The Virtue Signalling of Social Justice

virtue-signalI had somewhat decided to end my series on Social Justice Warriors with the last installment on the view of history used by social justice warriors. In a sense, I thought that I’d come full circle as I had covered both the methodology and ideology quite adequately, and once the history was covered to demonstrate how poor methodology applied to cherry picked examples are the engine of the movement, I could consider the series complete. However, then Nassim Nicholas Taleb tweeted out a question about virtue signalling, and I realized that this was a major gap in my series. Everyone engages in signalling, from the man who through posture and composure signals his status, to the woman who through her painted face and hourglass figure signal health and fertility.

However, the concept of signalling one’s virtue, is a relative new concept, first identified among the religious, where piety was the virtue most signaled, however much of human verbal and non-verbal communication is signalling on some level. Ranging from choices one makes in grooming, clothing, the manner in which one writes or speaks and many others. However, this differs somewhat from the signalling of virtue, as the former are honest signals, the latter may be argued to be dishonest signals.

Social Justice Warriors without virtue signalling are as hunters without weapons or a bank without money, it simply does not work. Virtue signaling to this community is not only a primary means of communicating status, and one’s allegiance to the group, it is also the means by which enemies are designated and then attacked. It forms the core of means, where I have previously covered motive and methodology. Virtue signalling has been a central element of many groups, from religious communes to atheist dictatorships, from Europe to the Americas and Africa, it is a central part of our communication as a species. Continue reading

The History of Social Justice

historyFor those of you who have read my precious essays on social justice, you will without a doubt have noticed the privilege hierarchy that serves as the social justice equivalent to the class struggle in Marxist doctrine. The privilege hierarchy exists in variants but it tends to cover race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, and wealth. So, a man who is white, Cisgender, hetereosexual, and wealthy has a privilege of over 9000, whereas a woman who is of color, trans/owlkin, non-majority sexual orientation, and broke is minimum privilege.

The ideology is largely based on an interprevist framework fueled by the tool of critical analysis courtesy of post-modernism, however as with all analysis techniques it depends on the chosen data set one interprets. Within research there is a concept called “convenience sampling” which is a nice way of saying that the researcher found a sample for their study that was conveniently available. A typical example of this type of sampling is when a phd student elects to use professors and other students as the sample for their study, to keep travel costs down, find a sample that is cooperative and incentivized to assist in the research. After all, if anyone sees the value in contributing to research it would be professors and other phd candidates that are likely to require the cooperation of the other candidate at a later date.

The downside of convenience sampling is that a researcher cannot make generalizations about the total population from the sample because it is not representative enough of the total population. This was somewhat highlighted by pollsters during the 2016 election, who made several sampling errors, out of which their tendency to over-sample in urban areas based on the location of their own firms was the major error. Perhaps the most clear example of this is that social justice ideology is largely based on historical analysis of the social framework from early modern history up to and including contemporary history. This gives them a sample range from roughly the early 16th century, including the European Renaissance and the Age of Discovery. In addition their focus is largely on American history, with quite a bit of Western European history added to the mixture. This means that out of 5000 years of recorded human history, they largely draw from a base consisting of at most 400 – 500 years. What this means is that their analysis is focused on the most convenient sample for someone who is educated in the West, as every country tends to be focused on their own history, and how their country relates to other countries. Continue reading

The Philosophical Foundation of Social Justice

postmodernismI once sat next to an elderly gentleman on a transatlantic flight, and as I often do, I engaged in conversation with him for the duration of the flight. As we spoke, we shared our educational and professional backgrounds, he was retired but he had been active in multiple businesses during his professional life, and his educational background was in philosophy. Somewhat taken aback by this, I inquired as to his reasoning for electing philosophy above many of the other educational directions a man of his intellect could have pursued.

His answer was that anything that ever takes place within human society is powered by philosophy, from how we approach our personal life to how we perceive the world is dependent on our philosophy. A person who values empiricism will view the world differently from a post-modernist, a person who subscribes to deontological ethics will view behavior from a different perspective than a person who values virtue or consequentialist ethics.  Few places today is this as clear as the case of Social Justice Warriors against the rest of society. Continue reading

The No-win scenarios of Social Justice

catch 22We make many choices every day of our lives, we choose to do things, to not do them, to procrastinate choice, however we can rarely select to not make a choice at all. The catch-22, a double-bind, Hobson’s choice, Cornellian dilemma, Kobayashi-maru and Zugzwang, a child of many names that all attempt to articulate the same concept, the unwinnable scenario. While there are small differences, between the above, Hobson’s choice presents two choices, where there is really only one, a Cornelian dilemma is a choice between two different, yet unfavorable outcomes, a double-bind is a situation where you are put in a situation where completing one task, would result in failing the other, where a requirement is that you are successful in both. A catch-22, from the novel by the same name written by Joseph Heller, is best represented by the example of needing experience to get a job, but needing a job to gain experience. Zugzwang is a German chess-term meaning that you are forced to move, but any move you make would put you in a worse situation than if you did not move. They are all terms that amount to a no-win scenario.

The ideology of social justice is based on Marxist principles, and as such becomes authoritarian. Like most ideologies except those based on enlightenment principles, the logical conclusion of such ideologies is a collective narrative that is maintained through manipulation and coercion, from the perspective that the end justifies the means. Such ideologies frequently make use of various manipulative methods to maintain their malignant narratives. Continue reading

The Prejudice of Social Justice

socjus leagueAs I’ve been slowly working my way through the social justice chronicles I’ve come to discover that they have some founding principles that may appear somewhat strange to those who attempt to adhere to the tenets of universalism and logical consistency. In the Democratic People’s republic of North Korea for instance, they practice a strange principle when it comes to dealing with dissenters that include punishing three generations of a family for the sins of one member, based on the idea of needing to “purify” the family. In essence this boils down to that if your grandfather was a dissident, then he along with the next 2 generations (your parents and you) will be shipped off to a labour camp as well. This type of thinking is not a strange concept in the Western world as Christianity is based on the concept of inheritable sin, we are all guilty of the sin of Adam and Eve, until we are purified by the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. However, most of western jurisprudence have moved away from the concept, as punishing the son for the sins of the father makes society guilty of punishing people for acts they had no hand in.

Social justice warriors and other totalitarian ideologies on the other hand, are based on the principle of punishing dissenters, and nowhere is this more clear in the calls to “check your privilege“. This simple statement, designed to invalidate criticism and argument, form the backbone of social justice rhetoric and narratives. Social justice prejudice is based in 2 simple principles designed to rob you of individuality so that they can allocate blame an guilt to groups rather than individuals. Continue reading

The tactics of social justice

SJW tacticsTactics are the action-oriented counterpart of strategy, while a strategy is an overarching plan on how to achieve a goal, tactics is where thought is converted into actions that are needed to implement the strategy. In my analysis of the social justice phenomenon I came across some common tactics that have been used throughout history by movements that seek to achieve influence regardless of merit, fact and reason. A great example of this is the communist movement that grew out of Karl Marx’s works in the late 1800s. The history of communism is filled with idealism Continue reading

The morals of social justice

Opression olympicsAs an observer of Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) for a while now, I’ve noticed certain patterns, mainly that there is a distinct lack of universality and logical consistency to the movement. To explain in brief, universality means that on an abstract level, the moral status of an act, a statement or a thought are to be applied universally to a population. For instance, if it is wrong for men to hit women, then it is also wrong for women to hit men. If it is wrong for white people to be racist, it is also wrong for people of color. If it is wrong for white people to be anti-Semitic then it is also wrong for Arabs to be anti-Semitic.  Continue reading