Is "social justice" a good idea?

267 posts in this topic

 

10 minutes ago, DoubleDTown said:

And that is the difference between a "social justice warrior" and actually getting things done.

 

By the way, when did working for social justice become a bad thing? Is it about the same time that being respectful of other people became 'political correctness'?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear AlexTr and Social Justice Warrior friends,

 

"social justice" is okay as an idea, but the radicalism that accompanies what I and like-minded 'reactionaries' refer to as warriorism I think is misguided and ultimately ineffective.

 

I'd say the only adjective "justice" needs is "swift".  Justice is for individuals, not groups.  All individuals should have equal rights and opportunities. Says I.  Can we really solve problems for groups that can't be solved by ensuring equality at the individual level? 

 

Affirmative action for groups that historically had disadvantages?  Quotas for underrepresented groups?  Not letting the rich get richer even if it means the poor get richer too?  I don't think they are good ideas. 

 

But my opinion often is discounted by advocates of "social justice" because white males in North America and Europe arguably can't form valid opinions about something that could be argued to impinge on the "privilege" they have enjoyed while living in North America and Europe.   Oder?  

 

Toytowners, I suspect, are overwhelmingly of European descent, and many have North American and European living experiences.  But those experiences are fairly varied.   

 

My experience says that while for sure there is racism and nationalism and bigotry in the world, and for sure those that start out in the middle class have advantages over those that don't (role models, quieter study space, physical security) a lot of people squander their equal opportunities with poor choices like early pregnancy, early school leaving, failure to plan for the future, etc. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well.... define "social justice"...

 

this is a very complex subject matter, impossible to discuss in a short post on a forum.

Before we can decide if "social justice" is a "good" idea, we'd have to know what you mean by "social justice".

 

Different aspects of "justice" (a set of rules and regulations designed to accomplish a common goal for a group of people) can be in conflict with each other, or can change in the group's perception over time. "Justice" is intertwined with a commonly accepted set of values within the group, subject to different interpretations by subsets of the group.

 

Just think about the different areas of "justice" to begin forming an opinion:

rewards associated with acchievements ("equal pay for the same job")
help integrating, getting started ("equal access to education")
fulfilling needs ("need based distribution of food and shelter")

equalizing distribution of everything ("communism")

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DoubleDTown said:

All individuals should have equal rights and opportunities

Even that is unachievable, as desirable as it may be, not least because:

 

1 hour ago, DoubleDTown said:

those that start out in the middle class have advantages over those that don't

and to fix that is impossible in a democratic society.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, DoubleDTown said:

 

 

By the way, when did working for social justice become a bad thing? Is it about the same time that being respectful of other people became 'political correctness'?

It became a bad thing when the far left made it a thing of their own and mixed social distance with their crazy ideas.

Same with green cause. Fortunately now green topic became a mainstream topic and things actually get moving. That is why I am completely against a "green" party. It politicizes a global topic.

 

Another bad example of far left fucking up a valid topic: police brutality in US. They took what is a valid topic, with possible solutions, and politicized it and came up with the incredible stupid slogan "defund police".

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

It became a bad thing when the far left made it a thing of their own and mixed social distance with their crazy ideas.

Maybe they did that because until then no one gave a fcuk about social justice.

Also the far left are only on the rise because the far right are as well.

The world has always and will always be run by people with money and power.The more money you have the higher your social standing.Money and power enables people to get away with virtually anything.

Yesterday (?) Jeff Bezos made the most money ever by a single person in 1 day.Seriously this was celebrated as though it was something to be proud of.

We as a race are more concerned with our own personal wealth than about anything else.We continuously vote in politicians who to remain in power spend more and more of taxpayers money to keep businesses and already financially comfortable people happy while people with nothing are ending up left with less than nothing.

"The greatest country in the world" has a man as President who actually stood up on stage in front of 1000s of people and piss takingly mimicked  a disabled man.FFS if that doesn`t show up what sort of person he is and what the world is all about then nothing ever will.Is it any wonder that social justice has become a hot topic.

