By: Matthew Mantzouranis
“Never have I encountered anyone who was so giddy about their hatred than the people who make up the SJW community. These are people who, on a regular basis, call for violence and genocide against “oppressors”, whether it’s white people, heterosexual people, thin people, or just anyone who even slightly disagrees with them.”
– Joshua Goldberg
Along with political correctness, there are social justice warriors who enforce that fascist way of thinking. A social justice warrior is an individual who repeatedly engages in arguments on the internet, often in an ignorant and/or shallow way for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A social justice warrior does not strongly believe in what they say or care about the group that they are defending. They adopt stances that are politically correct within their social circle.
Passion + Valid Reason + Cause + Evidence = Successful Argument
In order to make a successful argument, one must be able to use common sense/logic as well as provide multiple points to assist the level of its success. One of the things that is needed to provide a good argument to bring forth in a debate is at least a high level of passion. According to the merriam-webster dictionary, passion is “a strong feeling of enthusiasm or excitement for something or about doing something.” Passion can usually be found in many sensitive areas of interest such as politics, religion, sports, etc.
In order to formulate a strong argument, one must feel strongly about the topic that you are going to be arguing about. It is like when you are going to school. You are most-likely going to do well in the courses that you find the most interesting rather than courses that you could care less about. For example, if you are doing a specialization in history such as myself, you would typically do better in history courses rather than an outside course such as a science course – depending on your weaknesses – which needs to be taken as a general requirement in order to graduate.
“There is always something [that] you’re fighting for. There is always something in here *points to his heart*”
– Roman Reigns delivering his promo for his main event match versus Brock Lesnar at WrestleMania 31
Another thing that is needed on top of passion in creating an argument is a valid reason for it. As one can safely assume, I am very passionate about right-wing politics. But why? The main reason why I am a vocal and open Conservative is because of how Conservatives are treated on college campuses and even in the real world. Conservatives are always treated poorly by left-wing authoritarians. Now, authoritarians exist in both left-wing (Liberalism) and right-wing (Conservatism) politics but even more so on the Liberal side. College campuses, whether it is during frosh or other events, always promote their leftish agenda. That is not necessarily my problem. My problem is that if you disagree with their ideology, whether it has to do with Black Lives Matter, socialism, environmentalism, third wave feminism, refugee crisis, political correctness, etc. you get ripped apart like you are a seal swimming in the middle of a shark tank. This is very hypocritical to the so-called ‘diversity’ that campuses try to portray. They only seem to portray ‘Liberal diversity’ rather than ‘viewpoint diversity.’
What did I mean by having a valid reason? Surely there are many reasons why one could be passionate about a certain topic. By valid reason, I mean a reason fueled by passion for a cause. One of the first things that really set me off was an incident at last year’s frosh event. There were three teams: Enigma (Green; my team), Fortus (Red), and Orbitor (Blue). As I do with sports events, I decided to paint my face green in order to show team spirit. However, I was told to take it off because ‘Aboriginal people can see it as an offence.’ Not only did it take me like 20 minutes to wash it off but I was also annoyed at the fact that the coordinators only told the white people to take it off but when they encountered brown people wearing face paint, they did not say a thing! Liberal social justice warriors display blatant racism on campuses but bash Conservatives and other non-Liberals for disagreeing with their ideas.
Lastly, one needs evidence to prove why their argument is legitimate. One can have the idea, the passion, the drive, the motivation to create an argument but now, you need to prove why your argument is legitimate.
First Example: Imagine that I am a criminal prosecutor and you are my jury. Pretend that you do not know absolutely anything about this case gets under way. I am attempting to put Bill Cosby in jail for allegedly raping over 50 women. In my opening statement, I explain that Bill Cosby is a serial rapist who raped over 50 women over the past 50 years. That claim would be my argument for the case. Now, I would have to prove that he actually did commit those rapes beyond a reasonable doubt. Imagine that I showed the jury video surveillance of those rapes taking place. Catching the acts on video surely proves my argument. But if I were to just claim that he is guilty because the public believes it – typical social justice warrior move – that would not be proper evidence or enough evidence for my jury to believe in me. In that case, we could just accuse a random person of rape, and convict him – without proof – just because some people think that it is true. In that case, we would live in total anarchy.
