- Question
The Harper's Letter: How are people split?
On 7 July 2020, Harper's Magazine published a letter signed by 153 prominent artists, writers and intellectuals including J.K.Rowling, Noam Chomsky and Margaret Atwood. Titled "A Letter on Justice and Open Debate" the signatories warned against the "intolerant climate" crushing free speech. They alleged that the rise of "cancel culture" whereby public figures are called out and boycotted for controversial views, was an assault on free speech. Others see their complaints as ironic, pointing to their elite status and use of a global platform to complain about being silenced. So, what do the two camps believe?
The Signatories
153 notable signatories from across the political and ideological spectrum, including many academics and authors, claim cancel culture is eroding our freedoms, curtails free speech and is bad for democracy.
The Antis
This position maps the 'anti' camp's response to the Harper's Letter on open debate. It catalogues the critics' arguments: that prominent signatories complaining of being silenced is ironic, that the letter is tone-deaf and entitled, and that it shields the powerful from criticism.
The Divide
This position characterises the divide over the Harper's Letter as two sides talking past each other. It argues one camp focuses on the quality and principle of open debate, while the other concentrates on the letter's actual content and the people who signed it.