Social Justice – The Un-Level Playing Field by T. Edwin Perry
Social Justice: The battle cry of Liberals and Progressives. Often, the term “Social Justice” is linked and considered synonymous with the “Civil Rights Movement.” Images of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., are invoked. Promises of making up for decades of segregation and mistreatment are made. Assurances are given that “I feel your pain” for the promise of a vote at election time.
“Social Justice” is perceived by many as a “Leveling of the Playing Field,” the idea that every person who does a certain thing should achieve the same results, but this is an inherently flawed idea. Over the next few paragraphs, I’ll be explaining exactly why this is the case.
Before we start, though, allow me to recommend a little light reading. If you haven’t already, read Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron.” It’s a short story about “Social Justice.” Go ahead and read it. I’ll wait. Here’s a link: http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html
Now, most people would not connect Kurt Vonnegut with Conservatism. In fact, I’m fairly certain that he wouldn’t consider HIMSELF a Conservative, but, much like George Carlin, I find that much of what he talks about supports a Conservative point of view more often than not. “Harrison Bergeron” is his most clear example of this. Not to ruin it for those of you who skipped the link, but Harrison Bergeron is the story of a world where Social Justice has taken over. They “Level the Field” by HANDICAPPING the people who are above average to make them equal to those who are not. For example: If you’re strong, you carry weights around your neck so that you are too tired to be stronger than the weak. If you are smart, you can expect a blaring noise in your ear at random intervals to block your ability to form a cohesive thought so that you aren’t smarter than the stupid. If you’re a beautiful, you’ll have to wear a mask. Are you getting the point yet?
But, maybe you think this story is an absurd exaggeration. This would never happen in the real world. Of course, you’d be wrong. Go to a kid’s soccer game. Odds are, they’re not keeping score, so the bad team doesn’t know how bad they are. (The kids are keeping score. They’re not stupid, but the parents seem to be.) If you have one, take a look at your kid’s report card. If they’re in elementary school, there’s a pretty good chance that there aren’t any GRADES on there. Just numbers and comments.
But, the Grown-up world doesn’t have that, right? Sure. Right. That’s why we have a tiered income tax that charges a higher rate to those who earn more money than those who earn less money.
A “Level Playing Field” just means that all the participants have to FOLLOW THE SAME RULES! Skill, talent and timing still play a part in the results. Just because you PLAY the game doesn’t mean you WIN the game. If I were to play basketball with Shaquille O’Neal, we’d play by the same rules. Dribble the ball. Run up & down the court. Shoot the ball into the basket. Repeat. He’d likely run up 50 points in 5 minutes while I collapse on the side of the court unable to catch my breath. Why? Because Shaq has PRACTICED, and has conditioned his body to play the game. He has talent, and determination. Not only would he kick my fat, lazy ass, but he’d also DESERVE to!
You don’t play games and not keep score. Millions of people watch football, baseball and basketball during their respective seasons. I can guarantee that SCORE plays a huge part in the fun of the game. How about Reality TV? Watch Survivor on CBS, and you’ll see a pattern in the types of people who win the prize, and it has nothing to do with skin color or education, but determination and skill. So You Think You Can Dance? I guarantee that some Melvin with no sense of rhythm isn’t going to win at the end. American Idol? Trust me: Tone Deaf Tina doesn’t have a chance.
The Game of Life is no different. A level playing field just means that you are judged based upon your skills and qualifications instead of your skin color, gender, religion or sexual preference. It doesn’t guarantee that you’re going to be rich like Bill Gates, famous like Tom Cruise or popular like Oprah Winfrey. For each of them, timing and talent played a big part in their success, and for every success story, there are thousands of failures that you’ll never hear about. That’s just life.
Many who clamor for Social Justice are more interested in “Redistribution of Wealth” than a “Level Playing Field.” Being bitter because you are not as successful as someone else isn’t unique, but it also doesn’t justify expecting a share of someone else’s success.
“Social Justice” does not raise the poor to a higher level; it reduces the rich to a lower level. It doesn’t help one group as much as it hurts another. It’s not about rewarding failure so much as punishing success.
So, before you jump on that Social Justice Bandwagon, remember this: Chances are pretty good that YOU are more successful than someone else, and I sincerely doubt that you are eager to have YOUR SUCCESS punished.
I think you’ve hit on a central difference of conservative vs. liberal here.
The underlying goal of conservatism is to level the playing field by allowing everyone to line up at the same starting line.
The underlying goal of liberalism is to force everyone to cross the finish line together.
Twitter: Lawwoman99
, on January 11th, 2010 at 10:26 am Lynn Brauer(Quote) Said:
The problem is there is not equal ACCESS to better yourself. A black person from the projects in Detroit does not have the same opportunities as the white person living in a penthouse in New York City. If they both have the same intelligence and athletic skill, I guarantee the white person from the penthouse in NYC will be a CEO and the black person from the projects in Detroit will most likely be the leader of the drug cartel or in prison.
I agree with you about keeping score, but isn’t the game rigged in favor of certain individuals?
I’m just sayin’…
Lynn, I know for a fact that you are not a racist person, but the example you give is nothing but a racist misconception. First, success is as much a choice as it is opportunity, and no two people, regardless of the color of their skin, the financial success of their parents or the neighborhood that they are raised in, will ever receive the exact same opportunities to succeed. Timing plays a part in it, as well as the determination to make your own opportunities. If you’ve never had the opportunity, read anything written by Chris Gardner. (He’s the guy who actually LIVED the story in “The Pursuit of Happyness.”) Chris was never GIVEN any opportunities: He PUSUED them, and achieved them, but not because he was guaranteed a result.
Secondly, consider the statistics: Those born to wealth are much more likely to LOSE that wealth than those who, through their own hard work and perseverance, achieve it on their own terms. But, let’s just assume for the moment that you are correct, and that being born to privilege gives you greater access to a better education and, as a result, a simpler access to opportunity. Isn’t that a measure of success for their parents? Shouldn’t the success of previous generations be able to benefit their children? THAT, after all, is the real American Dream that our Founders and generations of immigrants fought and sacrificed to achieve: a better life for THEIR CHILDREN! Certainly your own hard work is as much for the benefit of your daughters as it is for your own personal comfort. Why should you be denied that success simply because you don’t live in a ghetto? The answer is that you shouldn’t be, and those who complain that they don’t have the opportunities need to strive harder to achieve them for themselves, so that their children won’t have to. That makes for better communities, and encourages an overall success of the society. But changing the rules or handicapping the score doesn’t achieve this goal anymore than just handing people money makes them rich. If you don’t work for it, you don’t appreciate it, and it’s easy to lose.
If we still lived in the 1940’s, I could see the argument, but we don’t. Yes, some schools are better than others, but some students are better than others as well. I did not go to a great high school, but I applied myself and learned. I didn’t have money, but I worked for good grades so I could go to college. The fact that I didn’t finish isn’t because the system was unfair: it was because I didn’t find the way to make it work. That’s on me, and no one else!
Social Justice is nothing more than “Racial Injustice” of another name. It’s galling that the assumption is out there that people of one social background is incapable of success without some kind of special assistance. If that were true, they wouldn’t deserve the success, but it’s not. The color of a person’s skin has nothing to do with their worthiness of success, and does not justify special treatment…regardless of what that color is.