Skip to comments.THE INJUSTICE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE
Posted on 03/19/2012 4:49:34 AM PDT by IbJensen
What is social justice? That is a very important question! Do you know what it is? If we listen carefully, we are hearing those words [social justice] frequently, wrapped with words like fairness, fair share, and equality. How can social justice be anything but apple pie and motherhood, particularly when its packaged with fairness and equality?
Justice is a virtue much like faith, hope and charity are religious virtues. Justice is goodness and rightness and encompasses moral principles. Social refers to the relation of human beings in a community. So, social justice should mean embracing moral principles and goodness by human beings within the community. But, thats not the case. When used together today, by liberals, social and justice take on a different meaning, and we need to pay attention because it is significantly impacting our lives. Many of the people using these words are members of the current administration including our president, congress and those liberal thinkers who are pursuing a personal agenda.
Dictionaries and scholars define social justice as the condition of a society that is based on the principles of equality and solidarity. Those who espouse social justice talk about human rights and the dignity of every human being. Those current social justice proponents remind us that social justice includes economic egalitarianism [the equality of all men] through progressive taxation and redistribution of income and property. Hence the true meaning of social justice is exposed! Social justice is about socialism. Make no mistake about that. If we ignore this, we are in for a whole lot of injustice!
When we listen carefully to todays social justice advocates, we hear them saying that economic inequality is an injustice of capitalism, which must be replaced by a classless society where differences in wealth and power are eliminated except of course for the social justice power brokers. The reasoning is that the haves do not deserve what they have and worked for, and the have nots are deprived and denied their due by an unjust society. These advocates continually emphasize the gap between the rich and poor. They are trying to create two classes in order to further their cause of socialism, or social justice, and they are trying to pit rich and poor against one another.
There is clearly a class society developing in this country, led by the liberal left. Their purpose is to divide America and they are largely succeeding and that is part of the injustice of social justice. There are a number of social wars going on all at once, as pointed out in the Charles Murray book called Coming Apart. Strong families and faith in God and religion are attacked daily across the nation by these social justice advocates in order to weaken society and create government dependence. Family is being de-emphasized since 1960, the marriage rates for people between ages 30 and 50 has declined from 84% to 48% today with only 37% of children living with both of their biological parents. The per cent of Americans among the lower classes reporting having no religion was about 4% in the 1970s, and has risen to 20% today. The fact of the matter is that a key factor in the decline of poor and working class life in America has been precisely the welfare state the liberals claim is a solution. We are progressing rapidly toward a welfare state created by misguided promises of social justice. In March, 2012, President Obama announced that people cant be left alone as he promoted his policies of protecting the middle class. That is code for inserting government in the peoples lives, making them dependent on the government a socialistic state. Today we literally promote welfare such as, for example, advertising food stamps! The demise of the middle and lower segments of our society is the tragic injustice of the liberals programs. The less wealthy we are, the more dependent we are, the less liberty we have and that is the goal of social justice. The OMB recently announced that the Affordable Care Act [socialized medicine] will cost twice as much as we were told when it was enacted. Social justice must rely on lies to be sold, and there is no shortage of lies from our government.
The steady erosion of capitalism and individualism in our country is alarming, but part of the social justice plan. Even our President has denounced our economic system, suggesting it doesnt work and calling it a theory, and finally suggesting other more equal economies are more successful than the U S. Nothing could be further from the truth, but the leader of our nation lets his true beliefs bleed through with comments like those while making misleading or false references to fair share, equality, and fairness.
Social justice as defined by liberals today is a code for socialism, a theory that is the opposite of capitalism. Private property and free markets and individualism stand in the way of this social justice ideology. Social justice is defined by men who also define what government can do, irrespective of our Constitutional protections. The goal of economic equality as part of social justice envisions complete state control. There can never be true justice with this social justice system, only injustice for those that produce, and a form of slavery and/or total dependency [obvious injustice] for those that depend on handouts from the producers [through government welfare] under the concept of equality and fairness. Indiscriminate taking of wealth and production is the social justice definition of fair share and it tends to keep those in need shackled to welfare forever.
The virtuous use of social justice to disguise the goal of socialism is more than injustice it is an outrage. Radicals use this term to disguise their agenda. The redistribution of income and wealth is foreign to Americans like Joe the Plumber and hard working people who honestly pursue the American Dream. Social justice, as used today by many politicians and the radical left, is an assault on that Dream and our ability to earn a living, educate our children, and accumulate wealth to pass on to our children and grandchildren. That is the injustice of social justice.
Americans must reject this assault, this disguised concept of socialism called social justice. We must not be deceived; we need to do everything we can to assure that our neighbors are not deceived, and we need to replace congressional representatives and presidents who neglect to listen to us. Social justice its a sham, a lie.
