Ask 10 people what is “social justice” and you’ll probably get 10 different definitions? Ask them if it’s a good thing and most will probably say ‘Yes’. Jonah Goldberg dares to disagree:
The next time you encounter a Leftist blethering on about social justice, check that your wallet is still with you and then back away slowly.
“social justice” is com-speak for either an extortive parasitic state feeding a parasitic culture of gratuitous extortion groups.
Commies never pay their own freight – they built an entire doctrine/dogma based in politically justifying open theft, extortion and moral fraud. “Social justice” is the catch-all banner for this doctrine.
IOW…..
let the executions begin…..
“The next time you encounter a Leftist blethering on about social justice, check that your wallet is still with you and then back away slowly”
————————–
INCORRECT
The correct response is to pull your side arm and fire two precise shots into the chest without jerking the trigger – and then one to the pan or the groin for theatrical effect. Bonus points will be awarded if the carcass belonged to a former journalist.
Social justice is the stubborn application of unworkable solutions to imaginary problems.
I am inherently suspicious whenever I encounter certain key words like “justice” further qualified by an adjective. And so should you be.
Commenting on the words inscribed on the US Supreme Court building – EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW – the writer Paul Fussell noted that only one of those words was necessary at all and it was JUSTICE.
“Social justice” is the antithesis of real justice. Justice is typically portrayed as blindfolded and holding a scale, carefully balancing the evidence and only the evidence to determine who case the stronger case. “Social justice” means that she peaks, and puts a thumb (or a heel) on the scale to balance it out because of a perceived prior injustice. It calls for a spiralling application of favouritism that will ultimately mean that no case can ever be judged on its own merits, but only on the basis of skin colour and background.
Ooch. wrong click to check speling.
“Social justice” is the antithesis of real justice. Justice is typically portrayed as blindfolded and holding a scale, carefully balancing the evidence and only the evidence to determine whose is the stronger case. “Social justice” means that she peeks, and puts a thumb on the scale to change the balance because of a perceived prior injustice. It calls for a spiralling application of favouritism that will ultimately mean that no case can ever be judged on its own merits, but only on the basis of skin colour and background of those involved. It means that those brought before the courts have no peers, but can be persecuted for the acts of others despite personal innocence.
Glenfilthie said: “…two precise shots into the chest without jerking the trigger – and then one to the pan or the groin for theatrical effect.”
Sir, I must PROTEST! That reaction is completely insane and over the top. One does not waste perfectly good ammunition on such creatures. Three rounds for a miserable Leftist? Even the contemplation of such extravagance is unhinged!
No sir! The proper response is to punch them in the face. (Roll of dimes optional.) Anything further is more attention than they deserve. Wear gloves, they usually carry diseases.
Remember: Hippy punching is never wrong, but ammunition is expensive.
There are exceptions, of course (“social drinking” is still drinking), but, in general, the word “social” negates the noun that follows it. “Social justice” is not justice, “social science” is not science, and “social life” is not real life.
My problem with the Prager U/Jonah Goldberg video is not that I disagree with the ideas he expresses. Watching through the imagined eyes of the typical low-information voter, I did not see the real-world personal consequences of big government redistribution.
How about showing the government sucking money out of the pockets of a regular truck-driving working guy, and dumping those bucks onto the belly of a welfare couch-surfer? How about showing government goon/bureaucrats harassing working citizens and entrepreneurs for speech violations or petty legal and property infractions? How about showing big government marching into a church to suppress some fundamental religious tenet and compel a new behaviour (i.e., same-sex “marriage”)?
If I were to share this video with my reflexively leftist family members, they would think it was a nice outline of their feelings, and isn’t it good that the nasty conservative is in a suit and tie?
They need to see the reality of how Big government “good intentions” will destroy freedom, families, and economies. That is communicated through personal, emotional, impactful examples. Show “social justice” policies stealing their own hard-earned dollars, indoctrinating their own children, and stealing their own own freedom.
C Miner said: “Social justice” means that she peeks, and puts a thumb on the scale to change the balance because of a perceived prior injustice.”
More like the All-Seeing Eye of Sauron. Let me lay this one on y’all.
http://phantomsoapbox.blogspot.ca/2014/03/even-in-hell-they-dont-do-this.html
Now you understand how restrained I’m being with the hippy-punching thing.
Social Justice eh..? The spreading around of your money to those percieved by your “superiors” & those that feel they are oppressed to be in need of it…without asking you if you are ok with it.
Although not exactly in the same context…What Margaret Thatcher said is relevant: Socialism is great until you run out of other peoples money.
When I heard the dean of Brock University say that the War of 1812 was fought over social justice it proved that he was an idiot. This is why we need to burn our universities down. They are turning out morons who have no idea how destructive social justice is and how it would impoverish the productive people in order to fund those who refuse to make an effort to support themselves.
