adzzzz

the specific "Her" I was referencing was the journalist that was the subject of the linked article.

No politicians today participate in cancel culture? I doubt it.

Regardless let's use a non political example. I assume if the issue is "force of government" then you were 100% okay with the Hollywood Blacklists? (Generally accepted to be part of MCCarthyism) After all that's basically analogous to deplatforming and it was private companies that were doing it with no force of government. Do you support the Hollywood blacklists?

Cancel culture isn't bound by politics, ethnicity, gender, etc. American conservatives are equally as guilty of this as progressives.

Yes those are good examples of cancel culture. What point are you trying to make or are you just making assumptions about me?

I've seen enough of the bad faith "accountability" arguments in favor of cancel culture to know the common refrain.

There are loads and loads of laws that prohibit smoking in all sorts of places and massive sin taxes among many other things. Chalking it 100% up to public health PSAs is inaccurate

>and/or their businesspeople and advertisers think these policies will bring in more money

Yes this is the reason. They will continue to stifle speech so its more palatable for corporations to run ads on their platform. Censoring art and dissent is working well for the people you agree with right now. 60 years ago the current culture would have been unfathomable. In 60 years it may be unfathomable to you again, but now you've taken the stand that it's right and just that they stifle dissent. Hope that never bites you.

It's not even left leaning thinking. It's just socially extremely progressive neo liberalism. Most marxists would be aghast at the idea of siding with giant corporations to unperson and deny dignity to an individual with a non mainstream political opinion or what have you.

There was no "red scare". Joe McCarthy was simply holding Communists accountable for their beliefs.

That the slippery slope is an inevitability is the fallacy, not that it exists. See also "Overton window"

In a capitalistic society where corporations hold as much power or more than governments do in our day to day lives you surely must see how this is a moral principle that must apply to them also. There's life ruining things beyond jail such as being homeless and shunned.

Yes they are entitled and we are allowed to disagree with it. That's the point everyone is trying to make. These legalistic arguments are silly and distracting.

Every theory (whether true or not) I've heard is this post modernist ideology came out of the French academia. Foucault, Derrida, etc. are who the American right wing blames for IDPOL

I want content that condones pedophilia, bestiality, and other extreme pornography deplatformed yes. Why do you want to keep it up?

It is absolutely on Reddit in droves right now.

The cartoon depiction of sex with minors is almost certainly illegal in many districts and countries.

I'm still shocked Reddit is allowed into the wider ecosystem of tech infrastructure. Between hosting explicit gore content and very extreme pornography with borderline legality at best (Including under Alexis's and Steve's leadership allowing a jailbait subreddit to continue for years) I would have thought they'd be booted from AWS etc.