I want to take a moment to talk about SJW's; how they gained political power, why they manufacture outrage, and why we're starting to see the decline of victim politics. Now a quick disclaimed: this is not a left vs right issue. This is about the portion of the political left that plays victim politics and why their political philosophy is flawed. Racism, sexism, homophobia, etc are still prevalent in America and are a large reason why victim politics is as powerful as it is.
Now as a disclaimer this post will be focusing purely on the evolution of victim politics in America; most of you will naturally be most familiar with politics and history in America. We're currently at what I believe to be the peak of victim politics and SJW power. I'll explain why victim politics holds the power it does, how we got to the point we're at, and why the inherent contradictions in the philosophy of the movement is going to cause it to tear itself apart.
To start we have to look at the systematic discrimination that people faced; women generally couldn't own land, start businesses, or attend schools. Black people were owned as slaves and denied education and basic rights. Even subscribing to the wrong denomination of Christianity made you a black sheep. Not everyone in these times was a bible-thumping racist but clearly discrimination was much more common and worse was legally reinforced. People took issue with slavery and we had the civil war (don't buy into the lie that the civil war wasn't about slavery, it was at the very least one of the major driving factors). People further took issue with the widespread bigotry and discrimination in America and we women's suffrage, the black civil right's movement, sexual liberation movement, etc etc. Race, gender, and religion became protected classes and discrimination based on these factors is now explicitly illegal (if not always enforced). Discrimination based on sexual orientation still exists but in the last couple years has been quickly dying (DADT repealed, marriage rights being passed in more states every year, sexual orientation being made a protected class).
Legal injustices have been heavily stamped out and are continuing to die, but black ghettos still exist, women and minorities are still noticeably absent from academia, and there is still discrimination against minority groups. Policies are implemented to alleviate these problems; social funding for schools in ghettos, minority scholarships, affirmative action, etc. These programs are far from perfect but do some good. Poverty, unemployment, and crime rates are still high for the black and hispanic demographics but have been slowly declining over time (despite what fear mongering in media has people believing).
Enter the beginnings of the era of victim politics and social justice warriors. Despite the policies and laws in place to fight discrimination disadvantaged groups are still absent from business, academia, and politics. People cry outrage, surely these businesses and schools are sexist and racist? Affirmative action policies become stronger. Woman and minorities are still too absent from desirable fields, quota policies are implemented. Companies and schools below their quota must hire any candidate who fills them, despite their qualifications or the qualifications of the competing candidates. Failure to meet or implement quotas, and outrage against these quotas, is again met with accusations of bigotry. Reasonable discussions and concerns are drowned out. Academia was and is exceptionally vulnerable to the power talk of victim politics; if you claim to be about freedom of ideas and expression how could you possibly be against diversification? If everyone is equal then why are women and minority groups underrepresented?
This is the crux of victim politics; as long as there is unequal representation in business, academia, and politics then discrimination and bigotry is in play. Any opponent of policies meant to correct this inequality is a bigot. This philosophy is sound and digestible enough at a glance, and the victim politics continues to gain steam from real and perceived discrimination. The political left begins to champion this philosophy and gains a large base. The issue is successfully branded heroic tolerant progressive vs evil conservative bigots, and anyone who opposes SJW's is branded as a bigot.
Here's the great irony; the victim politics and social justice movement today itself is based on institutionalized discrimination. When black people were being denied work for work it was racism, but when a white man is passed for a job for a less-qualified minority who fills a quota that's social justice. This is not a an anti-SJW boogeyman scenario; this happens all the time in business and academia, especially when the business or school is a publicly visible institution. So why is discrimination against a black person for being the wrong race racism but discrimination against a white man for being the wrong race/sex not? Because the social justice movement relies on a perverse form of groupthink and ignores the individual. You can't discriminate against a white man because white men are the most "privileged" group. It's not welfare to hire an unqualified individual for their race, sex, or sexual orientation because their "group" is disadvantaged. The social justice movement is based on the same racial and sexual discrimination it claims to fight. Ignore the views, merits, faults, and qualifications of the individual and attack them for their sex, their skin color, their sexuality. Claim that "reverse discrimination" is the opposite of "regular" discrimination and cancels it out, when in reality you're just causing more discrimination. This is why an upper class woman can claim discrimination when being born in one of the most privileged groups in the country. It's why a poor white man is painted as privileged when born into one of the most disadvantaged groups in the country (the poor).
The social justice movement gained a large foothold in recent years and has controlled the political narrative for a long time. However a self-contradictory movement will eat itself eventually. The movement only holds power as long as people see traditional forms of discrimination and are blind to the discrimination caused by the movement itself. As I mentioned earlier though institutionalized discrimination is continuing to be stamped out, and there aren't enough legitimate issues to sustain the movement anymore. Manufactured outrage works for a time, but the issues being made up are becoming progressively more ridiculous and people are smelling the bullshit. The various groups under the social justice banner are starting to fight to prove who's the biggest victim. Trans people are stealing women's victim status, Rachel Dolezal is stealing black people's victim status, everyone under the banner of LGBT is stealing victim status from each other, etc. It's stopped being about the actual discriminating policies and become about the groups themselves, like everyone is back in their own high school cliques.
The biggest lie that the social justice movement ever sold was that everyone is the same; that men, women, white people, black people, asian people, straight people, gay people, Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, etc. will act the same when treated the same. If you believe this it's easy to see why any difference in representation between demographics has to be caused by a difference in treatment. The logic is sound the basic premise is flawed. People are different, and when presented with equal opportunities will choose different outcomes. Men and women as groups act inherently different because of the difference in our biology. Christians and Muslims and Jews and Buddhists and Sikhs act differently because of the differences in their systems of beliefs. Whites and blacks and latinos and asians act differently because of the differences in their cultural history and development and to some extent the genetic differences between them. These are basic truths, but are politically incorrect and no public figure will say for fear of the backlash they would receive. Harvard president Lawrence Summers skewered for merely stating that the lack of representation of women in science was due to the innate differences between men and women.
Now while the social justice movement itself is based on a flawed premise and is beginning to fail it's important to remember that institutionalized discrimination does exists in America today. The discriminating policies implemented under the banner of social justice stand among those policies but are not alone. The war on drugs is a war on poverty, and thus more heavily affects the groups living in poverty. Same with the movement to control reproductive rights, and the policies in place against prostitution. You will never stop people from doing drugs, you will never stop people from having sex, implementing policy to attempt to do so just gives power to the criminals willing to provide these services and throws people in jail for being human. These policies do nothing to eliminate sex or drug use, harm the people that seek these things, and keep the poor living in poverty. The war on drugs has probably been the single largest obstacle to social mobility in the last several decades, but has stood for over 40 years now. All the focus on race vs race, sex vs sex, religion vs religion has distracted people from the worst social issues that plague us. Despite the plummeting crime rate and climbing economic productivity our incarceration rate and income inequality gaps are at all-time highs. These issues aren't "hot" enough and are taking a back seat to outrage and victim politics. The political landscape is going to go through some pretty big shifts soon, keep perspective on the issues and don't fall into identity politics.