Social Justice as Religion

So the theory that SJW-ism is an offshoot of Puritanism has been bumping around for a while now so I decided to see if I could find any evidence, eventually I stumbled upon this, what other such "coincidences" have been found? (I think this could become a very effective tool for redpilling certain types of people)

trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today 12-m&q=/m/04xy3,social justice

Other urls found in this thread:

americanthinker.com/articles/2014/04/antonio_gramsci_take_over_the_institutions.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_pedagogy
amazon.com/Divine-Feminine-Theosophy-University-Historical/dp/0801864992
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

...

Why is it always the first fucking post…

Wow those trends match up surprisingly well. Its almost spoopy.

I've seen the comparison made before. It goes something like this:

There are other versions wherein patriarchy is interpreted as God, because it's ultimately the power structure that feminism puts forth even if it's drawn in an antagonistic light. Feminism can not exist without patriarchy, so patriarchy must be pushed no matter what. Perhaps Satan would be a better comparison, but the difference is that Satan ends once God wins, but in this case even if God wins there will always be Satan.

So effectively it is Abrahamic monotheism just without the cheery afterlife.

Do you have a link?

Social justice as a religion was put forth by critical theorists at the frankfurt school, as a way to battle cultural hegemony aka the culture that maintains capitalism.

Feminism came from theosophy, and the concept of the divine feminine, hense why it adopts iconography of religion (venus symbol).

Desire to know more intensifies. Book?

SJW is an orchestated movement. It didn't emerge from nothingness, it a cordinated effort to subvert western civilisation. If it is an offshot of any religion, it would be talmudic judaism.

Why keep it as a theory? Why not just create a church of social justice?

Abrahamic monotheism was the original social justice

"Progress" is the new religion
SJWs are the new puritans
Media kikes are the new pharisees (or rather, they've always been the literal pharisees too)
Radical egalitarianism and tabula rasa are the new central dogma
The holocaust is the new creation myth
Global warming alarmism is the new apocalyptic revelation
White guilt is the new original sin
Anyone who questions any of this is the worst person in the entire world, and needs to be burned at the stake.

This is why some sort of actually eugenic pro-society religion is important. Without it, people don't suddenly become more logical and rational thinkers. They just latch onto something else to fill the void. And the garbage they fill it with is dysgenic and antithetical to society.

The deepest analogy is equivalence of original sin and privilege. Obvious similarity is that both blame a person for actions of their ancestors, but it does not stop there.

Original sin is the idea that original man has consumed fruit of tree of knowledge of good and evil. This has granted him moral agency, but also responsibility, as he now knows when what he does is evil.

Flip-side of this is often invoked by SocJus judges. Since a brown rapist has no privilege, it follows that they cannot know good from evil. This means that they cannot be considered responsible for their actions.

This also explains why SJW have such contempt for general population and are fast to proclaim moral superiority. While they denounce their original sin, they also see those without it as not real moral agents.

But your graph is not much of a proof of anything. This is quite typical graph for a non-specific school-subject query.

Apparently they get paid more for first posts.

Nice try (((Russians)))

Shills learning to speak Holla Forumsack

Only after you learn how to sage.

It is.
Look up the "Social Gospel" which is essentially proto-SJWism under the guise of Christendom, popular around the early 1900s. Eventually the values of the social gospel imposed themselves on the mainline protestant churches and the modernists (read:jesuits) imposed the same thinking on the catholic churches.

Sometime around the 60s-80s, one received the same moral high from going to church and hearing the priest tell you about egalitarianism as they did participating in leftist activism and telling the group they all believe in egalitarianism. So why go to church for the same effect?

BTW your graph conclusion is shit.

yeah.
ultimately, there would be no capacity to reason. there would be no capacity to make the distinction between one thing and another. there would be no order.
once there's order again, fascism and racism just comes back. if the jews are being cheeky, you know, like corrupting the body and spirit of the entire western world (hundreds of millions of people), people are going to become antisemetic again. i wonder why that is, though. it's truly a mystery.

i mean make what they want to happen, work.

politics is about relationships. functional relationships are ethical: hence ethics as a part of politics.

just, maybe, be ethical?

...

man some of these pics are old

americanthinker.com/articles/2014/04/antonio_gramsci_take_over_the_institutions.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_pedagogy

amazon.com/Divine-Feminine-Theosophy-University-Historical/dp/0801864992

...

it is a religion

its called "satan worship"

That's a terrible screencap.

That is the worst removal of a (you) I've even seen. It also begs the question of whether or not it was you who decided a 19 digit "unix" filename was a good idea, or you just saved as.

absolute bullshit
SJWs do not consider people "good", because it implies a value judgement and notions like good and evil have no place in cultural marxism; there is no absolute truth, so everything is permissible without being qualified of "good" or "evil"
SJWs considers everyone "equal" and places on individuals the shame of being superior in specific ways (attributed to "privilege") and on society the duty to elevate the inferiors at the cost of the enforced deprivation for the supposed "privileged" of benefits their virtues awarded them
and as SJWs are free to fabricate any test along which to measure individual differences, they can locate and identify an inequality anywhere one is needed if they decide to inflict punishment on a specific group

and your conclusion "man is good, society corrupts" is blatantly untrue
for SJWs, "people are equals, except old cis hetero white men who are ontologically privileged" and "a society that allows winners and losers is corrupt and must be transformed to enforce universal equality"

truth