What is the “Social Justice” Endgame?

With recent controversy over the objective and means of social progress, I think it’s worth exploring the underlying philosophy of progress itself. As somebody who has trouble making sense of the cultural moment, I’m inviting anybody to ask themselves these questions in forming a clear, consistent vision over how the world ought-to-be.

I do this (which I view as the Socratic Method) with utmost sincerity and respect, because I think they are a prerequisite to any useful discussion.

  1. What constitutes a protected group? Some obvious examples may include: race, gender, and the disabled. But what about low physical attractiveness, low class, religious groups, hair color, neurodiversity, age, and all other categories? On what logical basis can one decide whether a trait is a protected group or not (e.g. do they actually need to be a minority? if someday men start making less than women, would men become a protected group?).
  2. For what careers should protected groups have an equal per-capita representation? We’ve seen a lot of tension about engineering, and there’s definitely a desire to get different protect groups into the presidency, but I sense no hurry to try to gender-balance auto-mechanics. What is the philosophy at play here? Do only protected groups deserve equal representation or are there cases where underrepresented unprotected groups deserve equal representation? What has made engineering such a lightening-rod of controversy as compared to a field like finance?
  3. Which of these statements should be punishable?
    – “Statistically cats have lower IQs than people on average”
    – “Statistically, women are shorter than men on average”
    – “Statistically, Asians have a higher IQ than whites on average”
    – “Statistically, women are worse at basketball than men on average, because they are shorter on average”
    – “Statistically, people with down syndrome have lower IQs on average”
    – “Perhaps the reason we haven’t had a president with down syndrome isn’t because of systemic bias, but because statistically people with down syndrome are less qualified on average”
  4. Should left-leaning political statements and right-leaning political statements be equally punishable at work?
  5. Who gets to define who’s a “victim?” Who gets to define what’s “offensive?”
  6. If a remark may hurt somebody’s feelings, but is true, and relevant, is it protected? What is the philosophy over what is safe to say?
  7. How would you recommend we coexist if I completely disagreed with the groups you identified as protected groups, but with complete sincerity and having put a lot of thought and research into it?
  8. If we took a majority vote, and your answers on all of these questions were found to be incredibly unpopular, would that make you question your beliefs? If not, on what basis do you hope to convince those who disagree with you?
  9. Are guilt, social pressure, and reducing work safety fair ways to drive social progress? If somebody else has a contradictory notion of social progress to you, is it okay for them to use guilt, social pressure, and reducing your work safety as a means to drive their agenda?

I bring up these questions because I see a lot of negative reaction to how the world is. But what is harder is presenting a superior alternative.

7 thoughts on “What is the “Social Justice” Endgame?

  1. Literally the most epic article I’ve ever read on this nonsense. Thank you for putting this together, and I hope the word gets around, because there is an entire generation of mentally broken people that have been brainwashed by corporations to think in ways that are incompatible with reality.

  2. Disclaimer: not a native english speaker, i might lack vocabulary and do some grammar mistakes.

    1/ I have no idea of what a protected group is. A discriminated group however, depends on where you live. Erythreen jews in israel are discriminated against by the “dominant” group (white conservative isreali). Chinese suffer discrimination in some parts of India and Philipines, while people from Philipines suffer some in China (sorry, no idea how englsh call them).

    Past oppression is only relevant if some discrimination is done because of this (Hello Rwanda). Let’s take South Africa. Past oppression was relevant even after Nelson mandela because the culture was still related to the apparteid. This is less true today, so this is not as relevant now (my question: how did you not figure this on your own? Do you like asking leading question that much?)

    2/Leading question, again, nice. None. But people in discriminated groups should have an easier time joining profession that brings power or visibility, so related to law (even if it is as paralegal), politics or television, or company management. Again with the S.A example, the culture changed because there were more and more black people in courthouses, politics and at the head of national companies. The fact that there is some racial inequalities there come from class inequalities (not the subject here) and not racism.

    3/ What agenda?

    4/ None. I don’t see your point there, it might be lost in translation.

    5/ What? Why would you punish statement made at work? Except if there is a client (let’s say, the state want to buy your product, and you say “public worker are paid doing nothing” to his face, get ready to be fired or put in a closet). Is this a leading question?

    6/ Victims are defined by law in my country, i don’t know about the us though. I’d define “offensive” a statement that i would not say out loud to all my friends or family. Like “i find that any theism is dumb as f…”, which i would never say to my grandmother, despite being my real feeling, is offensive. 3rd part is a leading question, but my response is that i do not care about you and you can tell whatever you want to anyone, but if you say the previous sentence to anyone and get called out, i would not help you

    7/ I’m not advocating for anyone, but i can see (in my country anyway) that some people (obese people) have it worst than anybody in some places (hospital mainly). I defend them orally with my friends and on internet when i feel like it (not often in english though). Well, since i’m 20 i don’t really hang with anybody that would judge people for their looks (because its tiring /time-consumming to defend people i’m not related too for no reason but my personal ethic) but i did that.

    8/ Do you know that apostasia is punishable by death in pakistan, but not in other countries (tunisia come to mind), and in some, nobody cares. So it depends on WHERE you live, obviously. Do you feel that in USA/UK, the way most of the people treated Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam when he choose, after nearly dying twice, to change his religion, was justified/ subjectivly fair/fair isn’t the question? Where i lived, no one cared about this. So probably MORE protected if you live surrounded by dumb a-holes, about the same else.

    8bis: Sorry about the passive-agressive subtitle there, i might have no personnality and just mimic the way of expression of the people i’m talking to.

    9/ Well, you can see my response in 6/. Yes, there is studies that make correlation about IQ and how religious people feel, still, making any remark about that out loud (or on a forum where religious people gather, on a video about gregorian chant) is just rude.

    10/ Depending on where you live, discriminated people are not the same, so i don’t really care. I spent entire vacations with my racist cousin, we had no problems. He is quite honest with his hate and while i disagree, i still quite like him. Honestly, most of those are leading question and i decided early to go away from people i perceive as manipulative, so i would never hang out with you anyway, but we could coexist just fine.

    11/ No, i don’t care about the majority, i’m old enough to think on my own.

    12/ Sorry, how does work safety come with guilt and social pressure? I think this is manipulation, but w/e. Guilt and social pressure are sadly two educational levers, that are used and abused with children in school quite often (and in dog training too). Using it against adult are less effective, but it still works for some reason. I do hate this way of doing things, but whne i was a youth camp consellor, i had to use social pressure to make activities run smoothly. I’m still feeling guilty about it. I disliked doing it because i feel this was dishonest, even if this was the easiest way to get thing started.
    Those questions being a bit dishonest, are you feeling a bit guilty about it or do you feel its fine being dishonest to try to convince people they are mistaken (or do you think those question where objectively honest and i’m mistaken)?

    It was an interesting game, thank you.

    1. Sorry, I had trouble understanding some of the finer points of what you’re writing, but what I read I thought largely made sense. I also applaud you for rising to the challenge.

      I think you end on asking how I feel about my questions. I’m trying to implement the Socratic Method here, a way of using only questions to really hold up a philosophy to the light and check for internal consistency. However, in the web-format, you unfortunately have to put the questions up front so it can be perceived as a little more aggressive rather than interactive. But I’m absolutely sincere and writing because I think these are important questions.

      To help elucidate, the reason some of these questions are being asked is in light of recent events that highlight asking certain questions about gender differences may lead to being terminated.

Leave a Reply to mikemike Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *