Intimately understanding the fundamentals of Social Justice is important because it can now be recognized as a dominate ideology in both American and western culture. The ideology aims to uproot existing liberal moral and political imperatives and replace them with a new moral creed. Social Justice, having made its way through academia, social media, conventional media and now, corporate America, has rooted itself firmly in American culture and has made itself a permanent feature of American society so understanding its origins, its creed and its goal is critical. This essay will explore the intellectual evolution that prepared the ground for this new ideology, the nature of this new “religion,” how citizens may prevent total cultural usurpation and what life under Social Justice reign portends.
Following The Evolution
To begin delving into the historical evolution of western religious thought, albeit in the broadest, most simplified terms possible, it is worth considering first what is religion and what purpose it serves mankind. Religion is a cause, principle or system of beliefs bound by passion and faith in service to or in worship of God (or gods). Religion serves mankind in two principle ways. The world being a brutal, unpredictable place leaves man with a psychological deficit of understanding his purpose, how to navigate pain and suffering and lack of clarity into a framework for good living. Religion serves to unite a moral community on a set of mutually accepted norms and values to enhance relationships and set expectations for acceptable and unacceptable behavior thus making the challenges of life at least more bearable if not altogether enjoyable at times. Premodern religion was based on these premises. Premodern faith sought to explain the world and man’s role in it through mythologies and stories beginning with paganism and leading to mono-theism; an intellectual advance that provided for an objective truth and moral standard which existed over and beyond the consciousness of man. The teachings of advanced religious thought aimed to soften the menace of suffering by offering “truths” as a framework for how to live and act with one another. Belief in these truths was considered a mutual and moral obligation and were accepted on faith. Unfortunately, the doctrine espoused by premodern religion was subjected to coercion and power as religious doctrine became co-mingled with governance in the western world. In reaction to this corruption, the Enlightenment period ushered in an era of religious skepticism and was accompanied by the invent of scientific inquiry. The modern period, characterized by liberal thought, rationality, science and concentration on individualism, argued that faith-based beliefs were not epistemologically justifiable and could not suffice as legitimate “knowledge.” While scientific inquiry and reason were enormously satisfying contributions to the human experience, modernity eroded adherence to faith-based knowledge and ultimately led western society toward the infamous Neitzchian pronouncement that God was dead. This era paved the way for the social prevalence of agnosticism, atheism, nihilism and Darwinism. However, even though modern Enlightenment thought provided a more verifiable knowledge of the world, …
We have prepared a serious analysis of the Smithsonian pamphlet purportedly
enumerating cultural aspects of Whiteness and White Culture. Are these actually
characteristics of white people or are these qualities and lifestyles adopted by
Posting Soon: Analysis of the Smithsonian Pamphlet: Attack on Whiteness or Christianity?
The seemingly irreconcilable division plaguing twenty-first century America is a chronic refusal to use facts as a foundation for problem identification and thus, problem-solving. Human beings seem to be hardwired with a psychological mechanism to lie to ourselves when it is necessary to preserve the integrity of our belief system. How can free people solve real problems when they are chronically suffering from a lack of desire to seek truth; when they are willfully blind?
Willful blindness manifests both individually and collectively. CEO and author Margaret Heffernan has concentrated her work on the collective aspect of this phenomenon in the legal realm. She identifies willful blindness as situationally occurring when there is information one could know and should know yet somehow manages not to know. In her studies she investigates how collectively individuals who are party to wrongdoing choose to be blind to transgression in an attempt to render themselves legally immune from liability or consequence. She cites as examples the 2007 Mortgage Crisis, the decades-long Catholic church abuse scandal and the Iraq War. Her studies indicate that approximately eighty-five percent of people involved in a collective ordeal sense the transgression but will not bring it to light. People are generally more averse to fear of retaliation and sacrifice than they are motivated to stop wrongdoing or evil. For a deeper understanding of why this would be the case, a look at how this psychological phenomenon manifests on the individual level is helpful.
Dr. Jordan Peterson has studied the phenomenon of willful blindness and explains that all humans possess the capacity to lie to themselves when it serves to protect their fundamental belief system. Our belief systems are complex mental networks, or maps, comprised of assumptions and presuppositions that help us orient ourselves in the world and navigate experiences as we move through life. The biggest threat to human stability is chaos, therefore, the human mind will take necessary steps to avoid falling into a chaotic, unpredictable hell of confusion and uncertainty. Our axiomatic structure allows us to orient ourselves in the past, the present and the future and thus maintain a comparatively constant sense of self-identity.
An incident of infidelity well exemplifies how significant axiomatic disruption ricochets throughout one’s self-orientation creating profound, if not permanent, psychological damage. An intimate relationship, particularly marriage, is predicated on the idea of fidelity. Memories of the relationship are construed on the supposition of past fidelity, the present is balanced on the predicate of current fidelity and future plans are presumed to manifest on the assumption of continued trust and loyalty. Additionally, how a person identifies him or herself in that representation of the relationship is based on the presupposition of fidelity. Once one or multiple episodes of infidelity have been revealed, a chasm of interpersonal, psychological chaos opens. The representation of the relationship in the past is wrong, the present is wrong and the future is something different than what was anticipated. The whole story is false. Subsequently, there is confrontation with …
Given the spirit of the age it might be prudent to refine the American conception of “freedom” and “rights.” Regarding …
Are we a people who have grown ever closer to manifesting the ideals of freedom, opportunity and equality between all …
Sign up to receive updates for creative, informative content on the Conservative Chalkboard.
Just want to leave us a message?
Use the form below. Name and email are optional, but if you’d like to hear back from us, we’ll need an email.