Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Cancel Culture

The Economics of Cancel Culture

When mob mentality and moral suasion meet the market

Veronique de Rugy | 7.23.2020 12:01 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
sipaphotosten829847 | Kris Tripplaar/Sipa USA/Newscom
(Kris Tripplaar/Sipa USA/Newscom)

A wave of hasty firings is sweeping across the country, driven by demands from what some call the "cancel culture." The New York Times editorial page editor James Bennett ran an op-ed from Sen. Tom Cotton (R–Ark.) that displeased the paper's readers and some colleagues, so he lost his job. The chief curator at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, Gary Garrels, lost his job, too, after he was accused of being a racist for saying he would still collect art from white men. But the list of those who lost their jobs is much longer, and the rationale is sometimes as stunningly weak as someone liking the wrong tweet.

As a result, fear has gripped many workers: Any day, any worker can be fired for simply angering a Twitter mob. Meanwhile, employers are left wondering how they should react when one of their employees becomes a target.

Every case is different, and employers should be able to dismiss workers. "Employment at will" remains the best labor policy. However, one piece of wisdom is worth following: During scary, emotional, or angry times, don't act hastily. Slow down.

There is value in not making rash decisions during stressful times. Mental health professionals often advise grieving families to not make any life-altering decisions for a solid year after the death of a loved one. In daily life, some common advice for those about to send a nasty email or text is, "Sleep on it."

Acting out of anger is not uncommon. Mark Twain, for instance, noted, "Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured." Aristotle observed, "Anybody can become angry—that is easy—but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose and in the right way—that is not within everybody's power and is not easy."

This rule of not acting out of passion is central to our political system. James Madison, in Federalist No. 10, warns of impetuous mobs or factions "united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." As such, Madison and the Constitution's other architects created a system of governance that discourages fast, immediate action and gratification.

The built-in slowdown requirement enshrined in the Constitution is also present in our legal system. Due process means that no stage of legal proceedings can be dispensed with, preventing government from acting too hastily.

Today, the wisdom that inspires our constitutional system and many other fields could help private firms when responding to the demands of an impetuous mob. Imagine if employers adopted the public position to wait, let's say two weeks or so, when faced with demands that a worker be fired for some alleged claim. Such a policy would have a few advantages.

First, it would give the company time to determine if the accusations are well founded. It would also allow the company to assess the bigger impact of such a decision on other employees without excessive retaliation costs for not acting quickly enough.

Second, a waiting period would allow heads to level and passions to cool. In the age of instantaneous news, the mob might become distracted by other events, allowing a company to assess the situation without the constant pressure. At the end of the waiting period, if the employer decides it still needs to let the employee go, it will have had time to develop an argument for why it's making that decision as opposed to the contradicting messaging that has surrounded many of the recent firings.

There's a larger issue here, one that we libertarians pay too little attention to: What is the proper role of moral suasion on commerce? If there is no role, then the state, with its formal law, becomes the only constraint other than market competition. If there is a role, as Aristotle hinted, then let's be sure to do it right.

For now, however, it's easy to see the benefits for all involved if firms start waiting a little before dismissing employees under public pressure.

COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: COVID-19 Infections in U.S. Are About 10 Times Greater Than Reported Cases, Says Study

Veronique de Rugy is a contributing editor at Reason. She is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Cancel CultureEconomicsFree Speech
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (72)

Latest

Mothers Are Losing Custody Over Sketchy Drug Tests

Emma Camp | From the June 2025 issue

Should the
Civilization Video Games Be Fun—or Real?

Jason Russell | From the June 2025 issue

Government Argues It's Too Much To Ask the FBI To Check the Address Before Blowing Up a Home

Billy Binion | 5.9.2025 5:01 PM

The U.K. Trade Deal Screws American Consumers

Eric Boehm | 5.9.2025 4:05 PM

A New Survey Suggests Illicit Opioid Use Is Much More Common Than the Government's Numbers Indicate

Jacob Sullum | 5.9.2025 3:50 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!