Actually I have a more civilized protocol…..
I offer them my hand and when the fool takes it, I hang on hard and kick….try it y’all like it.
Occam, exactly.
Jonah correctly expresses Hayek’s points and fears.
As most of you here know, some of us , or at least some of our families have experienced the “compassion” of the “social justice” ideology.
Social justice sounds great, but is in reality an insidious enslavement of man.
Social justice meant things like similar quality of health care and education in poor areas which made sense. Unfortunately it’s worked its way into our justice system and nonprofessional classes in universtiy.
The good news is that our First Nations and other poor groups are mainly getting away with committing crimes against each other.
EVERY ONE of these ‘Righteously Aggrieved’ Minorities DEMANDS:
“Social Justice”.
Which is defined as:
When you selectively punish people in the here and now,
solely because they REMIND you of someone else who
supposedly committed “sins” in the past.
This is obviously NOT “Justice” of any sort.
See also: REVENGE.
Profiling and “Social Justice”:
Social Justice, because it requires the finding of guilt by broad generalization, clearly operates by Profiling!
If YOU fit their PROFILE of a wrong doer, you ARE one.
And you MUST be punished.
That is how Social Justice(TM) works.
The only people I have ever seen cry for “social justice” are those who are currently living off the taxpayers,either through welfare or government jobs.
Social justice means “I want WAY more than I’m currently getting”,which is kind of hard to hear when the speaker is an $80,000 a year teacher with a pension that will start at age 55.
I have never,ever heard a proponent of social justice expound on a REAL idea of how to get “the poor” out of their situation,and when I’ve suggested those folks should get a job,I’ve been accused of being a heartless, ignorant, simplistic redneck.
Because everyone in the social justice industry knows that what the poor need is NOT a job, but compassion,and maybe another $10 a month in welfare payments.
Good point. Ammunition is expensive and using it is loud and messy. As I used to tell my soldiers, the only excuse for shooting someone is that they are beyond bayonet range.
Ammo is cheaper if you handload.
Sounds like another cultist group heavily into the same thing and often in the news these days. Guess who?
Ergo, the current implementation of ‘Food Security’ programs in B.C. communities. The Couch Surfing program was a bust, but Food Security appears to be a motherhood issue. Building dependence, one program at a time.
Social House is the new moniker for PUB. And in stead of ‘mall,’ Commons is being used. When I noticed this in my new community, it struck me as odd. We may have been invaded by an Orwellian alien species. 🙂
Yeah. People who speak of ‘social justice’ want your money. Simple as that.
For what it’s worth, here’s how Social Justice is defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1928 Society ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority.
Wish it would say:
Society ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due (by the sweat of their brow) according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority.
We all know that the best social program is a job, which is good for both the employee as well as the employer (common good) under rules of engagement fair to both parties (exercise of authority).
In that regard, social justice should stem from the Gospels, not some Marxist flummery. If any of the ‘awareness advocates’ for social justice (ie- people who don’t have real jobs) had to put their dads’ money where their mouths were, they would have to scrub some hospital floors in Calcutta. I can’t see that happening.
The Conscience of a Conservative is a great little book (costs 99 cents) written in the 1960s which beautifully describes lefty disdain for the downtrodden that they purport to want to help. Lefties see the “poor” as not humans with spirit but instead as economic entities. So the most efficient way to deal with these entities is not to give them a job but instead just give them money. Other peoples money.
http://www.amazon.ca/Conscience-Conservative-Barry-Goldwater/dp/1481978292
Barry Goldwater, now there’s a blast from the past. He’s toxic according to the left so he must have something important to say. I’ll check at the library as I’ve run out of room to store my books.
“Social Justice” is the enslavement of the individual in the service of an arbitrarily chosen population statistical ideal. As such, it commits the most fundamental error of population statistics, the attribution of the characteristics of the group to the individual.
The whole concept is profoundly irrational and illustrative of an equally profound ignorance of the application of statistics. That’s why it only appeals to lefties.
A delusion alright, one that collides with human nature.
Like most of the progressive speak, the term does not mean anything close to its traditional or dictionary meaning, when babbled by your usual clueless parasite.
Plan seems to be, proggs have no brains, so they rely on BS to baffle any one enquiring as to what they want.
They will bother productive people relentlessly, but never ever will they truthfully say what they want.
possibly because honestly telling hardworking people that what you want is to steal their produce, interfere with their lives and destroy the means of production…
Makes of a short life for a career parasite.
Not only that, they want to take it by force rather than asking you nicely.
It’s mostly about the exercise of authority. There’s not really any such thing as the “common good”; there are goods and/or values that most of us share but as individuals.
Social justice = the king of the anti-concepts, a sugar-coated poison.
I was actually going to just post that. That’s been one of my favourite lines for the past six years or so. I thought it was originally “the forced application…”
Brilliant.