View Poll Results: What does "sociail justice" mean to you?

Voters
65. You may not vote on this poll
  • Equality

    15 23.08%
  • Solidarity

    7 10.77%
  • Wealth redistribution

    23 35.38%
  • Socialism

    20 30.77%
  • Justice

    19 29.23%
  • Unjustice

    14 21.54%
  • Good

    9 13.85%
  • Evil

    10 15.38%
  • Prosperity

    7 10.77%
  • Other

    18 27.69%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 15 of 23 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 224

Thread: Social justice

  1. #141
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I for one wasn't aware 'social justice' had any religious roots, or related to religion in any way. It's a purely political Leftist term used in modern propaganda, nothing more.
    Read it's history, the social justice movement began with christians, infact socialism before marx was almost entirely the domain of christians, and not people who happend to be christians, priests, monks and others that are motivated by their christianity. Infact the term was coined by a Jesuit priest.

    And after Marxism and secular socialism became popular, social justice becamse a battle cry of the christian socialists, who opposed marxist secular socialism, but had a communitarian social theology.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...l-justice.html

  2. #142
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by kenc View Post
    While I think the people were allowed to vote from the very first election, it seems to me that you are advocating that the people not be allowed vote at all and have to trust in their government to do the right thing for them. While I personally don't agree with this I am willing to do the experiment and give up my right to vote in the US if everyone else would and turn back the political clock until 1788. Let's see how well the government does when it doesn't have to worry about the general consensus of the people.
    no ,I am not saying give up your vote, I am saying that in republican government the people vote for their u.s. house representatives, and the people vote for their state representatives, those state representatives then appoint the u.s. senators of their state.

    this is know as separation of powers through representation. the people elect the house, and the state appoint the senate, this way power in not just in the hands of the people but the states also, so there can be no majority rule by the voting public.

    this is what as know as 1 direct vote , and 1 indirect vote, and the president is elected by the electoral college, another indirect vote, those are also chosen by the state legislatures.

    the founders say power should never be in just one set of hands, because that power will corrupt, that is why republican government puts powers in two different sets of hands, so it will limit corruption.

    problem is we have depart from republican government 100 years ago and moves towards democracy which has corrupted the u.s.

  3. #143
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    Collective rights are necessary for individual rights.

    Even the whole basis of Capitalism depends on collective rights, i.e. contract, and property, those are collective, if I own a big swath of land I need everyone to recognize that I own that land.

    You can't seperate the 2, especially with economics given that economics is by definition a social activity with social consequences.

    rights are not collective.

    the group IE...does not determine what rights are, my right or your rights do not hinge of what other people think.

    there founders state rights are individual.

    if rights were collective, rights would not be unalienable, they would be open to interpretation, whenever the collective chosen to alter of abolish them.

  4. #144
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    You want to get quotes on what the founding fathers thought about capitalism and finance and so on?
    I am discussing the structure of the federal government, not finance.

    separation of powers,

    checks and balances of government.

    democratic government as compared to republican government.

  5. #145
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    rights are not collective.

    the group IE...does not determine what rights are, my right or your rights do not hinge of what other people think.

    there founders state rights are individual.

    if rights were collective, rights would not be unalienable, they would be open to interpretation, whenever the collective chosen to alter of abolish them.
    Oh they absolutely are, your right to free speach is also a right to not hear other peoples speach if you so choose, property rights are your right to exclude others from a piece of nature, it is also the right to state protection, they all involve your relation to others.

    I am discussing the structure of the federal government, not finance.

    separation of powers,

    checks and balances of government.

    democratic government as compared to republican government.
    Republican just means anti-monarchical, all democracies are also republics, also democracy is not one type of government, it's a concept, i.e. demo (people) cracy (rule), that can manifest in many different ways.

  6. #146
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,069

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    I love how you think that depending on a private insurance company for your healthcare, that will try to take as much from you as possible, while withholding healthcare from you, is somehow more liberating than having a public democratically accountable healthcare system ....
    Absolutely. One of these items I can control, it is mine, I can fire it at will and get service from another. In a market, the providers are beholden to the purchasers. In government, providers are beholden at most to their supervisors, but significantly less so.

    You have a strange concept of "liberty."
    well it is a pre-progressive idea of liberty, liberty as lack of restriction of movement. the progressive idea of liberty (having government take resources from you and constrict your movement in order to provide a minimum level of sustenance), I'll admit, isn't really for me.

  7. #147
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    Oh they absolutely are, your right to free speach is also a right to not hear other peoples speach if you so choose, property rights are your right to exclude others from a piece of nature, it is also the right to state protection, they all involve your relation to others..
    that is not what I mean, I mean my rights are not for you and any other person or group to decide on, meaning the voting public cannot get together and vote, to take or infringe on my rights because they just don't like how I exercise them.

    example ..smoking bans are illegal, because the voting public has no authority to dictate my property has to be smoke-free, its my property, not the public's, when the public does something like that then they are making rights collective, and the founders state rights are individual.

    meaning no one has control over another person rights.



