I think it's meaningful to draw another line between the kind of casual value enforcement you see in day to day life (which, in my experience, is generally reas

I think it's meaningful to draw another line between the kind of casual value enforcement you see in day to day life (which, in my experience, is generally reasonable and mild) and the enforcement you see by zealot communities online (which is then amplified by 24/7 digital publishers and social media aggregators responding to evident market demand for divisive content). This model certainly applies to the left, but there are pretty obvious parallels on the right as well. Anyway, the "policing to madness" phenomenon can be more clearly understood as highly reactive online behavior by true believers who tie their entire identity to promoting their belief system. For the most part, I haven't seen this kind of behavior permeate daily life. The exceptions to that rule are generally violent and depressing, but they aren't the norm. Which is to say, I live right in the center of lefty-values America and see behavior every day that would get people cancelled on Twitter. But in the real world people have their feelings, talk it out, and try to move on. People get to screw up, get to be hurt, get to have really different opinions about heavy topics, and get to work through it together. And it more or less just works. Most people don't want to fight with the people around them so they figure out how to get along. Like everyone else, I'm worried about the jungle rules of online engagement becoming part of meatspace culture, but I don't believe we're going that direction. And while I have serious problems with the "public sacrifice" model of social good the digital jungle has embraced, I don't believe that's Coming To An HR Department Near You™️ either.