I would personally rather be cancelled on social media, than having my breathing cancelled.
It's should be possible to disagree and criticize without analogies to various atrocities involving mass murder.
Drawing such parallels is a form of cancelling, as it effectively prevents any defense or discourse on the subject.
Whatever "cancelling" that's going around is not all that new.
Yes, I think all agree with your preference and share it.
But they are both bad, undesirable things.
If I had to choose between assault and murder, I’d rather be assaulted. But I work to reduce assaults AND murders in society.
Drawing parallels between similarly negative things is appropriate to reduce negative things.
Perhaps you don't fully grasp how communists operate, then.
Maoist struggle sessions in which you were still permitted to breathe preceded your execution by a period of time, sometimes years.
Before Pol Pot sent intellectuals and their families to the killing fields, they were merely fired from their jobs.
Communists may be evil, but they are not stupid. They know that you purge your enemies by boiling the frog slowly enough that the useful idiots defend your actions every questionable step of the way.
What's more, if one lives in a red state surrounded by people similar to them on the political spectrum, they'll still have their employers harassed to keep them from holding down a job. It's not their peers "cancelling" them; it's a minority of people with wildly different worldviews from wildly different parts of the country. It's not all that different from swatting.
> It's entrenched monopolies
Agreed, huge huge problem here. Anti-trust is way way way way over-due. I also think without Competitive (inter)Compatibility (comcom) rules, it is unlikely to be effective at allowing new things to get going.
> in cooperation with the state
Uhhhh I see zero evidence of this at all. Zilch. Nothing. Nada. Not a single thing.