Is cancel culture justice or mob rule?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is cancel culture justice or mob rule?". Your opponent's style: George Carlin

Les chats sont des meilleures animaux de compagnie que les chiens

You're claiming cats are objectively superior pets, but you're confusing personal preference for universal truth. Dogs demonstrate loyalty, trainability, and emotional responsiveness that cats simply don't match. Cats are solitary hunters wired for indifference, while dogs evolved alongside humans specifically for cooperation. If superiority means companionship and mutual bonding, dogs win decisively. Your argument works only if you value low-maintenance detachment over genuine connection. So which is it: are you defending cats because they're better pets, or because you prefer pets that don't demand much from you?

Les chat sont affectueux mais garde une certaine indépaendance. Cela est très bien parce que les propriétaires peuvent carresser et jouer avec son chat tout en ne pas avoir besoin de s'inquieter que leur animal sans une depression à cause d'une manque d'affection.

You've just admitted cats are *less* affectionate, then framed that weakness as a strength. That's backwards logic. Dogs don't get depression from needing attention, they get depression from *neglect*, which reveals the real problem: you're defending a pet that tolerates your indifference, not one that thrives with you. Independence isn't a feature, it's a liability disguised as freedom. A dog that needs you isn't clingy, it's bonded. Your argument actually proves dogs are superior companions because they demand genuine engagement. You're not choosing cats for their superiority, you're choosing them because they require less emotional labor. That's honest, but don't call it better.