I published several pieces here, here and here that describe specific patterns of narcissistic behaviours seen in workplaces, friends groups, online communities and families over the past two years. The purpose of writing those pieces was to describe and analyse an archetype of interpersonal narcissism, not to pathologise people who fit the descriptions.
My social media feeds are filled with examples of people demonstrating hostility while at same time fighting for justice for their chosen vulnerable group. I also see many different analyses and characterisations of “woke”, “anti-woke”, “DEI” and “anti-racist” activists, “the racist”, “neoliberal”, “anti-woke Conservative”, “The Patriarchy” and “the White Supremacist” that show similar tactics used to vilify one group while making their own superior.
I see groups trying to force the ‘correct’ way of being into institutions that were founded on and established with very different ideas about human values. I also see how other groups work hard to resist changes and preserve an idyllic past envisioned by the institution’s founding fathers or the community’s mothers.
I’ve been fascinated by a specific archetype of social justice warrior/social entrepreneur that became visible to me in 2015 arising in online social networks among women, some of which morphed into racial justice activism.
I’ve been working on a piece on this archetype off and on for over a year now and I’m finally going to finish and publish it (any day now!). The resistance to working on the piece and my fear about publishing it piqued my interest.
Here are my question for you dear Hacking Narcissism readers:
Why does today's social justice activism look a lot like narcissism?
What is it about social justice and activism that bring out hostility, aggression and other narcissistic behaviours in these well-intentioned do gooders, to the point where I and anyone else would feel anxious talking about it openly?
What is social justice work supposed to look like?
I’m looking forward to seeing your perspectives and responses to this question and more importantly, giving others the opportunity to see different perspectives about social justice warriors and narcissism in today’s political climate.
I will also begin holding monthly live conversations on Zoom for annual and founding subscribers to do further analysis on topics of interest and approaches to strategically tackling and navigating social complexity without employing the same narcissistic tactics being done to you. The first meet up will be held in the last week of May (look out for the announcements)
Thank you for reading, supporting, sharing, subscribing and commenting below,
Social justice can become extremely paternalistic and condescending. It becomes largely about the privileged person proving to the world that they are 'one of the good ones'. Rather reminds me of humanitarian advertising campaigns where companies spend exponentially more on advertising their good deed than on the good deed itself. I've had this experience with several white people, with the additional caveat that whatever support they provide must be accepted without question. Actually asking for what I needed or even suggesting that what they were providing was not helpful was always grounds for a massive fight, thus underlining that the support they were giving was about them, and making themselves feel good and not about really supporting marginalised communities. The message that I wish privileged people would understand is that as privileged people in various circumstances, we have been given more of a resource than is fair. That extra bit of resource isn't ours to begin with. It never was. Our responsibility as holders of these resources is fair redistribution. Again, that is our responsibility. This is not about doing anyone a favour because they are your pet of the week, but about acting responsibly and redistributing what was never yours to begin with. Most privileged people behaving as if they are doing marginalised people a favour is where the narcissism shows.
Thank you Monica for this excellent summary on white saviourism as a form of communal narcissism. Those with entitlements to choose a pet vulnerable group as recipients of Good Deeds™. I can't wait complete this piece on a specific type of social justice warrior and receive your feedback. I'm so happy you decided to share your analysis and experience here!
My writing style is a bit caustic and sometimes "over the top" and I can definitely be accused of 'other' group vilification - so I can be off-putting. But it all arises from a deep frustration, and sometimes anger, at the path we seem to be walking. It's a road to hell paved with do-gooder intentions.
My observation is that we've moved from a 'model' in which some degree of personal responsibility was expected, to one in which largely 'external' things make one feel in a certain way, or cause some alleged harm.
This can be typified by things like the claim that a workplace environment is "unsafe" because someone said something that disagreed with a particular ideological viewpoint, or when a university offers counselling to students who may have suffered 'trauma' from attending a lecture.
This undue focus on external factors being responsible for your suffering, anxieties, and feelings is not at all healthy I think.
Lots of people have talked about the 'infantilization' of society - and I think that's kind of true. People are being encouraged to display the 'narcissism' (and often the behaviours) of a child. After all, the primary focus of a child is upon themselves and how they feel, and results in tantrums when they don't get their own way.
The calls for censorship and the rise of 'cancel culture' are nothing more than the equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and loudly going "nah, nah, nah".
