socialist Posted May 27, 2012 Author Report Posted May 27, 2012 I highly doubt that... Kid, you have to learns something, even over the internet people can tell your age simply by how immature you act. $20 says you are no older than 16. all the money in the world says im 22 Quote Thankful to have become a free thinker.
Signals.Cpl Posted May 27, 2012 Report Posted May 27, 2012 all the money in the world says im 22 16, not a day older than that. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
Moonlight Graham Posted May 27, 2012 Report Posted May 27, 2012 Would it possibly be because Marx and Dr. Engels didn't factor in some serious flaws in humanity? ie.mankinds lust for power and control? In otherwords,Marxism is infantile because it doesn't take these things into account? I doubt when Marx called for a "dictatorship of the proletariat" he had Stalin and Mao in mind, or maybe even a "dictatorship" in the literal modern sense at all. Some of those serious flaws in humanity include twisting a theory a little bit in order to consolidate absolute power. IMO it would be interesting to see communism tried in a country minus the totalitarian dictator part. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
bleeding heart Posted May 27, 2012 Report Posted May 27, 2012 How about you come back later and try this thread again without sounding like a know-it-all pompous ass? So basically you want us to tell you what we think social justice is so you can tell us how wrong we are. Nice. Exactly. Since the correct answer can only be a direct repetition of the poster's own views, there's no actual desire for a discussion here. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
bleeding heart Posted May 27, 2012 Report Posted May 27, 2012 I doubt when Marx called for a "dictatorship of the proletariat" he had Stalin and Mao in mind, or maybe even a "dictatorship" in the literal modern sense at all. Some of those serious flaws in humanity include twisting a theory a little bit in order to consolidate absolute power. IMO it would be interesting to see communism tried in a country minus the totalitarian dictator part. Whether or not it could ever work--and I have my doubts like almost everybody else--you make a good point. The Soviet revolutionaries despised Lenin-Trotsky, worried about authoritarianism. Correctly, as we see. There were supposed to be Worker's Councils (quickly dismantled by the dictators, as it turned out), grass-roots democratic groups, the whole bit. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Argus Posted May 27, 2012 Report Posted May 27, 2012 i've been studying social justice for a number o years now. i know more about social justice than most. It seems to me, from reading your posts, that you're mistaken. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
bleeding heart Posted May 27, 2012 Report Posted May 27, 2012 It seems to me, from reading your posts, that you're mistaken. Your generosity is noted. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Argus Posted May 27, 2012 Report Posted May 27, 2012 Social justice means equality for all. all people have equal access to goods and services. all people do their part to save the environment. there are no rich and no poor. everyone is in the middle and happy. there is no crime no poverty. no one thumbs their nose at the poor/ Hmmm. But that's not social justice. It's social equality. Justice means you get what you deserve. Suppose you're lazy and ignorant, and couldn't be bothered to work much or improve yourself? Suppose you don't bother to finish school while the guy next store is staying up late studying? Suppose you're out playing pool and loafing while he goes on to college? Suppose you're busy doing drugs and partying while he is working 12 hour days at his new professional job after school is done. Do you really think justice would call for you and him getting exactly the same amount of income, and living in the same size and quality of houses, etc.? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
socialist Posted May 27, 2012 Author Report Posted May 27, 2012 Hmmm. But that's not social justice. It's social equality. Justice means you get what you deserve. Suppose you're lazy and ignorant, and couldn't be bothered to work much or improve yourself? Suppose you don't bother to finish school while the guy next store is staying up late studying? Suppose you're out playing pool and loafing while he goes on to college? Suppose you're busy doing drugs and partying while he is working 12 hour days at his new professional job after school is done. Do you really think justice would call for you and him getting exactly the same amount of income, and living in the same size and quality of houses, etc.? yes, we are all equal human beings. you have a very twisted view of social justice. Quote Thankful to have become a free thinker.
