Putting The “Justice” Into Social Justice

If you pay any attention to the modern world you’ll notice a buzzword floating around that might be a bit confusing for literalists like me. When I hear a term I pick apart it’s meaning just to be sure it’s being used correctly. Probably the most overused buzzword floating around right now is “social justice.”

Recently there was a meeting headed by John MacArthur to come up with a Christian response to the term. The group came up with a 14 part “Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel”. I plan on combing through it over the next few days and give a good summary of what I agree with and disagree with. From my initial scanning I will say I am not totally sold on it.

The more I research the term the more nebulous it’s meaning. Just like the term “toxic masculinity“, the definition of the term “social justice” seems dependent on one’s political beliefs.

What’s my definition of “social justice”?

The “social” part is not hard to understand and for the most part I think people use it correctly. It’s pretty hard not to. “Social” just refers to people. The term clearly refers to how we treat people.

The “justice” part is much harder to understand.

“Justice” is defined by the Google as: “just behavior or treatment”, “the quality of being fair and reasonable”, “the administration of the law” which is somewhat helpful, if we can define “just”, “fair”, and “reasonable.”

“Just” is defined as “based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair” which seems clear right? It’s also defined as “(of treatment) deserved or appropriate in the circumstances.

So who decides what is fair? Fairness is a rather subjective thing. “Deserved” is also a relative term, especially in this day and age of entitlement nonsense.

These definitions are pretty cut and dry when speaking in legal terms. When a civil violation or a criminal action takes place fairness and a deserved retribution can usually be pretty easy to parse out. In “Social Justice” however, fairness and deserts can mean just about anything.

That leaves us with “morally right” and “appropriate in the circumstances”.

As a Christian, I have a basis for the moral treatment of others in scripture: “Treat others as I would have them treat me” “Love my neighbor” and “love my enemy”. To be socially just I must take pains to ensure I am loving those around me. Add “appropriate to the circumstances” and this becomes a slightly more difficult task.

Social justice as a Christian requires a great amount of discernment and attention to individuals. We cannot approach the subject as the pagan world does with blanket platitudes and government programs. We have to be involved with individual members of all classes, races, genders, religions, and whatnot.

To be just we must know what our neighbor deserves (love, first and foremost) in their individual circumstances. We must treat our enemies with love, understanding that they may deserve different things than our family or neighbors (again, they deserve love, but tempered with caution).

Social justice is a silly term for Christians to use. We have had the golden rule for millenia, why use such a trendy buzzword?

I’m just going to keep on treating others with love and kindness.

If you like my blogs/paintings/photography, please like and follow me!

Follow me on Facebook!

Check out my Steemit page for more content.
Many of my images are available as prints on my Artpal page

Dearest Millennials, A Letter From an Older, Wiser Millennial

The Desolation of Your Ideas

Dear millennials,
Post-post-modernism has failed you. Your parents have failed you. Your professors have failed you. You’ve been spoon fed ideas your whole life and no one has taught you to defend yourselves. As such, you are weak, flaccid and unable to handle life’s normal circumstances (like the loss of a political race).

You would do well to embrace the concept that truth is objective and not based on feelings. When you embrace this truth you won’t need safe spaces or days off to cry when someone opposes you. All you will need is a strong defense of truth as you perceive it.

While your perception of truth is subjective,  truth itself is not. Thankfully for you,  in most political matters these days it matters not if you are wrong as long as you can defend your perspective. A strong defense keeps your ideas alive and at play in the world, curling up in the fetal position and crying merely makes you look childish and ignorant.

Stop crying and brush up on your Marx, go read Engels and Nietzsche. Study the life of Che and not just his portrait on your t-shirt. Compare what you read with reality. Make up your own minds about the ideas of these morons. Realize that most of what they spout is feelings-based and indefensible. Understand that this is why your professors couldn’t teach you to defend it.

Then go out and study some real economics and social theory based on objective observation and reality. Read Bastiat, read Rothbard, read Henry Hazlitt, read Adam Smith and John Locke. Read people who took painstaking time to study reality and craft theory that could be tested and tried and found true (or false).

Configure your own perspective based on your observations of these theories, then formulate defenses of your perspective based not on feelings but on objective measurements and your subjective interpretation of the data.

If you create a reasoned defense of your views, I promise you you’ll never need a safe space. You’ll never need a day off to cry about election results. You’ll never fear the ideas of others no matter how absurd they are.

Instead, you can be bold, you can change the minds and hearts of others. You can make the world “a better place” or whatever it is that you younger people are trying to do these days. You may never have your utopia, but at least you will have some people who understand you and want to help you get that much closer to it.

Stop the temper tantrums and pick up a book or three.

Sincerely,

An older millennial who’s sick of being lumped in with you snowflakes.