The term “Social Justice” has seeped into every part of our cultural institutions. If you believe SJ stands for impartial, fair treatment for each member of society, you would be mistaken. To ardent leaders of SJ, the meaning is more nefarious. Rather than seeking equal justice for all people, the movement seeks radical transformation to socialism.
History
The concept of social justice can be traced back to Plato, Aristotle, Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. However, beginning in the mid 1800’s with the industrial revolution, the current term “social justice” has been subverted to what can be termed “distributive justice.” In the early 20th century, progressive legal scholars began embedding in institutions and international law. Later in the 20th century, “social justice” became a philosophy central to human rights education.
Defining
“Social justice is the view that everyone deserves equal economic, political and social rights and opportunities.” Sounds innocuous, worthy of all to strive for, but wait a minute.
While the term social justice permeates every aspect of our current society, it has not been adequately defined. Many books have been written about SJ without accurately defining the authors’ meaning. “It is allowed to float in the air as if everyone will recognize an instance of it when it appears…it becomes an instrument of ideological intimidation.” (Michael Novak)
Keeping the definition nebulous serves the cause of those wishing to push our culture to socialism, trouncing personal liberty through legal coercion.
Criticism
From Friedrich Hayek:
– SJ can only be ascribed to individual actions, not to a whole social system
– SJ proponents are interested in power, not virtue
– SJ presupposes people are guided by specific external directions rather than internal, personal rules of just conduct
– A person isn’t being held accountable for his or her own behavior, as this would be “blaming the victim”
– The function of SJ is to place blame on “the system,” those who mythically control it
– Your suffering is caused by powerful others and those oppressors must be destroyed
From Ben O’Neill:
– SJ is a term of entitlement, a claim for any possible desirable good, no matter how important or trivial, abstract or tangible, recent or ancient
– It is merely an assertion of desire, and a declaration of intention to use the language of rights to acquire said desire
– SJ inevitably involves claims for government provision of goods, paid for through the efforts of others
– Rather than earning desirable goods by rational thought and action, production and voluntary exchange, forcibly take goods from those who can supply them
From John Gray:
– The deluded cult of SJ don’t want to repair society, they just want to overthrow the existing social order
– SJW (Social Justice Warriors) are intolerant of any criticism
– Anyone questioning their vision is not just wrong, but evil
– SJW demand redistribution of the goods of society
– There is no world imaginable where the demands of SJ can be fully realized
Those forcefully advocating SJ portray themselves as being powerless, but in fact, they are exerting power over every aspect of our lives through government, business, education and even our places of worship, seeking to shape our world according to their predetermined values, and this we call oppression.
Just how just is Social Justice? You decide
References:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/social-justice.asp
https://areomagazine.com/2019/02/04/social-justice-and-the-critique-of-reason/
https://quillette.com/2018/02/17/thinking-critically-social-justice/https://unherd.com/2019/10/woke-revolutionaries-will-make-injustice-worse/
https://counterweightsupport.com/2021/02/17/what-do-we-mean-by-critical-social-justice/
[In her retirement, CJ Austin continues to read, write, publish and share insights from her professional background (marriage and family therapy) with others. Contact: cjaustinauthor@gmail.com]
Life Thoughts Today 