The answer to the OP is “No.” The principle–namely that refusing to support or reward unacceptable behavior–may be the same across the board, but that doesn’t mean that all uses of that principle are equivalent…
To answer the OP: Not at all.
Cancel culture is more like, canceling someone when they haven’t done something actually wrong, but rather, something the listener simply doesn’t agree with.
And who distinguishes one from the other?
It’s also never been the exclusive province of the social-justice left, despite the crocodile-tears whining from the Perpetually Aggrieved Punditocracy on the Right. Remember when Sinead O’Connor tore up the photo of the Pope on SNL? Her career was in the fringiest margin the next day. Not to mention Kaepernick sitting on the sidelines while vastly less talented but more cooperative QBs bounce around their various pockets.
It’s weird to lump the fierce ostracism of Putin and his minions into the same “cancel culture” bucket. Yes, it’s similar except as a matter of significant degree, but I would cock an eyebrow at the unspoken agenda of someone who tries to blur them together.
You forgot the other option. Let them continue to misbehave. IMHO this is the option favored by those who complain about cancel culture. Not because they oppose canceling someone who is misbehaving, but because they believe that many of the current targets are in fact not misbehaving.
This. Fundamentally the argument isn’t about whether canceling someone is wrong. It’s about who’s being cancelled and why. The conservative authoritarian bigots were previously on the side of doing the canceling, and they had no problems with that. Now that they’re the ones being cancelled, they’re making a big stink.
ETA. Same thing with Putin. He’s fine with literally canceling Ukraine, but heaven forbid anyone try to cancel him or his country.
I have to admit that I though Putin is being canceled, so yes I think it’s applicable.
…
I disagree with this. The conservative complainers were the former people committing cancel culture activities. Thing like making laws about homosexuality, and having societal norms that only were the ones conforming to their liking of how society should be. The issue is conservatism is losing and getting to the point that they have lost the ability to enforce their version of cancel culture and now are the whiners when it is employed against them.
Both were fired for people taking offense at social media postings, unrelated to their actual work. In my mind, they are both “cancel culture” and the only difference is that liberals embrace James Gunn and his work more than they do Gina Carano.
Right. Shunning only works when a critical mass of people get behind it. The problem the authoritarians have is that they no longer have that critical mass. Due to that, they are now sometimes resorting to illegal methods or outright violence when they want to cancel someone or prevent themselves from being cancelled. Putin is demonstrating this quite well.
ETA. In case it isn’t obvious, my preferred solution to their (the authoritarians) problem is for them to stop being assholes and join the rest of civilized society. Obviously some of them, Putin being the biggest offender, feel that lawlessness and violence is a better option.
Exactly this.
It’s anger about, and attempted resistance against, a shift in power. It could not be more pedestrian and petty.
Not weird if it’s your Russian handlers wanting to push the opinions of American ‘’‘conservatives’‘’ to ‘Putin is the real victim of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine!’
Same exact principle, taken to a logical extreme: “Hey, ya can’t take someone whose ideas you disagree with and then cause that person harm by boycotting his business and encouraging others to do so, so yuz all make him change his ways…”
Sure, I can.
The term “cancel culture” (on the rare occasions when it’s a valid criticism) is that it’s a severe overreaction to some minor faux pas. It really does not fit the meaning of the expression to apply it to sanctions against someone who has started an actual fucking war. Or are you suggesting that economic sanctions are a huge overreaction to the minor faux pas of invading a country and killing people?
He says it’s not a war, it’s a minor issue within Greater Russia caused by some illegitimate Ukrainian fascists committing genocide against ethnic Russians which his brave peacekeeping forces are taking steps to contravene. Everyone else should mind their own business.
Your point being what, exactly? Do you believe him?
Here we have a thread where Godwinizing it is actually appropriate. Hitler made the same arguments when he invaded the Sudetenland. Putin seems like he has similar ambitions. IMHO those arguing that we shouldn’t cancel Putin are basically arguing that Hitler shouldn’t have been cancelled back in his day, that we should have just let him do whatever he wanted to do. Which we did for some time, with disastrous results. I don’t see the difference, other than that Putin is being cancelled at an earlier point in time in his attempt at empire building than HItler was in his attempt.
It’s that hard to figure out? Everyone who is “canceled” says the same thing. “It’s unfair!!! I’m the poor put-upon victim here!”
It’s all bullshit.
So your claim is that because sanctions against Russia are justified, therefore nothing that fits the definition of “cancel culture” exists?
I agree that most claims of “cancel culture” are bullshit, but it depends on the facts of the specific situation, and your leap of logic from the Putin situation is indeed hard to figure out.
Sure it’s “cancel culture”, and that’s a good thing. “Cancel culture” is simply shorthand for “if you act like an asshole, you’ll be shut out of civilized society”.
An excellent way of putting it.
Well, no it’s not. The term “cancel culture” does not just mean stigmatization. It means an overreaction, generally against disparaged speech, with the implication that freedom of expression is being systematically and inappropriately suppressed.
The sanctions against Russia really have nothing to do with the supposed phenomenon of “cancel culture”.