Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Tuesday, March 09, 2010

On his daily radio and television shows last week, Glenn Beck set out to convince his audience that "social justice," the term many Christian churches use to describe their efforts to address poverty and human rights, is a "code word" for communism and Nazism. Beck urged Christians to discuss the term with their priests and to leave their churches if leaders would not reconsider their emphasis on social justice.

"I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site," the alcoholic drug addict and master of Vaseline-induced crying jags jabbered. "If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!"

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

Doc_Sarvis

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Whenever you hear someone talk about "social justice" just substitute that phrase for "socialism" or "redistribution of wealth" because that is what they really mean.

Undoubtedly there will be some moaning frm the Right, pretty much along these lines: "Why do you Libs keep bringing up Glenn Beck? He's just a radio and television person" -- meaning, "performer" -- "so why don't you stick to real pols and real politics? Beck doesn't make policy."

Really? I'm not sure about policy, but I do know he influences people. How and why I am not certain, because he's clearly a clown and his antics are beyond ridiculous. (Keith Olbermann pegged him early on as the modern-day incarnation of Bud Schulberg's "Lonesome Rhodes" character in "A Face in the Crowd".)

However, some of you may have noticed the recent condemnation of the terms "progressive" and "progressivism." I wondered what this was all about, although none of the posters I've challenged have been able to meet the challenge to explain what they think those terms mean within the historical context of American politics. (I have a feeling they neither know nor care.)

But Glenn Beck -- who, for all his pointing to the past, also clearly neither knows nor cares about historical context -- rails against "progressives" and "progressivism," equating those terms, as far as I can tell, with Communists, Fascists, Nazis, Liberals, the usual bugaboos. And I can only conclude that, like Beck, those posters use the terms as part of the litany of invective without really knowing what they're saying.

Thus this post. I fully expect it won't be long before we on the DR hear moans and groans and the catcalls of ignorant derision applied to the term "social justice."

You have to wonder in what -- beyond themselves and their personal requirements and wants -- some of these very scared, very angry, and very confused people actually believe.

Whenever you hear someone talk about "social justice" just substitute that phrase for "socialism" or "redistribution of wealth" because that is what they really mean.

Redistribution of wealth happens all the time.

Most of the time is means redistributing wealth upward from the masses to those who need it least.

Why are you a cheerleader for a steadily increasing gap between the richest and the poorest?

Are you morally bankrupt or just really, really stupid?

"Social Justice" as a term means many things.

It means fair courts, truly representational government, fair regulations, avoiding unhealthy wealth consolidation and worker exploitation.

Socialism means many different things to different people but at it's heart is the idea that the worker should have a voice at the table when discussing means of production and wages.

Socialism values people and pure unfettered capitalism doesn't.

Spud knows which side of that equation he's on.

Be Well.

People should be content to be peasants and happy with the crumbs that the ruling elite decide to throw their way. Any thing else would be against God's plan and if your priest or minister doesn't agree you should find a different religion which will put you back into your proper place.

Thank you Massa Glenn.

Charity should never be compulsory. Ever.

compulsory is what progressivism is all about. Progressives think they know better what is good for you so they always compell you to do it, by force of law and at the point of a gun and by threat of jail. How else would you explain that un-American insurance mandate?

How else would you explain the organization of human societ and the imposition of laws reflecting the mores of that society?

societ = society

Imposing laws to protect people's rights and property is one thin, that is the core function of any government. Imposing laws that violate people's rights in the guise of providing a benefit is something different.

compulsory is what progressivism is all about. Progressives think they know better what is good for you so they always compell you to do it, by force of law and at the point of a gun and by threat of jail.
#6 | Posted by member2586

That might explain this transmission from the other side of the Looking Glass:

After Telling Women, Gays How To Live, Oklahoma GOP Outraged At Government Intervention' In Divorces
thinkprogress.org

The Oklahoma legislature is currently locked in a dispute over whether to tackle the state's divorce rate, the third-highest in the nation. Although some Republicans are pushing the legislation, other conservatives are outraged at the "government intrusion" into their private lives:

Republican members proposed three pieces of legislation imposing new regulations on marriage and divorce in Oklahoma. Two of the measures were defeated, but another requiring counseling for those planning to wed, and therapy sessions for couples considering divorce is awaiting action.

The issue has produced sharp clashes among conservative colleagues who normally find themselves in agreement. The debates have featured charges of hypocrisy and of betraying Republican principles against government intrusion into private lives. [...]

"How far do I want government to come into my home and your home about private personal matters?" asked Rep. Leslie Osborn, a Republican from Tuttle, in a debate. She referred to state government as a "huge monster."

