True Left

This formulation is confusing. Whose property is the soapbox/megaphone? In the case of social media platforms, it belongs to the business which lends it out, hence they can stop lending it to whomever they want whenever they want. But your wording above makes it sound like the speaker owns the soapbox/megaphone.

I must have updated my post just as you posted. Yes, I'm referring primarily to social media. I'll make the rest a little clearer as well.

I understand Cancel Culture to mean taking away the soapbox/megaphone (owned by the business). I'm not sure what you mean by taking away the crowd separate from taking away the soapbox/megaphone. How? By kidnapping them? This just adds more confusion.

In way of a successful boycott campaign on social media primarily, but would also work in real life.

There is a difference between imprisoning or executing them in the middle of their speech so as to prevent them from finishing their speech, and imprisoning/executing them after they have finished their speech as consequences for its content. The former was despised in the ancient world, as it suggests fear of what might be said. The latter is part of statism in the ancient world. The monarch has a duty to hear anyone who wishes to speak; the speaker has a duty to show willingness to die for their cause. In some cases, even when the monarch does not request death but merely is unpersuaded by the speech, the speaker would commit suicide anyway in order to show conviction to their issue they just spoke about. This system thus automatically filters out trolls and other non-serious speakers, a feature that is utterly lacking today, hence leading to:

Excellent point! Had not even considered that and I should have such a long time ago. This also proves that not all people are equal, or could ever be! Great argument against the egalitarianism of social media as well.

On second thought I won't update my first post since your response is so on point.