Humiliation >>> Education
When cancel culture stunts the growth of the mind and discourages intellectual conversations, what is its actual aim and gain? The evolution of this toxic environment, particularly in the past five years, has been resignedly accepted and even defended. In our growing grey world, where binaries and sides have little to no meaning, what possible use does this atmosphere have other than suffocating people?
High Shoulders & Covered Ears, Viktor and Rolf Couture Spring 2022, Giovanni Giannoni, WWD
This Week On Cancelled…, The Take, Youtube
In today's dynamic digital age, cancel culture has become a pronounced feature of public discourse. Conceived initially by minority communities to express concerns and hold people and organizations accountable for their actions, cancel culture has morphed into a phenomenon that often prioritizes humiliation over education. It was a digital manifestation of grassroots activism striving to keep people in authority in check and challenge social hierarchies. With the trend gaining more clicks, it started veering off the tracks of accountability and education to the territories of public shaming and ostracizing. This shift raises essential questions about the long-term impact of cancel culture on society, particularly regarding intellectual growth and the cultivation of meaningful conversations.
The concept of this digital culture, constantly associated with the extremes of the politically liberal and the idea of wokeness, has been linked to the enlightenment to see the world as it is. Cancel culture is a social sensation where individuals or groups are socially boycotted due to their perceived improper actions or comments. This can lead to the withdrawal of support for public figures, cancellation of acting roles, banning an artist's work, being banned from social media platforms, or financial boycotts. The proliferation of social media platforms like Twitter ("X just doesn't hit the same #sorrynotsorry"), Instagram, and Facebook has boosted the quick spread and execution of cancel culture. This trend grew from the call-out culture, which gained weight after campaigns like #MeToo gained popularity.
Alexa Remind Me To Send Flowers To The Creator Of Cancel Culture, Pinata Farm
Urban Outfitters for cultural appropriation, Apple and the painfully expensive planned obsolescence, Balenciaga with their child model campaign, Tampax for social media posts that were cheeky (if you know what it's about, then you will appreciate the pun), Facebook's (repeated) privacy breaches, Bud Light's partnership with Dylan Mulvaney courtesy of Karens and Chads, Jonah Hill's "boundary" texts to his ex-girlfriend, J.K. Rowling because she is J.K. Rowling are just a few recent canceled victims (or rightfully punished, up to your discretion). The consequences of being canceled are undeniably heavy. The loss of friends and social ties, getting fired, losing business prospects, and being ostracized from a platform where they could communicate their inflammatory views sum up the experience. Some go as far as vigilante justice to confrontational debate to stalking, intimidation, and harassment. Although it does look like public figures are the focus of outrage, ordinary people who go viral because of videos or old tweets have been charged and have had stones thrown on social media in the crosshairs. In either case, the response can be similarly ferocious. Cancel culture frequently makes no distinction. She's an equalist!
However, one could make the argument that cancel culture is just an evolution of an already existing problem. Our world isn't new to destructive rumors and whispers, heinous smear campaigns, and biased censorship. The rise of social media merely enabled and amplified this new format of bullying. Obviously, some people feel that the current state of things is fair and can be avoided by simply being aware and accountable. It can be seen as a tool to address incorrect behavior and social inequalities, hoping to fuel change in the system. The pioneers of this culture are rarely, if ever, satisfied with just a hollow apology, retractions, and a promise to do better.
The question then arises: What is cancel culture's actual aim and gain? Is it to fix a particular wrong or to avenge the more enormous inequalities in the distribution of power? Or do we just enjoy the thrill of humiliating someone from an anonymous crowd? Apparently, we are way past call-out culture since just spotlighting people's missteps to make an example out of a cause doesn't seem to have worked. The difference between the world we used to live in is vividly stark. Although not much different in actions for change, we used to recognize and bother to uphold moral and ethical regards. We used to stay on course and target entities that had the power to change the system directly through protests. Now everyone is moaning and groaning about EVERY. SINGLE. THING., which drowns out even pressing and genuine concerns. Cultures tend to branch off into subcultures with its popularizing among the masses, and all the subcultures of the ubiquitous cancel culture tend to fuss over trivial affairs, which takes away from endeavors to enact influential change. At its best, cancel culture or accountability culture, seeks to hold people responsible for their actions and to promote a more fair and impartial society. However, the gain becomes debatable when it plunges into shame and exclusion. Instead of accomplishing its intended ideals, cancel culture can develop friction, stifle intellectual growth, and hamper the evolution of meaningful conversations.
