ABSTRACT
In a heightened period of “cancel culture,” too many voices have been silenced, thereby eating away at the principles of a pluralistic democracy. Deliberation and compromise, the anchors of democracy, have become the casualties of devout principles and deeply rooted identities that have their advantages but also their disadvantages. Here, I trace the history of cancel culture to the nation’s founding and then move forward to our contemporary moment to discover that silencing one’s opponents has become a popular social media pastime. To offset such trends, we need both a greater elasticity of identity and the privileging of discordant voices. The chapter grapples with the systemic inequalities surrounding cancel culture as well as deliberative models designed to offset such divisions. Public icons like Representative John Lewis (D-GA) and former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, I conclude, offer models of working across difference in productive and meaningful ways.
