What I meant is, he takes "cancel culture" as self-evident fact, when it's obviously a pretty overloaded term by now (like "fascist"). How could you make cancel culture a topic without specifying exactly what you are criticizing (god forbid even avoid the term altogether...)? That's why Lex is polemic there and not contributing anything really. There is also never even a pro forma attempt at emphasizing with the motivations for cancel-culturing. I mean, if you cannot understand incentives, of course the means feel inappropriate. Sure as hell, there are legit motivations for "cancel culture", but now there are too many cooks involved.

Like, how could you sympathize with spaceflight research spending without talking about possible destinations and why you wanna go to space? Spaceflight, like cancel culture, doesn't happen in a vacuum.