Having destroyed families, churches, voluntary organizations, charities, et. al., under the Obama-Brooks regime, this is absolutely correct. It was Brooks’ goal all long.

The term “social justice” presumes that there is a crime that needs to be set right. When people are born with differing talents and abilities it may be unfair, but it’s not a crime. It’s a fact of human nature. When people are not all the same in their willingness/desire to work hard, it’s not a crime. It’s a fact of human nature. When not all people are equally able to restrain their impulses that can lead to failure, it’s not a crime. It’s a fact of human nature.

The progs want to believe that they can change the nature of human beings. Give them enough power and they will fit everyone into a magic mold that will create a society where all the parents are above average and all their children are smart and good-looking. They also want to blame unequal economic results on discrimination. Women, blacks, Latinos, etc. are, in their books, all highly discriminated against. Give them enough power and they will legislate that away. (Cough, cough, haven’t they already done that?) Schools are not providing equal education to ALL children. Give them enough money and they will transform the schools. (Cough, cough, hasn’t that already been tried?)

Any human who has worked for a few years knows that, even in successful companies, there is a range of abilities and ambitions from low to high. If it’s well managed, the various workers are positioned in the organization in accordance with there abilities and contributions.

It would be wonderful if every employable human could have a job and that it would allow him/her to maximize their potential. But the jobs have to be created first. Profit making enterprises cannot just hire people out of the goodness of their hearts. There has to be a market for their product or service. That is why an economy that is growing (3%/annum or more is better) can provide jobs for most anyone who really wants to work. There are some who want a pay check but don’t want to work, who will always be in and out of the work force. Then there will always be the unemployables – the disabled, the addicted, the mentally ill, etc.

The best “social justice” is provided by a growing economy that provides jobs and opportunity. The government can only provide the environment in which businesses feel confident in the tax structure and even-handed regulation. Progressive government doesn’t do that.

The poor and unemployed will always be with us. A locally managed safety net should be provided. Churches and other charitable organizations always do a better job than huge, centrally managed Federal programs. The closer it is to the people, the less fraud and waste there would be. Yes, fraud would still exist – just not at the level of a nationally managed safety net.

I hate the term.

But appropriating it and redefining it in conservative terms is not such a terrible idea.

Thank you.