Someone want to explain "Social Justice" to me?

[4est_4est_Gump]

You are thinking in terms of economic zero-sum and that is how a Socialist thinks.

Under Liberalism (Capitalism) everyone can play the game and everyone can win (outside of severe disability, but one of the guys I am in charge of is retarded and he is quite a good worker, certainly not a loser as is the recovering meth addict who I supervise who is slowly, but surely turning himself into the man he wants to be), it is just that some people choose not to play the game, and that is one facet of Liberty, that you have to be free to fail...

You cannot discount Liberty because some people will refuse to fully participate in it. There are some humans who seem to prefer to be feral.

"Society has for its element man, who is a free agent; and since man is free, he may choose -- since he may choose, he may be mistaken -- since he may be mistaken, he may suffer....
I have faith in the wisdom of the laws of Providence, and for the same reason I have faith in liberty."
Frédéric Bastiat

 

[mercury14]

So Social Justice is the redistribution of wealth based on government's noted ability to pick winners and losers...

AJ's default tactic: fabricate and then attack the fabrication, declaring that since nobody defends said fabrication that he "won the thread".

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You've got socialism in the states, I think.....

Yes and that is why our economy is doing what Europe's has done and is slowly grinding to a halt. I talk about it al the time when your fellows begin blaming all our problems on Capitalism, but Capitalism has been in decline since the 1930s just as Germany went to war against it in the 1880s.

Back in 1859 one of my ancestors spoke of INSANE PHILANTHROPISTS who endeavor to destroy industry and thieves via the creation of a society where nothing is worth stealing.

"Three main tendencies or tenets mark the drift toward totalitarianism. The first and most important, because the other two derive from it, is the pressure for a constant increase in governmental powers, for a constant widening of the governmental sphere of intervention. It is the tendency toward more and more regulation of every sphere of economic life, toward more and more restriction of the liberties of the individual. The tendency toward more and more governmental spending is a part of this trend. It means in effect that the individual is able to spend less and less of the income he earns on the things he himself wants, while the government takes more and more of his income from him to spend it in the ways that it thinks wise. One of the basic assumptions of totalitarianism, in brief (and of such steps toward it as socialism, state paternalism, and Keynesianism), is that the citizen cannot be trusted to spend his own money. As government control becomes wider and wider, individual discretion, the individual's control of his own affairs in all directions, necessarily becomes narrower and narrower. In sum, liberty is constantly diminished."
Henry Hazlett, 1965

 

[mercury14]

You are thinking in terms of economic zero-sum and that is how a Socialist thinks.

It's how a capitalist thinks as well.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I understand a bit more than you give me credit for.

OK, we're still on the economic theme but have now added education. And by implication a sub-context that ALL people want the same thing for themselves and their children. Or to put it another way, poor people are poor because they're uneducated, but if we just gave them some more money they'd all of a sudden become more educated. An interesting concept, although in various forms we've been doing that for decades now with no real tangible results for the investment.

Ishmael

We have?

 

[mercury14]

Yes and that is why our economy is doing what Europe's has done and is slowly grinding to a halt.

It's not, it's currently growing after a recession caused by (or at least greatly exacerbated by) the recklessness of under-regulated capitalism.

 

[PoppingTom]

Under Liberalism (Capitalism) everyone can play the game and everyone can win ..., it is just that some people choose not to play the game, and that is one facet of Liberty, that you have to be free to fail...

What's wrong on not playing the game, if you don't want?

That's freedom.

And in a society with more social justice, you got more of that freedom.

 

[PoppingTom]

Yes and that is why our economy is doing what Europe's has done and is slowly grinding to a halt.

But I still call the police. I don't see them as enemies. I can talk to the police without danger, instead of Americans.

So YOU got socialism, not me.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

What's wrong on not playing the game, if you don't want?

That's freedom.

And in a society with more social justice, you got more of that freedom.

That is exactly what I said, but you are using people not playing the game as an indictment of the game itself and that is what I am patiently pointing out as fallacious thinking. In a Socialism, yeah, you can make it appear to be "fair" for the feral among us, but the only way that you can do that is to unfairly punish the people playing the game...



... and sooner, or later, it causes them to stop playing. They go Galt.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

But I still call the police. I don't see them as enemies. I can talk to the police without danger, instead of Americans.

So YOU got socialism, not me.

I did not say anything of the sort. I spoke in terms of those Socialisms that reached their logical absurd conclusion, places such as 1930s Germany, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, etc.,

Eventually, as resources dwindle you will fear the police too because those at the top of the Socialist pyramid always use the police to make sure they don't get economically "Socialized."

 

[mercury14]

I did not say anything of the sort. I spoke in terms of those Socialisms that reached their logical absurd conclusion, places such as 1930s Germany, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, etc.,

Eventually, as resources dwindle you will fear the police too because those at the top of the Socialist pyramid always use the police to make sure they don't get economically "Socialized."

One day you'll learn the difference between communist, isolationist, militarily hostile nations and socialist American policy.

Edit: And when you do, you'll ignore it since it doesn't fit your narrative.

 

[miles]

So you're a winner, because your parents pay your college, and the other one is a loser, because he has to fight for everyday survival?

Your American Game is a piece of shit.

It's obvious you're in way over your head in this conversation.

