DADvocate

Hearing or reading the terms "social justice" or "social injustice" sends a feeling of nausea through my body. A term loved by many because it sounds good and lends itself to equivocation. Wikipedia gives a pretty good definition on "social justice"'s current use.

Social justice is a term, generally applied by the left, to describe a society with a greater degree of economic egalitarianism, which may be achieved through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution, policies aimed toward achieving that which developmental economists refer to as equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

Today, the social justice Medusa reared her ugly head. Additionally, if you read the linked paragraph, the writer is wrong or lying about nearly everything said in the paragraph. One of those lies in the immigration issue. Contrary to the host of liberal lies, a strong majority of Republicans support a path citizenship for illegal immigrants. "When given three choices for how to deal with the 12 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, 62% of Republicans said 'They should be required to register, meet certain conditions, and eventually be allowed to apply for citizenship.' " Liberals love the imaginary conservative, straw man argument because without lies, they have nothing.

Social justice proponents support all sorts of injustice. Economic egalitarianism means taking from those who earned, or whose parents earned on their behalf, and giving it whomever the social justices feel like. Equal outcome provides such a hilariously absurd notion that I find it hard to believe that anyone is foolish enough to publicly support it. But, we have the parents who think every soccer game should end in a tie. (Kids are never fooled by this.)

Today, in Tucson within the Tuscon Unified School District, we find another warped version of social justice.

The board is calling for a two-tiered form of student discipline. One for Black and Hispanic students; one for everyone else.

With the goal of creating a "restorative school culture and climate" that conveys a "sense of belonging to all students," the board is insisting that its schools reduce its suspensions and/or expulsions of minority students to the point that the data reflect "no ethnic/racial disparities."

From the section of the 52-page plan titled "Restorative School Culture and Climate," subhead, "Discipline":

"School data that show disparities in suspension/expulsion rates will be examined in detail for root causes. Special attention will be dedicated to data regarding African-American and Hispanic students."

The board approved creating an "Equity Team" that will oversee the plan to ensure "a commitment to social justice for all students."

The happy-face edu-speak notwithstanding, what the Tucson Unified School District board of governors has approved this summer is a race-based system of discipline.

Hat tip to Darren.

Funny how egalitarianism and treating people unequally go hand in hand.

Three Dog Night asks some good questions.

How can people be so heartless
How can people be so cruel
Easy to be hard
Easy to be cold

How can people have no feelings
How can they ignore their friends
Easy to be proud
Easy to say no

And especially people
Who care about strangers
Who care about evil
And social injustice
Do you only
Care about the bleeding crowd?

During my life, I've found no evidence that the carers of social injustice cared any more about people than the rest of us. There is solid evidence that the conservatives actually give more than liberals. I've noted three patterns in much liberal "giving." First, what is given is first taken from someone else and involves little, if any, personal sacrifice. Next, the "giving" and supporting the "giving" brings great ego gratification to the "giver," even though they are only giving something taken from someone else. Lastly, they can be as harsh and uncaring as anyone else.

Just give me social injustice where we are all judged by the same laws and rules, where those who work harder and longer earn more. Give me a world where Bill Gates earns more than his gardener, where those with more talent and ability, who develop it and use it, are rewarded. Heck, give me a world where the fittest thrive, have more offspring and, over time, the human race becomes smarter and stronger. A world where Harrison Bergeron would be allowed to perform unfettered.