In American culture, a movement has emerged that has since spread throughout the Western world (as often happens), commonly referred to as "Woke" or, more critically, as "cancel culture."

Throughout history, certain fundamental principles of cultures have been surpassed and erased. Our generation (speaking of the older among us) has erased millennia-old and universal principles, cutting away an entire world to create modernity. Cancel culture, on the other hand, seeks to erase even the memory of the past. When statues of Columbus are torn down or Snow White is presented as a feminist, modern views replace those of the past. Now, none of us think of acting like the conquistadors or that a woman should only be a housewife like Snow White, but we must be aware that such things happened and were accepted in the past. We cannot interpret the past with modern principles in the same way we cannot interpret modernity with the principles of the past.

With cancel culture, our culture and our principles become the only, the right, the self-evident. But historical awareness warns us that this is an unfounded claim, born mainly out of historical ignorance: other solutions, other principles are possible, as happened in the past and will happen in the future, and some ideas that are now considered outdated can become relevant again in the future.

All history is the continuous change of the material and spiritual aspects of existence. Sometimes changes are very slow, sometimes very rapid and chaotic, but this does not mean that previous culture is ignored as if it never existed. For example, Christianity does not properly erase (it is never possible) the previous pagan culture, but it modifies it substantially and then over centuries very slowly re-evaluates and reinterprets it until the exaltation of humanism. Cancel culture, however, is the attempt to erase history, to disavow previous culture. The fact that some trends are new does not mean they are right and that society must accept them, and people who for cultural (political, religious, ethical) reasons are at odds with the currently dominant culture should not be marginalized.

We must not confuse the two planes: the merit of the issue is freedom of thought. I (hypothetically), a 21st-century man, do not consider homosexuality a crime, but until 50 years ago (let's say) it was almost universally considered a crime: the former is an opinion that can be debated, the latter is a fact that cannot be doubted (or erased). I (still hypothetically) may be in favor of gay marriage and perhaps against the ostentation of gay pride, but I must accept that others are free to express themselves, both those who are against gay marriage and those who are in favor of gay pride. Let's also bear in mind that in our society there are cultural differences: there are gay pride events and Family day with everything in between. Contrary to what some circles claim, there is perhaps not yet a majority in favor of gay marriage and widespread intolerance for gay pride still exists. It could then happen that a minority would impose itself on the majority in a democracy.

Those who oppose the woke mentality would like even opinions contrary to those considered superior to be expressed: no one thinks that those who consider homosexuality normal cannot say so, but they would like it to be possible to argue the opposite. This is the point. Once there was an index of forbidden books, but it was in line with the culture of those times. If, as is happening today, laws establish that it is a crime to claim that homosexuality is a dangerous vice, it is as if that index were reintroduced, but this time in contrast with the now almost universal culture in the West of democracy, whose basis is precisely freedom of thought without which democracy does not exist.

We must also consider that the sense of history and the plurality of points of view is a modern acquisition. Still, in the 1500s, the most important ancient Christian basilica, a thousand years old, was destroyed to build the current St. Peter's Basilica: it is as if we commissioned Renzo Piano to demolish St. Peter's and build a modern church on top of it. Especially in the past, it was said that truth should triumph and falsehood disappear, assuming it was possible to identify one from the other. Modernly, however, we think of democracy in which everyone can express their opinion as the highest form of civilization. All this means that cancel culture is in contrast with modernity.

To exemplify, we have referred mainly to issues of homosexuality (and related topics), but cancel culture affects all aspects of life, from colonialism to slavery to military conquests to pacifism to every form of racism and, particularly, the role of women. Let's recall the example of Snow White, now emblematic of cancel culture. In the ancient fairy tale, Snow White is a white girl who dedicates herself to the home and awaits great and eternal love according to the model of women of her time. If she is represented as black, leading a cavalry charge (as I saw in a film), history is falsified, it is erased because the model presented in the fairy tale is that the woman takes care of the family (cooks and cleans) and the man takes care of the rest and defends her (the prince carries the sword and rides a horse). Similarly, the prince kissing Snow White awakens her, that is, the man, by taking her, transforms the girl into a woman. Modernly, instead, the equality of roles is invoked: the dwarfs can cook and clean, and Snow White can lead the cavalry. Thus, the prince kissing Snow White is a sexual harasser because he did not ask permission: in short, he would end up in jail. Now, the problem is that this fairy tale is from ancient times and respects the models of ancient times: when we represent it according to modern models, we make a historical falsehood, like depicting Napoleon riding a motorcycle.

In conclusion, the essential problem, we repeat, is that in this way we end up considering our models as the only ones and the right ones, and therefore we consider them eternal and immutable: and thus to be imposed on everyone, and those who do not share them are evil and/or foolish and/or barbaric. But this is an unsustainable claim; they are not eternal and immutable, nor even universal, as the current majority of humanity does not share them.