I'm sorry you went through that; it sucks to lose a friend, and in such a frustrating way too.
I've been through a similar experience; my elementary school and jr high school best friend blocked and ghosted me about a decade ago, after we had a political argument on Facebook. I sort of shrugged it off at the time, figuring that eventually he'd cool down and we'd open communications again. Then, sadly, he passed away. :-(
First, my sympathy. I'll straight up say she just put you in a crappy situation, and it's pretty clear to me that, if she's been brooding on this for that long, then it really is "her problem," whatever led to draw lines in the sand.
Second, and this may not be exactly analogous to cancel culture but it contributes to it... The real danger here is self-righteousness. And it's dangerous because it leads to situations like this where someone decides that X is right or the truth or the way things have to be, and all that's left to do is use whatever force you have available to make the world conform. There's no longer doubt, questioning, even communication or attempts to convert (like you explain). There's mere force. Self-righteousness makes you disengage from the rest of the world as a participant and sets you apart as a judge. I'm sure you could come up with all kinds of wonderful psychological explanations for why certain people in certain circumstances feel that they need that attitude toward the world, but from everyone else's perspective, that person ceases to be a person and becomes a walking, talking force. You can only ally with or oppose them. But you can't engage them, can't have a relationship with them as an equal because they've removed themselves from any sort of vulnerability or recognition that they are one-among-others. They're just a tool of whatever idea or attitude has them in their grip.
I love your point that in situations like this, the only person actually doing harm to someone else is the person demanding that others conform to whatever decision they've made. That's why it's particularly upsetting to see it used so often on the side of ideas that, I would hope, are intended to decrease the harm and suffering in the world. But political/moral identities in our culture often seem stand in as substitutes for other more concrete kinds of solidarity and community and relationships, but when the most concrete outcome of your "opinions and stances" is that you drive away people in your life, what the hell's the point? A room that only contains people who've passed your purity test may be a pretty lonely place.
(Plus, there's a slippery slope version of this: if you're willing to cut people off from your life as not even worth engaging and trying to convince, what's to prevent you from deciding that maybe it'd be better if you don't share the same public spaces, the same institutional benefits, the same rights, etc. McCarthyism isn't a far fetched comparison.)
So if I cut off a high school friend who has become a Nazi, that's a slippery slope to McCarthyism? With respect, your statement seems a little extreme.
I don't cut off friendships lightly or easily, but I also don't have a moral duty to remain friends with people with terrible views. My personal friendships are not public policy, and I don't think you're making a good choice by blurring that distinction; my choice to not stay in touch with someone isn't a slippery slope to putting them on a government-supported blacklist.
I'm sorry you went through that; it sucks to lose a friend, and in such a frustrating way too.
I've been through a similar experience; my elementary school and jr high school best friend blocked and ghosted me about a decade ago, after we had a political argument on Facebook. I sort of shrugged it off at the time, figuring that eventually he'd cool down and we'd open communications again. Then, sadly, he passed away. :-(
First, my sympathy. I'll straight up say she just put you in a crappy situation, and it's pretty clear to me that, if she's been brooding on this for that long, then it really is "her problem," whatever led to draw lines in the sand.
Second, and this may not be exactly analogous to cancel culture but it contributes to it... The real danger here is self-righteousness. And it's dangerous because it leads to situations like this where someone decides that X is right or the truth or the way things have to be, and all that's left to do is use whatever force you have available to make the world conform. There's no longer doubt, questioning, even communication or attempts to convert (like you explain). There's mere force. Self-righteousness makes you disengage from the rest of the world as a participant and sets you apart as a judge. I'm sure you could come up with all kinds of wonderful psychological explanations for why certain people in certain circumstances feel that they need that attitude toward the world, but from everyone else's perspective, that person ceases to be a person and becomes a walking, talking force. You can only ally with or oppose them. But you can't engage them, can't have a relationship with them as an equal because they've removed themselves from any sort of vulnerability or recognition that they are one-among-others. They're just a tool of whatever idea or attitude has them in their grip.
I love your point that in situations like this, the only person actually doing harm to someone else is the person demanding that others conform to whatever decision they've made. That's why it's particularly upsetting to see it used so often on the side of ideas that, I would hope, are intended to decrease the harm and suffering in the world. But political/moral identities in our culture often seem stand in as substitutes for other more concrete kinds of solidarity and community and relationships, but when the most concrete outcome of your "opinions and stances" is that you drive away people in your life, what the hell's the point? A room that only contains people who've passed your purity test may be a pretty lonely place.
(Plus, there's a slippery slope version of this: if you're willing to cut people off from your life as not even worth engaging and trying to convince, what's to prevent you from deciding that maybe it'd be better if you don't share the same public spaces, the same institutional benefits, the same rights, etc. McCarthyism isn't a far fetched comparison.)
So if I cut off a high school friend who has become a Nazi, that's a slippery slope to McCarthyism? With respect, your statement seems a little extreme.
I don't cut off friendships lightly or easily, but I also don't have a moral duty to remain friends with people with terrible views. My personal friendships are not public policy, and I don't think you're making a good choice by blurring that distinction; my choice to not stay in touch with someone isn't a slippery slope to putting them on a government-supported blacklist.