Deprivation of Redemption: Cancel Culture and its Virulence
Technological advancement anchored our roots to a deeper multilateral connection by integrating channels that serve as pivots for supplementation to our everyday social lives–one of those is social media. Social media brought many ways for interactions and expressions among society to stretch beyond what was once limited by physical means and has even honed to elevate it to a more significant potential.
However, whilst fostering convenience for connection and unity, social media also caters to the polar opposite: misconduct, division, and everything in between; the indicator of this attempt to extend social justice into the digital world has manifested in its form today, albeit, unfortunately, the cancel culture.
Cancel culture is an agendum from a mutual interest sparked by an individual, followed by others, which aims to shame publicly and perhaps even ostracize someone or something for actions that may be labeled as “socially unacceptable.”
Nevertheless, its unfiltered problem in its inherent objectives is the absence of having a specific objective when deciding who or what should be canceled. Henceforth, cancel culture should be percolated. If not, it must become something more than a spawn of dogmatic beliefs that aim to serve social justice.
Foremost, a matter of great concern is Cancel Culture’s relentless deprivation of redemption from those who went against the dominant societal standards and expectations. People who are canceled find it extremely difficult to climb out of the limelight that emphasizes and constantly reminds them of their dubbed “misconduct.”
Secondly, cancel culture creates an environment that is unwelcoming to differences. However, the lack of being open to change hinders innovation from happening. Cancel Culture would instill a restricted set of value systems among people in the long run. This provokes the idea that unless someone wants to be challenged or questioned, they must be prepared to suffer the equivalent consequences of running against it.
On the other hand, the emergence of cancel culture in our society undoubtedly made remarks on social media by holding people and institutions accountable. Additionally, it reprimands them for their misalignment to what is acceptable.
Fundamentally, Cancel Culture mobilizes people into a certain collectiveness towards a common goal bred by goodwill. Not only does it empower, but it is also not impotent on establishing the grounds that are not inbound with what is considered “good.”
Indeed, as people, it is our responsibility to maintain the social climate to prevent it from becoming a raging storm. More importantly, we must recognize that for that to come to fruition, we, ourselves, should not also become the dense air that contributes to it.