Today’s P.C. police have taken on a public mantle, and political correctness has taken on a new persona. These passionate people claim to represent the social conscience of our times, but are they taking things too far?
In this post, we’ll explore the rise of the social justice warrior, and whether they are hurting the causes that they claim to support.
The Birth of Modern Social Justice Warriors
The term “social justice warrior” was first coined in 2015. There have always been people willing to fight injustice within a society, though.
Slavery ended thanks to activists. The civil rights movement is another pertinent example. More recently, the LBQT and transgender campaigns for equal rights have topped the agenda.
Social justice warriors may only have taken on the title recently, but these types of people have embraced the same principles for equality for millennia. The modern movement has embraced the concept of #SocJus—the shareable idea that nobody in society should feel marginalized.
SJWs (social justice warriors) are outspoken, ensuring that no rights are trampled for the voiceless minorities. The conflict arises where others feel that these types of comments have obliterated the right to free speech entirely.
Are Today’s Fighters Taking Things A Little Too Far?
Opponents claim that SJWs, in their rush for equality, are at risk of marginalizing those that they see as privileged. They have taken things too far.
An SJW’s purpose today is to shine a light on injustice. With the #MeToo movement of 2017, it exposed the battles women face in a male-dominated society. The movement was a timely message, but some believe it was diluted by the actions of a few SJWs.
Pictures of men with their legs spread out on subways were shown as evidence of men dominating woman. The action is inconsiderate, but is it anti-feminist?
A more recent development on the social justice front is the #BlackLivesMatter movement. SJWs have blasted those who raised the issue of black-on-black violence as racially insensitive, for example.
Black-on-black violence isn’t the reason behind the BLM movement. Rather, the fight focusses on systemic (and institutional) racism that allowed a white police officer to use excessive force against George Floyd and feel justified by his actions in the moment.
Still, we have to ask ourselves, “Does a black murder only matter if it’s a white person committing the crime?” Some even argue that institutional racism is a primary cause of black-on-black violence.
By making it politically incorrect to discuss the issue, SJWs could be ignoring one of the symptoms of the systemic racism they are trying to oust.
What’s The Harm?
The harm of being so openly hostile is that these warriors risk losing the support of parties they need to win over. Berating those who are at fault puts them on the defensive and limits the discourse. The risk to SJWs is that these targeted groups miss the message completely and stop listening.
Instead of real change, potential proponents might pay lip service to the cause. Racism and anti-feminism are as much mindsets as deeds. By stifling free speech, we run the risk of these behaviors becoming more subtle, or even taboo.
It’s like telling your teen they’re not allowed to drink or play on Goldenslot. They’ll find a way around the rules, but you won’t know until it’s too late.
The danger is the society we create—one that is politically correct only on the surface. Institutionally, it will become even harder to stamp out those flaws.