Second Example: Imagine that I just created a business selling cars and you are investors with a net worth of over $5 billion. I tell you that my cars are better than all of the other cars in the world. Certainly that would gauge some interest. However, in order for anyone to invest money in my business, I would have to prove why they are the best cars in the world. Right? If I just showed up, made a big claim, and said that it is true because my friends and I believe, would you take the chance and invest your hard-earned money into it? Of course not! But if I were to show you that these cars not only contain 10 times more kilometers than every other kind of car in the world as well as show my success in selling them (i.e. making $1 billion/year), would you not be impressed? In this case, I not only made a huge claim but I was also able to prove why my claim is legitimate.
Do Social Justice Warriors know how to argue?
Let us revisit one of the last sentences from the introduction above about how a social justice warrior argues: “A social justice warrior does not strongly believe in what they say or care about the group that they are defending. They adopt stances that are politically correct within their social circle.”
Firstly, passion involves a strong feeling for a topic. Social justice warriors generally care more about becoming popular within their social group(s). Hence they tend to say anything that would make themselves look good in front of others. This shows that they do not care about the topics at hand but rather care more about how they appear. This is much like how Hillary Clinton portrays herself as a grandiose feminist by claiming – in 2015 – that “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported.” However, in the picture/quote below, she seems to be doing the exact opposite. Clinton tries to act like she cares about women and women’s rights even though she has a history of disenfranchising women.
In addition to that, there needs to be a valid reason why one decides to create an argument. Wait a second? Social justice warriors do not create arguments, they bandwagon other people’s arguments just for social stature. Since they do not create actual arguments, there is no cause factor entrenched.
Lastly, social justice warriors lack evidence. This is one of the most important things that one needs to stabilize an argument. I am going to use third wave feminists as an example here. One of the most important proponents of third wave feminism is their so-called ‘rape culture’ where they believe that the society that we live in perpetuates and allows rape to occur. Now, in order to win a debate against a worthy adversary, one must not only create an argument but also think about ways that one would counter their argument. Personally, when I write essays, I always think that my essay is absolute gold – which is normal at that specific time. However, if you were to reread your essay – with an open mind – after a few days, you will most-likely find some flaws within your argument. After you find those flaws, you think of ways to eliminate those flaws. When it comes to third wave feminists, they tend to act like their argument is perfect thus making the decision to not edit or polish their argument. What do I mean by this?
Third wavers claim that “one in five women will be raped during her time at college.” Hence 20% of women in college will be raped. However, according to FBI statistics, the annual average of rape in total within the United States in 2013 shows that only 0.025% of Americans were raped. In the years prior, that percentage was slightly higher but nowhere near even 1%. In this case, these third wave feminists are actually providing fraudulent evidence. Then you have the social justice warriors arguing on behalf of third wave feminists claiming that rape culture exists despite the lack of evidence – just to look good in front of third wavers.
How to spot a social justice warrior:
Below are 6 links that will show you have the average social justice warrior looks like and how they argue/bandwagon. Notice how every social justice warrior copies a point that somebody else created, tries to argue a point – no matter how flawed – that they have no idea about, and get absolutely cornered by logic.
The Biggest Reaction that I have ever gotten out of a Social Justice Warrior:
Since the vast majority of social justice warriors happen to be Liberals, they tend appeal to ‘minority groups’ such as the Syrian refugees. Social justice warriors feel like they have an obligation to defend them at all costs in order to appear as if they care about them. However, many social justice warriors get too carried away in this regard. According to Michael Shermer, “as often happens in moral movements, a reasonable idea with some evidentiary backing gets carried to extremes by engaged moralists eager for attention, sympathy, and the social standing that being a victim or victim can bring.” Many of these social justice warriors on college campuses often carry an idea to the extremes in order to look like they care about various individuals. A lot of them take a very simple scenario and – like Nicholas Udall said in 1548 – “make a mountain out of a molehill.”