As adults we learn that delayed gratification is often beneficial - but this has been derided as "whiteness". Another example of the move towards more childish behaviours and desires and thinking.
The 'woke' practice a kind of selective empathy in which only those espousing the 'acceptable' ideology are worthy of it.
It is frustrating, it does make me angry, but perhaps most of all it makes me sad to see how we've managed to get to this extraordinary place.
We're better than this, or ought to be. I just feel we need to let the adults back into the room at times!
Wow Rudolph - I have to agree with your potent analysis. Discomfort aversion labelled as trauma and cotton wool parenting practices adopted across society promotes and justifies narcissism. We've gone from the extreme of stiff upper lip and soldiering on for survival to the opposite where comfort and censorship are gods. We as a society must not have any real problems if 'feeling offendend/bad/unsafe' is getting so much airtime.
Emotional immaturity will become less trendy and society will move on to the next crisis.
We can hope.
I look forward to checking your piece (after I finish writing mine) and discovering any overlaps.
I appreciate you giving us a glimpse of what you raised in your article and your hope for more sensible discourse and actions toward justice. I have been frustrated in the past but have come to accept that society and history are subject to cycles, moods and other influences and we can see how the past produces the present and that we continue to forget and repeat history.
Most of the time I feel like I'm living in some parallel universe. In one piece I gave the example of a Canadian professor who opined that lawns were "an education in colonialism".
Yes. Lawns.
I simply don't know how to take this kind of 'woke' glossolalia seriously. And this isn't some delightfully potty and eccentric random nutcase, but a professor!
It's just one example (of very, very, many) of the external symptoms indicative of something having gone very badly awry.
I hope you can figure it out, because I'm really struggling to understand how we've got this bonkers 🫣
I think some professors get off on saying whatever they believe or think because they can. I guess lawns didn't exist in pre-colonial times or the professor hates living in a neighbourhood of manicured lawns that pressures him into maintenance when he can't be bothered.
Human behaviours don't surprise me. Institutions built on the ideas spawned during Enlightenment period had unintended (and intended) consequences of exclusion from upward mobility in the social hierarchy.
The emphasis on rationality and suppressed emotional expression (because emotions were signs of weakness and irrationality) would eventually cause a build up that would need an outlet. The outlet is now in the age of emotional caretaking compounded by unexpressed and overwhelming grief. It's all coming out now!
Here's what is unspoken, processing is the product. That's what makes it narcissistic. Their efforts are about them, no one else. There is no prioritization on the material needs of the 'other'. Their collective lives do not need to change, because what's important is the 'social justice warrior' self-concept and control over others.
It's about the "social justice warrior" believing that the act of talking about it, doing research, going on 'listening tours', and calling out others is the work. And the folks they are doing their work on behalf of should be satisfied with being noticed by them. Any actions that may materially change the lives of those that they are fighting on behalf of go into the future faking category.
Yes yes YES Janedra! Self-serving communal narcissism all the way. The SJW expects appreciation and gratitude for all their efforts because they're doing it al for US. When asked about measurable impact - they can say that they've helped their community feel heard and understood, given them hope for a just future etc etc but no real material change or transformation. Thank you!
I'm with you Karl. I'd like to know what true activism looks like and what true justice looks like, and how they go together. The days of performative demonizing and virtue signaling can't pass fast enough!
I am bothered by how fundamentalist social justice gets. I am also bothered by how everything is called narcissism and trauma.
So with those cats out of the bag I think to answer your questions it depends on the activist.
Without writing an unduly long response I will say that we seem to struggle with holding complexity, allowing for emergence, and exploring power and oppression with nuance. I call it "who or what to blame" ovrrsimplification.
Sinner vs. Saint
Perpetrator vs. Victim
Your savior triangle even
To me they over simplify.
I started listening to people on sidewalks 8 years ago trying to find answers. I am finding growing our capacity to not know and the inability to listen openly more starts early. So our activism reflects that.
A colleague just did her dissertation on the Hero's Journey myth and how it pervades our psyche. Andrea Marie Brown's Holding Change takes up these questions well.
What I do know as a white gal...my work right now is to listen. I am allergic to white activists.
Oversimplification of complexity is sadly what our lazy minds need to do to make sense of a situation as quickly as possible to know how to act or where to stand. It adds to the mess and the noise.
What I wrote in the final section of the piece echoes your point about listening. Leaving space for inquiry, critical reflection and seeking to understand another's perspective without needing to agree with it , while sitting in the discomfort of the unknown is how we extricate ourselves from the mess of reactivity, blaming, shaming and drama.
