> People not wanting to patronize or associate with you when you cause harm to people they care about is really not a bad thing, and it's not new either, and yet it is what gets called "cancel culture" by a lot of people.
Although nowadays, soft penalties scale and can be automated. So it feels sensible to explore regulatory frameworks that could rein in the worst excesses.
I'm not saying they don't exist: if I advocate for gay rights, and turns out my employer has a bunch of homophobic customers who get me fired because they don't want to spend money that ends up in my pocket, that would be deeply wrong in my view.
The question is, what does the "regulatory framework" do there? Force those customers to spend money that ends up funding someone that fights for something they see as morally wrong? Force my boss to employ me even though I hurt their business?
The whole point of freedom of speech is the government doesn't get to ban views they don't like. Not supporting someone because of their views surely needs to be as much of a protected view as any other.
> Force my boss to employ me even though I hurt their business?
Well probably the answer would be stronger wrongful termination regulation and then if they fire you for advocating for gay rights then you would probably get paid a reasonable amount of money for the loss you suffered, and your boss would have more of an incentive to think over if they really need to fire you to avoid losses to their business or if they should stand up to the people trying to force their hand.
OK, but then the government is deciding what speech should be allowed without losing your job.
If it's any speech, then do I get to tell people my company sucks and they shouldn't shop there without being fired? What about telling individual customers they don't deserve human rights? That very quickly becomes obviously absurd. So the question becomes "where is the line", and if they government gets to draw that line, then that no longer looks like freedom of speech to me.
Although nowadays, soft penalties scale and can be automated. So it feels sensible to explore regulatory frameworks that could rein in the worst excesses.