The advocates of “social justice” are just practicing, as Sowell puts it, the “Politics of Self-Congratulation”. They’re doing it for their own self aggrandizement, and for their own power to determine who gets what.
I don’t know how anyone can claim to be a Christian and push class warfare and envy. Clearly a violation of, and an encouragement of others to violate, “thou shall not covet”. And it SPECIFICALLY SAYS “your neighbor’s house”!
And just last week the dhimmirats main talking point was about how many houses McCain owns.
I find that many Christians are almost shocked when I tell them the plain truth that socialism is based on three sins. Economist F. A. Hayek, in the Road to Serfdom predicted it also quickly leads to the use of the State to coerce people by the threat of deadly force, and as sure as the sun rises some citizens will get so upset that they will die during attempts by the police to arrest them for breaking a law that allows the State to seize their property.
In my book, it is just as much the spirit of murder to evoke the State police power to effect theft as it is if the “social activist” just seized the property in person. Why the spirit of murder? Because there is a predictable chain of escalation should the target of the law refuse to comply, a chain that leads to government use of deadly force, a chain **that would not be evoked** had the law not been in effect.
To propose that some social issue should be addressed by putting it within government power is to accept the possible consequences. Under totally different circumstances, we don't hesitate to hold gun owners responsible if a child were to find a firearm in a home that is not securely stored. We can easily see the chain of events. Had the gun owner taken “due care” in storage, the accident would have never happened.
Yet, we are so conflicted about how we use government power. We don't hesitate to assign some task to government, and we don't even give it a second thought that someone might refuse to comply, and we certainly don't want to consider what hell we will certainly put someone through when they steadfastly disagree with our good intentions.
It is one thing to define essential core functions of government, like say running the courts. What a monster we have today in comparison, and every single regulation we have allowed this monster to pass, we allow it to enforce by the threat of deadly force. No matter how trivial an item, we have said this item is so important that we are even willing to shoot our own mother rather than to allow her to not comply with the rule.
Like it or not, we would rather see our own grandmother dead than to allow her to sell a toilet that used too much water when it was flushed.
And socialists only want to feed the monster so it can grow even larger! And they only expect that this monster will bring about good things for everyone.