I say this as a left leaning person.
I understand why you have to exaggerate, though.
Certainly I join in your healthy fears of some misguided actions which have been attributed to "cancel culture". And I also concede that there have been quite a few such actions.
However, I'd also ask that you recognize that many of the reactions and consequences attributed to "cancel culture" have been entirely justified, and appropriate, and have resulted in overall good outcomes to society.
It's not possible to apologize in these cases as if you admit any culpability it WILL be used against you to do as much additional damage as can be done. You can't backtrack, you must simply weather the storm and hope your employer who's known you much longer than a pack of wild woke-mobbers will give you the benefit of the doubt rather than assume that you eat minority children for breakfast.
> Former President Barack Obama derided "call-out culture" in a speech at the Obama Foundation summit on Tuesday, saying achieving real change was more complex than being "as judgmental as possible."
> "That is not activism," he concluded. "That is not bringing about change. If all you're doing is casting stones, you are probably not going to get that far."
Regardless, it's destructive to reasoned discourse to treat people like enemies ("cognitive dissonance" is being used as an insult here) when the only thing you know is that they disagreed with you.
Edit: It appears I may have misinterpreted the initial comments sarcasm as a "if McCarthy could do it then it's fair game" rather than a criticism of modern outrage mob tactics.
You are correct that they are in fact not saying that; the hypocrisy is in then turning around and saying that cancel culture is right and endorsing their tactics.
Societies have always shut down behavior and media they collectively find inappropriate. There's no need to track this as anything other than a continuation in a long history of collective groups of humans doing what they do.
That's fair and accurate as far as it goes, but it doesn't really negate the need to oppose this particular continuation of said history, any more than it negated the need to oppose eg Prohibition or the Spanish Inquision when those were happening.
0: except in a "huh, the canary just died" kind of way.
1: or whoever happens to be popular at the time.
Yes, that's (a significant part of) what I'm referring to.
> rather than "cancel culture"
Actually, I generally call it "social justice".
So no, it isn't a way to describe people behing held accountable. It is a thing that is going on, by a small group to get rid of people that they don't like. It is abhorrent, and it is very toxic. It is most definitely not how society is supposed to work. I may not like what you have to say, but I will fight for your right to say it, and "sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me" is how society is supposed to work.