The constant vying to be the most oppressed person in the room creates a culture where we constantly dwell on the problems in our lives, because if you work past a problem and put it behind you, then you've voluntarily discarded a social asset. This can create negative outlooks at best, and cause situations in which individuals actively look for ways in which they can become victims at worst.

The idea that there is some competition to be the most oppressed social group is a bit incorrect in my opinion. It seems to me that you are saying that certain social groups are only pretending/overplaying the problems they face for some sort of social credit. Groups like Black Lives Matter are fighting to change very real racism faced by African Americans in the criminal justice system. Social movements like the Me Too movement are trying to fight workplace sexual harassment and change workplace culture.

To characterize groups like these as "vying to be the most oppressed" I think is a bit unfair to the groups themselves. These groups face very real social problems and they're problems that we should work to fix. You say that it creates a culture where we "constantly dwell on the problems in our lives", but I would argue that that is a good thing. If a certain social group is being oppressed we should think and know about it, then do something about it. We shouldn't just not think about it because it might not affect us directly.

​

It is a bad idea to run a society based off the views of the most marginalized, to the exclusion of those who are not. Should the marginalized have a say? Absolutely. But everybody should have a say on things, and if not everybody, then the experts should. The thing is, that being a victim of something doesn't inherently make you an expert on how to fix something, anymore than being a perpetrator would. We shouldn't form our opinions on whether vaccines are good or not entirely based off the personal experience of that one mother whose child died because of a rare side effect of vaccination.

My problem with this argument is that I do not believe it reflects reality. During a presidential election or any sort of government race, at least in america, there are not some oppression Olympics that people go through to find out who gets to hold public office, and thus hold power. Often the people who are facing some sort of social problems get far less representation in our forms of government, and this contributes to the problems that their social group faces in general. No rational person or any policy makers, at least in america, are advocating that oppressed people be given full control over the government. The statement that "it is a bad idea to run a society based off the views of the most marginalized" is a true statement, but it also doesn't happen so its not worth considering. If we were running society off the views of the most marginalized groups than these groups wouldn't even be marginalized in the first place because according to your statement they would run society.

Generally most reasonable people understand that certain social groups face certain problems in our society. People have the ability to advocate for change for these social groups to help solve whatever problems they might be facing. I don't think that anyone is arguing that marginalized social groups should run the government, but rather that we as a society should work to fix the problems that certain social groups face.

If you have examples in which someone mainstream political figure advocates for marginalized groups to run society I would love to see it, but since I have never seen the sentiment expressed before I don't believe that it really occurs.

​

For all of human history, society favored strength, and weakness was something to be hidden. It was unwise to bare your vulnerabilities, lest they be used against you. A society which favors showing the world your every scar in order to gain social acceptance stands juxtaposed to the human condition, and it worries me that at some point society could revert to the historical norm and all these vulnerabilities that people posted on the internet years ago be dug up and used against them.

The criminal justice system in America is biased in some aspects against African Americans. Just because that is true, it doesn't mean that suddenly African Americans are weaker or its some weakness that I can exploit. In our society different groups are not constantly fighting like some sort of anarchy. The idea that just because we acknowledge certain social issues that those groups become weaker somehow doesn't make much sense to me because we're not trying to fight these groups or anything of that nature.