The Pecking Disorder: Social Justice Warriors Gone Wild

[jeffk]

Good article on what is wrong with the social justice movement:
The Pecking Disorder: Social Justice Warriors Gone Wild

A couple of good points:

At the core of social justice dogma is fixation on identity and “privilege.” Some of this discourse touches on real and clear inequities: for instance, the widespread tendency of police and others to treat African-Americans, especially young and male, as potential lawbreakers. Yet even here, the rhetoric of privilege generates far more heat than light. University of California-Merced sociologist Tanya Bolash-Goza, who accepts the “social justice” left’s view of pervasive structural racism in America, points out that the term “white privilege” turns what should be the norm for all—not being harassed by cops or eyed suspiciously by shop owners—into a special advantage unfairly enjoyed by whites. (Indeed, in its dictionary meaning, “privilege” refers to rights or benefits possessed by the select, not by the majority.) This language speaks not to black betterment but to white guilt.

But generally, the “social justice” left strenuously avoids the issue of socioeconomic background, which, despite upward mobility, is surely the most tangible and entrenched form of actual privilege in modern American society. Rather, the focus is on racial, sexual and cultural identities.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

Good article on what is wrong with the social justice movement.

A couple of good points:

At the core of social justice dogma is fixation on identity and “privilege.” Some of this discourse touches on real and clear inequities: for instance, the widespread tendency of police and others to treat African-Americans, especially young and male, as potential lawbreakers. Yet even here, the rhetoric of privilege generates far more heat than light. University of California-Merced sociologist Tanya Bolash-Goza, who accepts the “social justice” left’s view of pervasive structural racism in America, points out that the term “white privilege” turns what should be the norm for all—not being harassed by cops or eyed suspiciously by shop owners—into a special advantage unfairly enjoyed by whites. (Indeed, in its dictionary meaning, “privilege” refers to rights or benefits possessed by the select, not by the majority.) This language speaks not to black betterment but to white guilt.

But generally, the “social justice” left strenuously avoids the issue of socioeconomic background, which, despite upward mobility, is surely the most tangible and entrenched form of actual privilege in modern American society. Rather, the focus is on racial, sexual and cultural identities.

Did he miss Bernie Sanders, Occupy Wall Street and everyone from Harvard to Warren Buffet talking about the vastly reduced soioeconomic opportunities in America?

 

[Thurisaz]

You probably should link to the article next time.

 

[Harmonica]

"If I were to take a white privilege standpoint, that would mean that I should feel guilty when the clerk does not assume I am a thief. The white privilege standpoint does not get me very far. It allows me to see my privilege, but does not make it clear what the next step is. If I see a store clerk following a black man, as a white ally, I should ask her why she is following the black man and not me. Ok. I can do that. But, how far does that get us?"

If you are true to your ideals, your next logical step in eradicating white privilege and restoring justice and equality would be to start stealing whenever possible and encourage other social justice warriors to do the same. That way, you will have store clerks following white people all over the country in no time. Privilege checked - mission accomplished!

 

[Madmick]

You probably should link to the article next time.

FFS, man, you're a 2006 account.

 

[Thurisaz]

FFS, man, you're a 2006 account.

And actually even older!

Still, a link is convenient in a way lack of it isn't.

 

[Madmick]

And actually even older!

Still, a link is convenient in a way lack of it isn't.

Did you try clicking the only text in the OP that is hyperlinked?

 

[in the]

To get to the heart of the matter:
https://spacrs.wordpress.com/what-is-critical-race-theory/

Critical Race Theory was developed out of legal scholarship. It provides a critical analysis of race and racism from a legal point of view. Since its inception within legal scholarship CRT has spread to many disciplines. CRT has basic tenets that guide its framework. These tenets are interdisciplinary and can be approached from different branches of learning.

CRT recognizes that racism is engrained in the fabric and system of the American society. The individual racist need not exist to note that institutional racism is pervasive in the dominant culture. This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures. CRT identifies that these power structures are based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of people of color. CRT also rejects the traditions of liberalism and meritocracy. Legal discourse says that the law is neutral and colorblind, however, CRT challenges this legal “truth” by examining liberalism and meritocracy as a vehicle for self-interest, power, and privilege. CRT also recognizes that liberalism and meritocracy are often stories heard from those with wealth, power, and privilege. These stories paint a false picture of meritocracy; everyone who works hard can attain wealth, power, and privilege while ignoring the systemic inequalities that institutional racism provides.

Intersectionality within CRT points to the multidimensionality of oppressions and recognizes that race alone cannot account for disempowerment. “Intersectionality means the examination of race, sex, class, national origin, and sexual orientation, and how their combination plays out in various settings.”[1] This is an important tenet in pointing out that CRT is critical of the many oppressions facing people of color and does not allow for a one–dimensional approach of the complexities of our world.

