Every generation has its "free-speech advocates" moaning, "you can’t say anything anymore." The current panics: political correctness, cancel culture, jokes under siege, has the usual suspects asking, "What will the free-speech crowd say about this one?"
This is a perfect example of Bourdieu's idea of symbolic violence and the violence of the arbitrary.
The uncomfortable truth is, for many the thrill isn't in enforcing fair rules, or even unfair ones. The thrill is in the power to enforce arbitrary rules. The point isn't who gets punished, it's that someone can be, at a moment's notice, for no coherent reason. And the joy is in unpredictability, in knowing they can shift the rules under your feet and there's no one appeal to.
This is the logic sitting beneath every hand-wringing editorial and rage-bait thread about "cancel culture run amok." The goal is sovereignty, not consistency. It's about who gets to draw the lines and when they can redraw them. Arbitrary enforcement isn't a bug. It’s the feature.
The clever "gotcha" crowd falls flat when they imagine that, by exposing contradictions, they'll force a confession, a moment of logic, an admission, and surrender. But that moment never comes. When the point is arbitrariness, contradiction isn't a failure. It's the currency of power. Pointing it out only proves you're not the one with power.
What will the "PC culture" critics say? Probably what they’ve always said. Remember, it's not about the arguments. It's about who gets to arbitrate, who gets to punish, and who gets to laugh last.
It always has been.