> It would be as if the word "christian" was a word created by athiests specifically to refer to those who did not practice what they preached.
May off-topic, but it might be interesting to note that 'christian' was similarly not something the Christians called themselves, but were derisively called that by others as in "followers of Christ or Messiah' alluding to the fact that they followed Jesus who proclaimed himself as messiah but was killed in a pitiful way in their eyes. The Christians actually called themselves "people of The Way"
--
You make a good point that when starting with a derogatory term does not lead to a productive debate. How would the 'woke people' define themselves?
For example, justice is not a new concept. It exists in every society, even the most primitive ones. So, justice as we have it in the US or West, could be seen as derived from English Common Law, which in turn was derived from the Bible's Judeo-Christian origins. Since the times and the culture of the people had changed, the laws itself have evolved.
So, what should 'social justice' bring to the table? Are there opponents of these woke actions that agree with the perpetrators of sexual harassment? If not, why are we debating an area we are in full agreement?