Two recent letters have inspired me to write this (somewhat more) serious letter about the ascendancy of cancel culture.

I’m in favor of removing the megaphone from those who express racist/sexist/homophobic/etc. views from a public forum. But expecting anyone who disagrees with you to be removed/resign/ or canceled seems to be abridged (sic) too far, in my opinion.

Ideological purity is the speed bump of progress, or as we say in my house, “Perfection is the enemy of pretty good.” I realize that what I’ve just written has lost three-fourths of the people who are reading this and I want to say that I appreciate those of you who want a more nuanced perspective and are still reading. But I digress.

First, the letter from a person who was mad about a column stating that the COVID vaccine alters your DNA. Totally wrong and yet still printed by the Gazette. The person threatened to cancel their subscription should the paper print another “anti-vaccine” opinion. Please don’t. The newspaper is an important institution. There would be no coverage of local government or issues without it. If enough people cancel their subscriptions, the paper will fold and we’ll have nothing.

Is that better then having a paper that sometimes prints things you don’t like? And how would you even know that things are happening that you don’t like if you didn’t read about them in the paper first?

We can also see this trend in national politics in the Democratic anger at Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. Many Democrats want to kick them out of the party for holding up the president’s agenda. I’m mad at them too. But would it be better if we kicked them out and they became Republicans? If the conservatives controlled the Senate, Joe Biden would be sitting alone in the White House because the Republicans wouldn’t have approved any members of his cabinet and Build Back Better wouldn’t stand a snowballs chance in our global warming environment.

Another letter asked the Northampton Arts councilors to resign because of the fumbled arts Biannual. People make mistakes. They’re placed in positions of decision making where pleasing everyone is impossible, but that shouldn’t require their banishment. Most people learn from mistakes and do better next time. But in today’s hyper-polarized political climate, it’s “one strike and you’re out.” And the lesson is that it’s better to do nothing then to take any action that might upset someone/everyone.

Besides if the entire arts council is forced to resign (is it a resignation if it’s forced?) who will step forward, into the line of fire, to make the Biannual happen next time, and won’t the new volunteers be a target just like the former members were? Especially when those most emotionally triggered tend to shoot first and ask questions later. Not to mention their forming the traditional liberal circular firing squad in which everyone gets it.

But I may be stretching this metaphor too thin. Sure it’s easier and safer to stay on the sidelines and criticize those who are civic minded for doing things differently then you would have, if you had stepped forward to volunteer, which you didn’t. So please, cut a volunteer some slack the next time they make decisions differently then you would. Express your opinions but don’t expect or insist that it’s your way or the highway.

The truth is that getting rid of everyone who disagree with them is the one thing that both the Loony-Left and the Ridiculous-Right agree on. But just because both sides do it, doesn’t make it right. After all, if you can get together an angry group of people to get rid of them, can’t they someday get together an angry group to get rid of you? Just saying…

Andy Morris-Friedman lives in Hadley.