blm uk
© REUTERS/Toby Melville
A participant takes part in a Black Trans Lives Matter rally in London, UK.
A Princeton professor has deftly highlighted how modern social justice movements and their proponents are not comparable to their historic counterparts, and may, in fact, be the polar opposite.

In a time of mass protest against systemic racism, coupled with 'woke capitalists' cashing in on social justice for the sake of a quick buck, activism and opportunity seemingly go hand in hand, with those taking a stand, or a knee, often being rewarding both socially and financially.

The risk-to-reward ratio is highly skewed in their favor in this era of online 'slacktivism,' where posting a black square on Instagram can win you brownie points that can, and often do, turn into greenbacks.

But this was not always the case, as Robert P. George, a professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University points out in an enlightening Twitter thread.

George explains how, as expected, his students insist that they would have risked it all to abolish slavery if they were white and living in the South before abolition.

"Of course, this is nonsense... Most of them - and us - would have gone along. Many would have supported the slave system and happily benefited from it," George continues.

He then unveils his gambit, offering to credit his students' claims if they can show that, "in leading their lives today they have stood up for the rights of unpopular victims of injustice whose very humanity is denied, and where they have done so knowing" that they would be abandoned by their friends, loathed and attacked by the powerful, and denied professional opportunities.

George's thread received thousands of likes and hundreds of comments, with some seeking further clarification as to which moral standard the respondent should be held - that of history or that of contemporary society, concluding: "History will be as cruel to us as we are to it."

Others inevitably rushed to claim the coveted victim status by boldly declaring their own social bravery:

Many proposed being "pro-life" in the abortion debate in the 21st century as a position which meets the professor's criteria, while others highlighted conservatism and certain positions in the debate on transgenderism and children as unpopular positions to espouse which might fit the bill.