We could all do with some help to interrupt our triggered responses and improve our thinking processes! Thank you for your comment Traci - I'm also allergic to the social injustice warrior type of activism.
Thank you for letting us share our thoughts with you, Dr. Nathalie. So, I have to be honest, this is a painful subject for me. I used to be part of this organisation and the industry, and I left, because of exactly what you mentioned: prevalent narcissistic behaviours. There's this unspoken belief that I think many people have when it comes to social/environmental change, where they secretly (or not so secretly) think they are better than everyone else. They know better ways of doing things (e.g. recycle, be more conscious and aware of what you buy, etc.) and other people do not know these things and ultimately they feel that they know best. It isn't really about the "team" or the people involved, or the work they do, or even the impact/issue, but more about their image/reputation (oh look at me, I'm doing so much good in the world, I need to be seen as a good person).
I personally think it's very ego-driven. It's always "you are bad, I am good" or "if you're not for the cause, you are against it" or "if you're not part of the solution, you are the problem." In my experience, I don't see many people creating change with empathy and kindness, where there isn't this dichotomous mindset involved. There's a lot of judgement, so, of course, people don't feel safe to talk about it. So, I can understand why we feel wary when it comes to discussing these things. People will make mistakes. And because judgement is involved, naturally, people rather not say anything out of fear. No one wants to be judged or shamed. Change takes time, social issues are complex, and there needs to be more patience and understanding, time invested in having conversations, as opposed to "this is why I am right, and you're wrong."
Casey! Thank you so much for shedding light on this complex topic from your own experiences. It seems that those who claim to dismantle white supremacy culture are employing the same tactics of white supremacy culture to silence those who have the 'wrong' perspectives. They want to be the one to choose the reality that suits them and the inhabitants of that reality. This is no different to what makes any community, organisation or industry like a cult. Despite the grief and loss of leaving something you once believed in, it's good that you got out.
Your analysis echoes so many similar sentiments I see online, on this platform and in my conversations. Thank you again for sharing your experience here.
I find Covert Narcissists are prone to advocate for Social Justice in manipulative ways largely for the sake of self-aggrandizement as Janedra said. They don't actually care about the 'other'. It's Malcolm X's Wolves and Foxes all over again. Take a look at John McWhorter's book "Woke Racism". There's another agenda though.
Ever hear of Ressentiment? Nietzsche and Kierkegaard wrote about it. The SJW folk don't simply seek to, say, replace all the Republicans with Democrats. They want to completely uproot the system, fundamentally change how everything is talked about. They want to make up down, weakness strong, and promote foolishness as wisdom. Consider Jonathan Haidt's opening chapter in "The Coddling of the American Mind." That's why they challenge individualism, objectivity, facing one's fears. They are very needy, can't take even token steps to mitigating personal bias, and they are afraid of the world's challenges. They are afraid of the status quo which they poorly understand. They pretend at trying to fix legitimate problems for a self-serving power play.
Isn't there something inherently narcissistic about favoring "my truth" over "the truth"? To be fair only some voices can speak to certain truths, i.e. the plight of those suffering under racism, but they are merely sharing part of the truth, however personal it might be.
The excessively dichotomous thinking is mentioned elsewhere in this thread. Buddhism associates that with an ego-laden mind. Modern psychology associates that with Borderline Personality Disorder. That condition in turn is associated with extremes of emotion in the absence of proportionate stress. All this happens in the absence of a political agenda.
Some studies suggest narcissists have poor meta-cognition, i.e. self-awareness and control of ones thoughts. They also have defects in certain cognitive domains. A narcissist might be intelligent, able to get a PhD in the liberal arts, but he will struggle terribly with high school math. The world looks very chaotic when you can't figure out its basic rules and it won't obey your oversimplified perspective.
Understanding others and features about the world you aren't explicitly taught requires developing a hypothesis and testing it against experience, Abductive Reasoning. Some research suggests that's an important part of empathy. You have to consider alternative explanations for a phenomena and possible evidence for or against conflicting ideas. This is the essence of Integrative Complexity which narcissists are bad at, c.f. Suedfeld or Tetlock.
They don't want to flatten the hierarchy rendering people equal, they want to invert the hierarchy placing themselves on top. They lack the foresight for planning, but they are good at guilt trips and other manipulations, so they play a Flying Monkey game with society, duping good people to work for them. They cry, so well-meaning people take them seriously.
