# Cancel Culture and Canceling versus consequences for actions

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cancel-culture-and-canceling-versus-consequences-for-actions/1020644>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [July 8, 2025, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cancel-culture-and-canceling-versus-consequences-for-actions/1020644 "2025-07-08T22:55:19Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 499

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\
**Post date:** [July 15, 2025, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cancel-culture-and-canceling-versus-consequences-for-actions/1020644/499 "2025-07-15T22:23:16Z")

</div>

> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> Let’s see some specific quotes, then, because I’m pretty sure you’re (once again) mischaracterizing my words.

Endorsing boycotts and doxxing:

> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> There are no hard and fast rules when it comes to how to respond to “bad” speech. Do the right thing as best we can. Occasionally that will involve “extreme” tools like boycotts or even (much more rarely) doxxing.

> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> Who is disagreeing with this? What specific policies or tactics are in conflict with this? Calls for boycotts and the like are just another form of speech.

> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> AFAICT our positions overall are no different, philosophically speaking – we both agree they can be warranted in some circumstances. We just disagree on some of those circumstances.

(‘they’ referring to “boycotts, doxxing, and other actions aimed at censoring ideas Andy disapproves of, and punishing anyone who tries to speak about them”, and no, we do not agree here.)

> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> The best way to sum it up is to try and only use boycotts or doxxing when it’s truly necessary, usually to show that certain flavors of advocacy should not be welcome in civilized society.

On ‘ordinary people’ having the power to censor:

> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> The rich and powerful will always use their wealth and power, as they always have, to shut down opinions they don’t like. It’s very often effective! Only recently, with social media and the internet, have “regular people” gained that power, at least to some degree, in some circumstances.

> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> Ordinary people, collectively, have gained the power to actually deliver real consequences against speech (and actions) they find objectionable. That’s not censorship - that’s consequences. It’s more speech. Collective speech is still speech.
> 
> It can be a good thing when used for good. Just like any tool. And sometimes people get it wrong and it’s bad. It’s good if fewer people see Mel Gibson movies, because he’s obviously a bigot, and it’s good that there are consequences for bigotry. But he still makes movies. He hasn’t been censored.

I’m not going to continue to talk in circles with you. If you are just doing to keep saying you don’t understand, and denying what you’ve repeatedly said yourself, then we are done here.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/cancel-culture-and-canceling-versus-consequences-for-actions/1020644)._