When you attack the class you attack the members of that class.

Well people can self-identify. SJW-ism comes out in people's behaviours. If you want to be an SJW, knock yourself out. I think you are doing net harm to the world if you do become one.

Okay in light of Chez's decision I will address this post on its merits.

When suggesting that something warrants criticism it is important to ensure that you aren't doing that thing. I would probably be considered among the SJW's but it's not me doing any labelling here it is the person that is labelling others as SJW's. I'm not sure what the objection to SJW's labelling people is when calling someone an SJW is giving them a label. So it can't be the labelling of people that is wrong it must be mislabelling? You should probably have tried getting that right.

I've not called for any bans either so maybe I'm just a sjw and haven't graduated to capitals yet. But it seems that banning people from ? not sure of the context here so I'll leave open where people are being banned from, or shouting down or labelling which seems weird given that OP is labelling people and people often assign those labels for themselves is pretty forceful given that it's all they have yet it's entirely responsible for the rise of the far right across the world.

Technically you got offended on behalf of someone else, so I would have to say yes.

I suppose it was your wallet that was being insulted though, so if you defended its leathery virtue then we're going to have a 12 Angry Men situation.

This argument appears only to be an accusation of hypocrisy.

That anti-SJWs are guilty of all the things that SJWs do.



Things anti-SJWs have never done:

- tried to get people sacked for their political views
- orchestrated social media campaigns to ruin people's lives
- wrongly targetted people who are not guilty of the things they said they are
- willfully overlooked the facts of science for idelogical ends
- stamped on people's freedom to express their ideas by banning them

Anti-SJWs generally stand for:

- reason
- seeing things as they are, not for how they ought to be
- common sense
- a sense of humour

They stand against:

- hysteria
- institutional bullying tactics
- wrongful accusations
- virtue signalling

For all these reasons, your post is wrong.

You make a disanalogy because anti-SJWs are literally nothing like SJWs.

No I'm saying that if you consider labelling bad you should refrain from labelling. It's not merely a claim of hypocrisy it was intended to point out that labels are useful as suggested by their being a thread about SJW's and your claim that you want to attack a class. You can't do that unless you define the class. So what is it about SJW's use of labels you think is wrong.

Richard Spencer would consider himself an anti-SJW would you credit him with the things you think anti-SJW's stand for?

Indeed. there' needs to be at least two different types of antiSJW (assuming the sort of definition of SJW used)

Those who are for the same social justice as the SJW's and those who aren't.

I am against racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. For equal rights.

I am also against SJWs.

This is also the vast majority of anti-SJWs I've met.

And clearly, since your people responded by electing Trump, who looks set to do the exact opposite of the things you stand for, it is time for the question to be asked of the evil SJWs: how many mean names would you need to be called on the internet before you abandoned all of your core principles and voted against them?

Who ever said Trump voters were "my people"?

You have jumped to a lot of conclusions. Conclusions based on pre-existing ideologies you have in your head.

You know that's not answering the question right? So what about the Anti-SJW's that went after Leslie Jones do you think they demonstrated the qualities you list above?

I'm trying to follow the logic here. It's the anti-SJWs that are behind the rise of Trump, right? So maybe you personally didn't vote Trump, but it's your anti-SJW crowd that did.

In other words, you're being far too generous in your labeling of "anti-SJWs", and far too ungenerous in your labeling of "SJWs". I mean, basically in your usage these categories reduce to "people I think are wrong" and "people I think are right", rather than having any kind of consistent referent that's useful in a conversation. By any reasonable standard a lot of people who also identify as "anti-SJW" do a lot of things that you claim to deplore. And lots of people who identify as SJWs (even if only by way of reappropriating the pejorative) don't engage in those same behaviors. And of course in practice lots of people who claim to be anti-SJW are not just opposed to tactics and means, but also to the goals of self-identified SJWs, which your analysis ignores.

I think I've said this before, but to me the obvious conclusion from all this is that we'd be better off discussing things more concretely. That is, if we object to certain behaviors or attitudes why not just talk about them directly? If some identifiable group of people is engaging in political activity you think is unhelpful, why not just point to it directly? The other useful thing that comes out of this is the possibility of putting into perspective how representative those people or actions or attitudes actually are, whereas these vague labels makes that more or less impossible. Mostly what the labels accomplish is the maintenance of collective identity. That is, ironically, it seems to me to mostly reduce to the kind of "identity politics" that's supposed to be so problematic.

The cluelessness of your questions demonstrates the very things I am saying.

I am not commenting more.

Feel free to list the reasons. It makes no sense to me that the alt-right nonsense wouldn't drive people away at least as much as SJWs.

Ok, so clarify then. The anti-SJW crowd are a different group to those who were so disgusted by SJWs that they voted for Trump?

This is incredibly wrong.

Gamergaters intentionally tried to ruin people's lives and that was one of the first movements to be "anti-SJW." Milo and others also joined in the harassment against Leslie Jones.

The science one is particularly ridiculous. Anti-SJWs are global warming deniers. Come on now.

I've been banned at Vox Day's blog, and he wrote wrote a book on SJWs. I think he's been trying to get people fired as well.

Perhaps you should look more carefully at these "anti-SJWs"

Geez, dude, enough with the virtue signaling already.

Outside of college campuses and social media, do SJW's even exist? What % of the left would fall under the hardline SJW category? I ask this seriously because I am a taxpayer and generally don't intermingle with the unwashed masses.

I'd draw a hard distinction between the rational sceptics who identify as anti-SJWs and the alt right.

You are describing the alt right.

They identify as anti-SJWers as well as alt right but there you go labelling them and this time against their own declarations.

It doesn't matter what you think.

Good. Stick to it.

He's probably posted their link enough. Generally the rule is if someone else brings them up it's ok but if the creator does they should talk to Bobo about advertising.

Same with me. I am a capitalist at heart. I hate big government bureaucracy. I hate over regulation and the layers of bureaucracy that it entails. I am for a pro growth economy based on free market principles. I think politicians should embrace business and growth and believe since they employ the majority of our citizens that business should not be constantly vilified like in previous administrations. I believe the government should be lean and mean and stay out of peoples lives as much as possible. I believe in personal responsibility and that you are responsible for yourself and not the government.

This is my only political motivation. So when some douchebag tells me that means I am a racist, homophobic, misogynistic fascist then I just roll my eyes at their total and complete ignorance and disregard anything and everything they have to say.