Skip to main content

More thoughts on the SJW protection stack

I have written several times about the social justice ideology "protection stack", or "oppression stack". In summary, "social justice" is an ideology of oppression. It's highly hierarchical and stratified, and also highly collectivist: It divides people in large groups, decides by an arbitrary metric how "oppressed" that group is, and demands and grants privileges, protections, responsibilities and guilt depending on how "oppressed" that group is.

This forms a stack: The more "oppressed" a group is, the higher on the stack, and the more protections and privileges those people are granted. People at a certain level on the stack can not criticize, disagree, talk back or in any way behave in any other way than absolute submission and servitude towards the people higher on the stack. However, they are free to take advantage of, discriminate against, deride, insult and abuse people lower on the stack, with complete impunity. (When this happens, SJWs will either ignore it, be silent about it, make up excuses or, sometimes, outright defend the behavior.)

For quite a long time the very top of this stack has been settled and is rock-solid and unshakeable: Muslim men of Arabic ethnicity. They are absolutely untouchable, and SJWs, no matter where they position themselves on the stack, will say and do nothing to them, no matter what they do. A tiny bit below Muslim men are Muslim women of Arabic ethnicity. (Yes, because Muslim women are below, the men can abuse and oppress the women freely, and SJWs will say nothing.)

The very bottom of the stack is occupied, of course, by white men. Although sometimes Jews and East Asians are temporarily pushed by SJWs even lower. Most of the time both groups are very close to the bottom, just barely above white men (depends on the particular situation. Whichever group is most convenient to be at the very bottom in the discussion at hand will be pushed there.)

Thus these two extremes are firmly occupied, especially the very top. But this leaves all the other places on the stack open. Since Muslims are firmly at the very top and cannot be moved from there, this has caused a rather fierce battle for the second place. For over ten years now different "oppressed" groups have sometimes furiously fought for that coveted second place, the most privileged and powerful available spot on the stack.

Almost a decade ago some black people in the United States tried to fight, sometimes literally, not just figuratively, their way to that coveted second place. They saw this opportunity with the so-called "Black Lives Matter" movement, which gained a lot of traction for a while. These ideologues became extremely pushy, aggressive and even violent. They would harass people (sometimes physically), yell at people, insult people, disrupt all kinds of events (sometimes violently) and engage in illegal protest marches (that the American police, rather obviously, was too afraid to do anything about). No clearer sign of them trying to fight their way to the top was when they several times physically stopped numerous "gay pride" parades, with ridiculous demands. Quite clearly they considered themselves to be a lot higher on the oppression stack than gays.

Eventually, however, they ran out of fuel, people started getting tired of it, and they started falling down from the stack once again. They encountered a contender that's absolutely unbeatable at the moment, and now sits firmly on that coveted second place on the oppression stack, as unshakably as the Muslims above them: Transsexuals.

Indeed, the power that the "transsexuals" have on society now rivals that of Muslims. Not only are they absolutely untouchable, and not only is anybody who dares to say anything against them very quickly and harshly punished in the worst possible ways, but their ideology has succeeded in infiltrating a massive portion of society. Even portions of society that so far has been relatively apolitical, such as science. Yes, even science is being infiltrated by the ideology more and more, even if it means pushing the politics over scientific accuracy and facts.

And that is, in fact, what this whole thing is about, like always: Gaining power.

This whole "social justice" and "oppression" and all that jazz has absolutely nothing to do with protecting human rights and fighting for justice. It's all a power grab. The more power they can gain, the better. BLM didn't gain much power, so it effectively died. The "trans" ideology, however, has succeeded in gaining an enormous amount of power, and that's why they are the unbeatable kings of the hill at this moment (besides Muslims, of course).

It has nothing to do with human rights. It has nothing to do with "trans rights". It has everything to do with gaining power in society.

If tomorrow they find out a way to gain even more power in society, a way that actually opposes and discriminates against "trans" people, they will embrace it in a heartbeat.

Comments

  1. hi, Twitter's blocking Trump brought the issue of content publishers and forum providers i remember one of article of you about social giants becoming content publisher's because of blocking people's opinions. and after comes a very tragic death of George Floyd by a policeman in USA you were contending that usa police doesn't interfere with violent protesters but here we see an unnecessary use of force. do you think sjw will use it as a leverage to force their agenda?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What are you referring to? If you watch footage of the riots, there's one thing that one notices quite quickly from them: Not a single police officer in sight, trying to stop the criminals from committing crimes and arresting them. The rioters seems to be completely free to destroy and steal private property, and there's not a single police officer in sight.

      Delete
  2. I meant in one side police officers doing nothing for violent protesters in the other side they are killing a guy who doesn't even resist to them. is not it such a damn contradiction?

    ReplyDelete
  3. i want to clarify "killing" it is not in the cold sense they killed but they failed to help a guy who was in a bad situation and their actions contributed to his death. any sensible person would try to act in a supportive way when the guy started saying i cant breath but those police officers failed in that sense.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment