Once I hear a group of social "scientists" employing the term, it generally means that are looking for reasons to favor some groups (almost always Democratic constituents), while excluding others...
We all have our own idea of social justice. My form of social justice is a little different. I would have people keeping the money they earn without the force of a gun to their head with orders to turn larger and larger amounts of it over to the government as they become more successful. I would also call it socially just to have people pay for their own health care without mandating others by force to pay for them.
Is the current form of "social justice" with its emphasis on government force for some special interest groups but not for others really justice?
The answer to the rhetorical question is no.
Update: Art taught in schools, and the tie-in with social justice, is discussed here.
(You knew I would bite....)
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how "artists" like this get so much fame and acclaim. That's because they know how to work the media. They know how to write grants. Essentially they do this by using other peoples' money to fund their political follies. Ironically, when I send my students to Portfolio Day, one of the biggest complaints is that students do not know how to draw, how to make a composition and how to be a technically skilled artist. It's more like a stage show than art to produce such theatrical events. As for the social justice aspect, I won't lie, there's a great deal of politics in art. But it shouldn't be the core of the art experience. While art can be personal, it doesn't have to be offensive. Unfortunately, offensive and loud are what gets big bucks. Which is why I teach art, but seldom show my work.
Justice is getting what you deserve. Social Justice is getting what you demand.
ReplyDelete