A good example of this occurred on 18 November 2015. I shared a video of a crowd chanting ‘Allah Hu Akbar’ at a Turkish soccer game during a moment of silence. I captioned it with the words ‘Well then’ in response to the fact that the fans decided not to keep quiet for the moment of silence. But out of nowhere, a social justice warrior blew my comment way out of proportion:
“Do you know what Allah Hu Akbar means? Like I’m sorry Matthew but it’s 2015. I am from a Muslim family do I look like ISIS to you? Fucking open your god-damn mind! Allah Hu Akbar ONLY means God is Great. May He Bless you. Allah is ARABIC for God. It doesn’t mean shit! If I call your god ‘bhagvan’ in Hindi that doesn’t make me HINDU. IT IS NOTHING BUT A LANGUAGE. Secondly, you think people in ISIS are Muslim? Then why in [the] FUCK are they burning down Qurans and mosques? They call themselves Muslim the same way [the] KKK called themselves Christians. By your logic every white person on earth should be considered an extremist. Third. Refugees are RUNNING away from ISIS. Who are burning down their homes, their houses. For some reason say the Canadian government started bombing our houses today. We had no food, no shelter, no place to go. Would you want the entire world to turn their backs on you? YOU ARE AN IMMIGRANT if you aren’t an aboriginal native. The only difference between you and the refugees is that you were ‘lucky’ enough to be born in this country. They simply had bad luck. Yeah you will say taking in refugees increases risks. Well then screen the shit out of them before they come in. Make sure they don’t have access to explosives and guns. BUT DO NOT DENY THEM FOOD WATER AND SHELTER. That is a right of every human being in the world. Also you are blowing your mind over a Syrian passport being found on one of the assailants. Well one of the assailants was a FRENCH NATIONALE. I don’t see anyone saying [that] French people designed the attacks on themselves. They why are you generalizing all [of] the refugees cause of one? I have seen your posts all over Facebook, and I know [that] some assholes will tell me ‘go back to your fucking country’ after this post. BUT know what? I’ll say the same. Go back to your fucking countries too. Leave Canada to the aboriginals. It’s fucking 2015. If you can’t use your brains to aid humanity then don’t try and stop people from helping others in need. 150 people died in Paris? 12000 died in Syria. Why is Syrians less important than Parisians? Cause they are from a third world country? Or is it cause you are too fucking arrogant to think [that] they deserve less than you? Everyone deserves a chance to build a good lie for themselves. It doesn’t matter if you are white, brown, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist. No religion permits you to kill people. No race permits it. And also by denying these people simple rights all you are doing is making them think you all are arrogant and selfish, causing them to act rashly, to hate you, and eventually to hate you back. It boils my blood when I see posts like this. I wanna cuss back. I am an atheist, so please don’t say [that] it’s cause I’m MUSLIM. It’s because I’m a human being. So enough with this bullshit. Open your eyes.”
This was by far the biggest overreaction to a post that I have ever gotten, and this was not even a post where I actually spoke my mind about. Keep in mind, I captioned this video with a “well then,” not a rant about Syrian refugees. This Liberal will remain nameless but their comment goes to show the typical response that a social justice warrior will spew: an extreme reaction to something very small, present false information, display their ignorance on how the world works, swear, and provide countless logical fallacies, etc.
In conclusion, social justice warriors do not create their own arguments, but rather, bandwagon other people’s arguments. They attempt to argue points – especially flawed points – that they do not know anything about or care about just to try to become popular within their social group.
Links/Works Cited List