Cancelled

In Spain it is canceled badly. So much so that it is necessary to invent the "cancellation in degree of attempt". If not, it would be difficult to understand that almost all canceled in our country have opinion columns, fill entire auditoriums or walk through television sets. The whole debate on the culture of cancellation is obviously imported and fits badly with our reality, but that does not make it less interesting. For a good starting point, take a look at the recommended

by Fernando Vallespín. Is pluralism and freedom of expression drowned by this new culture of political correctness?

On the one hand, speaking of cancellation as a type of censorship seems to me an excess. Censorship is a centralized thing done from power to stamp out annoying or dissenting opinions, while cancellation is a decentralized process with no coercive obligation. A boycott can be made against a product or author, but the questioned person can refuse to give in, especially in a society in which many cultural goods are market-based. Let's start by lowering the costs: whoever bows to the pressures of the tweeting mobs can claim economic or prestigious reasons, but plays in a different league compared to who can end up in prison for a book or a song.

On the other hand, it is also fallacious to make the equivalent of being canceled to being criticized. It seems that at the moment in which there is a reply to an idea for lazy, a comment for unfortunate or a joke for absurdity, it is trying to cancel it. This argument is used particularly by those who have always had a loudspeaker without being able to answer them. I think a Democrat should be radically against banning for offending, but it is not mandatory to laugh thanking anyone. Being in the public debate implies assuming the discrepancy, but being seen from the positive side; Frequently receiving furious attacks in networks ends up generating important adhesions. It's more,If the idea of ​​a culture of cancellation has had any use, it is so that those who accuse minority groups of wanting to victimize themselves do the same with themselves and their traditionally hegemonic ideas.

We live in a continuous evolution of moral soils, of what we consider acceptable to do or say.

This always occurs dialectically, especially in pluralistic societies, but social media seems to have blurred the distinction between the Twitter activist, whose salary depends on noise, and the whole of a group or social movement.

Perhaps discerning them is helpful for debating the perimeter of morality.

Unless, of course, that at no time has gone from that and that those worried about the culture of cancellation are not moved by the fear of losing pluralism or freedom of expression, but that they are the ones who remain in the minority.

More information

Does not cancel who wants, but who can

Sign in to continue reading

Just by having an account you can read this article, it's free

Sign upLogin

Thanks for reading EL PAÍS