In recent years, performative activism and cancel culture have become dominant forces in social and political discourse, particularly in countries like Brazil. While these movements claim to advocate for justice and diversity, they often lead to serious consequences that undermine free speech, democracy, and even legal certainty.
One of the main issues with performative activism—or “lacração” as it is commonly referred to in Brazil—is its tendency to prioritize emotional outrage over rational debate. Instead of engaging in meaningful discussions, many individuals and organizations opt for superficial gestures, where public displays of indignation take precedence over real solutions. This phenomenon creates a hostile environment where dissenting opinions are not only discouraged but actively punished.
Cancel culture exacerbates this problem by enforcing a rigid ideological conformity. Those who express differing viewpoints, even in a respectful manner, risk facing severe social and professional consequences. The fear of being “canceled” leads to widespread self-censorship, discouraging honest discourse and the exchange of ideas. In a democratic society, the ability to debate and challenge prevailing narratives is essential for progress, yet cancel culture stifles this fundamental right.
In Brazil, where political polarization is already extreme, cancel culture and performative activism contribute to an increasingly toxic climate. The so-called “mimimi” (excessive sensitivity and complaints) has made it difficult for people to engage in honest conversations without the risk of being labeled intolerant or hateful. Instead of fostering open dialogue, these movements create echo chambers where only one perspective is deemed acceptable.
Another alarming aspect of this trend is the hypocrisy of many large corporations that publicly embrace performative activism merely as a marketing strategy. Many companies fear the backlash of cancel culture and adopt progressive slogans, not out of genuine concern, but to protect their bottom line. However, a growing number of businesses are beginning to abandon the so-called “woke” agenda as they realize it alienates customers and damages their reputation. Companies such as Disney and Anheuser-Busch, which faced significant consumer pushback for their highly politicized campaigns, have been gradually shifting their strategies to avoid further financial losses.
In Brazil, a similar shift can be observed. Some major brands, once heavily invested in progressive marketing, have toned down their messaging in response to public dissatisfaction. Retail giants and food chains have faced backlash for aligning too closely with controversial social issues, prompting them to rethink their approach. Companies that once publicly embraced activism are now quietly distancing themselves to maintain broader consumer appeal. This demonstrates that performative activism is not only insincere but also unsustainable in the long run.
Equally concerning is the role of biased media outlets and so-called journalists who act more like activists than neutral reporters. Many mainstream media organizations no longer prioritize factual reporting but instead push ideological narratives, using their platforms to attack dissenters and reinforce cancel culture. By disguising activism as journalism, they manipulate public perception and contribute to the suppression of alternative viewpoints. Instead of informing the public with balanced perspectives, these media figures engage in selective outrage, targeting individuals and businesses that do not conform to their ideological stance. This lack of journalistic integrity erodes trust in the media and further polarizes society.
Perhaps even more concerning is the impact of this ideological rigidity on legal certainty. In an environment where subjective offense dictates legal consequences, the principle of free expression becomes fragile. Brazil already struggles with inconsistent judicial decisions, and the rise of cancel culture only worsens this issue. When laws are weaponized to silence individuals who do not conform to a specific ideology, good citizens face unjust persecution simply for voicing their opinions.
A healthy democracy thrives on diversity of thought and the ability to question prevailing narratives without fear of social or legal repercussions. However, performative activism and cancel culture have turned ideological purity into a form of social capital, where those who challenge the dominant discourse are punished rather than heard. If Brazil—and the world—truly values freedom and progress, it must move beyond performative outrage and embrace genuine, open discussions that respect differing perspectives.