Tag Archive

  Cancel Culture is a term that is is now common parlance, but what exactly is it and what are the conditions that foster such a blight on our society and social systems? 

Many of the actions of the activist-Left (or woke) when they attempt to cancel a person in society are enumerated on the list below.  One of the most striking features is the precipitous drop in the notion of mutual respect and dialogue – your ideological opponents are the ‘oppressive enemy’ rather than co-constituents of the society you both share.

Cancel Culture is the epitome of binary thinking and the dehumanization of people you classify as your opponent(s) and it is cancerous blight on cultures that value freedom of speech and rigorous debate of contentious issues.

So in light of the quotation’s last line – Proper diagnosis precedes an effective cure – we must educate ourselves in order to fight against what ails our cultural landscape.

 

“Rather, cancel culture and totalitarian societies are variations of the communal motif of Nisbet’s “revolutionary community.”

First, the revolutionary community is premised on the myth of human goodness. Core to any society is a founding myth of how the world works. For cancel culture, all problems in society are the result of some oppression, which can only be removed through “the liberative action of revolutionary violence.”

Second, such liberating violence is necessary. Only through force will our society be freed from its oppressions. Peaceful change through persuasion is to bargain with the oppressors. This is manifest in the bloodshed of the French and Russian Revolutions. It manifests in cancel culture as the vicious attack upon the perpetrator. This is not traditional violence, but the intent is the same: destruction of a person’s life. A wayward tweet results in doxing, ruining one’s economic and social prospects for life. It may not be literally burning down one’s house, but it is intended to have the same effect. Jonathan Rauch has gone so far as to compare literal assassination attempts such as those targeting Salmon Rushdie with the character assassinations of cancelations. This tenet of the revolutionary community is the reason.

Third, the holiness of sin. Nearly all consider violence under certain circumstances necessary, if regrettable. Public denunciations may be appropriate in certain circumstances, likewise cutting off friendships, firings, and so on. They are a last resort when other measures to bring repentance and change have failed. Not so for the revolutionary community. “Acts such as murder, kidnapping, treason, torture, mutilation, vandalism, and arson” are holy when carried out in the name of revolution. So such social violence wrought by cancellations are holy, they are noble, the very essence of righteous rage. Hence, celebrations when the canceled attempt suicide.

Fourth, the revolutionary community values terror. Fear has long been used to achieve certain behavioral outcomes. The crucifixion, public floggings, stake burnings, and the like were effective because they instigated fear. For the revolutionary community, terror is an essential part of the community because for revolutionaries it is a species of justice. It is the means whereby both the targets of terror get their comeuppance and everyone else is shown what lies in store should they dissent. The message is clear: silence or your life. Evidence of self-censorship indicates that this tenet is effective.

Fifth, the totalism of the revolutionary ideology. The revolutionary community seeks to advance its vision to every nook and cranny of life. Cancel culture is aimed at any communication through any medium at any time. The efforts of “offense archaeologists” work only because of the totalism inherent in cancel culture. Nothing said or done at any time anywhere—public or private—is beyond the reach of its total account of good and evil. It is why years-old comments lead to firings and forgiveness is impossible. Apologies, no matter how groveling and demeaning, are only proof of unforgivable guilt. 

Sixth, the principles and tactics of the revolutionary community are always derived from an elite. Relatively few scholars at elite universities dictated the terms of woke ideology and its antecedents undergirding cancel culture. While a single Twitter warrior, student, or disgruntled citizen may spark a canceling campaign, the ideological basis upon which they do so is derived from the elite.

Seventh, centralization. This is the element from which cancel culture diverges and it is cancel culture’s most salient distinction from a totalitarian society. Cancel culture lacks the centralization of a totalitarian state, although some think it is a precursor to such a society. For now, cancel culture remains decentralized. Those who carry on canceling campaigns have no discernable central command, but they do have a totalist vision of how their doctrines dominate all of society.

Proper diagnosis generally precedes an effective cure.”