it I had an idea for a new rant.
Recently (in recent months, not news cycles) the wailing and gnashing of teeth over 'cancel culture' has been a bit hard to miss. It seems every time you turn around someone has climbed on a soapbox and is carrying on about it. I must admit, this usually brings me a bit of amusement and joy.
One can be forgiven for mistaking the apoplectic ranting emanating from the right about 'cancel culture' for a legitimate complaint with some sort of merit. After all, censorship is bad, no? As with much of what comes out of their mouths these days, their shrill tirades bear little resemblance to reality.
All this crying over 'cancel culture' is a calculated attempt to reframe the discussion about 'deplatforming'. Deplatforming is a tactic often utilized by antifascists/antiracists as a means to hit racists/bigots/fascists where it hurts (in the pocketbook), as well as to deny them a platform for spewing their hate.
Two intersecting factors are behind all this. First, here in the US any speech that falls short of the 'fighting words' test is protected from government restriction by the 1sts amendment to the Constitution (more on this in a minute). The second is the paradox of tolerance, which states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant.
The shrieking cries of "free speech!" and "the 1st Amendment!" that punctuate the screeds decrying 'cancel culture' miss (conveniently and intentionally I suspect) an essential point. To wit, the 1st Amendment protects speech from GOVERNMENT interference. "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech." Until the 14th Amendment and incorporation doctrine came along, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government. With incorporation doctrine it now applies to state law as well but that is as far as it goes.
Corporations are in no shape, form, or fashion restricted by the 1st Amendment and this is both what deplatforming targets and why. Although I suppose the irony is probably lost on them, it was conservatives that brought about the Citizens United decision which basically declared money to be speech, making 'cancel culture' the very speech that its opponents claim it threatens.
Beyond all that is the blatant hypocrisy of it all. The ones yelling loudest (and their ideological kin) have historically shown no hesitation in cancelling those that they don't agree with. Remember the Hollywood blacklists? Pulling Beatles tunes from the air and burning their records after Lennon's "more popular than Jesus" comment? 'Freedom' fries? The shunning of the Dixie Chicks? I could go on but you get the idea.
The rage and ranting directed at 'cancel culture' boils down to some people getting a taste of their own medicine and not enjoying the flavor much. Bless their little hearts 馃槑
On a related note, I've seen hive (and it's previous incarnation) promoted as censorship resistant but didn't Justin Sun prove that that only holds true until the censors were willing to spend lots of money?