SJW - What would be a good literal name for them?

Post Reply New Topic

So it's up to the rest of us to use it properly. Along with the rest of the words that have been stripped of their meaning.

This may be a little off-topic, but I need to share my personal experience:

Last year, when I was homeless, a piece of sh!t on FB decided to berate me about my "privilege". Knowing full well that I was unemployed, homeless, and struggling with mental illness; he took it upon himself to inform me that because I happen to be a straight white male, that means none of my struggles are legitimate and that any troubles I am experiencing are my own fault for being lazy because I have all the advantages.

This type of scum couldn't care less about the plights of minorities; to them, the social justice platform is just a means to bolster their narcissistic egos. Their strategy is to target unfortunate and struggling individuals, who do not fall into any of the minority categories they acknowledge according to narrow criteria of their choosing. They bully these individuals by proclaiming them unworthy of sympathy due to their "privileged status" in order to trigger them, so they can accuse them of racism/misogyny/homophobia/etc whenever they speak to defend their positions, and then dogpile them with like-minded @$$holes. All so that they, in the end, can pat themselves on the back and congratulate themselves for being such great ****ing heroes. It's deplorable!

I recall that just a few short weeks prior to this incident, the same worthless piece of trash posted a meme that was a faux dictionary entry for the word "liberal", championing himself as some kind of champion of the downtrodden. No calls to action. Nothing that spreads awareness of any important social or political issues. No subtlety whatsoever. Just pure narcissistic virtue signaling. Look at what a great ****ing hero I am!

Also of note: this @$$wipe was my roommate for a year in college. He had ample opportunities to talk his sh!t to my face. But of course he never did then. It was years later, once he was in another state thousands of miles away, that he became bold on social media. You see, that another fact about these scumbags: they never will attack unless they're certain they're in a position which makes them perfectly safe from any retaliation. They only employ their bigotry in online forums and social media, where they can remain safely miles away from their victims and/or hidden behind the anonymity of a screenname; or only in public forums in which they can guarantee their control and superior numbers. They will never allow their opponents to face them on an equal ground. Based on this, I'd like to purpose my suggestion for the thread's titular request: F***ing Cowards!

Perhaps the worst damage of all is suffered by all the true social activists in the world: the waste of the vast amounts of time, energy, and resources they now have to spend simply to convince their audiences that their messages are not just more of the same SJW bullsh!t everyone is fed the **** up with.

The strange thing is, I think whites vs minorities has replaced upper class vs lower class.

It should be obvious that the wealthy are privileged above the poor. Many of the disadvantages that minorities are more likely to face could be due to poverty. For example if you have a town in which most of the black people are poor and most of the poor people are black, that would mean that most of the black people can't afford to go to college. It would also mean that 100% of the poor people can't afford to go college.

So let's say that people observe that blacks are underrepresented in the town college, because most of them can't afford to go. So they give scholarships to all the black kids. This would only solve part of the problem, if a small fraction of the town's poor are white and a small fraction of the town's rich are black.

It would mean that Cletus the white trash yokel wouldn't qualify even though he's poor and it would mean that Jaden Smith would qualify even though he's from a family of millionaires.

On the other hand, if you gave people financial assistance based on their wealth (or lack thereof), it would solve the problem more thoroughly.

I think that the largest and most marginalised group in the world are poor people. Not only do they suffer from poverty but they also get blamed for everything. It's socially acceptable to blame economic problems on the poor (even though it would be more sensible to blame economic problems on the people controlling the money).

I notice that intersectional feminists, who talk about marginalised people on the intersection of being black, female, gay, trans, muslim, etc seldom bring the lower class as a marginalised group that might be on the intersection of these other groups. They usually bring up poverty as a symptom of problems rather than a cause of problems.

I'm not blaming the lower class for being poor, I'm saying they need help just as much as any other marginalised group.

And SJWs have failed. When they talk about the number of professional women vs professional men who get promoted to CEO, that's of no interest to a woman living in poverty. If they made 50% of women CEOs, that wouldn't help the woman who mops the floors. If a male doctor gets $300,000 per year while a female doctor gets $200,000 per year, that's of no interest to the lady who mops their floors for $15,000 per year.

I'm not saying that it's fair for male doctors to get paid more, I'm saying that helping the cleaning lady who has to feed her kids on instant noodles should have a higher priority than helping the two doctors who both have six digit salaries.

The Alt-Left.

Last edited by CockneyRebel on 29 Oct 2018, 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That's a relief.

Perfect!

Virtue signallers...
Simples...

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll make it fit. It's not like you are beholden to reason or facts or anything. The Nazis also called Jews the agents of Communism and used that meme to attack them.

History.

But you agree there isn't just one alternative?
It is not "binary"...

That may well work better to get the conversation started for the uninitiated than SJW.

A good name has been found for at least one of them. He has been honorably dubbed "Cuck Norris." A great thing that tells you a great deal about his philosophy is that "I was trying to kick your phone" is his immediate defense as if that is acceptable either.

https://youtu.be/z7SqtIe5rZQ

Work on that as you hand out the brown shirts.

Don't you see I'm on you side? I was arguing against SJW being a Jewish conspiracy, not for it.

How many of you have actually read Marx?

This thread seems like it's about being angry at people you haven't met, due to the content of news articles which label whole groups of people.

How about "social justice fanatics," then?

My issue is with the word "warrior," which is being used metaphorically and has a variety of different metaphorical meanings with either positive or negative connotations, depending on the context and depending on who is using the term.


That's really convoluted, IMO. Two layers of metaphor, likely to cause even more misunderstandings.

Regarding my other, older examples of identity politics, you wrote:


Or just attain equality, with tensions calming down once equality was attained, has happened for the most part with the Irish and with Catholics from Europe generally.

Anyhow, there were alliances, not just single groups. Jewish groups formed alliances both with Catholic groups and with black civil rights groups with the aim of attaining equal rights for all.


Hmmm, not sure where you get the idea that they "rank" all these groups into a single linear "stack." The point is to try to create an alliance of people from many different, intersecting disadvantaged groups.


How does knowing about fanatics not help you deal with them? Of course, when arguing with ANY kind of fanatic, it helps to know a bit about their ideology too, in both its extreme and more moderate versions.


WHAT helps the radicals gather and organize? Not sure what you're referring to here.


An example of a kind of change that many right-wingers complain about is changes to language. This kind of thing had been done successfully before, and I think it's fine as long as it's not done in a disproportionately heavy-handed way.

With friends like you, who needs enemies?