Concerted campaigns to discredit someone for mundane “offenses” (which are well within the overton window) especially by coercing employers to terminate the target is not “plain social ostracism” and indeed the people who engaged in this in the past were themselves socially ostracized for their bad behavior.
To be clear, we’re talking about signing a letter endorsing free-speech ideals or Tweeting research on the efficacy of non-violent protest or saying a Chinese word that sounds vaguely like a racial slur.
Further, the term “cancelled” is not a term that the critics of cancel culture invented, but rather it was invented by the early participants of cancel culture.
It seems so obvious that cancel culture and social ostracism are different things that I don’t understand how anyone could confuse them in good faith.
To be clear, we’re talking about signing a letter endorsing free-speech ideals or Tweeting research on the efficacy of non-violent protest or saying a Chinese word that sounds vaguely like a racial slur.
Further, the term “cancelled” is not a term that the critics of cancel culture invented, but rather it was invented by the early participants of cancel culture.
It seems so obvious that cancel culture and social ostracism are different things that I don’t understand how anyone could confuse them in good faith.