Talk of cancel culture typically summons thoughts of celebrities or other high-profile individuals losing jobs and status after making statements that do not align with progressive ideology. Gina Carano, who played a prominent character in Disney’s The Mandalorian, might come to mind. She was fired from her role after posting a tweet comparing America’s political divide to what occurred in Nazi Germany. But those who understand the situation know that the reason for the fake outrage against the actress was due to the fact she holds some right-leaning beliefs.
However, a particularly troubling trend lies under the surface when it comes to discussions about cancel culture. In reality, this phenomenon also applies to everyday folks. This is especially true in the workplace, where people who espouse conservative beliefs are forced into silence for fear of punishment. The rise of cancel culture in everyday situations is arguably one of the most dangerous developments that few are discussing, and it could lead to some problematic times ahead for American society.
Cancel Culture Invades the Workplace
According to a survey conducted by Ipsos/Alliance Defending Freedom, three out of five employees fear losing their jobs should they express conservative religious or political views at work, while 54% believe that posting such views on social media could also result in negative consequences in the workplace. The survey also found that 40% of employees find left-leaning workplace training on “systemic racism” divisive, and 43% feel less comfortable discussing race afterward.
Jay Hobbs, from the Christian legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom, told the Washington Times that “it puts religious and political conservatives in the crosshairs of cancellation,” adding that employee fears of negative consequences cut across partisan lines. Conservatives are worried about being shut out of advancement opportunities, mistreated by coworkers and bosses, and even fired for voicing their beliefs. These fears are not unfounded. Counterweight, a support group for individuals who have been canceled in the workplace, features many stories in which people with right-leaning beliefs have been targeted at their places of employment simply for posting opinions on social media.
Recent high-profile examples of people losing their jobs for expressing their political opinions have only served to exacerbate this trend. “The censorship is everywhere and affects everything,” said Jeffrey Tucker, president of the free-market Brownstone Institute for Social and Economic Research. “Most employed professionals today, to say nothing of academics, are simply not permitted to speak out. We have developed an East German situation of information control by default.”
One of the contributors to this problem is that colleges and universities have cultivated environments hostile to political opinions that do not firmly line up with far-leftist thought. Proponents of these tactics are creating a culture in which people self-censor. Conservatives claim cancel culture has entered the workplace through recent college graduates, with growing numbers of speech codes aimed at silencing politically offensive speech on social media and at campus lectures. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a Philadelphia-based free speech advocacy group, reported in December that 88% of four-year colleges and universities now restrict the free expression of their students, reversing a 15-year trend.
(Photo by Steve Pfost/Newsday RM via Getty Images)
A recent survey conducted by the University of Wisconsin System found that 61.5% of self-described “somewhat conservative” students and 64.4% of “very conservative” students felt pressured by teachers in class or an assignment to agree with a particular political or ideological view. In contrast, 22.3% of “somewhat liberal” and 15.1% of “very liberal” students reported the same pressure to change their opinions.
The survey also found that 31% of all students and 58% of “very liberal” students supported disinviting a campus speaker “if some students find their message offensive.” In contrast, 44% of all students and 75% of “very conservative” students opposed canceling such speakers.
Another issue is the burgeoning environmental, social, and governance (ESG) movement that sprung up a few years ago. This initiative is essentially a vehicle to infuse progressive ideas into corporate America under the guise of encouraging corporations to be more socially responsible. A Thomson Reuters report explained that this has sparked a debate over the “purpose of the corporation.”
The author writes:
“Should corporations be solely concerned with maximizing shareholder value, or should their purpose be wider, encompassing other stakeholders — employees, customers, and community members — that are often outside the legal boundaries of the organization? The enhanced importance of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues is part the changed landscape for managers and employees. It is against this backdrop that some employees might be compelled to censor their opinion for fear of retribution, reflecting the idea of a cancel culture.”
The author suggests that the “boundaries between an employee’s private and work lives have become more blurred” because “[s]ocial media has contributed to an environment where companies can now monitor much of what employees say and do around the clock.”
The rise of cancel culture is a disturbing trend that is metastasizing in American society. In the workplace, it has created an environment where individuals are at risk of being targeted by co-workers who scour through their social media accounts to find material that they deem objectionable. The more this movement grows, the greater threat to liberty it will present.
The rise of cancel culture reflects the growing influence of the authoritarian left, which seeks to use whatever means necessary to compel people to adhere to its political philosophy. Rather than engaging in debate, conversation, and persuasion, they seek to use the threat of punishment to coerce people into compliance. This reality shows that an authoritarian movement does not necessarily need to wield the power of the state against political opposition; there are other weapons close at hand.
Do you have an opinion about this article? We’d love to hear it! If you send your comments to [email protected], we might even publish your edited remarks in our new feature, LN Readers Speak Out. Remember to include the title of the article along with your name, city, and state.
Please respect our republishing guidelines. Republication permission does not equal site endorsement. Click here.