Social Justice Is Nothing like Real Justice

The Essence of Liberty: Volume II: The Economics of Liberty (Volume 2)From the comments section: “Social justice is the literal opposite of justice in the same way that political correctness is the literal opposite of correctness.

“Something is not called “politically correct” if it is actually correct. There would be no point in adding the adjective “political” if that were the case. It is only called “politically correct” if it is NOT actually correct, which is exactly what the Nazis (yes, the actual Nazis) who first The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1)popularized “political correctness” explicitly said: That there were things that the state required people to say even though they were not true.

“Politically correct” statements are definitionally untrue. The speakers are simply asserting that society will be better off if they are accepted anyway.

The Essence of Liberty: Volume III: A Universal Philosophy of Political Economy (Liberty: A Universal Political Ethic) (Volume 3)“Similarly, “social justice” is opposite actual justice. Actual justice says that you reap what you sow. Social justice says that you reap what you would have sown if not for privilege. We wouldn’t even talk about such a thing if actual justice had already treated you “fairly” in the eyes of the SJW. We only talk about “social justice” when we want someone to reap what someone else has sown, which is definitionally unjust.”

by Germinal G. Van via Mises Wiregavel_0.PNG

 

 

Social justice is a political and social ideology that advocates for the equal redistribution of wealth, equal access to economic opportunities, and the reduction of unfair privileges within a society. The central argument used by social justice advocates is that the government has the moral obligation to equalize access to wealth, opportunities, and privileges.

In abstract, to many people, this ideology seems morally right. In practice though, social justice has done more harm to those it intended to help and has hindered society’s advancement as a whole. But to fully comprehend the reason why social justice is a problem; it is helpful to understand its origins.

The Origins of Social Justice

To understand social justice, we first need to define what justice is. Justice is a concept under which wrongs committed against one party by another party are “set right,” either through restitution or punishment. Justice is generally administered by an institution — law courts, for example —  in which a third-party impartially adjudicates a dispute. The purpose of adjudicating this dispute is to determine how a victim might be repaid for a loss or private property or bodily harm. Justice, properly understood, therefore assumes there must be an identifiable victim, and that some third party will ensure the proper steps are taken to repair the harm.

Reconnaissance Marine MCI 03.32f: Marine Corps InstituteCombat Shooter's Handbook  The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other Misfits  Social justice as a concept arose in the early nineteenth century during the Industrial Revolution and subsequent civil revolutions throughout Europe, which aimed to create more egalitarian societies and remedy capitalistic exploitation of human labor. Indeed, the concept of social justice is rooted in the Marxist theory of man-made exploitation. Advocates of social justice argue that social inequalities are based upon the fact that those who have access to resources, do so because they have deprived the have-nots of these same opportunities. Consequently, social justice advocates argue that the government has the moral obligation to rectify that injustice. Unlike true justice, however, reparations in the name of social justice do not involve a specific victim or a specific perpetrator. Instead, the guilty party is said to be an entire class of people, many of whom have never been shown to have exploited any specific person at all.

A Handbook for Ranch Managers Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian ViewIn America, social justice has become the new go-to “solution” to alleviate economic inequalities between people and social classes. The current trend of social justice in the United States underlies the misleading premise that the top 1 percent controls all the wealth while the bottom 99 percent produces that wealth. Moreover, this fallacious premise builds upon the myth that most millionaires and billionaires have inherited the wealth that they have today from their predecessors. But, according to a 2017 survey from Fidelity Investments, 88 percent of millionaires in America are self-made. Most did not grow up in exclusive country club neighborhoods. Needless to say, most millionaires started out within the 99 percent then worked their way up by climbing the social ladder. Yet social justice proponents argue that the wealthy — merely by being wealthy — have deprived those from lower social classes of wealth and capital. To fix that “injustice,” policies such as a progressive income tax have been imposed at the national level and in most states.

Note also that the moral system undergirding social justice requires immorality on the part of the state. Since the state produces no wealth of its own, it can only “create” wealth for the less-wealthy by taking wealth and property from the more-wealthy. Thus, social justice is founded on the idea of the state using violence to take from one group and give to another.  Since no specific victim and no specific crime has been identified, this is no case of reparation as exists under real justice. It is simply a transfer of wealth from one group to another based on some sort of general “exploitation.”

So, when a high-income person pays a higher rate of income tax to support a government program designed to increase inequality, we are not transferring wealth from individuals shown to have “exploited” others. Nor is there evidence that every recipient who benefits from these programs has been victimized by some sort of economic exploitation. Instead, it is merely assumed that those who pay more tax are guilty of exploiting others, while those who receive the wealth were exploited. These, of course, are not good assumptions, and are not based on any sort of judicial proceeding or examination of evidence, as would be the case of administering what is properly known as justice.

 

Germinal G. Van is an author, political essayist and libertarian scholar. He was born and raised in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa. He immigrated to the United States in 2010 with a student visa. He holds a bachelor’s degree in political science from the Catholic University of America and a master’s degree in political management from the George Washington University.

 

Check out our WebSite

A Handbook for Ranch ManagersA Handbook for Ranch Managers.  In keeping with the “holistic” idea that the land, the livestock, the people and the money should be viewed as a single integrated whole: Part I deals with the management of the natural resources. Part II covers livestock production and Part III deals with the people and the money. Not only would this book make an excellent basic text for a university program in Ranch Management, no professional ranch manager’s reference bookshelf should be without it. It is a comprehensive reference manual for managing the working ranch. The information in the appendices and extensive bibliography alone is worth the price of the book.

You might also be interested in the supplement to this Handbook: Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual.

About Land & Livestock Interntional, Inc.

Land and Livestock International, Inc. is a leading agribusiness management firm providing a complete line of services to the range livestock industry. We believe that private property is the foundation of America. Private property and free markets go hand in hand—without property there is no freedom. We also believe that free markets, not government intervention, hold the key to natural resource conservation and environmental preservation. No government bureaucrat can (or will) understand and treat the land with as much respect as its owner. The bureaucrat simply does not have the same motives as does the owner of a capital interest in the property. Our specialty is the working livestock ranch simply because there are so many very good reasons for owning such a property. We provide educational, management and consulting services with a focus on ecologically and financially sustainable land management that will enhance natural processes (water and mineral cycles, energy flow and community dynamics) while enhancing profits and steadily building wealth.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Social Justice Is Nothing like Real Justice

  1. Reblogged this on Flyover-Press.com and commented:

    From the comments section: “Social justice is the literal opposite of justice in the same way that political correctness is the literal opposite of correctness.

    “Something is not called “politically correct” if it is actually correct. There would be no point in adding the adjective “political” if that were the case. It is only called “politically correct” if it is NOT actually correct, which is exactly what the Nazis (yes, the actual Nazis) who first popularized “political correctness” explicitly said: That there were things that the state required people to say even though they were not true.

    “Politically correct” statements are definitionally untrue. The speakers are simply asserting that society will be better off if they are accepted anyway.

    “Similarly, “social justice” is opposite actual justice. Actual justice says that you reap what you sow. Social justice says that you reap what you would have sown if not for privilege. We wouldn’t even talk about such a thing if actual justice had already treated you “fairly” in the eyes of the SJW. We only talk about “social justice” when we want someone to reap what someone else has sown, which is definitionally unjust.”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s