Are social justice and solidarity between rich and poor dirty terms in American politics?

Answer 1

I know that saying the phrase "social justice" is enough to get you disappeared by this administration, so to THAT the answer is "Yes" it's a "dirty word."

Not too clear on the second part of your question, though.

Are you trying to say "solidarity between rich and poor" because if you are, I did not know such a thing existed.

Please enlighten me.

Answer 2

Not at all. "Solidarity" between rich and poor? Seems like the term is being misused. The rich are always supporting the poor. One will always depend upon the other. What role does solidarity play?

What is social justice? It often seems like just another term for implementing the "Robin Hood" philosophy and consequently, being used as a tool to fan the flames of class warfare.

Answer 3

No, they're just meaningless terms in the American economy.

For between 90% and 95% of us this economy is incredibly fluid - the feudal concepts of "rich and poor," the notion that you're born into a caste and pretty much stuck in it for life just doesn't square with reality. Not only CAN people migrate up and down the income ladder, almost all of us DO.

What's more, the economy is MORE fluid than it used to be, and this is, much to the chagrin of the people who claim to be concerned about the issue, precisely BECAUSE we've cut tax rates - - simply put, wealth is the accumulation of income, and it's easier to get ahead when the government doesn't kick you back seven steps for every ten steps forward you take.

Answer 4

One would certainly think so...looking at the state of the country now. Political parties don't need to take shots at one another, they just let the party following public do that for them. I guess that a country divided is easier to fool and lead than a united front against corruption!

Answer 5

Yes and No. Depends on who you are trying to appeal to. No, if you are trying to appeal to those that lean toward more socialist thinking (democrats). Yes if you are trying to appeal to those that lean toward a more libertarian position(so-called republicans), it would require too much government interference. We also have it as a part of the 6 social taboos (which apparently nobody knows anymore) the discussion of social status, guaranteed to offend someone.

Answer 6

The term "social justice" is hard-core marxist. There is no way to have "social equality" because people are just not equal. One can only have "legal equality", to be equal in the eyes of the law.

Answer 7

It depends on whom you ask. The less traveled the American, the more likely their offense to such terms, but the more traveled--and therefore open-minded the American, the more likely they understand such terms as important to understand whenever discussion humanitarianism and "true equality" between people.

Answer 8

It becames dirty terms in all over the world, money holds power, not men...

Answer 9

At a time when we create the same kind of chaos in other countries - the answer is diffently Yes

Answer 10

Yes. Because they have been defined as "liberal" and "liberalism" has been villainized to about the same point as "communism," you pretty much can't talk about it.