An ancient practice gets a new name
Cancel culture isn’t new; we’ve done it since humanity’s dawn. It’s critical to a functional society. The fact it seems special lately is due to a) a new name and b) faster and wider communication.
Imagine someone does something you don’t like. Maybe they hold beliefs you find abhorrent, or they keep doing objectionable things despite your objections.
Eventually, it reaches a tipping point. What do you do?
You walk away. You avoid the individual. You stop trying to change or communicate with them. You ghost them. You block them. You stop answering their calls.
You decide they’re someone you no longer want to associate with.
You cancel them from your life.
It happens all the time. “Cancel culture” is nothing new. Humans have engaged in it since we began having disagreements and opposing viewpoints.
At a personal level, it’s “setting boundaries”. At a societal level, it’s “ostracising”.
It’s expulsion from a community.
Ostracism is critical for a functioning society. It’s one important way society expresses what is, and is not, acceptable.
If someone in your small village keeps stealing and refuses to stop, you kick them out. It’s how you tell them that’s unacceptable and demonstrate to the community that stealing’s not allowed.
If someone in your community behaves in a way that most find abhorrent, it’s important for the community’s health to call them out and take stronger action if the behavior continues.
It’s critical for a healthy community to “cancel” (ostracize) those who are irrevocably harmful.
If this is nothing new, why are we hearing about it so much recently? There’s more “cancelling”, and complaints about “cancel culture” than ever.
Two reasons.
First, it has a catchy new term. “Ostracism” doesn’t roll off the tongue. “Cancel culture” is alliterative and implies it’s a “culture” of people looking to cancel others.
More importantly, our hyper-connectedness and ease of news spread (factual or not) have made ostracism something to share widely. In the past, the community would quietly show someone the door, with only involved members hearing about it. Today, the entire world needs to know.
It seems like a new trend, but it’s been here all along.
The other new objection is that it’s one-sided. The claim is that only one side of the political spectrum is engaged in cancelling and fostering a “culture” of it. They might face accusations of actively looking for things to be offended by, cancelling them, and then feeling self-righteous as a result.
It’s not one-sided. Those vocal about the evils of “cancel culture” are canceling those they disagree with right and left. The difference is in the social norms they feel are being violated.
If you feel someone or something you care about is being “cancelled”, don’t hide behind claims of oppressive cancel culture. Instead, consider the circumstances and reasons behind the ostracization. Society is trying to tell you something important.
Listen.
Especially if you’re the one who feels cancelled.
Previous: On Cancel Culture
Thank you Leo for this and so many thoughtful commentaries. You have a way of calming down the mental firestorms. I and many readers count on you for that.