It's what you get when you confuse Jesus with Robin Hood.
It's also what you get when you ignore the 8th and 10th Commandments.
Great, concise analysis.
To me Social Justice is when you work hard and get rewarded for it.Not when you sit on your ass and have it handed to you.
Thou shall not covet
Thou shall not steal
“Social Justice” is the cry of those who hate actual justice.
Social justice = Communism.
“The key here is to replace the current occupier of the White Hut and his complicit congressional allies.”
It’s very sad that a large part of the electorate loves the term “social justice” and will vote for those who espouse it.
(55% to 45%, Obama in 2013.)
Now you’re giving Robin Hood a bad rap. Remember, the rich that he stole from was the government, who had stolen it from the poor, to whom he was giving it back.
They also are confused about who Robin Hood was. When we say “Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor.” He was not a charitable thief. He was returning tax money to those who were unfairly taxed. Robin Hood was a tea party member.
Social Justice is taking the perceived victim and elevating him/her to the status of the perceived bully and then removing the ability of the new victim to complain.
“Seek Justice (one will never ‘find’ it), love Mercy, and walk humbly before God.” Folks using the “code phrase” Social Justice do NONE of these things.
Social Justice is the answer to a crossword clue: two-word term for collectivism.
I do not like the Robin Hood analogy. Hood “stole” from the corrupt. To imply Robin Hood with those who prospered through hard work and playing by the rules clouds the atmosphere.
I prefer turning Jesus into Karl Marx or Fidel Castro in making an analogy with the social justice types.
A good essay, but the issue of social justice is very simple. I can explain it while standing on one foot:
There is no such thing as social justice aside from justice itself; because all justice is social in that it always deals with more that one person. So obviously the term “social justice” is a cover for unjust policies.
So there: I now put my foot down!
Robin Hood never actually existed. He is a figment of folklore. There is a tendency in folklore for thieves to be made into sympathetic characters with the passage of time, perhaps so that people can identify with them and their larcenous exploits without feeling any guilt.
The Robin Hood myth is an opportunity for ignorant failures in life to justify redistributionist platforms. Sorry to say this, but it is true.
The classic 1938 Robin Hood movie is a cleaned-up version of the myth, to make it suitable in traditional America among general audiences. It is not the version which would appeal to Ayers or 0.
The way I figure it, Robin Hood was probably something that was created by the new ministry of goodwill, circa the Soviet Union 1917.
Social justice is a complete lie. Any virtue with “social” as a prefix is going to be the opposite of what it pretends.
You have it, I want it, give it to me, I'm entitled to it..
“Social justice is a complete lie. Any virtue with social as a prefix is going to be the opposite of what it pretends.”
Social Conservatism for instance?
Outstanding! Now if I can just stand on one foot long enough...
I tend to be a little libertarian on that issue. I feel that social conservatism should be enforced socially rather than legally. On other hand, I feel that society should have the power to do that without government sanctions against it. In other words, shunning, etc. works, and should be allowed to work until a consensus is freely reached.
That being said, I think “social conservatism” is a misnomer. Abortion is murder, and it should be neither conservative n or liberal to protect human life.
Homosexual marriage is a complete overthrow of 10,000 years of development, and IMO is a completely unnatural act for which the practiioners will pay both in this world and the next. But that’s their problem, not mine. Mine is when they start to insisit that I recognize their lifestyle as a good and decent one.
What other big issues does “social conservatism”, as a political movement, cover right now? That’s just about it, I think.
PS, as an aside, “conservatism” is NOT a “virtue”, but in this context a decription of a political position. I’m not sure that that is accurate either. The progressive position is dominant at this stage in our history, is trying to preserve and expand its power, and can thusly be descrribed as the “conservative” position, much as they tried to describe the old Soviet oligarchs as “conservative” instead of “progressive” Marxists and Communists.
However, let me restate my thesis. Any progressive position prefixed by “social” is the exact antithesis of the virtue that it tries to describe.
“What other big issues does social conservatism, as a political movement, cover right now?”
Socially conservative parents should not send their children to public schools. But instead of demanding the closure of government madrassas, self-described social conservatives want to reclaim the right to impose a socially traditional curriculum in these “public” schools.
Ain’t gonna happen - public schooling is the chief engine of socialism in America, and the government engineers are pulling hard on the throttle. Trying to reform this totalitarian system is a waste of time and effort, imho.
Perhaps only the kids can shut the system down by “going John Galt” on the cursed established order and not attending...
'Social Justice' is more closely identified with capital 'C' communism than socialism. Socialism is a means to that end.
Ah, yes. Thanks. I had forgotten that as my children are long grown.
And lets not forget...
...and they’re all about one thing: “using envy to justify parasites sucking the productive dry.”
Now that you point it out - yes. ;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.