3 ms·
> Only if the label by itself causes sufficient harm to silence, exile or otherwise ruin someone, eg. "white supremacist". There's no "only if" because in any
by Supermancho 5y ago
> Only if the label by itself causes sufficient harm to silence, exile or otherwise ruin someone, eg. "white supremacist".
There's no "only if" because in any sized community that can and does apply, even if it's not on TV. It's often part of a modern culture, which has unspoken or explicit rules that result in this behavior. eg Getting banned from a conservative subreddit because you point out what a piece of garbage Rush L was.
- naasking 5y agoI'd say the qualifier is applicable and important. It distinguishes between cases where the label has little effect, like a evangelical preacher calling someone a "sinner" (who isn't?), and calling someone a white supremacist. Even your example of being banned from a conservative subreddit can be ruinous if conservatives are the primary market for your goods or services, but no big deal if you have nothing to do with conservatives. The point is that I think the effect or intended effect of the label should dictate whether it qualifies as cancel culture, I don't think just any label should do. For instance, if I try to dismiss your argument here because I think you love "My Little Pony", I don't see how that should qualify as cancel culture.