The social justice activists seem to rely on one core argument to make their case – they refer to their intellectual opponents as a sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, fascist, and/or white supremacist nazis.
In other words, their core argument is the logical fallacy known as ad hominem:
Ad hominem (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”, short for argumentum ad hominem, is now usually understood as a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
This fallacy is often understood to be a personal attack. And that makes sense given my hypothesis that the thinking of social justice activists is id-based. Recall that the id is the place from where the aggression instinct is housed. Personal attacks are simply verbal expressions of aggression. So it would make sense that the primary argument of the social justice movement is verbal expressions of aggression.
What’s more, personal attacks are essentially childish arguments. I’m sure most of us can remember that among the first arguments we developed as children on the playground came in the form name calling and personal attacks. Because the id is basically an infantile impulse, it makes sense that social justice activists would retain this approach and express it through their ideology.
The bottom line here is that if you find yourself on the receiving end of some social justice tantrum, where the activist is calling you names like sexist, racist, homophobe, transphobe, Islamophobe, xenophobe, fascist, white supremacist nazi, etc., you should calmly respond by pointing out the activist is engaged in an ad hominem argument. Point out that this is a fallacy and is thus irrational. It won’t deter the social justice activist who is immune to the effects of critical thinking, but it will help any onlookers to appreciate what is happening.