We live in an era when the rise of the recognition of previously unrecognized human rights coincides with the perceived inadequacy of governments to address them.
This gap between social needs and their fulfillment has resulted in the rise of a group which is popularly known as SJW - or ‘Social Justice Warriors’. Many of these are millennials, born into a disintegrating global world in the past 25-30 years. They are highly educated, and often poorly paid in exchange for their qualifications and skills.
They are highly articulate, and often come from minority ethnic groups in majoritarian nations. They are combative, challenging and often incensed by the world around them, in which primitive ideas like patriarchal supremacy, racism and class bias proliferate. They sometimes use their ‘victim status’ to gain sympathy, support and access to liberal humanist circles in first world nations, which they then criticize from within, protected by the political systems of the countries to which they have gained admission. Pushback for this is inevitable, given the power structures of the world as it is, yet it seems to come as a surprise to many of them when they are accused of victim narcissism, hypocrisy or trauma peddling.
They have had to fight for their social and political space, from a marginalized and disrespected race, gender and class position. This makes identity politics their sigil and their war flag. This also makes them almost permanently frustrated, accusatory, stressed and angry. They are constantly mocked, accused of being ‘fragile’, ‘snowflakes’ and ‘easily triggered’. (It’s enough to make anyone furious.) They are offered ‘cheese with their whine’, because everything they write is seen as a complaint.
But they do themselves few favours by constantly arguing with people who they stereotype as ‘against them’, and who they frequently assume are biased towards them, as they pride themselves on ‘speaking Truth to Power’. ‘Justice’ is their catch cry, but they are often unjust in their own dealings with others, quick to make demeaning assumptions about those who oppose or do not agree with them.
In fact, it is eye-opening to see the way some of the SJWs operate on social media. Acutely aware of their own rights, they are frequently not so aware of their responsibilities in social discourse. They focus on what is due to them, and praise themselves and each other for their contributions to making the world a better place. They form cliques and conduct campaigns to raise awareness. Not all of them are well educated in the issues they dispute about.
And many of them are card carrying, core citizens of Cancel Culture.
They are the products of a narrowing world, and a highly technological era, where many of the views they hold have been prompted, influenced and disseminated by global social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. It is important to recognize that these platforms were created not (as their creators assert) to enable the construction of communities but to mobilize interest groups and weaponise opinion. And they have been very effective in doing so. The social and political world today is a divided place, noisy with the self assertions of everyone with an opinion to put forward. Which is everyone, especially those who were not often listened to in their youth. They are given a platform on which to perform. And perform they do.
The journalist and social media commentator Thulasi Muttulingam recently commented on what she saw as ‘The habit of the Generation X, Y, Z generations to label people they disagree with as “ist” or “phobe” of whatever kind, along with the push to cancel their lives and employment’, observing that ‘They act like a witch-finding mob on Twitter... (exhibiting a) crazy mob mentality,’ making the experience of participating on the Twitter platform like navigating ‘a minefield’.
The very same people who campaign for human rights and social justice are often both cruel and malicious to others, justifying their viciousness with accusations that their target ‘deserved it’, because of whatever transgression they had committed. Sometimes the target’s perceived transgression is expressing a racist or anti-LGBTQI or anti BIPOC viewpoint. Reductive labels are routinely thrown at the perceived transgressors, along with accusations of white supremacism, elitism, and unconscious or conscious bias, and their reputations are shredded and their metaphorical statues toppled down.
Those who behave like this start by criticizing, commenting and getting rewarded for their sassy sound bites with accumulated likes and positive emojis. Some grow out of this performative reactiveness, often after achieving some professional success, and realize that constant arguing is not a good look, after a certain age. But some increase their efforts until they cross the boundaries into slander, defamation and libel, conscious only of their own freedom of speech - and impervious to the equal rights of others to express their opinions without being targeted as criminals.
‘Too many people alert and woke rather than awake’, commented Muttulingam. I would say they are not so much ‘alert’ as constantly vigilant. On the lookout for anything offensive. Glorying in causing disruption, to admittedly unjust and out of date systems. Constantly triggered. To the point of exhaustion, burn out and compulsive bridge burning. Each time they offend someone in retaliation for offense given to them, they tell themselves they are too big for the littleness of that person. Very little self evaluation is undertaken, and indeed in such a stone-throwing, volatile, reactive context there is neither time nor mental space for such a necessary activity. The enforced democracy of the platforms results in experts and amateurs co-existing, and the value of their contributions being equated in real time. Some of the differences which are thereby erased should instead be noted and recognised.
The entire culture suffers as a result of all this. Instead of engaging in a litany of clamorous complaint and retributive remonstrance, these people could be engaging in politics, and pushing through legislation to change the society as pioneers of socio-cultural innovation.
But first they must comprehend that reactivity blocks reciprocity. This combative conduct does not build community, but incites mockery, vengeance and contempt. SJWs are accused of being attention-getting opportunity hogs, focused primarily on their own self advancement, and hitching their campaigns to the causes which gain the most primary traction. In their wish to assert themselves and provoke response, a pathological narcissism is sometimes evident. Some might say this is a primary qualification for entry into politics.
Yet at their best, SJWs are admirable people: many of their ideals are deeply and sincerely held: they believe in the decolonising and equitable redistribution of wealth, power and privilege. They believe that access to privilege should be shared, for the benefit of all. They believe in giving opportunity to those who have often been systematically overlooked, and whose voices have been suppressed and overridden. Because they themselves have been denied a seat at the tables of influence, they are more mindful of who is missing in any social space they come to occupy. They tend to compulsively critique and challenge stagnancy and inertia.
They proudly and loudly assert their identity markers - gender preference, ethnicity, neurodivergent status and political beliefs - in their Twitter handles and Instagram and Facebook profiles. They believe in accountability and try to live lives aligned with their values. They discount objectivity and detachment as goals of conduct, or even a possibility, and state that their own subjective biases influence every choice they make. Their communications are laden with acronyms and jargon. Their favourite word is ‘unapologetic’. It’s sometimes a veneer for a lot of disrespect and rudeness.
It can be noted that many of the active participants in cancel culture are formed by a heavily virtual world. They study and interact online, and in their formative years spent hours playing video games, with a heavy focus on combat and war set in fantasy worlds where violence had no consequences in the real world and the damage inflicted carried no moral or legal accountability. They blur professional and personal boundaries. And many have a library of memes with which they respond to others, to save time in formulating a personal response. It takes some painful mistakes before people so prideful and self focused develop any empathy or compassion for anyone’s rights other than their own.
There’s an intensely oppositional and confrontational attitude prevalent wherever cancel culture club members congregate in cliques. This can only be remedied if it is not rewarded, and when the systems which they are at war against self correct, in response to the sustained attack on their citadels. Which they should. Because racism, sexism, systematic inequity and normalized discrimination are unjust. And this blocks and prevents full social participation by many talented people.
But any gains in social equity will be delayed if over-reactions occur, incited by those who go too far, armoured in self justification, reinforced and amplified by echo chamber buddies, and impervious to alternative ways of seeing the world. It is in the power of choice of these creative individuals to course-correct, and refrain from becoming iterations - and grotesque versions of - what they started off protesting against. Then we can truly advance - collectively - towards a higher level of social justice, led by their brilliant instinct for disrupting the status quo.
No comments:
Post a Comment