The key is recognizing and naming the "social justice" version of Marxism for what it is - a religion. A core set of basic beliefs, not subject to examination, scrutiny or criticism, that people use to give meaning to their experience, regardless of whether that set of beliefs involves belief in a deity. It's interesting to me that the hard left now overtly and hypocritically practices what it has long (and wrongly, in my view) criticized its opponents for doing - using institutional power to promote adherence to its religion. Mandatory workplace DEI training is a perfect example of this. Take this DEI training and answer these questions to demonstrate that you understand and agree with the principles being taught (and you'd better get all the answers right), or you can't work here. The funny thing is that I don't recall ever being required to take theological training (or attend a workplace Bible study) as a condition of employment, and nobody (including me) would stand for such a requirement. Why do we play "go-along-to-get-along" with the DEI version of it?
That's a great point. Of course faculty would strongly object to a Bible workshop to teach Christian social principles. The social justice perspective is presented as neutral and just stating facts. What we need to do is show how it is not neutral it is promoting principles rooted in the Marxist religion.
Exactly. It's all built on underlying (and unquestionable) premises like "all disparities in racial outcomes are necessarily attributable to racism" and "if someone presents any evidence that casts doubt on premise A, that's just evidence of that person's own racism." Those are claims and assumptions, not facts, and students need to be trained to understand the difference, identify which is which and articulate why the distinction is important. You let me get away with making whatever assumptions I want, and I can prove anything...
Wasn't Jesus Christ himself an advocate for social justice? Did he not standup for the outcast and downtrodden? Or was your JC a different dude?
But more to the point. Why repeat tired Tucker Carlson-isms about Marxists in the university? That's simply a far-right cliche, which is lazy and in addition to being inaccurate -- and, frankly, smacks not just of Carlson-ism (if you like, I suppose it's a thing now), but McCarthyism.
Why all the mudslinging and fearmongering? If you don't like your colleagues, I'm sure you can find a job preaching somewhere else -- probably pays better too.
Well isn't that just the thing. If you define "social justice" solely in terms of "class struggle" and "oppression" you can make Marx the godhead; if you favor phrases like maintaining "the right of the afflicted and the destitute," you've got the Old Testament to thank. But if you prefer a more standard definition -- one aligned with the field of academic study -- you'll get something like ensuring that "everyone's human rights are respected, protected, and promoted." Do you have a problem with that?
Exactly, it depends. So to demonize the entire enterprise as Marxist is a gross over simplification, at best. Sit in on a class, read a book, look at the curriculum to see what is actually being done -- instead of parroting the same old culture war talking points. Just saying.
The key is recognizing and naming the "social justice" version of Marxism for what it is - a religion. A core set of basic beliefs, not subject to examination, scrutiny or criticism, that people use to give meaning to their experience, regardless of whether that set of beliefs involves belief in a deity. It's interesting to me that the hard left now overtly and hypocritically practices what it has long (and wrongly, in my view) criticized its opponents for doing - using institutional power to promote adherence to its religion. Mandatory workplace DEI training is a perfect example of this. Take this DEI training and answer these questions to demonstrate that you understand and agree with the principles being taught (and you'd better get all the answers right), or you can't work here. The funny thing is that I don't recall ever being required to take theological training (or attend a workplace Bible study) as a condition of employment, and nobody (including me) would stand for such a requirement. Why do we play "go-along-to-get-along" with the DEI version of it?
That's a great point. Of course faculty would strongly object to a Bible workshop to teach Christian social principles. The social justice perspective is presented as neutral and just stating facts. What we need to do is show how it is not neutral it is promoting principles rooted in the Marxist religion.
Exactly. It's all built on underlying (and unquestionable) premises like "all disparities in racial outcomes are necessarily attributable to racism" and "if someone presents any evidence that casts doubt on premise A, that's just evidence of that person's own racism." Those are claims and assumptions, not facts, and students need to be trained to understand the difference, identify which is which and articulate why the distinction is important. You let me get away with making whatever assumptions I want, and I can prove anything...
And even looking at disparities in the first place. The Marxist religion makes oppressed/oppressor the lens through which all else is considered.
Wasn't Jesus Christ himself an advocate for social justice? Did he not standup for the outcast and downtrodden? Or was your JC a different dude?
But more to the point. Why repeat tired Tucker Carlson-isms about Marxists in the university? That's simply a far-right cliche, which is lazy and in addition to being inaccurate -- and, frankly, smacks not just of Carlson-ism (if you like, I suppose it's a thing now), but McCarthyism.
Why all the mudslinging and fearmongering? If you don't like your colleagues, I'm sure you can find a job preaching somewhere else -- probably pays better too.
What is “social justice”?
What is "Marxism"?
One more chance: what is social justice? Read the first line of the Communist Manifesto.
Well isn't that just the thing. If you define "social justice" solely in terms of "class struggle" and "oppression" you can make Marx the godhead; if you favor phrases like maintaining "the right of the afflicted and the destitute," you've got the Old Testament to thank. But if you prefer a more standard definition -- one aligned with the field of academic study -- you'll get something like ensuring that "everyone's human rights are respected, protected, and promoted." Do you have a problem with that?
It depends. What is the cause of affliction and destitution or oppression? And for the Academics, what are these rights and where do they come from?
Exactly, it depends. So to demonize the entire enterprise as Marxist is a gross over simplification, at best. Sit in on a class, read a book, look at the curriculum to see what is actually being done -- instead of parroting the same old culture war talking points. Just saying.