I find cancel culture fairly abhorrent, not because there’s in anything necessarily wrong with public rebuke per se, simply that it appeals to the base urge for mob-mentality. Furthermore it tends to be faux-lions led by loud-donkeys.

And if it worked, the world would theoretically be getting more tolerant. Except it isn’t. When you fling someone out of a job because they made an ill-informed comment, you don’t get the moderates and liberals on side. Not really. You get a small baying minority getting their rocks off.

But you’re right, nobody suggests how to address these issues. So I will. A combination of restorative justice for those who offend and some serious boundaries in place for those who have weaponised offence. To reduce it, people need to be able to talk about racism openly.

As someone who is routinely accused of being a racist bigot - I don’t think the conversation is in a healthy place. I am a racist because I question the identity narrative and suggest a socialist solution that doesn’t centre race. If we suspend rational discussion and instead rely on the whim of a radicalised general public either side of the discourse then we’re on a hiding to nowhere. When it moves too far left, the right kick off - and vice versa. We’re seeing a polarised society forcing the demos to pick sides between two equally unappealing groups of people who believe they’re right and are prepared to police it.

That’s the point of the centre ground rationalists, polite disagreement, and the point of dissent and being allowed to dissent (even if it gets you blocked). It’s why I show up on your wall and you show up on mine, intelligent people are looking for answers and those are rarely simple.