They are toxic hypocrites with too much influence. People with real lives are too busy to learn how to see through the farce. It doesn't help that basic principles of epistemology aren't taught in K-12 so most people lack the education to start. Fools are filled with certainty, people who know better with doubt.
One of the Narcissist superpower's is Drive, or being "driven to achieve something".
So, when a strongly driven person achieves something through sheer force of will:
If for themselves, is evil.
If for others, is good.
But the "for others" is also about themselves, the others are just there for the ride. So is it good? or not good?
Apply this to social justice, and you can see how a good cause can be corrupted, if it gets run by a strongly motivated and driven leader to achieve a result that is in their best interest, and the cause is a means to an end.
Social justice can become extremely paternalistic and condescending. It becomes largely about the privileged person proving to the world that they are 'one of the good ones'. Rather reminds me of humanitarian advertising campaigns where companies spend exponentially more on advertising their good deed than on the good deed itself. I've had this experience with several white people, with the additional caveat that whatever support they provide must be accepted without question. Actually asking for what I needed or even suggesting that what they were providing was not helpful was always grounds for a massive fight, thus underlining that the support they were giving was about them, and making themselves feel good and not about really supporting marginalised communities. The message that I wish privileged people would understand is that as privileged people in various circumstances, we have been given more of a resource than is fair. That extra bit of resource isn't ours to begin with. It never was. Our responsibility as holders of these resources is fair redistribution. Again, that is our responsibility. This is not about doing anyone a favour because they are your pet of the week, but about acting responsibly and redistributing what was never yours to begin with. Most privileged people behaving as if they are doing marginalised people a favour is where the narcissism shows.
Thank you Monica for this excellent summary on white saviourism as a form of communal narcissism. Those with entitlements to choose a pet vulnerable group as recipients of Good Deeds™. I can't wait complete this piece on a specific type of social justice warrior and receive your feedback. I'm so happy you decided to share your analysis and experience here!
Nathalie
I've just written up a piece which, I think, overlaps a bit with the themes of narcissism you're asking about.
https://rudolphrigger.substack.com/p/riggers-ramblings
My writing style is a bit caustic and sometimes "over the top" and I can definitely be accused of 'other' group vilification - so I can be off-putting. But it all arises from a deep frustration, and sometimes anger, at the path we seem to be walking. It's a road to hell paved with do-gooder intentions.
My observation is that we've moved from a 'model' in which some degree of personal responsibility was expected, to one in which largely 'external' things make one feel in a certain way, or cause some alleged harm.
This can be typified by things like the claim that a workplace environment is "unsafe" because someone said something that disagreed with a particular ideological viewpoint, or when a university offers counselling to students who may have suffered 'trauma' from attending a lecture.
This undue focus on external factors being responsible for your suffering, anxieties, and feelings is not at all healthy I think.
Lots of people have talked about the 'infantilization' of society - and I think that's kind of true. People are being encouraged to display the 'narcissism' (and often the behaviours) of a child. After all, the primary focus of a child is upon themselves and how they feel, and results in tantrums when they don't get their own way.
The calls for censorship and the rise of 'cancel culture' are nothing more than the equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and loudly going "nah, nah, nah".
As adults we learn that delayed gratification is often beneficial - but this has been derided as "whiteness". Another example of the move towards more childish behaviours and desires and thinking.
The 'woke' practice a kind of selective empathy in which only those espousing the 'acceptable' ideology are worthy of it.
It is frustrating, it does make me angry, but perhaps most of all it makes me sad to see how we've managed to get to this extraordinary place.
We're better than this, or ought to be. I just feel we need to let the adults back into the room at times!
Wow Rudolph - I have to agree with your potent analysis. Discomfort aversion labelled as trauma and cotton wool parenting practices adopted across society promotes and justifies narcissism. We've gone from the extreme of stiff upper lip and soldiering on for survival to the opposite where comfort and censorship are gods. We as a society must not have any real problems if 'feeling offendend/bad/unsafe' is getting so much airtime.
Emotional immaturity will become less trendy and society will move on to the next crisis.
We can hope.
I look forward to checking your piece (after I finish writing mine) and discovering any overlaps.
I appreciate you giving us a glimpse of what you raised in your article and your hope for more sensible discourse and actions toward justice. I have been frustrated in the past but have come to accept that society and history are subject to cycles, moods and other influences and we can see how the past produces the present and that we continue to forget and repeat history.
