6 thoughts on “Vox Popoli: Mailvox: dealing with SJWs

  1. “Social justice warrior (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, and multiculturalism, as well as identity politics.”

    So what do you call someone who is not for empowering women, is against civil rights and want only white Christians in a nation packed with different cultures, ethnicities, religions and politics.

    A social injustice warrior?

    I think the reason SJW is evolving to being pejorative to some, conservatives mainly, is just a concerted effort by the right to belittle those who think differently about some injustices in America.

    Would fervent anti-choice protestors not be SJW’s. How about white nationalists or supremacists? Or gun rights advocates?

    Of course the original SJW was generally applied to progressives. But that does not make the examples I just gave any less annoying.

    Remember SJW’s gave us Civil Rights and the beginning of the end of 2nd class citizenship for minorities enforced by law and terror. They exposed the support for dictators in Central America. They exposed the lies that cost Americans 60,000 American lives in two wars along with millions of civilians. They are exposing wrongful convictions for long terms and death penalties, often based on race. They let women become doctors, engineers and lawyers, not just nurses and teachers. And they continue to poke our national conscience about many other things that we may not want to hear, but can’t be stuffed back in the closet anymore. Catholic Church is a great example.

    All these changes did not come about because of obscure essays in erudite journals. They happened because people took risks, were annoying and obnoxious, were persistent to the point of obsession. And they got results that few people will say are bad. Oh, and some were murdered for their efforts.

    You know what I think the “disease”, as you called it, is? The inability to compromise on issues anymore due to hard line stances, often on both sides, but it did start with the Tea Party and the Freedom Caucus. Both were damned if they were going to give Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, any kind of cooperation, or compromise, just because.

    IMHO

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: “Social justice warrior (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, and multiculturalism, as well as identity politics.”

      A much deserved pejorative, in my view, since the very concept of social justice is repugnant.

      Justice by itself is desirable. Social justice is a lynch mob.

      Like

    1. Not semantics.

      “Justice for all,” defined as all people live in a “just” or “fair” society is a practical and philosophical impossibility.

      They used to teach this in civics classes, where it was explained that “justice for all” in the Pledge only refers to equal access to the formal systems where grievances are addressed. The distinction between access and outcomes is profoundly significant.

      Like

      1. If Justice for all is an impossibility, who is justice for?

        You are beating up a straw man. Nobody who is serious believes that “justice” or “fairness” demands equal outcomes. People have different abilities, different work ethics, different interpersonal skills, different luck, etc. That is a simple fact of life that any just and fair system must recognize.

        That anyone is demanding equal outcomes is just one more plutocrat lie for the clueless.

        Like

        1. RE: “Nobody who is serious believes that ‘justice’ or ‘fairness’ demands equal outcomes.”

          That’s what I said. Where is the straw man?

          To answer your question, “If Justice for all is an impossibility, who is justice for?” It is for everybody, even if it cannot be achieved. The closest we can come is equal access to well-conceived formal systems where grievances are addressed. Since the question of specific outcomes is irrelevant to this point, I raised it only as a counterpoint to access.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s