A Social Justice Warrior is ‘a person who expresses or promotes socially progressive views’ (Oxford Dictionaries)
The online Urban dictionary offers a more substantial explanation:
“A pejorative term for an individual who repeatedly and vehemently engages in arguments on social justice on the Internet, often in a shallow or not well-thought-out way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A social justice warrior, or SJW, does not necessarily strongly believe all that they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting on behalf of. They typically repeat points from whoever is the most popular blogger or commenter of the moment, hoping that they will “get SJ points” and become popular in return. They are very sure to adopt stances that are “correct” in their social circle.” [i]
In the case you’re doubting the credibility of Urban Dictionary, take as further evidence, defining examples highlighted by the observer.com in an article called, ‘The Totalitarian Doctrine of Social Justice Warriors’. Such as:
“[when] your cool feminist T-shirt can becomes a racist atrocity in a mouse click. And since new “marginalised” identities can always emerge, no one can tell what currently acceptable words or ideas may be excommunicated tomorrow.”
I’m not in full support of every claim made by the author in the article, but the majority of the content makes a dent in the “progressive” bulldozers steamrolling everything they’re told to hate, or anyone that they’ve (ironically) judged as “judgemental, phobic or a hater.”
In one swift statement, the article presents the monstrous maelstroms of confusion S.J.W’s tend to create.
Another stand out example:
In addition, take the S.J.Ws apparent war on poverty and their counter-productive boycott of business.
Don’t get me wrong. Poverty is to be challenged and real injustices responsibly opposed, but how does boycotting businesses, just because they don’t agree with a party-line about same-sex marriage or support hashtag movements, serve the poor or help end poverty? In some cases the targets were mum and dad, small to medium businesses, who did nothing other than support traditional marriage, as being something shared holistically between a man and a woman. The impact of which hits charitable people actively trying to pull themselves and others out of poverty.
The method of boycott, hashtag, hashtag… people lose their jobs. Company shuts down. Capitalism is blamed [24hrs passes]. “Next victim”; is a radical cycle that only pads ego, wallet and blog stats.
What real purpose does this “outrage” serve, other than to boost approval ratings, celebrity funding drives or ignite social media with a feel-good fifteen minute hashtag keyboard riot?
It would be fair to ask whether or not their level of social media influence was the real concern, and not the marginalised, the minority or the poverty stricken.
Militant arms of all progressive ideologies are not about “…and justice-for-all.” They stand above, over and against us. They lay claims against the biblical equality of human limitations which states that: ”for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by His grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (Romans 3:23-24).
They don’t ask ‘…what can I do for my country?” (J.F.Kennedy) They demand that their country do for them what their free country empowers them to do for themselves!
The militancy hands justice over to pseudo politicians who judge from people’s courts, controlling popular opinion with image, idea, internet, and an index-finger pointed in judgement against blasphemers of idiotic statements and the ‘isms which encourage them.
This is not affirmative action. It’s the kind of action that motivated support for the Nazis and above that ‘Judas Iscariot, who went to the chief priests and said, “What will you give me if I deliver Jesus over to you?” Who in return paid him thirty pieces of silver. And from that moment he sought an opportunity to betray him.’ (Matthew 26:14-15/ Mark 14:10-11/ Luke 22:3-6) [ii]
The same ‘Judas who, seeing Mary take a pound of expensive ointment made from pure nard, anoint the feet of Jesus and wipe his feet with her hair, protested, saying:“Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?”, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the money-bag he used to help himself to what was put into it.’ (John 3:6)
The same Judas who, as Karl Barth wrote:
‘Perverted his office [of Apostle] into the exact opposite; placing Jesus under humanity, instead of humanity under Jesus – to deliver Jesus to sinners, not sinners to Jesus…Judas prepared for Jesus the fate of John the Baptist.’ [iii]
Because Iscariot thought that:
“Jesus was for sale.
He reserved to himself the right to decide for himself, in the face of Jesus, what the way of apostolic discipleship really involves.
It is an indication that his nature and function are those of the apostle who ultimately regrets his own devotion and the devotion of others to Jesus, who would prefer ultimately to use the power of this devotion for something which his own judgement considers to be better; for whom Jesus is finally less important and indispensable than this better thing.” [iv]
These statements form Barth’s critique of the elected who, in their rejection of Christ, reject themselves; suffering a similar fate of self-destruction that consumed Judas:
‘The one who kills Jesus also kills themselves, even though he [or she] may not technically be a suicide.’ [v]
This handing over of Jesus is occurring today. Jesus is being surrendered to an ideology as a slave, not as He exists – King of Kings and LORD of Lords, the one who is and was, and is to come!
The Social Justice Warrior is in many ways the militant arm of the progressive ‘liberalist religion’ (Eric Voeglin) [vi]. One example epitomises this: the Boycott and Divestments movement against Israel, and the inferences which proclaim that anyone who doesn’t align with the Leftist religion is not a disciple of Christ.
The will-to-dominate is, today, masked by the veneer of social justice. What it shows is that pride serves no one, least of all mercy, justice and love.
As Paul wrote to the young Timothy:
‘If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth…O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge, for by professing it some have swerved from the faith.’
(1 Tm.6:3-5 & 20-21)
Any Christian who hands Jesus over to this corrupt, enslaving ideology; or who chooses to measure Christian discipleship by allegiance to such, are the brethren of Iscariot, not Christ.
[i] Social Justice Warrior, sourced 29th August 2016 from urbandictionary.com
[ii] English Standard Bible, Crossway Publishers
[iii] Barth, K. 1942 The Doctrine of God: The Determination of the Rejected, Church Dogmatics, Hendrickson Publishers (p.481)
[iv] ibid, 1942 (pp.462 & 463)
[v] ibid, 192 (p.471)
[vi] Voegelin, E. 1968 Science, Politics & Religion Regnery Publishing, Inc.