Moonlight Graham Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 (edited) Hmmm. But that's not social justice. It's social equality. Justice means you get what you deserve. No, that's your view of justice (or our particular societies view in terms of the law). Justice more accurately means what is morally right, or righteous. Going back to Socrates and Plato and there have been thousands of years of people debating what "justice" is or isn't. Point being, everybody's view of what is justice is different, because everyone's morality is different. As for "social justice", that term refers to what is socially morally right, or what is the right moral treatment for people in society. This seems like a definition that would be different for many different people. Social justice for a libertarian could be that everyone is allowed to do mostly what they want with minimal interference from the state. However, the actual definition you find in textbooks seems to be highjacked by a certain group of people who value egalitarianism. Seems like "social justice" should more accurately be termed "social equality", as you say also. Edited May 28, 2012 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
August1991 Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 (edited) i've been studying social justice for a number o years now. i know more about social justice than most.Define "justice" first. Then, explain carefully why you have to refine this concept with the modifier "social".I think rather that the term "social justice" is kitsch. It can mean anything that you want it to mean. It is a fad term that happens to be in vogue now. In all likelihood, in a few decades, it will not be heard. A few decades ago, the Left used the (vague, kitschy) term "the masses". One rarely hears that term now. The term "Social Justice" puts us into the world of George Orwell: what do words mean? Edited May 28, 2012 by August1991 Quote
Michael Hardner Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 im waiting for people to ive what social justice means. what does it mean to you michael hardener? It's a new term, calling out the portion of justice that deals with equality, particularly of economic equality. Like the justice system, it's subjective but there are objective measures. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Define "justice" first. Then, explain carefully why you have to refine this concept with the modifier "social". Very true. Nobody agrees on a definition, so there really isn't one, yet... everybody has a definition that matters to them, and so there is a collective idea that it exists. If many individuals feel the system is unfair, then social cohesion falls apart. So the idea of justice is fought out in the opinions of citizens, every day. There are grave consequences if too many people think we don't have justice. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
eyeball Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 So the idea of justice is fought out in the opinions of citizens, every day. There are grave consequences if too many people think we don't have justice. Yup, once economics truly starts trumping virtue at every level of the economy social justice will take a seat that's even farther back than it already is. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Canuckistani Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Agree. We've come to know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Yup, once economics truly starts trumping virtue at every level of the economy social justice will take a seat that's even farther back than it already is. Farther back... subjectively... people will revolt over identity and think it's social justice. The perception has to be managed as well as the reality. If the lower and middle class are in roughly the same position as 30/40 years ago, well that means that the wealth is not being shared perhaps... but we weren't exactly starving back then either. So what is the perception, is the next question. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
eyeball Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Farther back... subjectively... people will revolt over identity and think it's social justice. The perception has to be managed as well as the reality. If the lower and middle class are in roughly the same position as 30/40 years ago, well that means that the wealth is not being shared perhaps... but we weren't exactly starving back then either. So what is the perception, is the next question. Whatever it is I think the moral imperative to be solvent or die is making the perception of reality more objective not less. Justice is becoming a luxury. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Michael Hardner Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Whatever it is I think the moral imperative to be solvent or die is making the perception of reality more objective not less. Justice is becoming a luxury. It's very difficult to evaluate, though over time. Social justice and economic justice always takes place in the context of the changing human experience. Unions have declined over decades, and large corporations have more power - but we also have more freedoms than in the past in many respects. The one problem I haven't heard anybody solve is how to evaluate exactly how well we're doing. People complain constantly, but how do we know if/when things are that bad ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
eyeball Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 It's very difficult to evaluate, though over time. Social justice and economic justice always takes place in the context of the changing human experience. Unions have declined over decades, and large corporations have more power - but we also have more freedoms than in the past in many respects. The one problem I haven't heard anybody solve is how to evaluate exactly how well we're doing. People complain constantly, but how do we know if/when things are that bad ? If it feels like abuse, it probably is. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Canuckistani Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Yes, people have an innate sense of justice, but that changes with times. We have a different view now than we had in feudal times. Globally you can say there is more social justice as many people are being lifted out of poverty. Some of that is coming at the cost of the lower and middle class in the West. I used to be all for globalization, saw is as a way of having global justice. Now I just think we'll have an entrenched global elite with little social mobility in and out of that elite, and with the means to enforce it's continued existence. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 If it feels like abuse, it probably is. There are other axioms: "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" ... and "why would anybody sit and listen to a squeaky wheel ?" My concern is that people mistake their consumer personas for their selves, and expect governments to react the same way as Bell or Rogers (ok... bad example)... Apple does when they're trying to get your money. People whine, see ? They whine and whine. On the other hand, government services are about as far behind times as can be imagined in a country like this... Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
g_bambino Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Social justice means equality for all. Never. Going. To. Happen.... Ever. It's actually entirely unnatural; an idealistic dream that's impossible to realise. Quote
Canuckistani Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 There are other axioms: "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" ... and "why would anybody sit and listen to a squeaky wheel ?" My concern is that people mistake their consumer personas for their selves, and expect governments to react the same way as Bell or Rogers (ok... bad example)... Apple does when they're trying to get your money. People whine, see ? They whine and whine. On the other hand, government services are about as far behind times as can be imagined in a country like this... You make some very interesting points. But to say people whine (for no good reason presumably) but govt services are behind the times seems contradictory. I think people whine because they know things are going downhill for most of them, whether in relative or absolute terms. Quote
Canuckistani Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 Never. Going. To. Happen.... Ever. It's actually entirely unnatural; an idealistic dream that's impossible to realise. Nope it won't happen. Depending on what you mean by equality it's certainly worth striving for. True equality under the law, for instance. Are you equal under the law when one person can afford a top lawyer and another can't? Quote
eyeball Posted May 28, 2012 Report Posted May 28, 2012 There are other axioms: "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" ... and "why would anybody sit and listen to a squeaky wheel ?" My concern is that people mistake their consumer personas for their selves, and expect governments to react the same way as Bell or Rogers (ok... bad example)... Apple does when they're trying to get your money. People whine, see ? They whine and whine. Some do get tired of whining and start taking matters into their own hands. That's when governments really start reacting. On the other hand, government services are about as far behind times as can be imagined in a country like this... It's ability to perceive is what's lacking, as is our ability to react to it's inabilities. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.