You answered your own question.

There are a fair few, some openly like Max, who only post here because they object to it's existence. We're nice around these parts and we tolerate them.

Yep, to be fair it's getting worse. Was reading on social media that apparently the virus actually was released from a lab in wuhan and is in fact a CCP plot to take over the world.

I despair.

I'm not sure if you would be good at moderating but you seem far more fit for the role than most here. There hasn't been a single politics mod or mods helper that wasn't a straight up SJW-type.

Not that i give two shits either way about social justice, but being against it seems like such an odd position to stake out. Never really understood that one.

Wrong. I post here for vigorous debate and a little bit of fun.

we tolerate you anyway. Maybe that's not doing you a favour.

Juan is very unsatisfied with his bigotry only being tolerated, he wants a straight up Nazi mod.

That's the rub most non-progressives have, though. People who oppose SJW's/radial progressives, don't oppose social justice. The SWJ's/radical progressives have redefined what social justice is, and used that redefinition as a cudgel. I'm anti-progressive, but I and most other non-progressives are not anti-social justice, they are two distinct things. They get conflated often, especially here. Social justice warriors/progressives weaponized social justice, to the point that any term that associates them with social justice instantly becomes a pejorative, and oxymoron. Your post is a perfect example. If you oppose these radicals, it purportedly means your anti-social justice. It's a really deceptive and devious rhetorical tactic.

The worst part is when Caligula shows up with the porn scroll and it's a huge hit, but when Claudius drop his epic scroll about the Carthaginean War, it completely flops.

Wait so anti-keyboard warriors aren't against keyboards? Who'd a thunk?

juan is against social equality (justice).

Fyp to demonstrate how absurd your argument is.

SJW-types and social justice are not the same thing. You somehow thinking that point is absurd, is one of the many reasons why I can't stand progressives. They don't operate with a modicum of logic or reason, and double down with ignorance. Then we get into the tedium of basic exercises in logic, which the SJW's will never get, because they will never admit when they are ignorant, even when it's proven beyond all doubt.

You keep doing you.

Of course they are different, that isn't what I was saying was absurd. Someone who doesn't understand what social justice is conflates it with SJW and you go on this spiel about how the two terms get mixed up because a group of people somehow hijacked the term social justice, as if they call themselves SJWs.

This is what you think an SJW looks like.



This is what an SJW actually looks like.

As a frequent "opponent" of Max, I agree with him here.

I also don't get why anyone would be non-progressive. That, too, seems weird to me.

Racism

A full palette of bigotry.

Non-Aggression Principle

Progressives love the use of force to achieve their goals.

Conservatives are more focused on the risks of change while progressives are more focused on the potential benefits of change. This appears to be a physical difference in the brain. It's been discussed many times in more rational moments but easily gets lost in the silly name calling thing.

Well said.

George Will often opposed many liberal ideas based on the Principle of Unintended Consequences.

For example, well-intentioned Great Society welfare expansion had the unintended consequences of nearly destroying the two-parent household.

If you live in and accept western society in its current form you are a progressive by the broadest definition even if many fit on the conservative end of that spectrum.

I'm gonna start labeling my political philosophy as "Regressive."

"Make the Stone Age Great Again"

It then feeds into a complete non-conversation. It's common to see the more liberal side argue that's there's no evidence of a problem so it's ok. This is irrelevant to the more conservative mind who want strong evidence that there wont be a problem. Some of this conversation is rhetoric as we see the sides switch when it suits but underlying it, is a very real difference in mental attitudes towards risk of change.

Then it degenerates into bizarre nonsense about empathy/selfishness and the silly name calling thing. A lack of comprehension cycle is established ending in complaint they don't understand each other. What a surprise given the effort they have put into not understanding each other!