Social Justice is no just, or fair, it is evil

H/T Moonbattery for the link to this story

Much has been made of the signature economic failures of the Democratic candidate’s professed socialism. The ongoing economic collapse in Venezuela is Exhibit A. But going hand in hand with socialism is “social justice” a concept that sounds noble for its presumption to level “the distribution of advantages and disadvantages in society,” in the name of equality. “My run for office was a manifestation of commitment to social justice,” Sanders said as he began his presidential run.

And “social justice” made another appearance, this time, in the form of what they did in Cambodia after the last helicopter lifted off from the U.S. embassy roof in Saigon in 1975, an act explicitly sought by Sanders’ anti-war left.

Three million Cambodians were slaughtered as a result by the Khmer Rouge communists, who were seeking to build an “equal” society of social justice from the ground up. They accomplished it through what they called “self-reliance,” another fine-sounding buzzword meaning autarky, the isolation of the country from all outside influence and scrutiny, an explicitly anti-free trade, anti-globalization romanticist philosophy that drove millions of city dwellers to the isolated countryside. There, they were systematically enslaved, shot, starved, tortured, brainwashed and indoctrinated, turning the country into a vast boneyard. With a quarter of the country dead, the Khmer Rouge achieved their sought-after social justice of equality all right: the equality of the grave.

These were not savages. Khieu Samphan and his fellow Khmer Rouge elites were mostly Sorbonne-educated and were much feted in the radical-chic circles of Sanders’ anti-war left. Sanders remains a friend of one of the Khmer Rouge’s staunchest apologists, Noam Chomsky.

“As an intellectual, I never wanted anything other than social justice for my country,” Khieu Samphan testified last week. Note that use of the word “intellectual.”

Until these trials began, the Khmer Rouge were heroes to the Sanders left. They fiercely defended the Khmer Rouge no matter what the reports of their atrocities, because of their commitment to “social justice.” The ends justified the means. When folk singer and anti-war protestor Joan Baez began to question the crimes, she was blasted by the left.

Social justice is a lie. Their alleged pursuit of “equality” is a farce, rather than a serious goal. The left’s perverted definition of equality can never be consistent with liberty. The steps advocated by social justice types to achieve their ends, are not fair, or just. They are, in fact evil. To reach the Utopian state of “social justice” the left seeks to centralize power.

Only an all-powerful government can enforce the left’s definition of equality. Liberty, naturally, especially liberty as defined by our Founders, is antithetical to the lefts “equality”. To reach equality, the left must have enough power to ration and or control, and of course redistribute everything. Income, housing, food,  medicine, speech, what type of car you may own, how many children you may have, how you raise them, and of course, nothing like a right to self-defense is allowable under social justice rules is it? Of course not, so a disarmed populace is a must.

What happened in Cambodia, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, the USSR, is happening in Venezuela will happen to one degree or another in any nation that embraces social justice. Bernie Sanders, and other American Leftists may or may not grasp, or care what their beloved social justice sows, and reaps, but understand that they are supporting evil.

12 thoughts on “Social Justice is no just, or fair, it is evil”

  1. Social justice as we see it cannot save the soul. That needs to be the objective of each of us. People need to be good to others regardless of what happens to this sinful body. Sights need to be set on what is not yet seen. That is what God means when he says seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. We need to see – Judge who is happy and who is not happy and why judging rightly. The person who is forgiven of a large debt will love the one who forgave them a lot for being forgiven. A person who is forgiven of a lesser debt will have happiness equal to the amount that they were forgiven of. People seeing that will judge rightly. That is not condeming. People got judging backwards.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s