A very slippery slope

this is not the first time the topic of cancel culture has been raised on thepeose.com, but i think it's a good issue, worth returning to.

so, do we keep and enjoy the works of art , that are made by people who commited some crime or expressed views that are repugnant to us.

just remember before we start, that many of the greatest artists, musicians, writers and poets, had a massive dark side to their personality, a side that drove some of their work to some extent, but also caused them to be terrible people..

so..bullet points, i know everyone is busy...

- what if it turns out that by cutting out all those masterpieces, we'll be left with very little that is meaningful?

- what severity of crime deserves the entire body of work of the artist to be expunged?

-is it possible, that this is going to be used as a tool of repression?

-is it possible that we could tolarate views that we feel repulsion to? how abput abnoxious behavior?

-if a crime is comitted, isn't it the role of the justice system to meet out ....emm...justice?

-what shall be done with the person thst still insists on using or appreciating the product of the offender? are they to be punished and viewed as ideologically sympathetic to the offender? (example: do people who listen to Vagner, to be viewed as antisemites or even nazis?) will we need to 'cancel ' them?

-can a normative sanction turn into violance?

-some values change over time. is it possible that at some point in the future, values that we hold , are viewed as repulsive and cause us to be canceled?

in other words, isn't normalizing mass expungment of expression a dangerous precedent?

as you can see , i am very hostile to the idea of cancel culture. many of my favorite artists were TERRIBLE people with horrible behavior and world views. some haveveven committed crimes. i just fear a day where i won't be able to enjoy their work because of that. the world is should not be built only on the positive acts of positive people.