“Always accuse your opponent of what you’re doing."

Octavia's probably right. 200 years from now we'll probably be back to hunter-gatherers, after "social crusades" leads to the collapse of civilization, as has happened in the past several times, in a 2,000 year pattern. (Rome 2,000 years ago, Babylon 2,000 years before that).

"Rome"

Fell to barbarians and Corruption. Well East Rome. I don't know about Babylon, but I am pretty sure it didn't fall to a Social Crusade. What ever that is

Rome fell to the barbarians because "social justice" causes had weakened its infrastructure, causing Rome to become poorer and poorer, pulling back from all the lands they'd conquered, and giving up many of the soldiers they'd conscripted from those lands, not to mention the mercenaries they could no longer afford.

They withdrew all the way back to Rome proper, followed by their enemies until there were "barbarians at the gates", and the people who actually lived IN Rome were too soft and spoiled due to their decadent lifestyle, gained from Rome's wealth being spread to everyone inside the walls by socialist ideals.

You can see how this theory (not mine) draws parallels between modern America and the fall of Rome here: https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/feminism-responsible-for-the-fall-of-rome/

It says "feminism", but it's really using that as a catch-all for what is now called "social justice".

Yeah... no.... but if you want to belive that a concept originating in the 2010s was somehow responsible for the downfall of rome 2000 years prior than fine by me.

"a concept originating in the 2010s"

I just... I can't... that has to be the stupidest thing I've read all week, and that's saying a lot. The NAME "social justice" might have originated in the 2010s, but the /concept/ has been around for thousands of years.

But given your past responses to me, I'm not remotely surprised you'd try to claim otherwise.

Social Justice has been around since the dawn of the nineteenth century. It was not, at least in the form we know it today, present in Rom 300A.d. nor was it the cause for the downfall of Rome. Of that I am utterly sure.

Does the phrase "Let my people go" mean anything to you?

What about Mel Gibson screaming "FREEEDDOOMMMMM" as his intestines are slowly pulled out?

Yes, they're lines from movies, but those movies are depictions of events from hundreds and thousands of years ago. Even if you don't believe that Moses and Pharoah were real, the very concept of social justice (ie freeing the slaves) was written about in that book thousands of years ago.

But let me guess, you probably also think that up until the end of the 18th century, men and women still lived in caves, and men dragged their mates along the ground by the hair to go off and have sex with them.

At this point your pointing to anything Progressive in history and saying that its social justice.

Well DUH!!! You're starting to catch up a little bit now, aren't you?

I already said that the concept existed for many thousands of years, only the official NAME "social justice" is new. Freedom from slavery IS social justice, by definition, as were programs to feed the poor.

Saying that the concept of social justice was only invented when the TERM "social justice" was invented is like saying the concept of equality was only invented when the term "feminism" was invented. In other words, it's something only a blithering idiot would say.

"Well DUH!!!"

Well now I KNOW your an idiot.

Given some of the users on IMGflip and the things they say?

Chicago ID card does not allow voting by immigrants in the country illegally
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/mar/04/blog-posting/chicago-id-card-does-not-allow-illegal-voting-cont/

Don't you mean, 'hoping that even though they know they're not allowed to open it, they open it anyway?'

Your analogy is framed from the perspective of those who gave out the ID cards... and they clearly want those who receive the IDs to be able to vote. In other words, the OP's meme is spot on.

Yes, and please don't get me wrong (not that I'm saying you did!) I was only trying to clarify what I thought was a simple mis-phrasing in your post. Living in the Peoples' Republik of Kalifornia, I know all about giving illegal aliens ID cards, in our case, driver's licenses, which in turn gives them the means to register to vote. The DL application here in Kalifornia s also used for registering to vote, which should make it 100% clear what the true agenda is when it comes to giving illegals ID cards. Yeah sure, the answer to one question would have to be a lie for this to happen. But somehow, I think if you're in the country illegally, answering one question untruthfully on a government ID application isn't going to bother you that much.

I can't really say why they get preferred treatment. The most glaring example of the situational morality in the Democrat party is that they don't want to stop illegals from owning guns, but if you're a citizen, they want to trample your second amendment rights. Things have definitely taken a turn for the surreal.

Sounds like a case of "same shit, different skidmark".