Originally Posted by Guybrush

I haven't seen Chapelle's special and don't know what he says, but I do find many aspects of cancel culture to be dumb. Do we have to agree on everything in order to accept and tolerate that someone else has a place in society / entertainment / whatever?

Taken to extremes, in the US, you could have comedians for democrats and other comedians for republicans. You could read different books, watch different channels, consume different news sources and entirely different narratives about the world. It removes common ground, segregates people and ups conflict.

It undermines democracy which was built on the idea that we should voice opinions, debate them and place our votes. Differing opinions should come into contact inside our brains and the best ones win. A good thing about that is it makes it possible for people to change their mind. Cancel culture is more like cultural war and you stick to your side/echo chambers where bad opinions can fester unchallenged. If you think your opinions are right, you ironically lose the ability to influence your opponents. You know more about alt right and q-anon than I do, I'm sure. Cancel culture is a small part of the environment that allows stuff like that to blossom.

Increased cancel culture is also one of the consequences of people getting radicalised by social media echo chambers and algorithms feeding us content.

Sometimes cancellation is appropriate, but I don't think the line should be drawn at legal expression of opinions you don't agree with. Cancel Varg Vikernes, R. Kelly, Harvey Weinstein - you know, people who would rape or murder.