Does the perception of those things actually matter? From my entirely unscientific anecdata it seems people concerned about being "canceled" are toxic assholes that can't believe other people don't want to deal with their shit. No one is owed a platform to be a toxic asshole. Trolls don't deserve a response on someone's platform. They're all free to go start their own platforms and pay for the privilege of broadcasting their bullshit.
> toxic assholes that can't believe other people don't want to deal with their shit
To use Twitter as an example, there has been the "block" and "mute" buttons for quite a while. I dont know why ppl dont use these more. To me its far more likely that the cancellation intent is to prevent the so called troll from speaking to others.
Pretty sure it's not assholes but rather people with opinions that the others hate. Or is that what "toxic assholes" means to you? Is expressing an assholey opinion in a polite respectful way is still toxic assholery? If that's the case, then you need to step back and work out how you decide what opinions are assholey.
How do you decide that a Nazi is a toxic asshole while other people aren't? I'm not asking about that specific type of person but about your general way of classifying them. Where's the boundary? If some new ideology comes along, how will you know how to classify its adherents?
> How do you decide that a Nazi is a toxic asshole while other people aren't?
Oh, that's easy. Advocating the wholesale extermination of people based on ethnicity is a strong signal you're a toxic asshole. If a new ideology comes along advocating the same thing...there's a good chance its adherents are also toxic assholes.
What about Nazis who don't advocate for extermination of people based on ethnicity? If you associate yourself with the ideology, are you automatically guilty of advocating all its things even if you don't agree with all of them?
And yes, it's a serious question. Seems like you have a simple decision tree of ethnic extermination? -> Toxic asshole.
