It is not uncommon for the left to spend a lot of effort and time creating words and phrases that make opponents look like terrible people. This was pointed out recently by Dave Chappelle, who observed that LGBT activists love to invent new phrases and words to win arguments.
Now the left has created a new word specifically meant to make White Christians maintain their “bad guy” status in any given argument, even when the left is clearly in the wrong. As highlighted first by The Daily Wire, this buzzword is “digressive victimhood” or when people point out how they’re the victims in a given situation when leftist groups come for them.
It’s a word created by (surprise, surprise) University professors from various places like UCLA and the University College London who wrote:
We show that members of dominant groups endorse digressive victimhood claims more strongly than conventional competitive victimhood claims (i.e., ones that claim “reverse discrimination”). We also consider the possibility that such claims could be more beneficial to a larger number of people, and may appeal to abstract principles. Our findings show that the preference stems from the belief that digressive victimhood cases are more effective in ignoring criticisms coming from non-dominant groups.
These claims could be strategically used, as we found out that even though they disagreed with some of the principles they were supporting (e.g. freedoms of religion and speech), individuals who are high up in prejudice expressed a positive endorsement for the digressive victimhood claims.
In other words, if an American Christian is being labeled as a homophobe for not providing a service to LGBT clients that goes against his religious beliefs and points out that he’s being forced to act against his beliefs in a clear violation of religious freedom (the “bake the cake” scenario being a solid example) the left believes this is an attempt at changing the subject to take attention off the accusation.
Addressing the accusation of homophobia directly is being called “competitive victimhood,” but is a losing battle for the accused as the accused is already considered guilty in the court of public opinion. What they call “digressive victimhood” is the real threat since it often points out that the accusers are guilty of the very thing they’re accusing others of.
However, all the fancy titles and phrases that are created for these things hide a basic fact. It’s another leftist “Kafka trap.”
Simple is the Kafka trap. It is easy to accuse another person of something. Then, when that happens, they will inevitably admit guilt. This denial can be used as proof that you are true. This is how it looks:
“You’re a racist!”
“No, I’m not a racist at all!”
“Aha! People guilty of racism always deny they’re racists!”
This attempt is to place the burden of proof upon the accused.
“Digressive victimhood” suggests that the accused is trying to change the subject in order to avoid having to answer the accusation, suggesting in itself that the person knows they are guilty and doesn’t want to make the situation about their supposed guilt.
It’s clear that they were trying to use a Kafka trap. They are making the accusers guilty and then making them innocent before the court.