Cancel Culture as an Anti-Classist Attempt to Supercede Community Silencing in the Courts, Put in Conversation With Its High Volatility Stemming from Community Traumatization

 For the most part, we view cancel culture to be collectivized DV. However, we understand that in many cases the courts are unjust and favor the rich due to bribery, limitations on communicative ability of necessary information, and extreme power imbalances regarding who has access to information. We request an analysis and acknowledgment of the technological differences that give the courts the ability to erase or change that information without the public eye, and we also request an analysis on who has the clearance to evade due process without retaliation or punishment and how that is completely a class issue.

We can see cancel culture as an anti-classist attempt by brutalized communities to met out justice where power imbalances have pervaded with the court and police system and these two institutions are held, appropriately, in low regard. Yet, the risks to community credit when they get it very wrong or revictimize a very vulnerable individual who was weaponized by an ill-meaning infiltrator are too high. Ultimately it is the community that pays for these grievances if they come to light, heaping financial and retaliative costs on their backs by the police and court forces--again, another class issue. 

We would like a thorough analysis balancing the anti-classist liberations in cancel culture with their threats to community credit where they link the community to competent resources, perhaps not directly through their local courts, but perhaps to more competent international courts that would not otherwise have access to them. We would also like included in the analysis the fact cancel culture usually is a reaction to a tradition of police brutality. Where police brutality is not properly addressed and treated, courts tend to get their sentences wrong or make issues oversimplified in a consistent and pathological manner resulting in poor credit with the community and more contempt/polarization between community and police services...to the point police services are desired to become moot (analysis on communities where "defund the police" has received rightfully due popularity). 

We realize that courts need to be in good credit with their community and communities need to be in good credit with their courts otherwise structural rot tends to occur. We realize a punitive court system tends to be the driving factor of this credit rot. We realize punitivity tends to be prevalent where there is high class disparity, suggesting it is a product of class contempt (would love to see more research on this). We hope to take nothing more from the court system than the idea of due process. We demand due process without punitivity and oversimplification. We do not view silencing or technological power wielding as due process or just in any manner. 

Solutions such as "medicinal structuralized timelining" as a practice of restorative justice or any other ideas that comes from the constructive and restorative, as opposed to punitive, directions highly encouraged. extra +$50 if the analysis is mainly solution focused while giving a proper class analysis of issues.

We are floating the idea of compensated analysis by both parties of their situation in terms of community, finance, trauma, history, etc. as a viable alternative to the punitive court system. This gives us more information to help address societal issues. This approach could easily have individuals that could be trained to help the person self-defend or acknowledge their position should they have communicative inabilities/disabilities without requiring extensive knowledge that becomes a classist access issue. It would also encourage the community empowerment cancel culture seeks, without relying on top-down competence after pathological failures by police and court have shredded credit with the community. 

Nothing is more traumatizing for the community than being consistently forced to trust the judgment of its greatest abuser.

Ultimately the cost of a pathological, silencing, and disingenuous court system is heaped on all individuals (including the wealthy should international human rights interests who can exploit the inequities catch wind of the cause), even if they originally believe they will keep making money by preserving these systems in the face of financial and structural collapse.

We validate all humans have the right to life, property, freedom of expression, and access to functional justice systems.

$100 reward