Re:OpenAI chief goes before US Congress to propose licenses ...
by nancyhn on Tuesday May 16, 2023 @07:30PM
(#35969195)
Tim Urban of Wait But Why has the best definition of "woke", which he calls Social Justice Fundamentalism.
Social Justice Fundamentalism is premised on the Marxist idea that liberalism IS the problem—an inherently exploitative, rigged game that entrenches power imbalances. SJF sees the whole argument inside the house as beside the point—the house is rotten to its core.
You can see this in SJF's attitude towards liberal staples like free speech. LSJ sees free speech as a fundamental right and critical tool of the powerless. SJF believes free speech is at odds with safety—its opponents' ideas are not just wrong but harmful and dangerous.
Or take this SJF chart from Smithsonian's guide to talking about race. The chart includes "emphasis on the scientific method" and "objective thinking" as aspects of "white culture." Again, this is an ideology that thinks the liberal house itself is bad and oppressive.
Inside the liberal house, movements make progress via persuasion. SJF opts instead for illiberal methods of coercion, trying to get opponents fired or get their talks canceled. SJF teaches its followers that it's good to be an idea supremacist.
Conversely, Liberal Social Justice brought us women's suffrage, the civil rights movement, and gay marriage.
SJF is pretty open about its revolutionary goals to dismantle liberalism, but its activists use vague language that appeals to the liberal progressive inside the house, like "diversity" / "inclusion" / "anti-racism," and makes them think SJF is in line with their values.
But SJF is directly opposed to the goals of Liberal Social Justice. The nice-sounding words really represent deeply illiberal concepts.
Social Justice Fundamentalism is premised on the Marxist idea that liberalism IS the problem—an inherently exploitative, rigged game that entrenches power imbalances. SJF sees the whole argument inside the house as beside the point—the house is rotten to its core.
You can see this in SJF's attitude towards liberal staples like free speech. LSJ sees free speech as a fundamental right and critical tool of the powerless. SJF believes free speech is at odds with safety—its opponents' ideas are not just wrong but harmful and dangerous.
Or take this SJF chart from Smithsonian's guide to talking about race. The chart includes "emphasis on the scientific method" and "objective thinking" as aspects of "white culture." Again, this is an ideology that thinks the liberal house itself is bad and oppressive.
Inside the liberal house, movements make progress via persuasion. SJF opts instead for illiberal methods of coercion, trying to get opponents fired or get their talks canceled. SJF teaches its followers that it's good to be an idea supremacist.
Conversely, Liberal Social Justice brought us women's suffrage, the civil rights movement, and gay marriage.
SJF is pretty open about its revolutionary goals to dismantle liberalism, but its activists use vague language that appeals to the liberal progressive inside the house, like "diversity" / "inclusion" / "anti-racism," and makes them think SJF is in line with their values.
But SJF is directly opposed to the goals of Liberal Social Justice. The nice-sounding words really represent deeply illiberal concepts.