>>114751804>You literally do that. All the time. What is the issue hereAnd he's asking for people to stop. Stating that Boycotts and cancellations were just reactions to people being "assholes", and it was okay because they "weren't really restricting our freedom of speech". They often try to stop people from complaining about their protests or boycotts by painting it a a moral good, or just them using their freedom of speech (which it is), or they are just taking someone to task for their (perceived) actions or words, however they don't want the anyone reacting to them in the same way for the same reasons.
Anyway, it's a bit of a mute point, as the argument against those who are against cancel culture is mostly ignored and most it to hate cancel culture anyway.
>NOO LISTEN TO MY CONTRARIAN OPINION I AM SPECIAL>Ah, I seeHow am I just being contrarian? You (I assume) stated that we you need the law to step in, I corrected you based on my opinion. Why have discussions with people if you don't want anyone disagreeing with you?
>>114751894But there's always problems with excess. Just like how everyone suddenly decided to stockpile their items at the same time caused problems, even though buying large quantities to prepare isn't a bad thing, the sudden growing number of boycotts etc. causes problems as well. It's also fair to say that a majority of these reactions are unreasonable and often overly sensitive. The public stepping in and telling the minority to settle down and shut up is course correction. So I see it as pro-free market.
People will naturally boycott and avoid bad products or if they're offended enough, we don't need people screaming at us to do so.