Nathalie
Thanks Nathalie.
Like everyone else, I guess, I'm just struggling to understand what the heck is going on!
I hope to shed light on that across the activism spectrum. You'll let me know if I do or not I hope!
I look forward to it!
Most of the time I feel like I'm living in some parallel universe. In one piece I gave the example of a Canadian professor who opined that lawns were "an education in colonialism".
Yes. Lawns.
I simply don't know how to take this kind of 'woke' glossolalia seriously. And this isn't some delightfully potty and eccentric random nutcase, but a professor!
It's just one example (of very, very, many) of the external symptoms indicative of something having gone very badly awry.
I hope you can figure it out, because I'm really struggling to understand how we've got this bonkers 🫣
I think some professors get off on saying whatever they believe or think because they can. I guess lawns didn't exist in pre-colonial times or the professor hates living in a neighbourhood of manicured lawns that pressures him into maintenance when he can't be bothered.
Human behaviours don't surprise me. Institutions built on the ideas spawned during Enlightenment period had unintended (and intended) consequences of exclusion from upward mobility in the social hierarchy.
The emphasis on rationality and suppressed emotional expression (because emotions were signs of weakness and irrationality) would eventually cause a build up that would need an outlet. The outlet is now in the age of emotional caretaking compounded by unexpressed and overwhelming grief. It's all coming out now!
Here's what is unspoken, processing is the product. That's what makes it narcissistic. Their efforts are about them, no one else. There is no prioritization on the material needs of the 'other'. Their collective lives do not need to change, because what's important is the 'social justice warrior' self-concept and control over others.
It's about the "social justice warrior" believing that the act of talking about it, doing research, going on 'listening tours', and calling out others is the work. And the folks they are doing their work on behalf of should be satisfied with being noticed by them. Any actions that may materially change the lives of those that they are fighting on behalf of go into the future faking category.
Yes yes YES Janedra! Self-serving communal narcissism all the way. The SJW expects appreciation and gratitude for all their efforts because they're doing it al for US. When asked about measurable impact - they can say that they've helped their community feel heard and understood, given them hope for a just future etc etc but no real material change or transformation. Thank you!
I’d like to see a new kind of social justice activist emerge who values persuasion and empathy over performative demonizing.
I'm with you Karl. I'd like to know what true activism looks like and what true justice looks like, and how they go together. The days of performative demonizing and virtue signaling can't pass fast enough!
Nathalie
I am bothered by how fundamentalist social justice gets. I am also bothered by how everything is called narcissism and trauma.
So with those cats out of the bag I think to answer your questions it depends on the activist.
Without writing an unduly long response I will say that we seem to struggle with holding complexity, allowing for emergence, and exploring power and oppression with nuance. I call it "who or what to blame" ovrrsimplification.
Sinner vs. Saint
Perpetrator vs. Victim
Your savior triangle even
To me they over simplify.
I started listening to people on sidewalks 8 years ago trying to find answers. I am finding growing our capacity to not know and the inability to listen openly more starts early. So our activism reflects that.
A colleague just did her dissertation on the Hero's Journey myth and how it pervades our psyche. Andrea Marie Brown's Holding Change takes up these questions well.
What I do know as a white gal...my work right now is to listen. I am allergic to white activists.
Oversimplification of complexity is sadly what our lazy minds need to do to make sense of a situation as quickly as possible to know how to act or where to stand. It adds to the mess and the noise.
What I wrote in the final section of the piece echoes your point about listening. Leaving space for inquiry, critical reflection and seeking to understand another's perspective without needing to agree with it , while sitting in the discomfort of the unknown is how we extricate ourselves from the mess of reactivity, blaming, shaming and drama.
We could all do with some help to interrupt our triggered responses and improve our thinking processes! Thank you for your comment Traci - I'm also allergic to the social injustice warrior type of activism.
Thank you for letting us share our thoughts with you, Dr. Nathalie. So, I have to be honest, this is a painful subject for me. I used to be part of this organisation and the industry, and I left, because of exactly what you mentioned: prevalent narcissistic behaviours. There's this unspoken belief that I think many people have when it comes to social/environmental change, where they secretly (or not so secretly) think they are better than everyone else. They know better ways of doing things (e.g. recycle, be more conscious and aware of what you buy, etc.) and other people do not know these things and ultimately they feel that they know best. It isn't really about the "team" or the people involved, or the work they do, or even the impact/issue, but more about their image/reputation (oh look at me, I'm doing so much good in the world, I need to be seen as a good person).
