Rolling Stone: Cancel Culture Is Good For Democracy Or Something

I remember growing up in the 80’s and Rolling Stone was all about freedom, counter-culture, limited government, and sticking it to the man, as they had been since it’s inception. Somewhere along the line they became the magazine about Listening to the government, following their dictates, and hardcore leftist politics. And like any good Progressive (nice Fascist), they always have Reasons for it. Here they believe that censoring people and entities is good for “democracy”, when, in fact, democracy requires free expression, and, If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all

Why Cancel Culture Is Good For Democracy

For many years, cancel culture has been despised or misconstrued as a new phenomenon that’s caused havoc on free expression and speech. We’re supposed to now assume that we can’t say or do anything without an angry mob instantly judging us and preparing to end our careers before they start. In actual fact, we are the people who make up the so-called mob, and we have control of our own actions.

Cancel culture has leveled the playing field for those who can’t always rely on the government to protect them. Right now, bigots are protected under the First Amendment to fuel disgusting rhetoric without state-sanctioned consequence. The America that tolerated white supremacy in their policies and laws is the same country that wants to remind us how such forms of hate are still legal via free speech. Cancel culture is the poison to those in power that have benefited from unchecked free speech.

There are more than enough bigots on all sides. We see black supremacy, we see climate cult zealots, we see treating white people with disdain simply because they were born white, and so many other things. You can’t have it both ways. The same people who say that shaming and bullying is a bad thing use those

When conservatives on Fox News declare that it’s a “free country” and that cancel culture is “un-American,” they forget  speech works two ways: It allows for discourse to take place but grants all voices can be heard. In other words, straight white men and other people with power aren’t used to getting pushback for the ways they conduct themselves—and cancel culture has reset the ways society can react. Those who fear cancel culture may claim they fear suppression of speech, but it’s accountability that they want to avoid.

Should regular citizens, the now powerful, be destroyed for expressing opinions that the Progressive Fascists do not like? Because that’s what happens more often. Yes, speech does have consequences, but, these people like to destroy opponents, and engage government, schools, and businesses to do so.

Cancel culture as we consider it today feels new because of the digital platforms we have at our disposal. Previous generations were canceling—but the road to accountability was paved with many barriers, both technologically and socially. It was hard to fully cancel something when you weren’t granted the same civil rights as your opponent—even more so when you could face even more persecution and exile for doing it. Once the internet began to take off in the 1990s, society began to see a shift in how the public could consider canceling with less gatekeeping. In 1997, the Supreme Court acknowledged this major shift when it dealt with its first internet-related First Amendment case. The court wrote at the time that “any person with a phone line can become a town crier with a voice that resonates farther than it could from any soapbox.”

See, it’s easy to do with the Internet, and doesn’t require anyone to do much, just join the mob. When people were upset over the Rolling Stones song “Some Girls”, they actually had to make an effort to complain. Write letters. Call companies. Not drop a quick tweet with a hashtag. Here’s the Rolling Stones article on it, in which they don’t go after the Stones, from 1976.

Those who fear cancel culture may claim they fear suppression of speech, but it’s accountability that they want to avoid.

I’m betting if those forces came after Rolling Stone they’d sing a different tune. But, the magazine of counter culture is now all about following the predominant trends, the ones pushing for cancelling those involved in Wrongthink. It’s part of the Marxist cultural revolution. Journalists should be pushing for free speech, not advocating for it the same way that the cultural revolution in Red China did.

Cancel Culture doesn’t hold people accountable, because it rarely goes after big shots: it attempts to destroy the lives of average folks, and is often pushed by those in power. Those with a big voice.

The post Rolling Stone: Cancel Culture Is Good For Democracy Or Something appeared first on Pirate’s Cove.