Michael, thank you for taking the time, sincerely.
Todd Flora

Thank you for your response. To clarify, I meant a Marxist interpretation, not necessarily a Marxist outcome. Marx identified 3 classes of nobility, bourgeoisie, and proletariat that made up the bulk of society. In his view, it was a hierarchical system of oppression and exploitation. Tweak this view and replace class with race or class with gender, and you see a similar narrative that many social justice types would tend to agree with. (Also, the recent policy proposals of BLM have explicit collectivist undertones about community control of economic resources, but that’s another discussion.) I agree with you on most of your points, although “economic justice” is pretty vague. I’m pretty left-libertarian, so any socially-liberal, anti-corporate positions (preferably without government intervention in truly free markets) are generally acceptable.

On most of these social justice issues, it sounds good to say that women are treated unfairly in the workplace or that minorities are oppressed by a racial hierarchy. When looking at facts and the numbers, however, you find discrepancies and alternate reasons for disparities in society. Whenever these are brought up, however, one is immediately labeled a sexist or racist. Personally, I’m okay with any speech-feel free to tell and laugh at white people jokes, but don’t get upset when it goes the other way. If we all want to be on an equal playing field, we should all act like it!

Like what you read? Give Mercer Atreides a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.