The pipe dream of Social Justice
Of course, the call for 'inclusive growth' seems all too human. Yet the idea of an equitable society is flawed. Because that is isn't the way nature intended anything to be. Hierarchies are but natural. Flattened worlds, the kind seen by Thomas Friedman, can't and won't exist. Its a pipe dream.
Equitable societies driven by inclusive growth seem to be pet talking points for politicians. And that is but natural. After all if such Utopian dreams have to come to fruition, taxpayer burden has to grow. The funny thing is, large sections of society can't come to terms with the fact that 'social justice' is a canard. Because it makes them feel as if they aren't doing their bit. And so they are like lambs led to slaughter, by hair brained government schemes, that instead of wiping out poverty, make the people in charge more prosperous than before.
Herbert London addresses the issue of Social Justice and puts it the 'right perspective';
'For many, social justice is a form of egalitarianism. Why, it is sometimes asked, should a few have so much and the many so little? This is the fairness gambit. Overlooked by acolytes of this position is that individualism on which this nation has put a premium is often at odds with economic equality. If people are free to pursue their goals, some are likely to be more successful than others.
The government has attempted to legislate a form of egalitarianism through progressive taxation. But even with a progressive tax designed to reduce the wealth of the most successful Americans, income disparity cannot be eliminated. Unless you change human nature and incentives as the Soviet Union unsuccessfully attempted, economic equality (read: social justice) is unattainable.
It is instructive that so-called progressives want to gain control of the state in order to bring about social justice. However, whenever this effort has been successful the progressives or radicals end up rewarding themselves and impoverishing those they claim to represent. Poor people are invariably subject to this political protest chant, but most know that it is a fiction borne of demagoguery.
Life is not fair — an observation everyone understands intuitively. The rich want something they cannot buy and the poor covet what the rich already have. If there is psychic justice, it is found in religion where every believer is equal in God’s eyes. But in the City of Man, social justice is a chimera, often sought but impossible to attain.
Perhaps it is time to inter this notion, bury it deep into the past. Of course, that isn’t likely to occur when so many are committed to its retention. They will parade across our streets calling for social justice as if they had any idea what it is they are seeking.
This is the lamentation of our age, a chant of frustration and desire. As long as governments seek to address this apparent concern manifest as passion, there will be reinforcement for the employment of these empty words. Listen carefully and you will hear the words “social justice” at any protest rally. This is a case of reifying fake ideology.'
In the world of marketing too, brands may be tempted to work for the 'greater good' of society. Bad Idea. Brands have one responsibility, one alone. Create and deliver value to consumers. In doing so they create fertile ground for what is a fair exchange. Products and Services for the consumers' money. A part of which the brand then pays its employees for being architects to the fair exchange.
And that for you, is how social good is propagated. Governments, instead of preaching inclusive growth should concentrate on their one critical responsibility. To provide for an environment where such fair exchanges flourish, within the confines of the law of the land.
Social Justice will follow.
Equitable societies driven by inclusive growth seem to be pet talking points for politicians. And that is but natural. After all if such Utopian dreams have to come to fruition, taxpayer burden has to grow. The funny thing is, large sections of society can't come to terms with the fact that 'social justice' is a canard. Because it makes them feel as if they aren't doing their bit. And so they are like lambs led to slaughter, by hair brained government schemes, that instead of wiping out poverty, make the people in charge more prosperous than before.
Herbert London addresses the issue of Social Justice and puts it the 'right perspective';
'For many, social justice is a form of egalitarianism. Why, it is sometimes asked, should a few have so much and the many so little? This is the fairness gambit. Overlooked by acolytes of this position is that individualism on which this nation has put a premium is often at odds with economic equality. If people are free to pursue their goals, some are likely to be more successful than others.
The government has attempted to legislate a form of egalitarianism through progressive taxation. But even with a progressive tax designed to reduce the wealth of the most successful Americans, income disparity cannot be eliminated. Unless you change human nature and incentives as the Soviet Union unsuccessfully attempted, economic equality (read: social justice) is unattainable.
It is instructive that so-called progressives want to gain control of the state in order to bring about social justice. However, whenever this effort has been successful the progressives or radicals end up rewarding themselves and impoverishing those they claim to represent. Poor people are invariably subject to this political protest chant, but most know that it is a fiction borne of demagoguery.
Life is not fair — an observation everyone understands intuitively. The rich want something they cannot buy and the poor covet what the rich already have. If there is psychic justice, it is found in religion where every believer is equal in God’s eyes. But in the City of Man, social justice is a chimera, often sought but impossible to attain.
Perhaps it is time to inter this notion, bury it deep into the past. Of course, that isn’t likely to occur when so many are committed to its retention. They will parade across our streets calling for social justice as if they had any idea what it is they are seeking.
This is the lamentation of our age, a chant of frustration and desire. As long as governments seek to address this apparent concern manifest as passion, there will be reinforcement for the employment of these empty words. Listen carefully and you will hear the words “social justice” at any protest rally. This is a case of reifying fake ideology.'
In the world of marketing too, brands may be tempted to work for the 'greater good' of society. Bad Idea. Brands have one responsibility, one alone. Create and deliver value to consumers. In doing so they create fertile ground for what is a fair exchange. Products and Services for the consumers' money. A part of which the brand then pays its employees for being architects to the fair exchange.
And that for you, is how social good is propagated. Governments, instead of preaching inclusive growth should concentrate on their one critical responsibility. To provide for an environment where such fair exchanges flourish, within the confines of the law of the land.
Social Justice will follow.
Comments