Saturday, November 06, 2004

Social Justice Reality?

Over at Matt Y.'s place they are arguing that Bush has no social justice program in the works.

I give this counter argument

Social justice writ large:

What is the Reality Based Community's answer to dictatorship? The faith based people think you get rid of them quickest by war. Have the reality people shown better results? Women got the vote in Afghanistan. Sufferage used to be a liberal value.

You are also forgetting the new Bush initiative "The Opportunity Society". That is social justice by different means than the Reality People would use. It is not an absence of social justice.

You guys are getting strategically blind sided.

I was astounded to learn that 50% of the bottom 20% in America own houses. This is astounding.

I think Bush's idea of social justice is to turn all Americans into property owners. How do you counter that?

I have been a liberal since birth. I have not changed my ideals. I have changed my methods.

You are going to have to deal with reality. Social programs and socialized anything are not very attractive to gun toting property owners.

The more people who own property the fewer who want high taxes. In a way we are reverting to the Jeffersonian ideal. A land of small property owners.

--==--

Your philosophy is blinding you to reality.

It will make your opposition inneffective.

--==--

Capitalism
Despotism

Right now the "Reality" people have no counter argument. Religiosity is not the fundamental driver, effectiveness is.

Welcome to all my new fans from Instapundit.

I have posted a few more comments here.

Welcome Kesher Talk readers.

1 comment:

Old SAW - S. A. Wilson said...

You have stumbled on the profound truth about voters!

To understand most voters is not to plumb the depths of their desires, but to appreciate their perspective.

I am a conservative not because my ideals are that much different than yours. I voted for Bush because I believe his policies will give us more security, prosperity, and liberty.

It’s about effectiveness.

Take the term "Social Justice." When I hear a liberal say this I hear, “No one should be poor.” I agree. A liberal may want government to take from “those that can afford it” and give it to the poor. This is a policy not an ideal. I believe that this policy will not eliminate poverty, therefore i will vote against it.

I WILL BE LABELED A HATE FILLED GREEDY RACIST when I propose a “opportunity/ownership society” of economic growth, less government, educational & medical insurance vouchers… free market solutions to the problems of social justice.

I am not stupid. I see the problems we face. I’m not greedy. I’m willing to sacrifice for the common good. I am tolerant. I am not afraid of homosexuals or others that are different than me.

I GET IT!

But I do not believe in a powerful benevolent central government. It is an oxymoron. That you would disagree with me is a policy conclusion, not moral depravity.

If the left can present something with a track record of success… something that works… not just naive slogans… (nor hateful Michael Moorism)…

THEN WILL VOTERS LISTEN !!

But in the end, if we disagree…

THE FUNDAMENTAL DRIVER IS EFFECTIVENESS !

Steve Wilson, Irvine, CA