Cancellation and Moral Realignment in the Context of Cultural Polarization

• In Event: Moral Boundaries, Accountability, and the Possibilities of Solidarity

Abstract

The wave of activism known as “cancel culture” stigmatized its targets with the aim of enforcing accountability to a shared moral framework. Overlooked by the movement was the potential for targets to find new connection to communities with alternative moral commitments, in spite of—or even because of—their transgression. Using unique in-depth interviews with eighteen people in the process of undergoing cancellation, we find that cancellations often prompted moral realignment among targets. Facing profound stigmatization, respondents began to define themselves in opposition to a liberal mainstream that they increasingly framed as immorally punitive. In some cases, they began to explicitly develop new alignment with alternative moral communities that valorize, rather than condemning, the stigma incurred by cancellation. Variation across respondents in the type of transgression provides additional analytical leverage, as those canceled for sexual misconduct or racial insensitivity were more likely to start from within the liberal mainstream and experience realignment, while those canceled for prior beliefs that were already at odds with the liberal mainstream double down on their opposition. The results point to two theoretical contributions: first, highlighting the central importance of cultural polarization—or the increasing prominence of diverse or directly contrasting cultural communities—in understanding the impacts of accountability practices; and, second, in theorizing accountability practices as contingent on the target’s desire to remain within their previous cultural community.

Authors

• Laura Adler, Yale University

• Elena Ayala-Hurtado, Princeton University