John Stossel‘s latest column at Human Events probes the flawed concept of “social justice.”
Protesters demand “social justice.” I hate their chant. If I oppose their cause, then I’m for social “injustice”? Nonsense.
The protesters usually want to punish capitalism. “Spread those resources,” says Hillary Clinton.
Even capitalists often make the mistake of talking about “social justice” as if it’s the opposite of free markets or a reason to rein in markets with more regulations or redistribution of wealth. But there’s nothing “just” about the leftist protesters’ claimed solution: more big government. …
… Goods don’t get matched to consumer needs by anyone’s burning desire for justice. The amazing coordination of the marketplace happens because sellers and buyers are free. Sellers can sell whatever they choose at prices they choose. Buyers decide whether to pay. That flexibility — and chance to make a profit — is what persuades people to create what customers want and risk their own money and safety to stock it in a store.
Without the free market setting prices and allocating resources, all the cries of “justice” in the world don’t help anyone. You can’t eat justice. You can’t use it as toilet paper.
Intellectuals, activists and government alike love it when politicians take “tough,” decisive action — usually meaning sudden interference in the marketplace. A year and a half ago, Venezuelan government used the military to seize control of Daka, one of the country’s largest retailers, in order to force the chain to charge “fair” prices. Punish those rich, greedy store-owners!
Surprise! That didn’t work. The chain is now collapsing as looters take what they want.
Socialists say capitalists just want to make a quick buck, but it’s government that can’t plan for the long haul.