Originally posted by Quadrivium
If possible, would you be willing to write your life on a slip of paper, drop it in a pile with everyone else's life, mix it up, and pull
another's life out to take as your own? Would you expect to have a good life if you did so? Should you expect to have a good life by doing so?
Social Justice The Great Life Swap: By Van Jones
I think this man, and those like him, have lost touch with reality. What say you?
I think he is on his way to reality. I disagree with the notion that everybody must be equal, that is simply impossible, however he never stated this
in the video. He clearly argued that people should be given equal chances in life, the video I see decided to edit that and make it about an equal
outcome, but no where do I see him state this.
At the moment the United states like all others in this world holds a form of social justice whether you like to admit or not. Such programmes as
medicare and medicaid, welfare, these programmes are in place. Some states like massachusetts have health programmes in place to cover citizens. These
are essential programmes to millions of people despite some of their flaws. The removal of these programmes will result in millions of people being
left out of the dark, and if this is what you view as a path towards a better free market society, you are joking yourself and your chances in getting
somebody in power with that mentality.
Reagan is one good example of somebody who felt he could eliminate all social programmes. Came in with the mentality of the free market, of a society
based on near anarchy for businesses for people. He thought he'd come in to DC and swoop out all the welfare folks and medicare-medicaid dependents,
and what exactly happened? reagan had both republicans and democrats on his side, he won by a landslide in the 1980 elections against carter, so why
didn't he finally rid these social justice programmes once and for all? Because he knew the consequences, because he knew he'd get a run for his
money in the next elections if he dared move to completely end those programmes. Same with bush senior and Junior.
Here is social justice as defined below:
Fair and proper administration of laws conforming to the natural law that all persons, irrespective of ethnic origin, gender, possessions, race,
religion, etc., are to be treated equally and without prejudice. See also civil rights.
From a literal conservative perspective, social justice seeks to make everybody equal in every aspect, but this is the scaremongering version of it.
It gives folks an equal footing in order to earn the bare necessities. A man cannot work at the factory to feed his family if he cannot afford
healthcare or if no healthcare insurance company will cover him and he is sick. A single mother of a child depends heavily on assistance from the
government in the form of food stamps, of tax cuts. If not for the government, that child would be another statistic and in inevitably another cost,
whether it be through the government's child and youth services or what not.
Social justice argues the necessity of assuring the bare essentials of life if civilization is to function. It argues that there will be an
inevitable cost to society
if we do not have these safety nets in place. It does not argue that everybody should be equal in outcome. John
Ryan, one of the early advocates, was not a dumbass. He did not spend his time arguing why everybody should get the same amount of meat and milk, the
man like many others who pushed for the theory, argued about opportunity.
This is why we have never seen a modern functioning country without some social programme in place. It has never existed and will never exist because
it does not mix in with reality. Reagan, Nixon and Bush all thought they could come in and create a society without any need for these safety net
programmes, but they found themselves against reality once they got into office.
And yes, redistribution of wealth is inevitable in any society. Money will always be distributed through to the public, even through the most free
market, unless government is completely eliminated. Nobody here can talk about a modern relatively successful functioning nation where government is
limited to enforcing laws. It has never been successfully established despite efforts from the rightwing time and time again.