While reading “Boundaries with Kids” by Dr. Henry Cloud and Dr. John Townsend, I realized how many of the issues the 'woke' brigade, (progressives, liberals,social justice warriors etc.) have are due to parenting without boundaries and a lack of internal self-control and need for attention in the SJWs themselves. Let’s look at the issues the “Boundaries” books describe when someone lacks boundaries and the behavior of SJWs.
Social justice warriors were not raised with proactive boundaries, so
they see only boundaries others, unfairly in the SJWs view, place that are reacted to –
when they find any kind of resistance, whether a “no, I don’t believe
that” or “I won’t change what I’m doing”, their reaction is outrage like
a young child told NO. They blame the person who sets the boundaries or
refuses to go along with their ever-changing, emotionally based demands
for triggering it, just as an older child blames the parent for the
tantrum or damaged items thrown in response to being refused.
When someone lacks internal self-control and a proactive mindset,
they feel like they are victims of external sources of pain and
restriction. They feel oppressed and helpless. Liberal political leaders
harness this by saying, “Here are the identities of those oppressing
you, hate them, I will help you, help me tear them down and destroy what
they built to make things fair”. The unsolvable problem for the
perpetual victim is solved by the manipulative liberal leaders who say
the solution is tearing down whatever they point at. The perpetual
protests are another symptom of this mentality, since protesting
identifies a problem but does not solve it. They are protesting in the
hope that those in power will solve it; they are like crying children
assuming adults will fix the problem they cannot quite define just to
stop the crying.
Per Dr. Cloud, immaturity is defined as not understanding the
difference between caring and protecting. Caring is telling the truth,
including reporting a criminal to the police and pointing out that one’s
actions are wrong. Protecting is lying to protect the person regardless
of the criminality or immorality of their actions. Liberal social
justice warriors say that caring via correction is immoral, that judging
an action wrong and enforcing consequences is in and of itself evil.
They think that “don’t judge me” and “you’re on my side, you have to
side with me no matter what” is the definition of love, though it is
actually the opposite.
Liberals define boundaries as bad. They even apply this to
international politics by saying there should be no national boundaries,
standards or rules. In reality, it is incredibly lacking self-awareness
since they are demanding the right to exclude people who disagree from
high paying jobs, positions of authority or their presence. The end
result is a double standard they think is moral and fair, that others’
boundaries are unfair and immoral while any boundaries they set are
fine, even if exclusionary and enforced by violence.
There is a difference between hurt and harm, just as there is a difference between words and violence. Hurt is when you tell someone no, ground a child for breaking things on purpose, revoke privileges. Harm is beating a child with a belt, refusing to feed them, letting the child get electrocuted because you cannot bring yourself to hurt their feelings by saying no, you are not allowed to touch that, enforced by a swat to the hand.
Social justice warriors engage in the ultimate
confusion of hurt and harm by equating hurt feelings with violence, such
that disagreeing with them is seen as a literal slap in the face,
justifying any blows they throw at the speaker for daring to disagree.
Children raised with healthy boundaries and developed internal
controls are capable of proactive boundaries, acting based on their
internal values instead of external manipulations. Immature children and
adults who only operate based on reactive boundaries can only say what
they are against, what they hate. Against patriarchy, against whiteness,
against systemic oppression, against Trump. The SJW is able to vaguely
say they are in favor of love, tolerance, rationality, education only in
the most general sense. However, that answer is disingenuous because it
applies these positive words to the ideology no matter how hateful,
intolerant, irrational or contrary to the evidence the group’s actions
are. The ability to say “I’m for love” while hating the heretic who
uttered hate facts contrary to your narrative and calling for violence
against the evil ones who refuse to do whatever you’re demanding they do
based on today’s ideological checklist is cover, not truth.
Nothing against other nationalities, but what about Americans? Why are the multigenerational Americans that fed, defended, paid taxes and whos ancestors are buried on U.S. soil, the ones to be marginalized?
The oldest of political realities is that people are most tolerant of those who differ from themselves when they live among those who do not differ, and when they do not fear having alien ways pressed upon them. This recognition is what enabled history's great
ecumenical empires to survive in peace.
Libs may learn that cities supporting school prayer or are anti-abortion could also become 'sanctuaries'
http://jewishworldreview.com/0617/codevilla061917.php3
That's too complex an idea for people who are driven by their need for peer approval of course.