What Is Social Justice?
The idea of social justice, on the surface, seems like it ought to be a good thing. It seems to be advocating a notion that all people should have access to proper justice. But the truth is, that is not what it is all about.
Based on the ideas used to define social justice in modern society, it is expressed as the promotion of fair and just relations between the individual and society. Those who advocate for social justice specifically attempt to promote equality in society based on wealth distribution, and on opportunities for personal activity and social privileges. Essentially, it is the attempt to use government policies to break down barriers to social mobility, and to create economic justice. This process is pursued by manipulating taxation, social services, public health, access to public schools, access to public services, labor laws, and by regulating the market. All of this is done in the name of ensuring fair wealth distribution and equal opportunity for all.
While the notions of doing right by society and of justice are important themes in virtually every society, these motifs are particularly prominent in Christianity. Thus, Christians, from the very beginning of church history, have promoted true justice and helping people in society. It is not surprising then to see churches involved in these areas.
However, in recent times, these themes have been taken up in some churches in a different way. In the traditional biblical tradition, advocating for the down and out has been done as an expression of the gospel message itself. Christians promoted social services and justice as a means of advancing the work of God in the world, and of pointing people to eternal life in Jesus Christ. However, in some “Christian” groups in modern times, a new underlying philosophy has been substituted for traditional biblical teaching. One of the more prominent theological strains that has been front and center in this effort is that of Liberation Theology. Liberation Theology has as its focus liberation from unjust economic, political, and social conditions. In other words, its primary focus is not on the gospel message, but on efforts related to this world. Additionally, its primary underlying philosophy comes from Marxist beliefs, not from the Bible.
Some of the more common social categories advocates promote include: healthcare, racial equality, gender equality, age equality, religion, nationality, education, and mental or physical ability. Some of the specific expressions of this in contemporary society include the focus on white privilege, reparations, gay and transgender rights, unlimited immigration, sanctuary laws, black lives matter, the “me too” movement, along with other similar causes.
While many people look at this kind of advocacy as a good thing, there is a serious problem when it comes to implementing social justice policies. Let’s delve a little deeper into this topic to try and understand it more fully.
Foundations for Achieving Justice
When analyzing this topic, what we have are two entirely different ways to approach the understanding and implementation of justice in society. In order to completely grasp the issues involved, we must start with an understanding of the worldview foundations of these two different approaches to achieving justice.
The traditional American understanding of justice is based on a biblical worldview foundation. This worldview approach derives its beliefs about justice from the Bible. The Bible has a lot to say about the notion of justice, but the first thing that we must know is what it teaches about the source of justice. Biblical Theism teaches that the notion of justice itself comes from the very character of God. He is just in an absolute way, and will make sure that, in the end, justice prevails. Based on God’s justice, there is no arbitrariness involved. There is such a thing as absolute right and wrong, and wherever wrong exists it will be made right. Thus, justice is based on an absolute standard.
In the creation of the American justice system, an absolute standard for justice in society was established using the concepts that underlie biblical Theism. The ultimate standard that was created as the basis of law for America was the U.S. Constitution. Then, based on that standard, other laws were created to make sure the standard was implemented in all sectors of society. In creating this system, perhaps the most important principle involved is the notion of “equal justice under the law.” In other words, after the standard was set, it applied to everyone regardless of personal circumstances. It applied to the rich as much as the poor, to those of high social standing as well as those in lower social circumstances, and to the powerful as well as the powerless.
On the other side of the ledger we have a relatively recent attempt to change the substructure of the justice system from its traditional Christian theistic foundation to a naturalistic one. Naturalism is the belief that the only thing that exists is the natural universe. Since it dismisses belief in God, it must also dismiss the possibility that laws can be based on any kind of objective foundation. With that as a starting point, the only possibility for establishing a basis for justice is the beliefs of human beings who are in a position to create it. That approach is specifically built upon a relativistic foundation. What is right and wrong, just and unjust, is decided by those who are in power, and it can change as the power influencers change.
Focus of Justice
After looking at the source of the two primary competing approaches to establishing justice, we can now begin to explore the implications of the two approaches. As we look at this, it becomes immediately apparent that the outcome of the two is very different.
The focus of the Christian theistic approach is on the individual. In this system, an individual’s acts are evaluated against an objective standard of right and wrong. A person either obeys the law or disobeys. If there is obedience, the person is left alone. Individuals who break the law are judged guilty and appropriately sanctioned. This is also where the notion of “equal justice under the law” comes into play. The verdict and sanction for a wrong is not based on any kind of outside circumstances or on the personal opinions of those doing the judging. Rather it is based on the acts of individuals in relation to the law itself.
The focus of the naturalistic approach is not on the individual, but on society. This is the place where the concept of social justice enters the picture. Here the judgment is not based upon the objective right or wrong actions of the individual (since in this system objective morality does not exist). Rather, it is based upon what is deemed good for society based on the evaluations of those who hold power. Since an objective source of justice is not acknowledged to exist, the only possibility for defining it is the beliefs of those who hold power; and their motivation is to create a society that operates in a way that promotes its survival. Thus, social justice, not individual justice is seen to be a more important concept.
Social Justice Is Not Equal Justice
As has already been noted, justice based on biblical values is established upon an objective standard that applies to all. Everyone, regardless of any outward circumstance, is measured against the same standard. This provides for genuine equality when it comes to applying justice.
Social justice is not equal justice. Social justice is based upon a relative standard. Those responsible for dishing out justice feel justified in being selective regarding who they deem deserving to receive benefits and sanctions. Based on their approach, it is “fairness” not justice that is most important – and those in power get to decide what is fair.
Promoting Fairness
Sadly, the standard of equal justice is not always applied. There are both societal and individual cases where people have not been treated equally under the law. It is because of that kind of injustice that some people advocate for “social justice.” The thinking is that since some people have not received a fair shake in the past, out of “fairness” they should receive extra consideration in the future, while others should have their equal justice set aside.
The big problem with this is that you cannot create true justice by substituting the notion of “fairness” for justice. All it does is to change who is receiving unjust treatment.
A biblical approach does not involve trying to promote justice based on a societal foundation. In order to promote true justice in society, it is necessary for there to be only one objective standard, and everyone must be held to the same standard. Then when there are cases where individuals or groups are receiving unfair treatment, the proper solution is not to try to right the wrong by disadvantaging some other individual or group. That only shifts the injustice to a different place. The proper remedy is to hold the ones who are meeting out injustice to account, and make it right for those who have been treated unjustly. In the end, that is the only way true justice can be accomplished.
© 2018 Freddy Davis