What we CANT do though, is actually stop responding to real racism when it's pointed out just because inaccurate claims of racism exist. And some stance must be taken on situations where there is some amount of uncertainty around what actually happens vs how it is reported. Where you fall on that question seems to have some sort of overweighted influence on people thought processes and they often take the shortcut of just using how they would respond when there is uncertainty as they way to ALWAYS respond. You can be against SJW bullshit AND stand up to actual instances of racism.

The problem is that in those areas where objectivity doesn't exist is that there is no reason to follow along with your subjective opinion over my subjective opinion. In areas of subjectivity it must be left up to the individual to decide. Anything else is tyranny. Even then I don't think there are nearly as many areas where objective reality doesn't exist as postmodernists would like to think. Meaning of a text is a good example. I've seen it argued that there is no one true interpretation of a text for example. But this argument always discards authorial intent as an inconvenience. Muddying the water up with how people interpret that doesn't mean there is no objective reality. It means that the objective reality of people's interpretations differs from the objective reality of the authors intent. In that case we call peoples interpretation wrong. I think in most situations regarding accusations of racism that the accusation is a statement about the intent of the person being accused. That accusation may or may not align with the person's actual intent. Whether the accusation is accurate depends on whether the person actually had the intent to of being racist. The person who made the original statement has the best view of the objective reality of the accusation because only they actually know their true intent. Just like the author has the best objective view as to whether a persons interpretation of their text is correct. Subjectivity is a relative value comparison and objectivity is an absolute one. The existence of one doesn't exclude the other.

I for one wouldn't be a member of any club that would have me.

Not to mention steganography is a thing. What appears as an innocuous recipe to some may in fact contain encoded battle plans for instance.

Racism kills more people than corana virus by far. It's reach is much greater than you realize. Did you know that most black men suffer hypertension because their ancestors only survived the crossing the Atlantic because their bodies retain salt. The people who didn't retain salt dies and were removed from the gene pool. What do you think the death toll that results from something like that look like? That's not even getting into everyday racism and it's affects on individuals, or the effects of poverty on health outcomes, or the effects of poverty on your chance to encounter violent situations. What do you think the cumulative effect of all that combined is? I bet it's waaay higher than 100k... The argument could also be made that the same people making points like yours were just fine with the right wing protests but now themselves are complaining about it using arguments they already discounted.

Citation Needed.

And conditioning people from a young age to take recommendations from a marketing bot.

Slashvertisements seem to be selling well at least.

Then why does brain damage cause behavioral and personality changes?

Depends on whether you think postmodernist's approach to analyzing writing is valid. I think they are full of crap personally. The author is the definitive authority on their own work.

San Franciscans seem to think living in their city is a privilege that they should have control over. It's more like a punishment. Long lines everywhere, no parking anywhere, and a bunch of snooty holier than thou street bums fighting with snooty holier than thou trust fund brats. Let them keep it all to themselves. The rest of us can just lure tech companies away with reasonable cost of living and people who dont scream or hit you for holding the door open for them.

I don't care that they've been around sine the internet was a thing. They are not a credible fact checking source.

Google Invisible computing.

We dont want to share. But it's already out there.

Add to this that the localities that could regulate this (Ahem California) choose not to because the amount of money coming in from international crowd sourcing businesses vastly outweighs the damage to existing businesses in their area.