I think that voicing disapproval and not associating with people we disapprove of is healthy and often necessary. "Canceling" goes beyond that: it amounts to enforcing a general ban on approval of and association with a person, and is not sustainable in a pluralist society.
-
-
-
For example, imagine a physicist has supported an initiative against gay marriage, and my values dictate that I won't be friends with that physicist. Is society better off if I also get that physicist fired, and he is now working as a Uber driver or becomes homeless?
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think there's an important distinction between: 1) "voicing disapproval and/or voluntarily dissociating," and 2) doxxing and similar tactics intended to inflict concrete harms, such as loss of employment.
-
I approve of the former. The latter, even if non-state action, can become aggressive to the point of coercion. Analogy: the mafia is a non-state actor, but even when it's not physically violent, its use of blackmail and similar threats should not be viewed as acceptable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I got a problem when it comes to institutions easily caving to pressure tho. Which of us couldn’t have a mob of 100 outrage hobbyists come against us?
-
There is a problem of scale and locality. Dissociation is appropriate within a shared locality. It’s an inappropriate punishment at a society-wide level
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.