Luckily for you, I’m just a random internet person sharing an opinion, and I won’t have my way (and, once again, your assumptions about my views are mostly false). I did my best to answer your questions - but there are no hard and fast rules, and thus each case must be considered on its own merits. I’m not sure why you have such a problem with this.
Why are you bothering with a boycott, then? The whole point is to stop people sharing opinions you find offensive.
What boycott? Do you think I’m leading a boycott?
But you do choose to complain about left-wing “cancelling” while living in a country where the right charges people for waving flags, investigates people for chanting slogans, or declares a protest group terrorists.
I can only speak for myself, but they were never fun. The societal change wasn’t fun → unfun. It was (for a moment at least) listening to the people who didn’t ever find it fun.
I completely agree. There’s a reason I put the word “fun” in quotes. That’s how some men in a now-obsolete culture thought of it, and it was wrong, harmful, and downright predatory.
I have a problem trusting to the judgement of a mob. As @wolfpup says, there is no due process. And the ‘punishment’ often doesn’t fit the crime. Employers fire people before establishing the facts, or because of a passing social media frenzy that the majority don’t care about.
And I don’t want to empower moral busybodies who enjoy policing others. I don’t trust their judgement either, and why the hell should I?
That’s a lot of sweeping. You left out the fact that the flag belonged to a terrorist organization, the “slogans” were a call to violence, and the “protest group” broke onto an army base and vandalized airplanes.
Ah yes, the well-known terrorist act of property damage.
So what do you suggest? Everyone should keep their opinions to themselves?
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.
The Labour party is in power now. This is all happening under a centre-left government.
iiandyiiii next time you create a hypothetical Nazi shop owner could you please make your hypothetical shop owner in fact a Nazi.
Next time he’ll be double secret Nazi!
“Regular people” just elected Trump. Why do you trust the mob’s judgement on whose life to ruin next?
If it’s bad when the rich and powerful shut down opinions, it is also bad when activists do it. I want to make it harder, not easier, to silence unpopular opinions, to take a broad view of what should be acceptable, and support free speech as a positive good for society, rather than merely the US first amendment.
I can only assume that our free speech warriors would have condemned the boycott during the civil rights movement as well.
Freedom of speech and association is only reserved for the elect according to conservatives and “centrists”.
Who says I trust the mob?
No you want to take away some of the only effective nonviolent tools the underclass has.
In my hypothetical, they’re using their profits from their shop to fund KKK organizations, and spread white supremacist and genocidal messages. All secretly under the guise of internet anonymity.
In my hypothetical it does! You can make your own hypothetical in which that never happens, if you want, but I still get mine!
This is a good argument for why we shouldn’t care particularly about people fired for ‘dumb racist joke’ type reasons. But ‘cancelling’ means more than just firing. It usually results in a notoriety that makes it hard to get a new job, it may mean being abandoned by friends, and usually means suffering online abuse from a mob of strangers. That doesn’t happen if you are fired for being 15 minutes late due to traffic.
And when someone is fired or boycotted for expressing conservative opinions, it doesn’t just harm that person. It has a chilling effect on other people’s willingness to exercise their free speech rights, affecting a whole class of people. Indeed, that is frequently the aim. It’s not unreasonable to object to this, even if you don’t support better employment protections in general.