Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman

This post has 22 comments with rating of 4.3/522

• 
  davidlah
  April 28th, 2019
  

  Thanks for sharing.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  Sauser99
  April 28th, 2019
  

  Sosial Justic warriors neeto be stoped! Tehy want are chrilden to det OUTsideE OF theiyre race! And make ALL of tehm GAY!!

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  pandapuppy
  April 28th, 2019
  

  

  Your posts have repeatedly caused me to view and reconsider issues and history from various angles. Thank you.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  jewwangle
  April 28th, 2019
  

  

  Thank you for this book. Unfortunately, as Sauser99s comment highlights, the ones who most need to heed this warning, are the least likely to even consider POV outside of this lockstep orthodoxy.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  caesar963
  April 28th, 2019
  

  

  @Sauser! Slight overreaction there; about a 9 on the Tension Scale.

  How did these geniuses ever get the “idea” that justice needed any kind of qualifier? A smidgen of legal/philosophical/linguistic knowledge would have disabused them of this.

  Departing from the concept of the dignified individual before the law, is enormously retrogressive, and completely fails to meet the interests and objects of justice.

  Dividing people up according to gender, sexual orientation and perceived “race” is sexist, homophobic and racist. No way around that one, I’m afraid. So, this radically stupid movement is, even on its own simplistic terms, self-refuting.
  And compelled speech - is it really necessary to explain at this point in our development why this is wrong/unjust/doltish?

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  marcodiluce
  April 28th, 2019
  

  

  WOW; thank you, what a treat!

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  Audi0books
  April 28th, 2019
  

  

  Thanks. Wonderful book.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  BioCapsule
  April 28th, 2019
  

  @jewwangle @carsar963 I find it funny that what was once clearly ethical stances. Now risked being label as “lockstep orthodoxy”, simply because political opposition were able to come up with new narratives to repackage toxic obsolete ideas. Is it really so easy? Just a little re-framing of those words ’social justice’ and pick the worst elements as prime example and suddenly, ’social’ & ‘justice’ becomes a bad thing?

  Justice needed qualifiers as a respond because injustice used to be carried out with qualifiers. While people might end up obsessing the relevance of labels, many forgot that labels once determine how you live and die for no good reasons. Nowadays people can pretend they were always for true ‘justice’ or merely perceiving what they think are “truth”, even when it’s just the same discrimination changing from overt to covert. Because they have grew up benefiting from social outlook rendered much less overt by those responses, hence they have the luxury of tearing it apart, thinking there are no consequences. Fear the day when you seek justices and all you get is being accuse of seeking the “coveted status” of “victim-hood”.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  caesar963
  April 28th, 2019
  

  But you’re actually defending indefensible discrimination. That’s the point. Describing these as “ethical stances” is itself expedient re-framing. MLK had unqualified ethical stances; but this social “justice” (bowel) movement is utterly racist and socially divisive, promoting hatred and noxious victim hierarchies. I’ve condemned racism, sexism and homophobia, here and elsewhere, whereas you seem to support these. More to the point, ask yourself why?

  You can’t conveniently separate out the toxic elements of this movement, they are an intrinsic part of it. No free expression for people who rationally disagree with them. Why are they incapable of comprehending that this, along with the impenetrably brainless trend of compelled speech, are double-edged swords?

  Justice is an unconditioned, abstract ideal. It has always been unattainable, because when we seek it, what we get in actual fact, is imperfect law. Going backwards, where the law will divide people up according to social status, sexuality, ethnicity, sexual orientation and class is an entirely foreseeable Pandora’s box for those with eyes to see it. It certainly does not require preternatural powers of perception. Or perhaps it does now?

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  BioCapsule
  April 28th, 2019
  

  @Caesar963 That’s the thing, how is ’social justice’ even a “movement”? Where is the leaderships, etc. etc. is it a movement simply because the opposition say it is a movement? Is it not itself a qualifier for the opposition? Bear in mind SJW is a term that came about as a pejorative against people who simply promote civil rights, feminism etc. You boldly declare me defending the “indefensible discrimination”, how so? Do you assert your stances as somehow self-evidence? In what universe does what you see as the (Bowel) movement, the face of all that is social justice. I didn’t conveniently separate them, you conveniently view them as the forefront and the only thing there is to say.