13 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

Same with green cause. Fortunately now green topic became a mainstream topic and things actually get moving. That is why I am completely against a "green" party. It politicizes a global topic.

 

But if it wasn`t for those people then you really believe the green cause would be a mainstream topic now,it would still be considered a laughable topic.

13 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

They took what is a valid topic, with possible solutions, and politicized it and came up with the incredible stupid slogan "defund police".

Perhaps that shows how shit we are as a species when a slogan means more to most people than the message behind it ?

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Keleth said:

But if it wasn`t for those people then you really believe the green cause would be a mainstream topic now,it would still be considered a laughable topic.

Those people appropriated themselves with the green message for political purposes, which delayed mainstream acceptance for decades. They mixed it with their political message, which alienated center and right voters. In Portugal the green party is basically a part of the communist party since 1982.

 

1 hour ago, Keleth said:

Perhaps that shows how shit we are as a species when a slogan means more to most people than the message behind it ?

OK, what is the message behind it? Really! Because I only see something out of an anarchist / neo-luddist / "green book" Gaddafi theory.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/07/2020, 13:31:39, DoubleDTown said:

..."social justice" is okay as an idea, but the radicalism that accompanies (it) is misguided and ultimately ineffective.

 

... those that start out in the middle class have advantages over those that don't...

Right then. I agree 100% with your first point which is so succinctly and lucidly put - well done - that it summarises in a sentence the argument behind my university thesis 30 odd years ago. I discussed the rise of anarchy in early 20th century Spain, the precursor to civil war. Nothing more to be said really, as you hit the nail right on the head. End of. Could have saved myself 15,000 words.

 

I would add to your second point that Mother Nature herself does not deal a fair hand. Some are born with pretty faces, long legs and razor-sharp brains. Others are born lopsided, lacking and worse. The former will have an easier ride than the latter. Life can be extremely cruel and it sure is not fair. A levelling of the playing field is desirable and necessary but we still have not worked out how to do that.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, optimista said:

...Life can be extremely cruel and it sure is not fair. A levelling of the playing field is desirable and necessary but we still have not worked out how to do that.

"life" in itself is neither cruel nor fair - it just is.

 

Darwin's law rules. All living things have just two goals:

1. preservation of itself
2. preservation of its kind

 

When humans decided to band together, to acchieve goal #2 as a group, they started being extremely successful (compared to other living things). So, having a self-imposed set of values and rules looks like a smart choice on the global level. Of course, some individuals still prioritize goal #1 over goal #2 - I don't blame them :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MikeMelga said:

OK, what is the message behind it? Really! Because I only see something out of an anarchist / neo-luddist / "green book" Gaddafi theory.

To avoid things like this...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/what-los-angeles-minneapolis-dallas-police-spend.html

 

You have some cities/states spending over 3 times as much on police whereas in the same city/state teachers are made to buy their own supplies.

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Keleth said:

To avoid things like this...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/06/what-los-angeles-minneapolis-dallas-police-spend.html

 

You have some cities/states spending over 3 times as much on police whereas in the same city/state teachers are made to buy their own supplies.

 

You really think the problem with US police is using too much money? How about the real reasons, like being a paramilitary group with inadequate training? How about mentioning that each county has its own police and its own set of rules? And the best for last, how about simply asking to end war on drugs?

 

Defunding solves nothing. It will not solve the violence, the lack of training nor the source of crime.

Ending war on drugs destroys the prison-industrial-complex, not only freeing money for other public uses, but also reducing crime levels and (who would guess?) defunding the police, as less police is needed and especially, less bonus are awarded by drug bust. As you see, shifting funds to other programs is a natural consequence of fighting the underlying problems. Direct forcing defunding is plain stupid.

 

Second most important, this has to stop being a county-run police. There have to be general regulations for all police, which includes mandatory increased training time.

 

BTW, cheap prison labor is modern day slavery. Want social justice? End war on drugs, end the prison-industrial-complex.

