Grey Matters header image
Photo taken from deck of Warren's home.

On “Social Justice”

With the election of Barack Obama to the presidency, the clamor for “social justice” is becoming louder. But what is “social justice?”

All justice is social in nature. Absent a society of some sort, there can be neither justice nor injustice. Alone on a desert island, who is there to treat you unjustly, or justly, for that matter? With no one else there, can you yourself be unjust? Hardly.

When criminals are convicted of breaking laws, they “pay their debt to society.” Absent society, there is no one to wrong, and consequently, no one to whom recompense must be paid. Justice (and injustice) cannot exist absent a society. Justice is, by definition, social in nature.

So, if all justice is “social,” are those demanding “social justice” just being redundant? I wish it were so. Those calling for social justice want the opposite of justice. They don’t want fair, impartial treatment, they want special treatment — practically the opposite of “just” treatment.

They are dissatisfied that fate, the gods, the universe did not parcel out talent, wealth, good looks, ambition, intelligence (but mostly wealth) evenly to all persons. They bemoan the fact that we do not all enjoy the same standard of living. And they demand that this be remedied. In short, “social justice” is socialism. They want it. Well, they want more of it. The present level of socialism is not working to their satisfaction.

To hear them tell it, the cause of poor people is rich people. Rich folks, you see, hog all the money leaving very little available for the poor. Shame on them.

Now some people, it’s true, inherit their wealth and, arguably, don’t “deserve” it. The rest of us have to create our own wealth — that is, work for it. We apply our talent, good looks (in some fields), ambition, intelligence and we labor to earn a paycheck.

Since talent, good looks, ambition and intelligence are not equally distributed, the income that these traits can earn is not equal for all of us either. That’s natural, not unjust. But socialists would have you believe that the unequal results necessitate government intervention to even things out — to “spread the wealth” as it were.

That’s what those seeking “social justice” are after — more of other people’s money.

Comments are closed.