Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let me begin by outlining my own position and background:
I grew up in a dairy-farming family of more-or-less "mainstream" socially-conservative standards, "leavened" by several career-educator aunts and uncles; came of age in the rebellious 1960's, but was introduced to more-philosophically-grounded writings -- Ayn Rand first, but also Murray Rothbard, Karl Hess and other contemporaries. I was present at the founding of one of the principal components of the libertarian movement (captital or lower case "l" -- take your pick) c.1970. Later exposure to the life and writings of Eric Hoffer, the "philosopher longshoreman", further softened that stance.
To some of the more outspoken in the other camp. I'm a "neocon" or "right winger", but I doubt if most of them could formulate a concise description of what they fear and oppose. The only principle to which I strongly subscribe is: that personal and economic freedoms are essentially indivisible, and that attempts to tamper with them invariably fail, and that further attempts to "improve" upon them merely intensify the cycle of repression and failure.
And I recognize that the fragile nature of post-industrial life mandates a societal "safety net"; my only reservation here is the recognition that bureaucratized "answers" to societal problems usually lead to calls for further concentration of undeserved power.
History has taught us that most of these misguided experiments eventually correct themselves; the three exceptions were Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, and the Soviet Union; those in turn were by-products of European royalty's attempts to perpetuate their power in the wake of the excesses pf the French Revolution and the Napoleanic Wars, all with very bloody consequences The rest of the industrialized world evolved toward expanded pluralism. And within that group. likely to expand as more nations meet the unofficial "standard" of a century of transfer of power by exclusively-democratic means, no member has since resorted to the use of force against another member. But polarization -- a common feature of hard-partisan politics in supposedly-"advanced" European societies -- is clearly intensifying in America.
The rise of the "Social Justice" advocacy is a product of an unlikely alliance between very-young, often-moneyed and sheltered individuals. attempting to bond with illegal immigrants and the hard-core underclass against supposed "exploitation" with a similarly-moneyed "limousine Left" seeking to orchestrate the Master Plan; the ascendancy of Donald Trump (whom I did not support) owes its success to the recognition among millions of us of ordinary means (the Kiddie Krusade may now scream "racism" as long as it wishes) that those so-called "liberals" are only open-minded toward those ideas of which they approve.
it remains to be seen whether this display of viciousness and vulgarity, unparalleled in recent memory, will produce an additional backlash during the next two Federal election cycles; we are entering unexplored territoty.
Your post reminds me a lot of the analysis by sensible people of the "hippy" movement of the 1960's. People were scared to death of going to Vietnam. The crusade to "stop the war" became a moral imperative. The predictions that there would be a bloodbath were brushed aside as being either reactionary or irrelevant.
What sobered up the protesters was, unfortunately, Kent State. When parents understood that their offspring might not just fail a few classes but might come home in a pine box, the "movement" settled down. The issue was no longer one of abstract morality; it was a matter of immediate death in riots, or possible, down-the-road death in Vietnam. But then as now, to quote the OP, the movement was "a product of an unlikely alliance between very-young, often-moneyed and sheltered individuals." The people don't have long hair, but they are just as foreign to the system.
The many victim status groups have so far traveled parallel path united against a male wasp enemy
Resources are getting more scarce so —-That is changing
Huh? Has oppression and injustice been erased from the planet? Until that time, people will fight for social justice.
How is this a bad thing?
Please define "Social Justice" ???
To elaborate, is it characterized by Equality of Opportunity -- where an impartial system for the resolution of disputes ignores all factors beyond the control of the individual (race, sex. etc)??
Or Equality of Result -- in which all the rewards and benefits arising from individual effort are redistributed, individual incentive is stifled, and we all end up on the same level because some arbitrary "standard" determines what's best for all ??
The former can be easily mitigated -- as in the example of the societal "safety net" which has evolved in all the globe's tested democracies; the latter revolves around the pursuit of absolute power which has been a driving force behind most of the examples of man's inhumanity to man.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 09-17-2018 at 07:31 PM..
To elaborate, is it characterized by Equality of Opportunity -- where an impartial system for the resolution of disputes ignores all factors beyond the control of the individual (race, sex. etc)??
Or Equality of Result -- in which all the rewards and benefits arising from individual effort are redistributed, individual incentive is stifled, and we all end up on the same level because some arbitrary "standard" determines what's best for all ??
The former can be easily mitigated -- as in the example of the societal "safety net" which has evolved in all the globe's tested democracies; the latter revolves around the pursuit of absolute power which has been a driving force behind most of the examples of man's inhumanity to man.
My definition is in my earlier response. I don't play politics or take sides. I care about people.
My definition is in my earlier response. I don't play politics or take sides. I care about people(?)
Do you care about individual people, differentiating between those who try to live responsibly (and recognizing that no one is perfect, but most know right from wrong), vs. the less-principled to whom the (expedient) end justifies the means, and who afford little or no respect for the lives, liberty and property of anyone else?
Or do you see yourself as in pursuit of some arbitrary "standard", called "the greater common good", or "the people", as defined by petty tyrants, and imposed via the monopoly on the use of force granted to a nation-state (be it Socialist Denmark or Nazi Germany) after you and those you deem your friends decide what's best for all?
This is the essential difference between the Classical Liberalism of the Enlightenment, and the pursuit of unchecked power which nearly destroyed all human progress between 1930 and 1945. And the Social Justice Krusade is pointed in the wrong direction.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 09-17-2018 at 09:10 PM..
Do you care about individual people, differentiating between those who try to live responsibly (and recognizing that no one is perfect, but most know right from wrong), vs. the less-principled to whom the (expedient) end justifies the means, and who afford little or no respect for the lives, liberty and property of anyone else?
Or do you see yourself as in pursuit of some arbitrary "standard", called "the greater common good", or "the people", as defined by petty tyrants, and imposed via the monopoly on the use of force granted to a nation-state (be it Socialist Denmark or Nazi Germany) after you and those you deem your friends decide what's best for all?
This is the essential difference between the Classical Liberalism of the Enlightenment, and the pursuit of unchecked power which nearly destroyed all human progress between 1930 and 1945. And the Social Justice Krusade is pointed in the wrong direction.
It seems as if you think that one has to be EITHER for individual people OR for the common good. That's very limited thinking. Both are important.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
