Cancel Culture Is Still in Search of a Reasoned Defense
For weeks now, I’ve been seeking a reasoned defense of cancel culture, the notion that people, brands, shows, movies should be essentially disappeared because of views that some (or even many) consider to be offensive. This has been scaring the hell out of me. What is the argument, I wondered, that would seek to champion one kind of speech — the “correct” kind of speech — and cancel another? What gain is to be made by sacrificing the singular, foundational principle of a free society — free expression — to the value of racial equality or other deserving measures? And why is that exchange binary? So I read with great interest the group letter published last week in Harper’s magazine led by writer Thomas Chatterton Williams, reaffirming the principle of free speech and warning against “an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.” Editor Thomas Chatterton Williams (left) /Wikicommons/Harper’s Also Read: JK Rowling, Fareed Zakaria, Wynton Marsalis Decry Rising 'Intolerance of Opposing Views' In Public Letter It was signed by 150 leading intellectuals, writers, academics and journalists, including fatwa survivor/author Salman Rushdie, far-left...
Read original story Cancel Culture Is Still in Search of a Reasoned Defense At TheWrap
