@Haraldson

I agree it resembles partisan warfare, and as is the case in conflict, each side is still responsible for their behavior. Both belligerents aren't equally good or bad because they're engaged in battle, that judgement should be made according to their actions.

You make a valid and important point. But having said that, I don't see any fundamental difference in cancelling someone because they objected to the invasion of Iraq versus cancelling someone because they owned a replica of the General Lee. Even if you personally agree with one and disagree with the other, the act of trying to tear someone down for their beliefs is as un-American principle as I know of.

Again, I'm fine with voting with your wallet; it's one thing to say, "I'm not going to support this person or this company financially because their business practices or core values are anathema to mine."

It's another thing entirely to actively move to destroy a company or a person's career because of an opinion. Because when you do that, you're essentially saying to the world, "I want to abrogate your right to hear what this person or this company has to say because I object to it and I consider my objections to have more weight that your rights." Anyone who decides on my behalf what I should be allowed to see or hear or be exposed to because their principles are offended are - to me - an authoritarian.

I'm not sure I understand you entirely, and from here I may unintentionally veer off your track as a result.

No worries; let me rephrase.

I am not against disagreement; we're always going to disagree as a free people. But what I perceive is happening here is partisan warfare that - for most people - isn't even based on ideological belief as much as it is sheer pettiness.

Take the 2020 Presidential election: what were the core ideological issues? Did we even have any? Because I don't remember any hot button ideological issues getting discussed for more than a cup of coffee. What I do remember the key issue being is Trump is a great leader vs Orange Man Bad.

Biden? He barely left his basement. More votes than any candidate in history and no one knew until the debates what his "platform" was even about. I think the majority of people who voted Biden weren't voting for him as much as they were against Trump.

And why is that? Did the people who voted Biden not experience a couple years of excellent economic growth and low unemployment like everyone else? Why would they vote against that, ESPECIALLY to vote in a Washington-lifer that was clearly in cognitive decline? And enough people wanted that SO BADLY that multiple states violated their own constitutions to help grease the wheels.

Why? Because Orange Man Bad. Even though he gave America several good years, Orange Man hadt to go because he was the leader OF THE OTHER SIDE.

So now we have a new President, wide-open borders, a return of critical race theory, a return to military action in the Middle East, lost jobs in the energy and manufacturing sector, continued riots, et al and a whole lot of people with confused faces asking, "wait, things were supposed to get better; what happened?"

You observe that people must be held to account for what they voted for, and I agree that when you're voting for an ideology, that's absolutely true. But the voting public in the U.S has gotten to be so low-information they might as well be voting on America's Got Talent, for all the critical thought they put into who or what they are voting for. They were told that Orange Man was bad, spent zero time assessing that information, and voted to get him out, even if that was against their own interests.

And this is what's tearing our country apart and making us vulnerable to countries like China and Russia.

Anyway, hope that helps.