Opinion Polls: Delphi's Polling Place

Hosted by Showtalk

Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!

  • 4181
    MEMBERS
  • 80520
    MESSAGES
  • 4
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Social Justice: Not What You Think It Is   The Serious You: How Current Events Affect You

Started Apr-6 by WALTER784; 795 views.
WALTER784

From: WALTER784

Apr-6

Social Justice: Not What You Think It Is

Abstract: For its proponents, "social justice" is usually undefined. Originally a Catholic term, first used about 1840 for a new kind of virtue (or habit) necessary for post-agrarian societies, the term has been bent by secular "progressive" thinkers to mean uniform state distribution of society's advantages and disadvantages. Social justice is really the capacity to organize with others to accomplish ends that benefit the whole community. If people are to live free of state control, they must possess this new virtue of cooperation and association. This is one of the great skills of Americans and, ultimately, the best defense against statism.

Let us begin by asking what most people think social justice is. After that, let us review how the term arose. It is a Catholic concept, later taken over by secular progressives. What social justice actually is turns out to be very different from the way the term is now used popularly.

https://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/report/social-justice-not-what-you-think-it

FWIW

I don't know if the abstract you present is accurate, but assuming it is I'm not sure it's as incompatible with how "secular" progressives have possessed the term. First, I'm not a proponent of social justice as a tool for over the top political correctness and I find any attempt by the state to condone it to be pandering to a voting group that would turn on them in a second if they do even the slightest thing wrong, so I would say that it's not about uniforming advantages and disadvantages because that would lead to equality of a sort, the term I hear most often coming from social progressives is "equity", which is not the same thing, it compares more to gaining advantage rather than levelling the playing field. 

But in terms of organizing and living free of State control (at least from the powers who traditionally control the state) these aren't anarchists or libertarians, they'll happily support the State if the State panders to their ideology, that's why the NDP exist in Canada, and the do possess a new virtue (virtue signalling) and they do know how to co-operate and associate to advance their movement's goals, so it's not dissimilar at all from how progressives have utilized social justice, it's exactly how it's interpreted. 

My main objection to social justice is that much of it can be avoided if we treat everyone with respect and legislate based on fairness and openness, you do that and it goes a long way to getting rid of this over the top political correctness. But while we're on the subject of that, I'd say that we're discussing a group that is by all accounts quite small but disproportionately monopolizing a massive amount of the conversation, again owing to their ability to organize and associate and co-operate have given them the tools to successfully take over the conversation and the other side's unwillingness to engage.

WALTER784

From: WALTER784

Apr-6

Politics aside... it's from the Heritage Foundation.

And it documents numerous misconceptions that many today have about social justice.

I found it an interesting read all the way to the end.

FWIW

Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Apr-6

How is this a current event and not political? We don’t do politics here anymore because of the fighting.  

Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Apr-6

I tried to read it but it’s very long and he bounces around to different subjects.  I’m interested in justice as it is defined in the Bible vs justice as it’s used for political gain, which is stepping into potential political realms.

In the Bible, and actually out of it, for those who don’t care for the book but still embrace the idea, there are two kinds of justice.

1. Retribution for sin (or evil or crime)

2. Restorative where amends are made, property is returned (or the criminal does time in jail.)

Social justice for equality of opportunity makes sense to just about everyone.  Social justice for equality of outcome, does not.  We can’t control outcomes without taking everything away from everyone and then doling resources back out.  However or education system should give everyone the same or similar opportunities, then it is up to them to make the most of them.

Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Apr-6

What is the NDP?

Canada's third political party, it's a left wing party, it's ancestral leader Tommy Douglas is considered the founder of the Canada's medicare system we "enjoy" today. They are consistently third in elections because they attract a lot of leftie radicals with ideas most of the country can't tolerate at a National level, the NDP exists at the Provincial level too, they control several Provincial Legislatures across the couuntry.

Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Apr-6

I thought all of Canada is socialist. What are the other two parties?  Which one usually wins? Don’t most people like your healthcare?

Socialist has a much different context here, your version of socialism is analogous to American Democrats, here those are our Conservative Party, the Liberals would be slightly more progressive and the NDP very progressive.

The Liberals and Conservatives go back and forth in terms of governing, right now we’re in a Liberal Majority and will likely be in a third term of that Government come next cycle.

Regarding Medicare, I guess it depends on what you need it for, if you need it for medicine prescriptions or the ability to see a family doctor it’s great, if you need specialized scans and surgery it’s a long, long wait.

TOP