    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    Republican just means anti-monarchical, all democracies are also republics, also democracy is not one type of government, it's a concept, i.e. demo (people) cracy (rule), that can manifest in many different ways.
    again not what I am saying, a republic is a government which has 3 branches of government.

    the u.s. is a republic of republics, and each a republican form of government, which separates power into the hands of the people and the states.

    democratic government concentrates power only into the hands of the people, and that leads to corruption, because when any one person of group of people have all the powers they will be corrupt

    this is why the founders put power in the hands of the states also, to limit that corruption, but the check and balances of government has been removed with the 17th amendment.

  8. #148
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    08-04-13 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    459

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Absolutely. One of these items I can control, it is mine, I can fire it at will and get service from another. In a market, the providers are beholden to the purchasers. In government, providers are beholden at most to their supervisors, but significantly less so.
    No. In Canada, the government makes zero decisions about health care (health care is provided by private entities, and paid for via taxation. And you can't get denied coverage because of "pre-existing" flaws, like the fact of being a human being sometimes subject to things beyond your control.

    I hasten to add that I'm not holding the system up as superior to the American one; America will hopefully deal with its healthcare problems in its own, effective and decent way, and Canada will repair its flaws and issues in whatever way we deem best.

    I was only responding to your universalist notion that the American way must be better. Well, maybe it is. For Americans. Not for everyone, however.

    Heck, it's so popular here that our PM, who openly derided universal health care back when he was a mere political wonk, will now simply not raise the issue at all.

    Ever.

    Because he'd be turfed, on that issue alone.



    well it is a pre-progressive idea of liberty, liberty as lack of restriction of movement. the progressive idea of liberty (having government take resources from you and constrict your movement in order to provide a minimum level of sustenance), I'll admit, isn't really for me.
    I think you're elevating theory as somehow more pertinent than lived reality.
    ...for perhaps the most admirable among the admirable laws of Nature is the survival of the weakest.
    --Vladimir Nabokov

  9. #149
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Absolutely. One of these items I can control, it is mine, I can fire it at will and get service from another. In a market, the providers are beholden to the purchasers. In government, providers are beholden at most to their supervisors, but significantly less so.
    No they arn't, you can sack your insurence company and try get another one, but good luck with that, the companies know you NEED insurance and will gouge you, like they do, for more and more profits, the individual purchasers need the insurance company, not vise versa, the insurance companies know this, and then when you get sick they'll put you in debt, lessening your options even more, and limiting your actual freedom.

    Public healthcare is beholdent to the voters in the end, and you have more liberty since they arn't trying to gouge you, and you don't have to go in debt.

    Also it's only payment, not actual treatment, the product is universal.

    well it is a pre-progressive idea of liberty, liberty as lack of restriction of movement. the progressive idea of liberty (having government take resources from you and constrict your movement in order to provide a minimum level of sustenance), I'll admit, isn't really for me.
    The progressive idea of liberty is ACTUAL freedom, i.e. you cannot be free if you have no access to capital and one person has all of it.

    This idea of liberty, i.e. being free do actaully do things, goes way back, before progressives.

    You can't be free, if you are a debt slave, or a wage slave, you can be formally free, but not in reality.

  10. #150
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Social justice

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    that is not what I mean, I mean my rights are not for you and any other person or group to decide on, meaning the voting public cannot get together and vote, to take or infringe on my rights because they just don't like how I exercise them.

    example ..smoking bans are illegal, because the voting public has no authority to dictate my property has to be smoke-free, its my property, not the public's, when the public does something like that then they are making rights collective, and the founders state rights are individual.

    meaning no one has control over another person rights.
    oh of coarse, in principle rights are rights.

    Property is not a right though, it doens't exist in a state of nature, it needs violence to exist.

    I can talk without the state, it requires violence to make me stop, thus freedom of speach.

    If I claim that a large swathe of land is my land it is nothing more than an empty claim without the threat of violence, so property is NOT a right.

    As far as smoking, yes, if you own a restaurant your providing a public service, your property is protected by the community and recognized as such, and as thus the community has a right to say if you wnat to have a restaurant in our community, we want it to be smoke free, becasue we want people to be able to use public services in our community without fear of second hand smoke.

    again not what I am saying, a republic is a government which has 3 branches of government.

    the u.s. is a republic of republics, and each a republican form of government, which separates power into the hands of the people and the states.

    democratic government concentrates power only into the hands of the people, and that leads to corruption, because when any one person of group of people have all the powers they will be corrupt

    this is why the founders put power in the hands of the states also, to limit that corruption, but the check and balances of government has been removed with the 17th amendment.
    You're just making that up, that isn't what a "republic" means, there are many different types of republics, also the states are also (in theory) in the hands of the people.

    A democratic government CAN and generally does, have checks and balances and constitutions.

    The states are also democratic ....

Page 15 of 23 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •