The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > 'Social justice': Utopian fantasy or foundation of prosperity? > Comments

'Social justice': Utopian fantasy or foundation of prosperity? : Comments

By James Franklin, published 22/1/2008

'Life to the Full: Rights and Social Justice in Australia' explains exactly what 'social justice' is and its implications.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
So James Franklin thinks I haven’t taken on board a word of what he said (i.e. agreed with him). “Social justice theory is a theory of *justice*, not of charity,” he says. Who argued charity is the alternative to Catholic social justice?

Franklin’s social justice awards refugees rights – but they have to get out of detention first to exercise them.

Franklin supports a justice system that dispenses justice according to how much you can afford to outlay on smart lawyers while low-income people are told that legal aid has run out of funds.

And his social justice enables the PM’s wife to get immediate hospital treatment for her gallstones while thousands of ordinary folk wait…and wait…and wait.

His social justice enables wealthy Christian schools to rip off taxpayers many of whom can’t afford to pay even the modest levies in state schools.

So all you people out there who feel things are not as fair as they should be, those who are or will be (sometime, some day) the beneficiaries of a healthy economy against your own felt experience, remember what James told you: “There is nothing utopian in looking for the secret of our own society’s success, social justice, and urging it to be implemented more consistently.” Now that’s a mathematically neat formulation.

If only they’d be more patient, eh James? We’re all God’s creatures and social justice is available to us…but not just yet; or not consistently yet.

Col Rouge starts with platitudinous ‘respect for others’ and ‘compassion’ then proceeds to insult and patronise refugees (should be grateful), the homeless (it’s their own fault), the disabled and the illiterate (want us all to wear shackles and deny us worthies an education), the isolated (move!), the chronically ill (whingers) and the penniless (fritter away their money on poker machines).

When people like Col Rouge endorse James Franklin’s concept of social justice by reference to Mrs Thatcher, you know it’s crook.
Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 22 January 2008 3:37:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Col Rogue,

On this point I must disagree with you; not for what you say about compassion, but because you neglect to address the question of justice within political economy.

All legal rights, and economic rights, are founded in a sense of justified moral claims.

For example, is there a just moral claim to the ownership of natural resources? Many thinkers argue there is not - and also argue that all individuals have equal right to a share of its proceeds.

You can read a list of quotations on the matter here:

http://www.taxreform.com.au/intreformers.php
and
http://www.taxreform.com.au/economists.php

Government certainly has a role in dispensing this sort of social justice; and it is not merely qualitative, but quantitative - divide the site rental value of all natural resources by the number of people.
Posted by Lev, Tuesday, 22 January 2008 3:37:38 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
DNB's points are good ones, but it's exactly in matters like the problems of remote communities that the hard edge of social justice comes to the fore. Most of us in Australia are doing just fine when it comes to the protection of our rights, which is why I said social justice is already here. But if you're a child with foetal alcohol syndrome or abusive parents in a remote community, the pieties of the city folk calling for "reconciliation" and "apologies" are not doing anything for you - as explained in the recent Bennelong Society paper I helped write: http://www.bennelong.com.au/occasional/Warin2007.pdf . Hobbes was right: in cases as bad as that the first thing justice requires is an authority prepared to suppress violence.
Posted by JimF, Tuesday, 22 January 2008 3:44:03 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
bulldust leavened with pious platitudes.
Posted by DEMOS, Tuesday, 22 January 2008 7:01:35 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James Franklin says, "I’d suggest intellectual property as the perfect model of social justice: it’s because creators of books and inventions morally deserve to be rewarded that there ought to be such protections; implementing IP law is possible but it took several centuries and as we all know China hasn’t caught up even now. And there are major economic benefits from it, through the encouragement of the bright ideas that drive technological progress."

I'd suggest Jim, that this an absolute load of rubbish. Copyright (and other IP rights to a lesser degree) have become a money-making racket for copyright owners. Sometimes copyright owners are the creators (or their descendants) , but more often they're corporate entities. Copyright in Australia was recently extended to 70 years from death (up from 50) to "harmonise" our copyright laws with the United States. NOTHING NEW will enter the public domain in Australia before the year 2025. And if you believe that there won't be an extension to 90 years before then, well, I've got a large metal-arch bridge I'd like to sell you.

The advance of copyright has nothing to do with creativity, especially when it comes to derivative works. Disney relied on a great deal of public domain music and stories for Fantasia. While happy to take from the public domain, Disney Inc. is anything but pleased at the idea of contributing anything to it.

Copyright law is now written at the behest of the major copyright holders (who, unsurprisingly, are major political donors). What began as a protection for creators, has become a form of welfare for corporations, who are impoverishing the public domain.

I note, James, that your own article is licensed under Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/ My own view is that such a CC license (allowing non-commercial copying, distribution and transmission) is a much more appropriate model for many (though by no means all) works in the current era. Open-source software, Wikipedia and Project Gutenberg http://www.gutenberg.org (to name just a few examples) suggest to me that restrictive copyright is the enemy of "the bright ideas that drive technological progress."
Posted by Johnj, Tuesday, 22 January 2008 8:52:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
hi to all the forgotton australiansout their and to those who understand us victims , social justice is for everyone but we the forgotton australians are receiving any social justice ,justice is for all and its their to protect the victims something the australian goverment does not seem to care about when it involves the forgotten australians , i was going to have a rest and stay away from having my say in the forum but i just could not help my self as i am fighting for social justice in the court system so the forgotten australins will be acknowledged , maybe mr rudd might put his hand up for us as he has for the aboriginies ,we are the forgotten australians kind regards micheal i hope you all have a good new year ,and im just still hanging in their ,
Posted by huffnpuff, Wednesday, 23 January 2008 2:17:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy