SJW's generally don't care about definitions, unless they are dishonestly using them as an absolute authority to dodge responsibility for their actions.

For example, the same feminists who demand special privileges and advocate for female supremacy will immediately pull out a dictionary and declare the feminism is a movement for egalitarianism.

To me, SJWs are largely the under-30 liberals who have no sense of personal responsibility, who are so deeply immersed in the an ideology of identity politics they function like a cult, who are intolerant of anyone elses opinion, who are against free speech, who think bullying is fine as long as its done by the right side, who lack a sense of meaning and purpose in life and so invest all of their self worth and sense of purpose in their extremist political/social views, and who eagerly, shamelessly participate in grouthink.

SJWs have ruined feminism and they both started and ruined the Black Lies Matters movement.


But wikipedia has, perhaps, a more useful explanation. Remember, this is NOT about 'equal rights for women' nor is it about 'civil rights', nor is it about a 'positive, functional approach to multiculturalism'. That's the facade, the self deception they engage in:

"Social justice warrior" (commonly abbreviated SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual promoting socially progressive views,[1] including feminism,[1][2] civil rights,[1] multiculturalism,[1] and identity politics.[3] The accusation of being an SJW carries implications of pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction,[4] and being engaged in disingenuous social justice arguments or activism to raise personal reputation, also known as virtue signalling.[5]"

and get what?

article doesnt say anything has happened except for investigation

but

its interesting that he notes the suspects ethnicity and not the victims

in black communities, mostly suspects are black

same in white communities

or mexican

or asian


unless criminals walk around with their ethnicity on their forehead searching for those without the same on theirs,, crime within communities is not news,,,

truth is great

partial truth can be harmfully misleading

As always, the problem with this is sort of subtle.

That is, that there is a TON of duplicity involved, and too many people reacting to it, are either ignorantly or purposely pretending that the duplicity and the erroneous thinking isn't present.

One BIG hint that this guy has problems, is where he (supposedly) tries to hide behind the "I'm not politically correct" trick.

The goal of using that phrase these days, is almost invariably to try to promote racism, sexism, or some other obvious prejudice, by pretending that the existence of even the IDEA of prejudice,is a political myth.

Here's the core challenge: there is a HA-YOOOGE difference, between pointing out that a lot of crimes are being committed by a given subgroup...and instead, suggesting/implying that the SOLUTION to those crimes, is to formally arrange for systematic prejudice against ALL members of that group.

THAT is the problem with this guy's facebook post. As with too many Americans who also chant the "I'm not politically correct" phrase as a mantra/lie to hide their own prejudices, this guy certainly appears to be purposely advocating that everyone become purposely anti-immigrant, and or anti-Muslim, and/or anti Arabic (since he focused on Arabic names).

There is nothing MORE "politically correct" these days, than to declare that you are NOT "politically correct," and then to try to use that as an excuse for your being rude, thoughtless, selfish, or outright anti-democratic.

Is anti-democratic a Racist?

what is an SJW?

and the definition of RACISM is:

a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.


those who hold such beliefs or express such beliefs are called 'racists'



like this or that group gets arrested more because the 'group' is more criminal,,,,,etc,,etc,,

SJW's generally don't care about definitions, unless they are dishonestly using them as an absolute authority to dodge responsibility for their actions.

For example, the same feminists who demand special privileges and advocate for female supremacy will immediately pull out a dictionary and declare the feminism is a movement for egalitarianism.

To me, SJWs are largely the under-30 liberals who have no sense of personal responsibility, who are so deeply immersed in the an ideology of identity politics they function like a cult, who are intolerant of anyone elses opinion, who are against free speech, who think bullying is fine as long as its done by the right side, who lack a sense of meaning and purpose in life and so invest all of their self worth and sense of purpose in their extremist political/social views, and who eagerly, shamelessly participate in grouthink.

SJWs have ruined feminism and they both started and ruined the Black Lies Matters movement.


But wikipedia has, perhaps, a more useful explanation. Remember, this is NOT about 'equal rights for women' nor is it about 'civil rights', nor is it about a 'positive, functional approach to multiculturalism'. That's the facade, the self deception they engage in:

"Social justice warrior" (commonly abbreviated SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual promoting socially progressive views,[1] including feminism,[1][2] civil rights,[1] multiculturalism,[1] and identity politics.[3] The accusation of being an SJW carries implications of pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction,[4] and being engaged in disingenuous social justice arguments or activism to raise personal reputation, also known as virtue signalling.[5]"

Again. IF such a post,listing all the people with Arabic names who committed crimes, had been posted specifically and directly in response to someone else claiming that NO such people committed crimes, then it would NOT have been a problem.

There was no such argument made at all. Instead, it was an obvious attempt to portray ALL Arab immigrants as inherently criminally dangerous.

Pretending it was a simple listing of facts, is another example of supporting prejudice as a way of dealing with concerns, as opposed to dealing with the criminal acts directly.

Following the same reasoning, anyone with a white European heritage should be presumed to be the real danger when it comes to committing tremendous financial scams and crimes, since the vast majority of those are indeed committed by white European Christians.

The problem with prejudice-as-a-solution people has always been, that they don't think things all the way through. They stop looking at bad behavior, as soon as they are done listing the people that they already hate or fear.

"If you can't discuss the problem of crime among immigrants without somebody attributing it to racist propaganda, we are in deep trouble," he said. "The problem is that nobody wants to talk about this."

Establishing facts about how crime rates correlate with perpetrators belonging to the immigrant community is not the same thing as branding all immigrants criminals, Springare said explaining his position.

isn't that why politics threads exist?,,,,

'only I know the REAL truth',,,,,,

lol... they are called "liberals"...

Ah, the old logical fallacies, let us count the ways: Appeal to Pity, Bandwagon Fallacy, Appeal to Consequences, Appeal to Popularity, and Arguing from Ignorance all wrapped up in a Red Herring Fallacy. And that isn't all of them.

I believe an award should be in order.

And truth has nothing to do with it?