Completely at the bidding of globalists, it will be interesting to hear his justification if/when he addresses the Schumer/Graham Biometric ID plan for immigration.

Doc, being Republican doesn't mean anything anymore. Many Republicans love Big Government. That is why even if they get into power in 2010 and 2012 I don't anticipate the government shrinking one bit. We've been slapped in the face the GOP one too many times. We are not falling for that small-government talk from them again.

"We are not falling for that small-government talk from them again."

You may not. But plent of others will. The GOPiggies are banking on it.

plent = plenty

"We are not falling for that small-government talk from them again."

No not again, well except when you go into the voting booth. All the denials in the world won't convince me that the vast majority of those like Member pay lip service to small government conservatism but will still vote for whoever the Republican Party tells them to because the alternative would be to let a Democrat win.

I've been voting LP since 2002. Never looked back. I mistakenly voted for Bush in 2000, didn't make that mistake again in 2004.

you are so wrong danni or at least silly thinking that your predicted sort of allegiance is some sort of behavior belonging only to the right.
I guess you missed the percentage of blacks who always vote for a democrat...and other blocks like that...

and speaking of beck

yesterday he had a good look into the inner workings of the liberal TAX STEAKING NETWORK..and all founded on live clips and quotes, which of course the left will dismiss regardless..

FOR INSTANCE.......

the breck forum...
"we will bring this country down"
" we must destroy the system"
"the destruction of the united states of america"

FOLLOW THE MONEY
STIMULUS MONEY was given to the new york council of the arts...and NINE THOUSAND of THAT Tax money was give to..

(WAIT FOR IT..........

the breck forum........

also stimulus was divised by a man named jeff jones of the appolo foundation,..,...who is jeff jones..
an advocate for the destruction of the capitalist system of the USA...

LINKS to follow..

here is one that should make everyone mad..

biggovernment.com

notice how EVERYTHING is supposed to be GIVEN to everyone......

"Charity should never be compulsory..."

Famine should never be compuslory, either. But it has been in some countries and that sad fact has found, to my utter astonishment, support by more than one poster, persons usually styling themselves "Libertarians".

good comments Doc, thanks.

civic virtue

Beck is insane, he must be seriously unbalanced. besides that he has a serious lack of understanding about out way of government.

he is a dangerous clown, he MUST be some kind of NAZI. has to be. that is the most reasonable and obvious explanation of his ranting.

afkabibble, you are COMPLETELY insane as well.

Social justice is a part of Catholic social teaching:

According to Pope Benedict XVI, its purpose "is simply to help purify reason and to contribute, here and now, to the acknowledgment and attainment of what is just. [The Church] has to play her part through rational argument and she has to reawaken the spiritual energy without which justice cannot prevail and prosper", According to Pope John Paul II, its foundation "rests on the threefold cornerstones of human dignity, solidarity and subsidiarity".

Catholic social teaching is distinctive in its consistent critiques of modern social and political ideologies both of the left and of the right: liberalism, communism, conservatism, socialism, libertarianism, capitalism, and Nazism have all been condemned, at least in their pure forms, by several popes since the late nineteenth century.

These concerns echo elements of Jewish law and the prophetic books of the Old Testament, and recalls the teachings of Jesus Christ recorded in the New Testament, such as his declaration that "whatever you have done for one of these least brothers of Mine, you have done for Me."

We start here with Doc, Spud and Danni, the DR's leading purveyors of Truth. They nail it. We continue with the immortal Nancy pontificating that charity should not b e compulsory, ever. That, if true, is the finest argument around for a "socialist" state, i.e. one in which the elected infrastructure assumes the essential responsibility of filling human needs. The next nut likens this to socialism/totalitarianism, and off we go. I think the rigid right is hopeless. Wipe them out and start over, building a new opposition out of reasonable material. herm

compulsory is what progressivism is all about.

Yeah... why do we need a speed limit anyway?

what an idiot.

Did you get this "compulsory is what progressivism is all about" crap from your latest visit to Glennbeckistan?

Member could you at least try and educate yourself about what progressivism really means before you embarrass yourself any more than you have.

and wipe that drool off yer chin!

www.hippocampus.org

We start here with Doc, Spud and Danni, the DR's leading purveyors of Truth.

#23 | Posted by herm at 2010-03-10 03:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

I laughed until I cried after reading this one. Spud has some credibility. DANNI is the BIGGEST shill for her party on the DR (left or right). Doc is batshit crazy sometimes. HERM on the other hand is just plain EVIL. Which probably understates his WARPED vision of the value of human life.

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable