“When I use the term Social Justice,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—-neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.” Humpty Dumpty is quite right -- Social Justice is all about white knighting to empower the "powerless" in order to gain power via virtue signaling.
I would agree with that, mmazenko--but for *individuals*, not *groups*. The distinction is huge, and is a large part of what divides Left and Right in this country.
Granted. But when data shows disproportionate action and inaction based on groups - racial for example - then the response and action must be implemented with those group biases in mind.
Well, if you're conclusion is that one group (ie. one race) is naturally more criminal than another and society can make assumptions about a group based on that stereotype, then I guess I understand the need for race-based social justice.
Because that thinking is the textbook definition of racism.
“When I use the term Social Justice,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—-neither more nor less.”
ReplyDelete“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.”
Humpty Dumpty is quite right -- Social Justice is all about white knighting to empower the "powerless" in order to gain power via virtue signaling.
Very well done!
ReplyDeleteEqual protection and opportunity under the law.
ReplyDeleteI would agree with that, mmazenko--but for *individuals*, not *groups*. The distinction is huge, and is a large part of what divides Left and Right in this country.
ReplyDeleteOpportunity, not outcome.
Granted. But when data shows disproportionate action and inaction based on groups - racial for example - then the response and action must be implemented with those group biases in mind.
ReplyDeleteIf one "group" commits a disproportionate number of crimes, is the "group" wrong? Is society wrong? Is the law wrong?
ReplyDeleteYou know where I'm going with this, I just want to hear your answer.
Well, if you're conclusion is that one group (ie. one race) is naturally more criminal than another and society can make assumptions about a group based on that stereotype, then I guess I understand the need for race-based social justice.
ReplyDeleteBecause that thinking is the textbook definition of racism.
But I think you already know that.
Which is clearly why that's not what I was saying at all.
ReplyDeleteBut I think you already know that.
Thus, what's your conclusion?
ReplyDeleteWhen social ills seem disproportionately aligned with a group or demographic, who's "wrong"?
And, more importantly, how do we achieve equity and justice?
Yes, valid questions.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the answers?