 

And as this is related to Trump, not that I like that idiot, but I have to say Obama did almost nothing against this and Bill Clinton made it even worst.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US would save itself also a lot of money and cut way down on crime if they would put any sort of competent social security net in place, but, nope, for the majority of people, you're either working (a LOT) or are perpetually a paycheck away from sleeping on the street.  Personal debt in the tens of thousands is commonplace, unimaginable for most Europeans.  Yes, part of that is because people buy shit they don't need (and consumer culture teaches us that if you don't have nice stuff by a certain age, you have failed as a human--no joke) and too many people own cars (in part because there is also no competent public transportation system in the majority of places, distances are longer etc), but a lot of it is because they just can't make ends meet between the money they make and the lifestyle they really should be able to lead given the amount that they work.  They shuffle bills like electricity and rent across various credit cards. Health insurance coverage usually somewhere between inadequate and nonexistent. 

 

All this has gotten even worse since I left, so I'm told, homelessness is through the roof and violent crime has skyrocketed in my hometown, which in name just keeps getting richer and richer, while the average person is being bankrupted by too-low wages and the exorbitant price of living.  

 

Desperate people do desperate things and from what I can glean, an ever-growing number of Americans are either already in places of desperation or a couple of paychecks away.  

 

Crime, drugs, homelessness, police, whatever, maybe I'm oversimplifying it but if people wouldn't have to rob and steal...when it's time to eat a meal [sic]*, or go into lifelong debt when they become ill, if they would have a place to sleep when they lose their job rather than joining the ranks of junkie crackheads under the bridge, a lot of problems might solve themselves, I think.

in the words of the inimitable Notorious

9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, MikeMelga said:

End war on drugs, ...

Free Fentanyl for all!

.. and more people will say "I can't breath"

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pace and speed of technological change is much faster than people are able to keep up with and adapt to.  Millions of jobs have been eliminated by computerized enterprise systems and robotics and the skills required to maintain these new technologies outweigh the supply in the workforce.  These old jobs are gone forever and pining away won't bring them back.  In the meantime and for the foreseeable future, these dislocations will persist and people will either adapt and succeed, or not and fail.  Bottom line: when you've got a job, you've got something to lose.  When you don't, you've got nothing to lose and therein lies the desperation in all its manifestations.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, catjones said:

The pace and speed of technological change is much faster than people are able to keep up with and adapt to.  Millions of jobs have been eliminated by computerized enterprise systems and robotics and the skills required to maintain these new technologies outweigh the supply in the workforce.  These old jobs are gone forever and pining away won't bring them back.  In the meantime and for the foreseeable future, these dislocations will persist and people will either adapt and succeed, or not and fail.  Bottom line: when you've got a job, you've got something to lose.  When you don't, you've got nothing to lose and therein lies the desperation in all its manifestations.

 

Not exactly a new situation, how many Spinners and Weavers are around today? What is new is globalisation and the movement of jobs from "rich" countries to poorer ones where the international companies don't need to pay as much for their workers.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, catjones said:

The pace and speed of technological change is much faster than people are able to keep up with and adapt to.  Millions of jobs have been eliminated by computerized enterprise systems and robotics and the skills required to maintain these new technologies outweigh the supply in the workforce.  These old jobs are gone forever and pining away won't bring them back.  In the meantime and for the foreseeable future, these dislocations will persist and people will either adapt and succeed, or not and fail.  Bottom line: when you've got a job, you've got something to lose.  When you don't, you've got nothing to lose and therein lies the desperation in all its manifestations.

Nothing new, same thing happened in ancient Rome, when slaves were being raised by the millions in slave farms. This lead to cheap labor, which lead to very high unemployment. Now replace slaves with robots and it´s the same thing.

 

Eventually this lead to tough legislation that banned slave breading farms and limited the number of slaves in the empire.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, MikeMelga said:

Nothing new, same thing happened in ancient Rome, when slaves were being raised by the millions in slave farms. This lead to cheap labor, which lead to very high unemployment. Now replace slaves with robots and it´s the same thing.

 

Eventually this lead to tough legislation that banned slave breading farms and limited the number of slaves in the empire.

 

It is not only an unemployment problem, economically slaves and robots are a disaster since only their owners benefit from the profits of their work they (the slaves and robots) consume far less than they earn leading to serious imbalance in supply and demand.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now