  You claim to have condemned these and that and somehow assert I ’support’ what you oppose because I dare defend ’social justice’ as a term? I reject the pejorative narrative, you nor the author don’t get to dictate the narrative. It’s like Libertarian narrative… those who proclaim themselves so somehow think they are the greatest, only guardians of “freedom” and everyone not them are somehow “anti-freedom”, simply because they know how to say the word a lot.

  You mistake free expression as automatically “rational”. Rationality, logic, reason will be shown in the express statement, not be automatically proclaim as so. If the statement can’t stand up to scrutiny, consequences is to be expected.

  And you have got it wrong, people don’t seek abstract perfection in ‘law and justice’. It is precisely because it is imperfect, therefore we seek always to redress mistakes, problems via facts. On that, we should never stop doing. It never require preternatural powers of perception. Just not let pseudo-philosophical/political rubbish blur the lines of the practical.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  Mria
  April 28th, 2019
  

  I think today’s social media do transform every cause into a movement be it left- or right-wing. But as in most cases with groups of people they consist of very different characters, some of which have extreme views. And intellectually unscrupulous people instead of analyzing every argument in its own right turn to manipulation and ad hominem attacks, esp. preferring Whataboutism and association fallacy.

  I would propose a book that has an interesting view on conservative and democratic liberalism: Why Liberalism Failed by Patrick J. Deneen.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  caesar963
  April 28th, 2019
  

  Initially you defended it, now you’re claiming that it never existed! You accused me of picking “the worst elements as prime example” - this is to conveniently separate out intrinsic toxic elements. At least you’re consistent in your inconsistency. It would be helpful if you were familiar with what you wrote, quite apart from I said! I think that there may be some definitional & linguistic problems. Also, can we just call out the usual slippery tactic of condemning the book without having actually read it? The last refuge, etc.

  You should be aware that the social justice movement and intersectionality are inextricably linked to the cynical contrivance of identity politics. This is an electoral ploy to separate people according to group identity rather than dignified individual identity. These groups can then be used as a wedge to deliver short-term, electoral success, with no thought to the social damage and long-term, deleterious impact. If you’re at all familiar with the Common Law, conceptualising group identity rather than individual identity, in adjudicating legal rights is unconscionably harmful to the interests of justice. Perhaps that’s the point?

  For the abstract, ideal nature of the concept of justice, read Plato (and don’t be too quick to dismiss the dialectic as “pseudo-philosophical/political rubbish” - which is, ironically, an apposite designation for the social justice movement!). We use justice as a conceptual term, and seek to attain it, but as it is a utopic ideal of unobtainable perfection, everyone gets imperfect law instead. That’s what I receive when I go to court, even though all the while I will have the concept of justice in my contemplation.

  The citizens of every functioning, civilised state have both rights and obligations, not merely rights. I couldn’t disagree with you more, the right of free expression is entirely rational and logical, we should value it while we still possess it. I I were to attempt to deny it to social justice activists, because they do not satisfy the rationality test, tomorrow I could be denied it. Do you see this? SJW is a discrete point, one which I did not even make. So, well done there.

  A movement, trend, attitude or umbrella term does not require a formal leadership structure for it to exist. A desire for law reform, in whatever direction, does not need an actual “boss” whom you can reach by telephone or email!

  You’ve proven my argument with each successive statement, especially as you could only misrepresent what I actually did say. Please re-read what I actually said, if you’re in a logical, rational frame of mind, you will see its commonsensical clarity.

  I’m not sure what all the libertarian stuff is about, unless you’re uselessly contending with the libertarian who lives in your head! Rejecting reality is inimical to one’s holistic health.
  It’s unnecessary to explain the points stil further, please refer above for further corrections of misconceptions. The description uses the term “blind justice” - do research this phrase, as it is vital to understanding the gruesomely dysfuntional nature of the social justice pathology. Failing that comprehension, “bowel movement” remains a beautifully apt image.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  litote
  April 29th, 2019
  

  “Toxic ideology”: my thought s exactly. Virtue-signalers are the new Puritans.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  loonyboyx
  April 29th, 2019
  

  

  Racist person: White people are superior
  Non-whites: Don’t be racist
  Racist person: Arggghhh stop causing divisions and spreading hate.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  caesar963
  April 29th, 2019
  

  It’s probably fair to characterise that as a grotesquely simplistic caricature and miscomprehension of everyone’s position, loonyboy. What are identity politics if not inherently racist/sexist/homophobic? Reducing a complex, dignified, human individual to merely one aspect of their character cannot capture their essence.

  There is only one race, so how can separating people according to a bogus, evil racial theory represent a civilised advance or insight? It’s incumbent upon you to at least give these issues a modicum of thought and not resort immediately to screaming ill-advised invective. Thereby thwarting any mature reflection. That’s what generated the morass in the first instance.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  BioCapsule
  April 29th, 2019
  

  +Caesar963 lol, the hilarity. First, I didn’t say it never exist, I say I reject your narrative of it, yours, the author’s or any of your ilks. You can’t tell the difference? Not my problem.

  Nor did I even talk much of the book, I am more concern and critical of the comments. Is it your contention that what you speak of is not at all align with the contents/contexts of the book? If so, whether I have read the book is hardly a problem. You don’t need to say ‘SJW’ btw, Sauser99 already did, was your context suppose to massively differ?

  The idea of social justice far older & beyond the squabbling of recent US politics history. Yet you somehow think it just an ‘electoral ploy’? After so much waxing of pseudo-philosophical crap, it just comes down to you thinking people will somehow vote for stupid ideas you support if people don’t see those stupid ideas tended to also come hand-in-hand with some fairly discriminatory practices. ‘Social damage’? Or is it long term political prospects of those stupid ideas and deplorable people? You think people so easy to be fool by such transparent counter-accusation? lol

  And speaking as someone belong to one of those ‘groups’, just not in the US. I know very well how my ‘group’ came about. Loonyboyx may have crude 3 line, but more succinctly put then I could manage, so I am long-winded. :)

  Your whole rubbish premise would have been remotely convincing were fighting for the rights of discriminated ‘group’ and fighting for ‘dignified individual identity’ were in conflict or somehow mutually exclusive. They aren’t and no pretenses of telling people to read Plato will change that. Seriously, you get to claim you have “condemned racism, sexism and homophobia” etc, etc… all of which represent different ‘group’. By what reasoning do you conclude that these group only exclusively care for the groups. That somehow they can only pick one? Is it the lack of imagination or willful deceit? You might as well stop pretending to use the words ‘logical’, ‘rational’ or ‘commonsensical clarity’ as if you have any, it wouldn’t make your argument any less weak.

  It the same rubbish as ‘all lives matter’, instead of standing with BLM against those who view lives with little regards, it came as a counter as against BLM. I don’t even need to be black or American to smell the bullcrap. So transparent was it that it was laughable, and this is the same kind of rubbish.

  I really had thought better of you. Misrepresent you? I think not… you only reveal yourself more clearly. You are right in 1 thing, further explanation is unnecessary… you can keep waxing faux-philosophy for ‘justification’, it would have made no difference.

  Btw… an advice for your reply to Loonyboxx “don’t go full retard”. lol

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  BioCapsule
  April 29th, 2019
  

  @loonyboyx I wish I can be as succinct as you. :)

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  caesar963
  April 29th, 2019
  

  The horror! The horror! Sauser was being ironic, and I regret to say that you have failed to understand my position to an even greater degree than his. It has to be intentional at this point? Surely it can’t be grounded in simple error?

  The genealogy of social justice of course means that it cannot possibly be deployed as an electoral ruse! Rofl. Once again, faultless, impeccable reasoning. Have you had a recent bang on the head? You may be hopelessly concussed.

  I’m not American, but that does not mean that I do not deplore the state of their politics and the social catastrophe wrought by divisive, harmful identity politics.
  I come from a country which was colonised and brutalised beyond imagining. We were discriminated against for most of our history. The best remedy is living the fullest life that you possibly can, not wallowing in puerile, retrogressive victimhood. You cannot develop as a person, or a people, until you take control of your own subjectivity and make your own choices. Don’t ceaselessly take refuge in the past, pointing fingers at others and being a person to whom things are done.

  You are an honourable individual, you are not your group. To be blunt, if I was to go around pretending to be a victim because of something that happened to my great-grandfather, the cold, hard truth is that this is the real world, everyone is wrapped up in their own drama. No one gives a de facto sh*te, ultimately.

  On individual vs group identity: they are both mutually exclusive when it comes to legal status, legislative reform and equal treatment before the law. That’s…the…point.
  It took us a very long time in the West to arrive at this delicate, civilised legal balance; and now people who are not capable of comprehending it, want to discard it, in favour of utter nonsense upon stilts. (The twisted logic of “group” identity renders the dystopian nightmare of collective punishment a distinct possibility. Rewards & punishment; carrot & stick).

  You think the concept that all lives matter is “rubbish” & “bullcrap?” Disturbingly revealing (psycho alert!). You employ too many groundless assumptions, flawed premises, illogical non sequiturs; far too much vacuous sophistry and spurious “reasoning” - back to the drawing board with you, I say!

  Yes, I know it’s a shock, but halfwits on all sides of this are racist/sexist/homophobic. That’s what I’m manifestly criticising. All the eejits. If you choose to identify with the eejit “group” - so be it. You may not be as pithy as loonyboy, but at least derive comfort from the fact that you’re equally wrong.

  You need to lie down man, you’re contriving crazy, false narratives and tilting at them like the Don! Amusing, but tragic nonetheless. Indeed so, further explanation would be futile. So, in addition to supporting racist pseudo-thought, you hate disabled people (or “ret*rds” as you disgustingly term them). You really do believe in dividing human beings up according to group identity, and then reserving the privilege to detest them for it. Unthinking prejudice is truly ugly.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  BioCapsule
  April 29th, 2019
  

  @caesar963 lol yes, sauser99 may be ironic, doesn’t change that the comments are under such context. “You cannot develop as a person, or a people, until you take control of your own subjectivity and make your own choices.” blah blah… That may be you, again you pointlessly wax pseudo-philosophical rubbish that you seem to think as “wisdom” because you think too highly of your own conclusion and somehow do deem ok to dictate it as some ultimate “truth”. So much for honoring individual identity.

  I can be an individual and be supportive of or as part of a group. The shared group identity & experiences can be part of an individuals identity, it’s all up to the individual. Again, just because you are incapable of it, doesn’t mean much at all. Nor is it anyone else’s problem. They are not mutually exclusive just because you say so… you simply declare and somehow think it true? As said, it something that isn’t always in conflict.

  I don’t go around pretending to be victim, I don’t actively call others victims. I however demand fair treatment no less then others, for others, and hopefully help other if I can. Doing it as an individual or as part of a group is not an issue for me. I however do not need to accept your crap simply because you think individual and groups seeking their equality is a threat to what you think is a “delicate balance”. It apparently couldn’t be you being utterly wrong, it has to people “not capable of comprehending”.

  You think it’s just something that happens to ancestors? (which doesn’t even apply to me) You think people are ‘pretending’ victim-hood because of ancestry? Wow… you really are a piece work. At least it shows that dignified individual identity of others don’t mean sh*t to you. I don’t need to accuse you of what you try to counter-accuse other, your statement reveals who you are.

  Lives does matter, doesn’t mean that ‘all lives matter’ gets to use it as pretext for their less then honorable purpose.

  Like I say, you should “never go full retard”. That how you end up being here trying to pontificate pseudo-thought, pretending it is deeper then it really is. (and also apparently I can’t use a movie reference without being accuse as hating disabled) Btw, doing mental-jujitsu to justify your own prejudices as some greater “ideal”, only works mostly on you…

  I don’t think this discussion, nor any future exchange serve any purpose. You are so full of yourself that even Narcissus would blush. No wonder you so commonly appear in this category, spewing. Loonyboyx is much more astute, 3 lines is more then enough, may be even too much. lol

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  caesar963
  April 29th, 2019
  

  LMFAO! You’re being hysterical! Try to focus and think clearly, and get a hold of yourself. Compose your mind, and concentrate your thoughts. And try to stop using slurs relating to disabled people, you might think it makes you sound edgy and cool, but trust me, it’s as pathetic, inadequate and evil as categorising people according to what you think their “race” ought to be. It reveals a very unhealthy obsession with so-called “race.” Try to snap out of that rather sleazy fixation.

  You genuinely can’t see the disturbing parallels and precedents to identifying with a tribal/group identity - indulging that narrowest part of yourself, and allowing that to express your essence? A child with a rudimentary knowledge of history could make the connection, and you cannot. That’s the reason so many people can’t grasp these concepts, and are terrified of ideas - not even a basic, working consciousness of the factual historical record. I would be more inclined to blame your education on this point, rather than you personally.

  I know that you were confused that I had to repeatedly call you to task for reprehensible (or non-existent!) reasoning. But this was a central problem and a causal factor in your failure to understand. Unfortunately, you didn’t demonstrate that you fully comprehended the crucial issues involved. Sequential thought is critical here, and making bare assertions without any supporting argumentation was a principal weakness, for future reference. As a useful analogy, in order to accomplish any task, one requires the necessary implements. This is no less true when you have to think things through. You need information and a cultivated, trained mind to sort, weigh and sift that data. To determine what is valuable and important, and what is not. Refer back to what I said on the subject of law, legal rights, and equality before the law - if you take nothing else away, this represents significant guidance.

  If this is your first time debating a political topic, it would be a further mistake to give up at the first attempt just because it didn’t go at all well. If linguistic problems are an effective barrier to communication & comprehension, nothing is served by not identifying those failures. I would caution against continuously seeking to take refuge behind incoherence, others might not be as patient with you. That’s where you’d get dismissed early on. Unless the unscrupulous, Machiavellian strategy is to construct an elaborate word salad which will dissemble the complete absence of a coherent thought or argument?!

  Why discriminate on the basis of who and what an individual is - male or female; black or white; gay or straight; or any variation thereof? This is the central question, on which social justice activists are entirely self-refuting. There is no “acceptable” prejudice or racism - this is inescapable logic: if you admit any, your argument utterly collapses.

  If I choose to join a political party or a golf club, that’s volitional. However, I cannot choose my ethnicity or sexual orientation. They are not achievements; equally, nor should I be punished for them. This is where ludicrous “social justice” consumes itself. It’s where logic goes to die an excruciating, agonising death. Like MLK said, try to see past skin colour to the true person and their individual merits and character.

  You should’ve quit while you were so woefully far behind - you were digging a hole straight down to the pit of Hades for yourself.
  The other chap achieved peak error in a much shorter piece. I suppose that is an achievement of sorts…
  You were wiping the floor with yourself for much of it, rofl! It was the argumentative equivalent of savagely punching yourself in the head. Incessantly.

  I almost admired your tenacity, but as to your arguments, they remained stubbornly obtuse & fatuous. You should get points for so consistently missing the point at every given opportunity and patient explanation. I think that I correctly identified the problem earlier on. Anyway, it’s like you’ve got these shields on that are perfectly adjusted to deflect logic and reason. Set faces to stunned!

  The pertinacity is born out of a lack of knowledge (and perhaps interest?) in the pertinent areas.
  You could generate more interest by reading about the subject areas, and then you can embark on your steep learning curve. I wish you well in the worthwhile endeavour! Just don’t go in seeking to bolster superficial, wrongheaded convictions.
  Don’t fear ideas unduly.

  What is there left to say? I suppose I hope your debating skills improve - in the absolute sense! I hope the pointers help.
  Oh, and join us when the shuttle lands!

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  Jiminy Cricket
  May 8th, 2019
  

  The new social justice is not only belittling the word, “justice,” it also lacks self-criticism, if Caesar doesn’t mind me borrowing one of his favorite terms. And, yes, it really is unraveling America. Thankfully, people recognize the idiocy for what it is.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman
• 
  SpaceMonkey23
  May 14th, 2019
  

  ‘Social justice’ is an anti-western psyop designed to undermine and destroy western society. It was started by the Soviets during the cold war, and has continued today, promoted by both Russia and China.

  Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America - Noah Rothman

Add a comment (please log in before commenting)