The internet has gone all atwitter over a recording of a woman berating a Lyft driver for having a Hawaiian hula doll on his dashboard. The short video is well worth a watch, if only to demonstrate that social justice warriors (SJWs) do exist in real life and do fit the worst caricatures made of them.
The video blogger, one Annaliese Nielsen, offered up textbook SJW catchphrases and stock words, in a whiney, affected 21st-century Valley Girl equivalent. The anchor for them all was her assertion that the driver was, as a white male, the “least hurt in the situation.” The driver later identified himself as Asian, whereupon Ms. Nielsen attempted to grill him about the composition of his “Asian-ness.” In doing so, she may be deemed in violation of the principle of self-identification that is part of progressive social-justivism, but as we’ll see in a moment, she employed the exception to that rule.
When I first heard of the incident, I wondered if the accuser had taken the time to determine whether the driver had some Hawaiian heritage, or whether the doll was crafted and sold to him by a native Hawaiian. Either of those might be legitimizers, but I suspect that such provenance would have to be established before the SJW had the opportunity to accuse.
Once the accusation was made, of course, there was no chance of a reversal or mea culpa, because the “white male” exception had been invoked. In the social justice world, white males are the lowest rank on the totem pole, the nadir of the grievance hierarchy, and the eternally safe target. They are presumed guilty, no matter their socioeconomic status, no matter their life arc, no matter their beliefs, their upbringing, their politics, or their efforts in the social justice realm. It doesn’t matter if they grew up dirt-poor, if they were bullied their entire lives, or if they embrace all the correct political positions.
White males bear the equivalent of original sin in the SJ world. Thus, they are required to spend a lifetime engaging in atonement, even if they themselves have done nothing wrong. The irony that this is overt racism and sexism is lost on the SJWs, who will tell everyone who’ll listen that racism and sexism are one-way streets. The other irony lies in the extension of the religious metaphor.
Those most likely to be given a bye for their white-male-ness are the rich and powerful who are “of the Church of Social Justice.” Thus, Bill Clinton is adored, despite his atrocious record regarding the treatment of women. George Soros is also adored, despite his deep association with the financial world that the SJWs deplore. Michael Bloomberg wore the dreaded “Republican” label as mayor of New York City, but his extensive spending on issues cherished by the left and his relentless nannying are sufficient “indulgences” to keep him in the Church’s good graces. There’s that thing: “indulgences.” Spend enough money on SJW-approved issues and you buy yourself enough “good guy” points to countervail your original sin.
The “original sin” of being born white-male only affects you if you accept it. Like religion, it requires faith and commitment. Unlike religion, there’s no promise of a glorious afterlife. The best most white males can hope for in that world is a reduced degree of contempt aimed in their direction. Only the mightiest few, the “church elders,” if you will, are allowed to rise above the levels of purgatory. The lack of a positive reward is a problem for the Church, and the members of the SJW hierarchy know it. Thus, progressive society works overtime to inculcate this doctrine and dogma into today’s young white males, and measures its success by the degree to which they turn boys into sniveling, shivering, quivering chihuahuas.
Fortunately, they can only apply social pressure, and it is within each of us to reject the false premise being foisted upon us. I applaud the Lyft driver for refusing to accede to the self-important twit’s demands, and I applaud the blogosphere for mocking her. Her response that the mockery is “gamergate style anti feminist bunch of nonsense” suggests she’s learned nothing from this incident, but we should not be surprised. Dogma doesn’t brook dissent.
As fortunately, more and more people are getting fed up with the excesses of the Church of Social Justice. People can only be beat down so much before they stop “taking it,” and the increasingly absurd nonsense coming from SJ quarters is prompting more and more people to ignore rather than comply.
As for the hula girl? I noticed that Ms. Nielsen did not assert any Hawaiian heritage of her own, which means she was offended on behalf of someone else. If we had a little less of that in the world, we’d all get along much better.
Loading ...
The word you are looking for is “arrogance”. Finding injustice when you are not even the person that has presumably been slighted, without even asking them, is a textbook example of you putting your interests over theirs. This would not happen in a polite society. For all the talk of “it’s just basic politeness” that SJW’s claim to be acting upon, really they’re the most impolite of all.
I guess you simply have to be “worthy” of their politeness.