I don't see a big deal with either of those links you post. In the first case, Pinker has such a pattern of problematic behaviour (
the first example is literally him misrepresenting research that contradicts the report's own conclusion in order to downplay racism as a factor in police brutality) that is documented there that it's hard to defend him and easy to see why he is fostering animosity against his position. It is not a petition for him to be sacked but for LSA to remove him 'from both
our list of distinguished academic fellows and
our list of media experts'. Is that 'cancelling' or is that not just asking one institution to clarify how its values align with an individual and if it is happy to continue to associate itself with his work? Pinker would be free to carry on in life operating exactly as he has done irrespective of LSA's decision.
Likewise, the second article is literally just a fringe petition on Change.org with 8,000 signatures asking for an award to no longer be named after a man who passed away in 1962. Is that 'cancelling' him? Can you even 'cancel' a man who has been dead for 58 years? Is this really the powerful ultra-left cancel culture scything down anyone who dares not align to its morally unimpeachable standards - or is it not just about 0.001% or whatever of a population spending about 30 seconds of their time to click a few things online and request an award be named after a deceased person of their choice. I think even the tabloid press would struggle to whip up an outrage about this one.
This is just Pinker's career.
The Blank Slate is probably one of the worst books ever written, because of all the contemporary people he rails at for being blank slatists, none of them are. They don't exist. He called John Watson and B.F. Skinner blank slatists, that's so stupid that he just has to be lying, it's almost impressive how he gets away with it.
You didn't mention if, but from the petition the way he tried to whitewash Bernhard Goetz is probably the most disgusting example of all the times he downplays racism. Maybe not the most consequential one, since it's just a single case instead of racism generally, but it's just so visceral and blatant.
And to just make fun of Pinker a bit. Cancel culture happens online, so is there any issues with it? That is, after all, how Pinker defended Epstein when he was accused of soliciting a minor. Sure, he might not have known that it was
Epstein, but he knew that he was defending a child rapist when he helped his friend Alan Dershowitz who is credibly accused of the same crime. When lawyers defend horrible people to the best of their ability, even if that includes doing disgusting things, the rationale is that lawyers have a duty to do so because of ideals and justice. Linguists have no such duty, Pinker did this because he wanted to.
Or, maybe we could tell Pinker that cancel culture is like sexual harassment, that way he
won't care.
In any case, I hope millionaire Harvard professor and best selling author Steven Pinker will survive the horrible consequences of cancel culture, which might possibly get him removed from a list nobody had even heard of a week ago. Truly a pressing issue of our time.
If this is cancel culture, what is the reaction, outrage porn?