http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=682
you need to get your child out of that den of kooks now and enroll her in a different school
In modern application this does not necessarily imply that because John and Steve have dissimilar houses full of goodies there is injustice going on. It means that a difference in goodies between a group having John as a member and a group having Steve as a member is, that social justice is a relationship between classes and not individuals, that it is necessarily collectivist. This implies that no matter what the real relationship between John and Steve is economically, one may still be plundered on the other's behalf on the basis of group membership.
This is the justification for someone like Jeremiah Wright, the possessor of thousand-dollar suits and a 2 million-dollar house, may justly pick Joe the Plumber's pocket - the difference between the two is not their relative wealth but the relative wealth of groups in which they may be described as members: black and white respectively, in this case. This is the "social" portion of social justice - it applies between collectives, not between individuals.
What is amusing about this is that for Marx the economic relationship between the individuals involved is the only permissible signifier of class, not, as interpreted by the post-Frankfurt School Marxian doctrine, other markers such as race, sex, ethnicity. For Marx Joe the Plumber would have been justified in picking Wright's pocket and not the other way around. For Adorno, et al, it works the other way, or it can if it's expedient.
Most "classic" Marxists, however, would happily allow the reinterpretation so long as it serves to destabilize society and hasten the Revolution. Most modern Marxists aren't smart enough know the difference.
The real problem with this, as with other tenets of the Frankfurt School, is that any individual may be described as a member of multiple classes depending on what class signifiers one wishes to use, and that all such classes have conflicting class interests. The upshot is that social justice is, in application, a points system through which an individual may measure his or her moral right to someone else's pocketbook based on whatever class signifier is trendy at the moment. It results in the grotesque spectacle of a wealthy black handicapped man and a poor white lesbian woman comparing social wounds to see who has the moral high ground over the other. The only obvious low man on that totem pole is - wait for it - one who is a member of all the "privileged" classes of the moment: white, male, upper-middle-class, non-handicapped, employed, etc, etc, etc... Sound familiar?
It’s a euphemism for communism. Makes the dolts who parrot the term feel good while concealing from them the reality of their handlers’ motives. Keeping an ear out for people who use the term is an easy way to screen for useful idiots.
Social justice is really just an argument for left-wing policies designed to aid the losers that arise when people interact freely, and some are too incapable to function. It is based on a premise that anyone who fails to navigate an environment of freedom successfully has experienced an injustice at the hands of an unfair system (which unfairly discriminates against idiots, imbeciles, and layabouts who refuse to contribute anything of value to the nation or their community). There, justice is the state reapportioning success from someone else to the losers.
I have written a huge site, in my tag, on the evolutionary reasons that we have two psychologies in our species, one which seeks the freedom to do their own thing without governmental support, and one which feels the only “fair” “justice” is everyone given free resource availability. If you understand that, you understand why you are facing this, though I probably wouldn’t make this argument to a leftwing administration, lest your daughter be suspended, or just discriminated against by the teacher and admin.
You might be well served to first, find statistics on the support for the Tea Party, and demand their inclusion on the basis of giving students a fair and balanced curriculum on political activism. Second, structure your argument to subtly threaten to turn the group against them – out-grouping arguments are particularly effective against Liberals. Find how many vote republican in your area, how many religious individuals are republican, and if the numbers indicate you could create a sizable movement against the administration from parents, make an out-grouping argument. Tell them with all these people who support limited government, it is only appropriate to also include Tea Party, limited government arguments, or parents will get upset, and it could lead to acrimony between parents and administration which would detract from the student’s experience at the school, and cause headaches for the administration.
Liberals don’t respond to reason or morality, but rather to emotion. You have to couch your argument not as what is right, but as what will cost the Liberal personally, in terms of status, social respect and attachment, security, membership in the group, and threats from others. You present the argument you want to make as right, but include the out-grouping, to motivate them to do what is right. ie, this is right and moral, and if you don’t do it, you may find yourself looking for a new job, because there are enough people who want this, to get your ass fired. But say it nicely.
Good luck.
Social Justice is a nice sounding phrase that basically means taking from the hard working and prosperous and giving to the not-so-hard working and therefore less prosperous. Plain and simple, wealth redistribution, a.k.a. socialism.
Real social justice is some pie-in-the-sky jargon. I guess real “social justice” is when people all follow the same laws and when someone breaks the law, they pay the price.
The only example I can think of true social justice would be caring for those who truly cannot care for themselves, and have no family to care for them either. Not meaning those able-bodied without jobs, but truly handicapped, ill, etc.
It’s one of those wonderful sounding phrases that if you’re against it, you’re a greedy, hateful conservative.
“My kids go to a small Seventh Day Adventist school in Orlando.”
Seventh Day Adventist - that’s a 19th century sect started by a woman with delusions of grandeur. Take your kids out now.
Social Justice = Lynching... Mob Rule by mobsters.. Wild West Law..
costumed in marxist agitprop.. and psycho dribble..
This article in the WSJ, today should give you most of the ammunition that you need. Zinn is the father of the concept of social justice in America. Read these links and you should be well prepared.
David J. Bobb: Howard Zinn and the Art of Anti-Americanism
Hollywood and the academic left have made the late Marxist historian more influential than ever.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324769704579008453713889352.html?mod=hp_opinion
Here’s another from Discover the Networks -http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=715
and from the Eagle Forum -http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2009/mar09/social-justice.html
What, exactly, do you plan to accomplish?
If you sent your kids to a Catholic school, would you meet with the teachers before the school year and try to convince them to teach that divorce should be acceptable and abortion should be legal? It’s their school, their beliefs, and I would think you’d send your children there because you want them instructed in that faith.
It sounds like social justice, as defined by the Adventists, is important to their faith and is taught in their schools. I can’t imagine that one discussion with you is going to cause them to change the Adventists’ beliefs or alter that course plan. So have a discussion with the instructor before school begins to find out what will be taught. Based on that, either remove your children from that school, or monitor the teaching during the year and have a discussion with your children on why you disagree with certain aspects of what they are learning.
By the way, according to the Adventist’s site: “Seventh-day Adventist concern for social justice is expressed through the support and promotion of religious liberty, and through organizations and departments of the Church which work to relieve poverty and conditions of marginalization.”
The Creation of the Religious Left
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2958373/replies?c=33
“Faith and Social Justice”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2958765/posts?page=11#11
Remarks at the Launch of the Office of Faith-Based Community Initiatives
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Shaun Casey
Special Advisor
Melissa Rogers, Director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
Washington, DC
August 7, 2013
MR. CASEY: “I’m reminded today of Reinhold Niebuhr, ....”
http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2013/08/212781.htm
Keep it simple.
You and your Daughter could simply ask “wouldn’t it be Racist to consider some people less capable than others?”
show her tbe dedication page in Rules For Radicals.
that was enough for me.
dedicating a book to lucifer was a bit of a shocker.
Social justice, social media, social skills, social studies -- all of these terms are essentially neutered due to qualification with the word "social."
Social Justice is the euphemism used to justify the theft through thuggish activities of the fruits of the labor of the competent and responsible and the redistribution of them to the less capable and industrious - it is a scam pure and simple.....