The Fine Line Between Consequence Culture and Cancel Culture

An angry mob protesting outside the house of a doctor by Thomas Rawlandson. Wikimedia Commons.

The past couple years, if not more, we’ve heard the argument about what constitutes someone getting cancelled, following an outcry about the dangers of “cancel culture.” In turn, those who are for cancelling people for mistakes, transgressions, or outright bad behavior call it “consequence culture.” Those who are for cancel culture talk about the importance of holding people accountable, so that society might improve and strive to be just. Those who are opposed to cancel culture list ways in which it’s draconian, stifling free speech and expression. But what if it wasn’t so clear cut and dry? What if the issue was more complex than that?

Now, before proceeding, I am mainly going to cover the canceling of people, not so much books, music, movies, and games. While the later is a problem in modern American society, it warrants another article.

Now, what if there was a fine line between “cancel culture” and “consequence culture,” and to put all situations under one umbrella did a disservice as a whole?

Let’s take these two situations and analyze them. One, I feel is worthy of consequences, while the other, not so much.

In our first situation, we have a young lady who took a trip around the world. This young woman’s name was Justin Sacco, and her story can be read in The…