It can be difficult to communicate (particularly in writing) with someone that you don't know and already have some base of understanding with. But, you also have to take responsibility for being clear about what you are trying to say. For example, when you said, "On the other hand, MLK's murder is a prime example - you could say the pinnacle example - of cancel culture." that is to me quite obviously conflating murderous white supremacists with modern day activists. If that isn't what you meant, then you really ought to be more careful and precise with your words. I can only take my impression of you from what you actually say - not what you meant which has not been expressed.

I'm all for a culture of better conversations, and better attempts to actual understand one another, but one has to also take into account the context. For hundreds of years there have been active attempts to silence and marginalize certain voices, and to minimize and misunderstand their struggles, and this continues to a large extent to this day. It is perhaps therefore incumbent on those with historically more social power to be doing the bulk of the listening and trying to actually understand. Whether we would prefer it this way or not, the fact remains that those with power never seem to give it up or share it willingly. It has to be fought for and demanded. So, in the face of that, those with historically more social power need to be the ones leading the way in creating a more civil, more collaborative culture - because they are overwhelmingly the main impediment to that taking place. As I pointed out to the Penguin, cancel culture wouldn't be necessary if people were being listened to and their needs respected.