Narratives or counterstories, as mentioned before, contribute to the centrality of the experiences of people of color. These stories challenge the story of white supremacy and continue to give a voice to those that have been silenced by white supremacy.[2] Counterstories take their cue from larger cultural traditions of oral histories, cuentos, family histories and parables.[3] This is very important in preserving the history of marginalized groups whose experiences have never been legitimized within the master narrative. It challenges the notion of liberalism and meritocracy as colorblind or “value-neutral” within society while exposing racism as a main thread in the fabric of the American foundation.

Another component to CRT is the commitment to Social justice and active role scholars take in working toward “eliminating racial oppression as a broad goal of ending all forms of oppression”. [4] This is the eventual goal of CRT and the work that most CRT scholars pursue as academics and activists.

 

[J. Bernie Cunningham]

Every conservative who hates this SJW shit should join me in never saying sjw again. In calling people who believe in civil rights yet not to a point of lunacy, people. Of not clicking shit inspired by gay conservatives who love to hear themselves speak.

Removes the idea of this being a two way street, having people jump to extremes just so they feel part of a group, and never subjects us to stupid stories from single colleges again.

The only thing as stupid as this shit is people on the other side who find it easier to brand ideas with 3 letters than measure the ideas and beliefs on their own.

 

[Thurisaz]

Did you try clicking the only text in the OP that is hyperlinked?

Yes. It's a completely different article.

 

[panamaican]

The initial article is interesting and it mirrors what @Zankou has said in the past - that what we call "privilege" is a misnomer because it implies an institutional benefit to the majority when what we're really discussing is an institutional detriment to the minority. I think his distinction is accurate but I also understand why the term privilege gained strength.

Of course, I could be paraphrasing him poorly.

 

[Madmick]

Yes. It's a completely different article.

Aha, I see. My apologies.

I found the same article @AmbivalenceKing is reading that discussed the problems with "white allies" and "white privilege" (i.e. SJW's) as well as the police and everything else summarized. I figured the surrounding context was discussion leading into that Merced article as there was no reference to any other article or writer. There is only the title which I presumed the OP had generated himself.

I will fix this.


P.S. FFS, @jeffk, you're a 2007 account.

 

[Thurisaz]

Aha, I see. My apologies.

No worries, it's easy enough to google, seeing as the name is given in full.

 

[IDL]

"If I were to take a white privilege standpoint, that would mean that I should feel guilty when the clerk does not assume I am a thief. The white privilege standpoint does not get me very far. It allows me to see my privilege, but does not make it clear what the next step is. If I see a store clerk following a black man, as a white ally, I should ask her why she is following the black man and not me. Ok. I can do that. But, how far does that get us?"

If you are true to your ideals, your next logical step in eradicating white privilege and restoring justice and equality would be to start stealing whenever possible and encourage other social justice warriors to do the same. That way, you will have store clerks following white people all over the country in no time. Privilege checked - mission accomplished!

And don't forget to only steal from stores with white people working in it, because it only matters if a white person follows a non white person. This is ideological law that sees the world through the lens of white vs. non-white and sets whites up to be the universal oppressor standing in the way of utopia.

If it is a non white person following a non white person, then this is ok because that person isn't privileged, again by ideological law.

 

[Harmonica]

And don't forget to only steal from stores with white people working in it, because it only matters if a white person follows a non white person. This is ideological law that sees the world through the lens of white vs. non-white and sets whites up to be the universal oppressor standing in the way of utopia.

If it is a non white person following a non white person, then this is ok because that person isn't privileged, again by ideological law.

Nice addition to my theory. You and I should get together sometime online and write a tract on it, it's bound to lead to at least one or two spiritual awakenings.

 

[IDL]

Nice addition to my theory. You and I should get together sometime online and write a tract on it, it's bound to lead to at least one or two spiritual awakenings.

Or maybe we could get jobs working in a critical theory department in some university?

We could take it to the next level.

 

[Harmonica]

Or maybe we could get jobs working in a critical theory department in some university?

We could take it to the next level.

While it does sound like an interesting idea, I'm afraid I will have to pass. My looks alone would prevent me from ever becoming a true social justice warrior. There's something about being 6' 3'', 240 pounds of pure muscle and having a mean Western mug that simply screams "micro-aggression". All my efforts would be futile.

 

[Deleted member 502383]

SJW have gone complete mad on twitter attacking the elderly even though more elderly voted to remain. These people need sectioning and I'm not joking.

 

[IDL]

While it does sound like an interesting idea, I'm afraid I will have to pass. My looks alone would prevent me from ever becoming a true social justice warrior. There's something about being 6' 3'', 240 pounds of pure muscle and having a mean Western mug that simply screams "micro-aggression". All my efforts would be futile.

Have you considered identifying as a transracial, transgender, transbody that can only bench teh 135?

 

[jeffk]

Did he miss Bernie Sanders, Occupy Wall Street and everyone from Harvard to Warren Buffet talking about the vastly reduced soioeconomic opportunities in America?

I do not consider warren Buffett part of the social warrior movement. I agree with a lot he does say.

I have thought the occupy movement is an indepdent movement but there may be some overlap.