Cancel Culture Will Not Be Canceled.
Cancel culture is the natural outcome of the governments' failure to address negligent racism.
Despite attempts to cancel, cancel culture the act of canceling individuals for their behavior has become increasingly prevalent. The most recent case of canceling an individual was the LGBTQ’s community attempt to cancel Dave Chappelle for his comments about the trans community.
What is cancel culture?
Depending on your perspective cancel culture can mean different things. Most definitions center around themes of accountability but diverge regarding their impact. According to a Pew study, they defined cancel culture according to political leanings and gender. Interestingly, Pew avoided defining cancel culture from a racial perspective. Women and Democrats were more likely to define cancel culture as a form of shaming, whereas Men and Republicans were more likely to define cancel culture as an attempt to stifle free speech.
“[Cancel culture is] a method of withdrawing support for public figures or companies. It can also be considered to be used as a form of online shaming on social media platforms.” — Pew Research
“[Cancel culture is] trying to silence someone that does not have the same belief as you. Basically, [it’s] taking their First Amendment rights away. It violates affected people’s civil rights.” — Pew Research
The term cancel has its origins in the Hip Hop community of the '80s. First used in the movie New Jack City by Wesley Snipes to “cancel” his girlfriend. The term quickly became a ubiquitous part of African American Vernacular English and morphed into what we now know as cancel culture and has become one of the most effective tools against racism.
Negligent racism
The Civil Rights Act was designed and enacted to prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, however, the Civil Rights Act focuses on intentional discrimination. That means overt, clear acts of discrimination. In regards to racism, for an individual or organization to be found liable for racism under the Civil Rights Act a White person would need to stand in front of you calling you the N-word while holding a noose in their hand, and informing you they denied you a promotion because you are an N-word, AND you will need to record the act of intentional racism because if the incident is not denied, you will be gaslighted into thinking the individual did not mean it in a racist manner.
More often than not, racism is more subtle and casually negligent. In recent years we have called it Implicit Racism. Implicit Racism is when racism has been so socialized into being White that they are not even aware they are being racist. The theory is that most racism is not the result of malice, hatred, ill will, or bigotry, but rather an innocent unconscious manifestation of racism. In other words, we cannot hold White people accountable for racism because it is unintentional, therefore laws that address intentional racism miss the mark, leaving only the most egregious forms of racism addressed by our justice system. Everyone else gets an implicit racism get of jail free card.
Here is the problem.
Whether intentional or unintentional racism is harmful. Negligent racism involves negative unfounded stereotypes of individuals based on race. Negligent racism can include jokes, off-color comments, and the exclusion of individuals based on race. Negligent racism lacks intent or mens rea, but we convict people of crimes that lack mens rea all the time. These are called strict liability crimes. As a society, we decided that some crimes are so hazardous that simply engaging in that activity is enough to create liability. Some examples of strict liability crimes are statutory rape, selling alcohol to minors, speeding, and consumer product liability.
Is Racism hazardous?
Numerous studies have illustrated the detrimental effects of racism. Racism in America has resulted in educational disparities, health disparities, economic disparities, and social disparities. Black people are 3.23 times more likely to be shot and killed by police. Black children are 5 times more likely to be incarcerated for childhood behaviors. A Black family's wealth is 10 times less than their White counterparts. Despite poverty rates in America declining to 10%, the Black community has an 18.8% poverty rate. Even the Centers for Disease Control have acknowledged that racism is a primary driver of poor health outcomes in the Black community. Despite overwhelming evidence that racism is harmful, even hazardous, the government has decided to treat racism as not inherently dangerous. White society has decided to treat racism as a childhood rhyme: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me. The problem is that racism does hurt people.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
With the failure of the government to properly address racism and the harms caused by racism, those targeted by racism have decided to engage in another form of justice, cancel culture. Victims are engaging in what is known as The Court of Public Opinion. It has been known by many names, has been documented as existing in communities around the world. The Court of Public Opinion is as old as time. Cancel culture is nothing more than a current manifestation of an old tool of social control that allows society to address morally reprehensible behavior that goes against society's values, mores, and laws.
Is it always accurate? No. But it is always effective? Yes.
White society has used cancel culture for decades to control members of other ethnic groups, the most notable of which is the murder of Emmett Till who was tried in the court of white public opinion and canceled right out of life for the imagined and false sexual assault allegation of a White Woman. The challenge now is that society’s values have changed and we have decided that racism is morally reprehensible, among other social ills. The problem is that Whites who have traditionally controlled this tool of social control are now finding themselves the target of this method of social control, hence the discussion of whether cancel culture should exist or not. In their mind, the question really is, as White people do we need to be held accountable for behavior that we have deemed harmless. The answer is yes because as a society we have decided that those who benefit from racism do not get to be the arbiters of what is or isn’t racist.
Until the government enacts laws that address negligent racism and other isms and provides meaningful justice for victims of morally reprehensible behavior that is enshrined in law cancel culture will continue to exist as long as BBQ Becky harasses Black families and the Brock Turners of the world receive probation for raping women behind dumpsters.