I personally think it's very ego-driven. It's always "you are bad, I am good" or "if you're not for the cause, you are against it" or "if you're not part of the solution, you are the problem." In my experience, I don't see many people creating change with empathy and kindness, where there isn't this dichotomous mindset involved. There's a lot of judgement, so, of course, people don't feel safe to talk about it. So, I can understand why we feel wary when it comes to discussing these things. People will make mistakes. And because judgement is involved, naturally, people rather not say anything out of fear. No one wants to be judged or shamed. Change takes time, social issues are complex, and there needs to be more patience and understanding, time invested in having conversations, as opposed to "this is why I am right, and you're wrong."
Casey! Thank you so much for shedding light on this complex topic from your own experiences. It seems that those who claim to dismantle white supremacy culture are employing the same tactics of white supremacy culture to silence those who have the 'wrong' perspectives. They want to be the one to choose the reality that suits them and the inhabitants of that reality. This is no different to what makes any community, organisation or industry like a cult. Despite the grief and loss of leaving something you once believed in, it's good that you got out.
Your analysis echoes so many similar sentiments I see online, on this platform and in my conversations. Thank you again for sharing your experience here.
I find Covert Narcissists are prone to advocate for Social Justice in manipulative ways largely for the sake of self-aggrandizement as Janedra said. They don't actually care about the 'other'. It's Malcolm X's Wolves and Foxes all over again. Take a look at John McWhorter's book "Woke Racism". There's another agenda though.
Ever hear of Ressentiment? Nietzsche and Kierkegaard wrote about it. The SJW folk don't simply seek to, say, replace all the Republicans with Democrats. They want to completely uproot the system, fundamentally change how everything is talked about. They want to make up down, weakness strong, and promote foolishness as wisdom. Consider Jonathan Haidt's opening chapter in "The Coddling of the American Mind." That's why they challenge individualism, objectivity, facing one's fears. They are very needy, can't take even token steps to mitigating personal bias, and they are afraid of the world's challenges. They are afraid of the status quo which they poorly understand. They pretend at trying to fix legitimate problems for a self-serving power play.
Isn't there something inherently narcissistic about favoring "my truth" over "the truth"? To be fair only some voices can speak to certain truths, i.e. the plight of those suffering under racism, but they are merely sharing part of the truth, however personal it might be.
The excessively dichotomous thinking is mentioned elsewhere in this thread. Buddhism associates that with an ego-laden mind. Modern psychology associates that with Borderline Personality Disorder. That condition in turn is associated with extremes of emotion in the absence of proportionate stress. All this happens in the absence of a political agenda.
Some studies suggest narcissists have poor meta-cognition, i.e. self-awareness and control of ones thoughts. They also have defects in certain cognitive domains. A narcissist might be intelligent, able to get a PhD in the liberal arts, but he will struggle terribly with high school math. The world looks very chaotic when you can't figure out its basic rules and it won't obey your oversimplified perspective.
Understanding others and features about the world you aren't explicitly taught requires developing a hypothesis and testing it against experience, Abductive Reasoning. Some research suggests that's an important part of empathy. You have to consider alternative explanations for a phenomena and possible evidence for or against conflicting ideas. This is the essence of Integrative Complexity which narcissists are bad at, c.f. Suedfeld or Tetlock.
They don't want to flatten the hierarchy rendering people equal, they want to invert the hierarchy placing themselves on top. They lack the foresight for planning, but they are good at guilt trips and other manipulations, so they play a Flying Monkey game with society, duping good people to work for them. They cry, so well-meaning people take them seriously.
They are toxic hypocrites with too much influence. People with real lives are too busy to learn how to see through the farce. It doesn't help that basic principles of epistemology aren't taught in K-12 so most people lack the education to start. Fools are filled with certainty, people who know better with doubt.
Don't trust Whitey!
Drive.
One of the Narcissist superpower's is Drive, or being "driven to achieve something".
So, when a strongly driven person achieves something through sheer force of will:
If for themselves, is evil.
If for others, is good.
But the "for others" is also about themselves, the others are just there for the ride. So is it good? or not good?
Apply this to social justice, and you can see how a good cause can be corrupted, if it gets run by a strongly motivated and driven leader to achieve a result that is in their best interest, and the cause is a means to an end.