It's not race and class because race has eclipsed class in the public discourse. I don't know why that is but if I was being cynical I'd say it's to sow division and limit effectiveness.

On And vs Or, there's limited space in public discourse. Introducing additional issues necessitates that space being divided into smaller chunks. Grouping the issues also only serves to narrow your potential support. That's not to say certain issues can't/shouldn't be grouped.

Personally I believe that a focus on class would be more effective in dealing with the harms of systemic racism than the current approach focused on race. While also taking a lot of steam out of the right's rhetoric.

I honestly only see harm in the current approach where upper middle class white people tell some guy living in a trailer, paycheck to paycheck, that he has white privilege and that's why he should be paying reparations and passed over for a job.

> Also, who has been canceled inappropriately?

I'm not talking about people being cancelled, I'm talking about how we engage with people who are either politically apathetic or exploring a leftist perspective for the first time.

> 1. Generally already on the right

There seems to be this insular view that we should only engage with people that already fully agree with us and it often results in attacking people that might have problematic views that they would otherwise have become open to examining. I've seen a lot of younger people who don't necessarily have fully formed opinions pushed away in this way. The same applies for people who are generally apathetic and maybe examining their opinions for the first time.

> 2. If they are pushed, it's by the internal contradictions on the left. And those internal contradictions are caused by a wavering of conviction, not an excess

Hard disagree. The demand for ideological purity is the biggest factor that pushes people who haven't quite made up their mind or don't fully engage to the right. We literally saw this play out with the atheism movement in the early 2010s.

My observation has been that orthodoxy and too many causes has alienated a lot of people that were traditionally aligned with the left.

In the UK a recent example would be the collapse of the red wall. Constituencies that had been held by Labour for up to ~80 years flipped. A key factor was that the working class in the area felt that Labour was no longer interested in representing them, with the focus having shifted to social justice and right wing press latching onto this as an angle of attack.

I don't follow celebs enough to name names here but there are many democrat-leaning ones being cancelled. It's hard to cancel a dedicated conservative in a conservative environment, but a lib can be cancelled for anything, like saying the correct messages from six months ago.

And then there's everyone not in the news. All the women kicked out of breastfeeding or ovarian cancer groups for complaining that they allow men, etc.

> In fact, who has even suffered significant consequences for being cancelled?

Parents who question what their child's school is doing. The father who the school board worked with the FBI to label a terrorist because he shouted during a meeting where he was discussion the cover-up of the rape of his daughter at school.

> people being pushed right [by] the internal contradictions on the left. And those internal contradictions are caused by a wavering of conviction, not an excess

Contradictions are probably not caused by wavering beliefs but by inconsistent or hypocritical beliefs. Combine this with an excess of conviction and usual absolute unwillingness to discuss and you have alienating opinions.

But I don't think people are being pushed "right" as much as the liberal parties are being pushed to hard-left absolutist positions. "Capitalism bad. White people bad. Men are women." The people are staying roughly where they were and the parties are moving.