 

[PoppingTom]

That is exactly what I said, but you are using people not playing the game as an indictment of the game itself and that is what I am patiently pointing out as fallacious thinking. In a Socialism, yeah, you can make it appear to be "fair" for the feral among us, but the only way that you can do that is to unfairly punish the people playing the game...

No, I don't.

We all play the same game. Real socialism, like the one I left behind 20 years ago, tries to play a different game, and that game never worked well. But the Europe of today plays the same game like America, maybe with a few changed rules.

And these rules are to make the game more fair, and to help the zeros by staying zeros. If everybody wants to be number one, it's last man standing.

 

[mercury14]

It's obvious you're in way over your head in this conversation.

You said you don't care about social justice and have nothing to contribute here. Why are you still talking?

 

[cjh]

Explain equity.

Why were there both courts of law and of equity?

Why are there still equitable remedies?

 

[mercury14]

No, I don't.

We all play the same game. Real socialism, like the one I left behind 20 years ago, tries to play a different game, and that game never worked well. But the Europe of today plays the same game like America, maybe with a few changed rules.

And these rules are to make the game more fair, and to help the zeros by staying zeros. If everybody wants to be number one, it's last man standing.

And the reason America has less social mobility according to AJ is... "Not enough white people in America".

 

[PoppingTom]

It's obvious you're in way over your head in this conversation.

It's obvious your arguments lack any disposability.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Yes and that is why our economy is doing what Europe's has done and is slowly grinding to a halt. I talk about it al the time when your fellows begin blaming all our problems on Capitalism, but Capitalism has been in decline since the 1930s just as Germany went to war against it in the 1880s.



"Three main tendencies or tenets mark the drift toward totalitarianism. The first and most important, because the other two derive from it, is the pressure for a constant increase in governmental powers, for a constant widening of the governmental sphere of intervention. It is the tendency toward more and more regulation of every sphere of economic life, toward more and more restriction of the liberties of the individual. The tendency toward more and more governmental spending is a part of this trend. It means in effect that the individual is able to spend less and less of the income he earns on the things he himself wants, while the government takes more and more of his income from him to spend it in the ways that it thinks wise. One of the basic assumptions of totalitarianism, in brief (and of such steps toward it as socialism, state paternalism, and Keynesianism), is that the citizen cannot be trusted to spend his own money. As government control becomes wider and wider, individual discretion, the individual's control of his own affairs in all directions, necessarily becomes narrower and narrower. In sum, liberty is constantly diminished."
Henry Hazlett, 1965

Yes. But more to the point, too many non-productive government parasites overwhelm the capacity of producers, and society collapses. It got so bad in the USSR that Stalin was forced to keep producers in prison inorder to feed and provision the bureaucrats.

 

[mercury14]

Yes. But more to the point, too many non-productive government parasites overwhelm the capacity of producers, and society collapses. It got so bad in the USSR that Stalin was forced to keep producers in prison inorder to feed and provision the bureaucrats.

The problem is because of capitalism so many jobs are so shitty that many folks are poor no matter how many hours they work and qualify for benefits and extreme tax liability deductions.

 

[PoppingTom]

Eventually, as resources dwindle you will fear the police too because those at the top of the Socialist pyramid always use the police to make sure they don't get economically "Socialized."

I don't think so. The living standard of Honecker wasn't so much over the top like the average East German.

And the main reason why the people of East Germany forced the change wasn't that much of economical kind. Maybe a bit, as we had the West German media showing us a lot of the other world. The main reason was missing freedom of speech, travel and business. East German people had a lot of money, but nothing to buy for it.

 

[islandman]

A new year and Ish is already busy pretending to be a master puppeteer.

I find comfort in the old ways.

 

[Ishmael]

Let's go at it from a different angle.

If the phrase 'social justice' does NOT have a single, almost universally, agreed upon meaning, then it has NO meaning at all. Just a pair of words thrown out that have the virtue of sounding good, but in the end are meaningless in any context of an overwhelming public understanding of the word.

"I'm for Social Justice, you know what I mean?" Well no, I don't have a fucking clue what you mean. And if you can't definitively define the term, then you don't know what in the fuck you mean either. And if there is NO agreed upon meaning for the phrase then the very act of using it makes you look like a fool.

Ishmael

 

[Lancecastor]

Try to keep it brief.

Ishmael

"Social Justice" is an egalitarian way of viewing and/or running society.

It calls upon the well-founded and legally recognized principals of Natural Justice and the Law of Equity to ease or level the playing field created in capitalist societies and free-market economies.

To pure Capitalists, social justice smacks of Socialism.

But the underlying theme is that everyone deserves a fair shake, to have the basic necessities of life, etc...and that's not a bad thing.

Example: The perversion of an American Teenager paying $200 for a pair of Air Jordan sneakers while the teens who sew them live without access to clean water, nutrition, education (for example) is the sort of thing "Social Justice" seeks to address.

 

[PoppingTom]

"I'm for Social Justice, you know what I mean?" Well no, I don't have a fucking clue what you mean. And if you can't definitively define the term, then you don't know what in the fuck you mean either. And if there is NO agreed upon meaning for the phrase then the very act of using it makes you look like a fool.

Don't blame me, if you look like a fool.

Social justice is not equality of wealth. It's equality of chances to social movement..

 

[koalabear]

You'd sound more intelligent if you said something relevant rather than your bitter personal attack routine.

Try it some time, MORON.