Message from @Abel
Discord ID: 496443450561134594
Where it doesn't lead to equality, it simply leads to more division
A particularly good example is the Evergreen Fiasco
you guffaw'd my christianity argument, but the crusades were still done by christians, the bad social justice is still social justice and it's still the dominant form of social justice
it's still the one that went to the UN to argue that video games are horrible and sexist and need to be changed to include more non-gamers
Probably. which is why I don't call myself a social justice advocate anymore
dayum democrats... "In 1864, an amendment abolishing slavery passed the U.S. Senate but died in the House as Democrats rallied in the name of states’ rights. The election of 1864 brought Lincoln back to the White Housealong withsignificant Republican majorities in both houses, so it appeared the amendment was headed for passage when the new Congress convened in March 1865. Lincoln preferred that the amendment receive bipartisan support–some Democrats indicated support for the measure, but many still resisted. The amendment passed 119 to 56, seven votes above the necessary two-thirds majority."
Just like how I don't call myself a feminist anymore
Which ***is why i said i believe he has an incorrect defintion of social justice and requested disprovement***
disprovement?
is that a word?
hm...
Social equity. He's not wrong here
You are conflating the tactics of radicals with the entire concept of social justice
That is merely dishonest
No I'm conflating radicals with the most pure enactment of social justice.
forcing equality of outcome because that's "fair"
You'd still be wrong
"You can't be racist against whites" was the last drop
The radicals here, have a fucked up world view in the first place
that's equity, because you can say "it's about equity" and they can say "it's about equity" and you're both being honest
Where the world is based on systems of power
because nebulous bullshit can be used for good and bad, again like the religion comparison
but the nebulous bullshit boils down to "acquiring justice for people through means other than the actual justice system"
See, I'd describe a good social justice advocate as people like Stephen fry, or MLK
stephen fry is not a fucking social justice advocate
The bad ones, someone like PZ Myers
PZ myers is
@Beef Taquitos He classifies himself as such
He said good social justice, you dink.
His openning statement on the munk debate
there is no such thing as good social justice
that's like dry water or cold fire
😐
Then you are dishonest.
Don't be obtuse.
it's like *ethical child porn*(you guys might not get the Destiny reference there)
Don't be obtuse.
says the person repeating themselves.
I wouldn't have to.
But you continued.