Because you do seem genuine I will describe why I find this discussion to be in bad faith. You rarely (if ever) grant a charitable interpretation to my statements. You (almost?) always extrapolate my comments to the most extreme and weakest position. You seem to mostly be interested in "winning" and are funneling the conversation to points you find yourself most comfortable and strongest in. You regularly attack me as a person.
I find it unlikely that if I were to surface information and/or an argument to you that you did not know, that you would incorporate it into your world view. It seems you would dismiss it and focus on other aspects of the discussion and/or extrapolate the new argument to an absurd extreme thus making it irrelevant.
> In response, you made a claim that certain things were examples of "cancel culture" coming from the right. A claim you have thus far still utterly failed to defend.
I think this is the crux here. I offered a potential alternative explanation for why we might see more "cancel culture" from the "left" than the "right". Simply that the "right" often has more effective and lower risk options in "cancelling" a person.
I find it unlikely that if I were to surface information and/or an argument to you that you did not know, that you would incorporate it into your world view. It seems you would dismiss it and focus on other aspects of the discussion and/or extrapolate the new argument to an absurd extreme thus making it irrelevant.
> In response, you made a claim that certain things were examples of "cancel culture" coming from the right. A claim you have thus far still utterly failed to defend.
I think this is the crux here. I offered a potential alternative explanation for why we might see more "cancel culture" from the "left" than the "right". Simply that the "right" often has more effective and lower risk options in "cancelling" a person.