What are people´s real motives in the cancel culture? Beneath the surface, it´s about much more than moralism and activism only. Conformity, opportunistic herd behaviour, peer pressure (and fear of one's own position) unconsciously plays an all-determining role in today's sensitive social topics.

Hardly a day goes by nowadays there isn't huge social outrage and there isn´t someone not getting cancelled. And every time I observe the same (sanctimonious) phenomenon: 'celebrities' are super eager to prove how much they dissaprove of it and to publically distance themselves from it (from unfollowing someone on social media, ending collaborations or sponsorships, and the implausible top of it all: even claiming 'to never play someone's repertoire/songs ever again') one screams it even louder than the other.

The values of these topics itself are actually very close to what I stand for myself: that we should all treat each other as equal (and with tolerance) regardless of who you are. All the activism did also bring a positive change, people being more aware about equality. But why does this automatically have to mean that someone must be forever be publically executed (in such a embittered reproachful bloodthirsty way) when someone commits a (human) mistake?

Do we really always cancel people (in this unrelenting way) truly out of own moralism or do we (unconsciously) copy each other? Conveying to socially accepted standards? Out of fear that we will otherwise get into trouble ourselves? And isn't it solely moralism at all, but also pure opportunism, peer pressure, indoctrination (and fear of consequences) that subconsciously drives us in the cancel culture?

We all pretend that our own principled considerations (or emerging awareness) drive us in this, but the mechanism (of herd behavior) influences us way more than we think. Or are conscious of.

It seems as if people rather want to show the world how much they distance themselves from it instead of that it comes from the heart. It's also making sure you are safe (your carreer) subconsciously.

Because if you have the guts (or audacity) to not participate in boycotting someone, then it's your turn!

That's basically what it is: this mechanism stems from the fear being canceled if you don't go along with the prevailing (virtue/woke) sentiment.

Everyone always comes up with the argument 'there is just more awareness about these topics nowadays than before' (and I absolutely believe this, people previously trivializing it, also has to do with how normalized things became over the years) however, the fact that people (even in this day and age) don't cancel similar cases (of misconduct) when there happens to be no fuss about it (or when the fuss fades away) does prove that 'what happens to be the accidental public opinion' IS in fact leading.

Because in those cases you suddenly don't hear anyone (no cancellation, nothing) despite it being similar cases of misconduct. You know why? Simply because there didn't happen to be social outrage about it.

Take for example Snoop Dogg (who was accused of sexual misconduct) yet he was not canceled (in fact: the same week he was performing on the Super Bowl!) while other famous men (who were accused of this) were immediately cancelled. Or take Top Notch, who pulled their hands off Bilal, but yet they didn't do this to other misbehaving contracted artists who even have committed worse crimes. How remarkable!

Another example is that there was a naked woman hanging somewhere, which was removed because of criticism (sexism) then there was even more outrage about that, and they hung it back!

It speaks volumes about what our true (unconscious) motives are in the cancel culture: peer pressure.

And not solely our own moral considerations at all.

If other people cancel them, I do too. If others don't cancel them, then neither do I.

If everyone is ruthless, so am I. If there is more nuance, everyone shouts that again.

That is what it literally comes down to these days.

It's literally puberty behavior instead of a mature society who's capable of own critical or wise thinking.

So do we actually cancel people out of our own conviction or is it mainly the power of social outrage that suddenly frightens people (or at least morally influences/indoctrinates us)?

And to be clear: all this does not mean that people cannot sincerely disapprove certain misbehaviour. No one condones misconduct. But that doesn't mean they don't have critical opinions about the way it is being fought against. But due to the extreme (fuss/cancel) culture, people do not dare to express this.

It almost seems like a battle who explodes the most with anger... yet if there hadn't been huge fuss about it (and wasn't a popular social theme) most would have easily ignored it or trivialized it.

In fact, that has already been proven! For years certain issues were ignored! And now look: how everyone suddenly explodes with extreme anger. And how much people want to show this, especially. But the fact is that people only got so concerned with these topics when it became a "hype". But otherwise we would have simply remained insensitive to other people's hurt feelings and themes that do not concern us.

Perhaps we as a society should take a closer look at ourselves what actually drives us unconsciously in this. Because it is certainly not solely the moral content itself.