The difference between humiliation and education is vital when evaluating the convincingness of cancel culture. While holding someone answerable for toxicity is critical, how this accountability is enforced can either stimulate growth or stunt it. Humiliation, often manifesting as public shaming and ostracism, tends to close lanes for dialogue and reflection. On the other hand, education, which encourages understanding, empathy, and constructive criticism, offers a pathway to growth and transformation. Cancel culture, in its current condition, often leans toward shame. The speed with which social media users can mobilize to cancel someone builds an environment where mistakes are not seen as chances for learning but as unsalvageable transgressions. This approach squashes personal growth and discourages individuals from engaging in difficult conversations because who wants to be canceled?
Hurricane Cancel Culture Blowing Us (And Common Sense) All Away, The Week
The most concerning impact of cancel culture has to be the trend's ability to suffocate and kill intellectual discourse. Cancel culture has created a climate of anxiety and conformity. The fear of shame and exclusion prevents people from exploring new ideas and contesting established norms. Obviously, these are important for individual growth, but this questioning and exploring is what develops our society as a whole. Ironically, cancel culture nurtures the very behaviors it aims to eradicate. The backfire effect, a psychological phenomenon, refers to the reaction of people to double down on their beliefs when attacked. The public shaming of individuals might send them deeper into embracing their positions instead of reconsidering. Instead of promoting intellectual progress and empathy, cancel culture can lead to the polarization of opinions and the entrenchment of ignorance.
Academic dialogues are the backbone of a healthy society. It allows us to exchange thoughts, question assumptions, and foster the development of new perspectives. The catch is that these conversations depend highly on foundations built on mutual respect, readiness to listen, and openness to the possibility of being wrong. As a culture, it mainly focuses on harsh punishment rather than education, which inherently undermines the point and security of these conversations. If you aren't allowed to be wrong, you will never learn; when you can't learn, you will never understand. If we were to prioritize education, we would have to encourage open and broad dialogues and mindsets. It would require patience, empathy, and optimism in the human ability to change for the better. We can cultivate an atmosphere that nurtures intelligent maturation and understanding by creating spaces where individuals can confront thoughtful discussions without dreading retribution.
A recent example of cancel culture was related to the Paris Olympics 2024. Actually, there was more than one instance. Regardless, I wanted to pick apart the opening ceremony performance, particularly the reaction (coughbacklashcough) to it. The opening ceremony featured a performance that depicted the Dinner of Bacchus, a classical Roman feast associated with extravagance and festivity. Bacchus is the Roman counterpart of the Greek god of wine, revelry, fertility, and ecstasy, Dionysus. His stories and worship explored indulgence, freedom from social constraints, and the balance between civilization and primal instincts. So, in the context of the Paris Olympics 2024, the Dinner of Bacchus likely referenced themes of celebration, indulgence, and the abandonment of normal societal norms. The backlash stemmed from the misinterpretation of a scene to Leonardo da Vinci's The Last Supper. Viewers, especially from religious communities, saw it as an offensive appropriation of a holy image. The intended inspiration conflated with The Last Supper's religious symbolism and the Biblical narrative's solemnity.
This controversy proves how cancel culture is fueled and pioneered by brisk judgments and misinformation, especially about complex and foreign cultural references, pausing the process of considering facts and understanding nuances and dialogue before making comments and accusations. Misinterpretations are understandable, but allowing them to guide smear campaigns without fact-checking when information is available at our fingertips is a conscious decision driven by a self-inflated, baseless ego. The Paris Olympics 2024 controversy was unnecessary and could have been avoided with one Google search. It also proves how cancel culture stifles artistic expression along with intellectual discourse. The intended meaning got drowned out because of the misinterpretation and public outcry. It hindered the conversations that could have been inspired by the performance and its surrounding art and culture.
This Isn’t Going To End Well, Is It?, Rick McKee, CT News Junkie
Cancel culture's emphasis on humiliation over education decreases its potential as a tool for progress. The current state of this trend poses a consequential obstacle to encouraging intellectual development and productive conversations. While holding individuals accountable is important, focusing exclusively on punishment and shaming stunts intellectual growth, limits fruitful exchanges, and can worsen conflicts. To tackle this challenge, we must reconstruct cancel culture into a medium for education rather than vindication. This change will lead to a society where taking accountability and nurturing intellectual inquisitiveness are interconnected. Only then can we realize the pursuits of justice and progress. To achieve its true aim—whether it is fairness, equality, or societal progress—cancel culture must shift toward enabling dialogue, education, and chances for growth. Otherwise, we risk letting cancel culture cancel out the very conversations we need to move forward. Let us hope the world (digital, political, social, and whatnot) evolves into one where curiosity and mistakes are met with empathy and the willingness to educate as opposed to scrutiny. Even Bacchus would agree that the only thing worse than a party gone wrong is a canceled party altogether.
