Expansion of Cancel Culture in Furtherance of Radical Politics

I think if I were as dedicated as you to collecting links of deplorable things my enemies do, I could also create a gish gallop of evidence (and yes, you are absolutely gish galloping) that my enemies are planning to put me up against the wall and/or actually doing so ("metaphorically"). Mostly what I see is a few minecraft LARPers, fortunately, but I regard your catastrophizing exactly the same way I regarded leftists catastrophizing about how Trump was Literally Hitler.

Since you're so fond of collecting links and saving them, why don't we make some predictions? What do you think the world will look like a few years from now, free speech-wise? I've heard from some of your compadres that it's going to be de facto illegal to be a Republican or a conservative, all the way up to literal gulags. Do you go that far, or do you want to stake your claim to something less extreme?

Is the claim I'm making these up, and that they mostly aren't happening? Or is it that you don't care about these examples, either because there's not enough or you don't find the topics relevant?

Because if you're counting someone providing too many true and relevant examples as a Gish Gallop...

The last time we played a variation on this topic, I pointed out that not a few of your examples had already come to pass somewhere, and you had better things to do with your time. Since then, the EEOC has helpfully provided a worksheet that has a nice warning about "Increasingly heated discussion of current events occurring outside the workplace", Biden's rolled back the guidance for struggle sessions diversity, equity and inclusion training to focused on the specific dividing line, and in addition to Demkovich itself bringing up the exact case of 'people calling homosexuality a sin', there's three or four states in the midst of working on exactly how to handle the 'parents tell trans kids being trans is bad' paradox, often in not-great ways.

And, lest I need to say this explicitly, these are the matters you picked, rather than the ones I'm particularly outraged over or are particularly severe versions of the problem.

((I'm not even sure the way trans stuff is being handled in these states is wrong, just that it's being done with little regard for conventional legal standards and absolutelylooks bad to Red Tribers and has little interest in trying to not do so.))

Given how you've treated that, I'm don't see what you will get out of it, and I definitely don't see what I will get out of it, but I'm not especially opposed to writing out predictions, so in the interest of being kind and charitable:

  • HR restrictions on free speech, pushed under statute and legal interpretation and regulation, will continue to dominate and grow, and do so most aggressively whenever speech is considered Red Tribe-like or -adjacent. This is basically me "predicting" Damore, who wasn't even Red Tribe, so to be explicit: we'll have an example involving politically-oriented speech entirely after-hours and out-of-workplace, which the employer says requires firing or otherwise terminating the employee to allow other employees to feel safe. Which is me "predicting" Kevin Williamson, so let's also say not a media-facing, PR, or C-level employee.

  • The NRA probably loses to New York and has a decent chance of losing to DC if the case isn't consolidated or mooted. This probably won't come to a complete dissolution, but it's definitely going to involve the official leadership getting pushed off, and probably part of the existing board either gets forced out or 'voluntarily' resigns under threat, or put under onerous consent orders or administration that strongly reduce its ability to coordinate or apply political speech. The target is to turn its resources toward "gun safety" (aka gun control) advocacy, but they'll definitely take removing it as a political actor as a nice second-place prize.

  • A state RFRA is either rolled by the legislature, or strongly reduced by the courts. Pennsylvania's is already been made toothless, so I'd probably put Rhode Island, New Mexico, and Virginia in order of most likely.

  • Denial of cert in Remington v. Soto turns into a general permit for its philosophy of law, at least in the 1st and 9th (maybe 4th?) Circuits, as well the legal progeny of the Defense Distributed cases. These cases won't be that successful in terms of final judgements, at least in the next decade, but they'll last much further and be far more ruinously expensive than a similarly argued case against Blue Tribe-favored matters, will increasingly bypass not just the PCLAA but also anti-SLAPP statutes. While generally aimed to shut up or embarrass organizations for financial or business activity (at least to start), it will conveniently also produce a tremendous chilling effect on Red Tribe-adjacent speech as 'dangerous'.

  • We find out that there's another Operation Choke Point-like action. That's specifically us finding out about it, since the CFPB still isn't willing to say it stopped the old one.

  • There's a tremendous growth in private-public partnerships focused around censorship, probably flying the flag of Fighting Misinformation. The concept isn't new -- the MPAA and even MPPC before it were "voluntary" agreements made under duress -- but this will be far more tightly coupled and far more invasive. I'd expect that by the next Presidential election season, it's openly known that there -- and that these move in every case brought by Blue Tribe-aligned, and ignore or dismiss obvious examples brought by the Red Tribe. In theory, this would just be inviting a Streisshanding, a la the Hunter Laptop story from last election; in practice, these will become more subtle and tightly coupled, and by definition you only notice the cases where they fail.

  • On the genuinely private action side, at least to start, there's an increasing movement to treat disagreement as hate speech. This'll eventually feed into the above HR and private-public actions, but that might be 5+ year off. From a free speech as a norm perspective, not terribly exciting. Which would be one matter if it were restrained to terribly-written books against trans people being booted from Amazon, since I don't particularly like Singal either, and less so when ARFCOM's been losing its registrar.

  • Extra-legal attacks will grow, and seldom if ever receive serious punishment; most will not receive scrutiny. The next Republican Presidential candidate will likely have some private information disclosed "accidentally" by the IRS. Groups like Distributed Denial of Secrets and Unicorn Riot will not be making increasingly restricted disclosures targetting only actual fascists; they'll simply be local news when they get people fired, and will not find themselves facing hacking charges (and probably not serious investigation). The next VCDL lobby day that isn't restricted to cars will be declared a Public Emergency, again, and damn what the law says.