Does the cancel culture promote liberty: A closer look at objectivism

Objectivism would argue that cancel culture can actually promote liberty if it is done in a rational and objective manner.

The concept of “cancel culture” has become a hotly debated topic in recent years, with some arguing that it promotes liberty by holding individuals and institutions accountable for their actions, while others argue that it is a threat to freedom of speech and expression.

Objectivism, a philosophical system developed by Ayn Rand, offers a unique perspective on this issue.

In this article, we will take a closer look at Objectivism and examine whether or not cancel culture promotes liberty.

Objectivism is a philosophical system that emphasises the importance of reason, individualism, and laissez-faire capitalism.

According to Objectivism, individuals have the right to pursue their own happiness and should not be coerced by others or by the government. This includes the right to free speech and expression, as well as the right to associate with whomever one chooses.

At first glance, it may seem that cancel culture goes against these principles. After all, cancel culture often involves shaming or boycotting individuals or institutions for expressing views or engaging in behaviour that is deemed unacceptable by certain groups. This can lead to a chilling effect on free speech, as people may be afraid to express their opinions for fear of being “cancelled.”

Alice O'Connor, better known by her pen name Ayn Rand, was a Russian-born American writer and philosopher.
Alice O’Connor, better known by her pen name Ayn Rand, was a Russian-born American writer and philosopher known for advancing the philosophy of objectivism.

Nonetheless, Objectivism would argue that cancel culture can actually promote liberty if it is done in a rational and objective manner.

According to Objectivism, individuals should be held accountable for their actions and beliefs, and if they engage in behaviour that violates the rights of others, they should face consequences. This includes consequences in the form of social disapproval or economic boycotts.

The key to determining whether or not cancel culture promotes liberty, according to Objectivism, is whether or not it is based on objective standards.

In other words, cancel culture should not be based on subjective feelings or opinions, but rather on objective facts and evidence. For example, if an individual engages in hate speech or promotes violence, they can be held accountable for their actions.

However, if an individual expresses an unpopular opinion or engages in behaviour that is simply deemed offensive by some, they should not be subject to cancellation.

Furthermore, Objectivism would argue that cancel culture should not be used as a tool of coercion. Individuals should not be pressured into conforming to certain beliefs or behaviors simply because of fear of being cancelled. This would go against the principles of individualism and free choice that are central to Objectivism.

In conclusion, the question of whether or not cancel culture promotes liberty is a complex one. Objectivism would argue that cancel culture can promote liberty if it is based on objective standards and is not used as a tool of coercion.

However, if cancel culture is based on subjective opinions and is used to silence dissenting views, it can be a threat to freedom of speech and expression. As with many philosophical issues, the answer is not black and white, but rather requires a nuanced and thoughtful approach.

Wilson Chipangura
Wilson Chipangura
Articles: 46

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *