By now, you have likely seen the stories about actor and music artist Nick Cannon being fired by Viacom for some anti-white and anti-Semitic comments he made on an episode of his podcast. During a conversation with Professor Griff, a former member of rap group Public Enemy, Cannon made a series of questionable and outright bigoted remarks.
The actor claimed that black people are the true Hebrews — which is a belief common among Black Hebrew Israelites — and intimated that whites were “a little less” than those with darker skin. He claimed that those who lack melanin have a “deficiency” that compels them to act as brutal savages. “They had to be savages,” he said.
Essentially, Cannon was stating that whites are genetically predisposed to using violence to attain power while engaging in wanton acts of brutality due to the lack of melanin in their skin. Now, imagine what would happen if a high-profile white man made similar comments about blacks or Hispanics? We all know what would happen.
But what’s interesting is that the subject of cancel culture came up in relation to Viacom’s decision to fire Cannon. While the media company cited the actor’s anti-Semitic comments and conveniently left out his racist remarks about white people, some on both the left and the right argued that he should not lose his job for expressing these views.
Some have indicated that his firing is the result of cancel culture, which is far too prevalent in American society today. But it seems to me that we might be missing something here, which is why I chose to record the following video:
There is no denying that cancel culture has become a societal cancer that the progressive left is using to assert its dominance. But in our efforts to push back against the purveyors of this Marxist political weapon, we must be careful that we do not fall into the trap of applying the cancel culture label where it might not belong.
In many of these cases, individuals and corporations must be allowed to make decisions regarding who they associate with, and when to cut ties. In many of these scenarios, the people being fired, or “canceled” are simply dealing with the consequences of their actions and should not be seen as hapless victims of authoritarianism.
Freedom of speech is of the utmost importance. But the freedom to choose with whom one associates is also important. When these situations arise, we would do well to measure the facts of the situation before determining that it is cancel culture. In some cases, it makes sense to support the right to choose with whom we associate.