Recently Michael Wilbon, sports journalist, caused a stir with his reaction to Bruce Pearl stepping down as Auburn's basketball head coach. Wilbon said he was glad and he hoped the school pressured him to leave. Why did Wilbon say this? Because Pearl became more vocal about his conservative Christian beliefs. Wilbon called that divisive.
This response caused some more conservative sport reporters to challenge Wilbon's take. They claim that Wilbon isn't saying keep politics out of sport, as he constantly cheers for pushed liberal politics.
I've seen a great many leftist respond calling the right leaning reporters hypocritical for cheering on Pearl's positions, while saying keep politics out of sports. This seems like a tactic of the left. Shift the Overton sharply to the left, the right responds can't we leave politics out of things, they are mocked and accussed of privilege. Eventually some righty will push back a little and the left will cry, see you said keep politics out of things but hear you are supporting politics.
And it usually works.
The Distributist said something similar on his last livestream, on the subject of the accusations of hypocrisy over the cancellations. Something like "When the left wins, they get cancel culture, but when the right is in control, we're supposed to get nothing?" I think it's a useful way to frame it, focusing on the consequences rather than the dishonest accusations of hypocrisy.
Besides, it's not hypocrisy to hit bullies back.
Leftists are mad that the right is “weaponizing” Charlie Kirk’s assassination in order to advance the right wing agenda. Apparently, when one of our most effective people is murdered by them in cold blood, we’re not supposed to benefit from it in any way. It’s supposed to be an utter defeat and total loss on our part. Anything more than that is “gross”.
There was a leftist college student who gave away the game on video during an informal debate. She said that her greatest fear was that people would react “incorrectly” to Charlie’s murder by promoting his beliefs. She was admitting that she thinks his beliefs should have been defeated by his assassination. This is nothing short of a full-throated endorsement of political violence with maybe 1-2 extra steps.
They can't seem to grasp that using cancelation against them is the peaceful option and there are only 2 options at the moment