Rule 1: Treat every person as an individual, and not accept for yourself privileges, praise, or blame for the actions of any other person.
The core principle of a fair and equitable treatment, where everyone has the most opportunity and freedom, is individualism. It means that every person is judged only on the merits of their own words and actions. Furthermore, it refers to accepting every person has the freedom to choose for themselves how to conduct their lives, what they buy, what they do, what they say, and who they associate with as long as they cause no harm to anyone else or restrict their ability to do the same.
This is in stark contradiction to collectivism, one of the core tenets of Social Justice doctrine. Collectivism is the principle that every person is to be treated as a member of a group (or under the principle of intersectionality, multiple groups), and that individuals are responsible for the offenses done by the group. It also means that individuals are directly harmed by the mistreatment of other members of their group, past or present. However, these ideas are not applied consistently and are used more as a tool within cultural Marxism with which to mobilize minority groups against the majority. This is because, where Marxism aims to take power by using the proletariat against the bourgeois within a European class system (that does not exist in the USA) CULTURAL MARXISM attempts to create division between social groups to use them to attack the majority group. The inconsistencies lie in how they will claim that all white people are responsible for acts of racism committed by other white people but then claim that acts of racism committed by black identitarian groups like BLM against white persons do not reflect poorly on the entire group.
Social Justice has branded itself as fighting for equality for all by trying to right the unequal OUTCOMES for minority groups. This may sound “fair” if you do not understand that equality of outcomes is completely contradictory to freedom of will, human diversity, meritocracy and equality under the law. The truth is that there has never been equality of outcomes, there never will be, and there is a good reason for that. For example, if people are completely free to make their own choices, people will not make the same choices and thus will attain differing outcomes. It is important that people have the freedom to succeed, or fail, to take the path less traveled or the path of least residence. Even people who choose the same path will have varied levels of success based on the fact that humans are not all the same. Humanity has a wide range of intelligence, strengths, abilities, motivations, and interests. The fact that even if we are treated equally under the law, that we are not equal in ability means it is irrational to expect equal outcomes. Ignoring these factors and insisting on parody is bad for everyone. The lie that women are paid less than men for the same work comes from the fact that women have the freedom to choose to work fewer hours, do less over time, spend more time with family and pursue personal interests over professional.
Attempting to force equality of outcomes also undermines meritocracy. Meritocracy is a system that allows those that have the natural ability and motivation to perform better at something, to succeed over others. It is not a system where winners and losers are picked arbitrarily, and where people are placed in positions or jobs based on group affiliation rather than ability. Meritocracy is one of the core tents on individualism, as it allows every person to be judged on their own merits. The collectivist alternative is a system that seeks to promote individuals based on identity groups, rather than ability, towards the goal of parody. This concept values the diversity of ethnic, sex, and cultural groups over an actual ability to perform a task. This prioritization is harmful to everyone. For example, If two firefighters graduate from the firefighting academy and both apply to the same fire station in the local area it would be normal of the station to hire the student with the better performance in the academy. However, if the student with the better score is a white straight male, and the student with the lower score is a 4 foot, 5 inches, 90 lbs sopping wet, third wave feminist with barely passing scores, is hired instead, this would be wrong. This would be denied the better student an opportunity he had earned through his own merit and gave a position to someone that may be ill-suited for it. This may be an extreme example, but diversity quotas are well documented in companies and universities run by those who believe in Social Justice. In every case, when diversity is paced over actual merit, the business, university or government institution suffers. This is because they have stopped hiring the best person for the job that applies, and instead are settling for the best person who checks the most diversity boxes.
The collectivist view of diversity comes down taking from those who have earned it, to give to those who have not. They justify this by saying that historical oppression of members of their group in the past has put them at a disadvantage that they must correct through redistribution of power and wealth. If we ignore for a moment the flaw in this logic, that EVERY racial group has both been the oppressor and the oppressed throughout history as our species has evolved socially, then we can address how individualism is a far more equitable concept when dealing with these disparities.
First, an individual is not guilty of any crime committed by any other person, even if that crime put another person at a disadvantage. The race of the persons is irrelevant. If a black person chooses to hire another black person rather than me because of racial hatred, the person who was hired does not owe me money, or their job. In this case, the racist employer may face black lash for his hatred, but the employee is not at fault. There were systemic disadvantages many years in the past that harmed black people. Those systems have been changed and corrected. Black people now have the same legal rights, and same opportunities available to them. This is evident in that black people have taken these opportunities to reach every level of government, become professors, the CEOs wealthy companies and gained political and social power. The disparities that remain in our society are not due to laws, or institutions, but are greatly due to cultures that devalue education, undermine strong family units, encourage criminality and teach victimization. Ironically, social justice teaching black communities that they oppressed and are unable to succeed has done more to retard the advancement of black communities than any other form of modern racism. The social justice racism is the bigotry of low expectations. An individualist believes that all people, regardless of race, should have the equal opportunity to succeed based on their own abilities and efforts. Collectivists believe that some racial minorities are unable to succeed on their own, and thus need to be given an advantage over other groups to be successful. Both the act of denying an opportunity rightly earned by a white person and the act of giving to a black person an unequal advantage because they are believed to be inadequate to achieve on their own, are both acts of racism. Their racism is made more evident with the publishing of articles from social justice sources stating that tribal mythicism should be accepted as science,(University of Cape Town, South Africa) or that logic and mathematics are for white people(Ian Miles Cheong via Dailycaller.com), that standardized testing in racist(thedailybeast.com) or that enforcing the law is racist(cliffsnotes.com). The result of the social justice collectivist mindset is that you end up punishing entire groups for the acts of a few, while at the same time infantilizing and victimizing other groups they claim to be trying to help. Collectivism is just as bad when used by other groups, such as white/black nationalist groups. They use collectivist group identity as the basis for their bigotry. The only cure this cancer is individualism.
So the challenge before you is to treat every person based on their merits, and not based on assumptions about what identity group they may belong to. It is important to do this even if others continuously make assumptions, and blame you based on your identity group. Never accept the blame they try to place on you for any words or actions that are not yours. Do not support organizations or political candidates that attempt to benefit any racial or identity group over another. Insist that every person have equal opportunity under the law, but do not allow the unfairness of forced equality of outcome. A white man has more in common with his black neighbor who shares his same culture than he does with a white man from another country and culture far different from his own. This would be clear if both persons interacted as individuals, not through the lens of collectivism. Always remember that each person is an individual and not part of a collective.