Yes, if not abused. I think that there is way too much of an ideological orthodoxy that happens anywhere progressives get their hands on. However, it is dually true that wrongdoings do call for the offenders to be held accountable. The objective for our society is to balance the amount of cancel culture so true offenders do get punished and others do not.

In the end it is not “Twitter” that cancels someone. It is either a company that, say, fires a journalist or a political party does not continue to support a member. These institutions make mostly a rational business or political decision whether that person is still beneficial to them or not. On other words, if the transgression is serious enough, they will proceed to ‘cancel’, it not they won’t. So online discourse about people’s behavior is a net positive

Yes, if the reason for the ‘cancellation’ is serious. Harvey Weinstein should absolutely be cancelled, but Dave Chapelle should not

The goal of "cancel culture" is to hold people accountable so that they can learn from their mistakes and grow as a person. Granted, sometimes it has gone off the rails (ex death threats) but if no one ever pointed out something was wrong, nobody would ever learn. Also, it can be argued that celebrities and social media stars should be held to a higher standard in regards to their behavior because they have a fanbase that looks up to them and learns from them.