Justice: n. a moral distribution of (ingus and/or rewards) and/or punishments without reference to one’s own personal choice which may be different.

 

Ingus: n. information and/or goods and/or services and/or property

 

Justice is merely a subjective discussion without a definition to start with and no consensus about justice can be arrived at without a general enough definition. Historical philosophical discussions about justice are all outdated and a new reality should take hold.

 

My definition is broad enough to include the major considerations which must be made which is morality, the distribution of ingus as a reward and/or punishment, and recognizing that personal choices as to this morality and distribution may vary to some extent over the course of history. The laws which enforce the existing establishment of any nation may be slightly modified to fit the new circumstances or realities.

 

I think that we can all agree that a common morality must exist in a nation and it must be general enough to include many moral variations on an original theme. I would strongly suggest a secular moral code which should be taught to all impressionable young minds so that they don’t have to always ask themselves is what I am doing right or wrong or is it moral or immoral?

 

Any moral code has had religious meaning historically and it is one thing which is largely intuitive and not scientifically or mathematically provable yet civilization would be impossible without a moral sense of what is right and wrong. An immoral country can’t long endure in a state of chaos or anarchy. A belief in morality or a sense of morality gives each individual personal control over his or her personal actions and is of primary importance in the relatively peaceful interactions within a society among it’s members.

 

I strongly suggest a modern universal secular moral code which is- in nonemergency situations- don’t destroy biodiversity, don’t lie, don’t be inefficient, don’t steal, don’t commit adultery if married, and don’t murder.

 

Yes, in the real world absolutes have some exceptions and this moral code is an absolute approach to life but offspring need certainty in their lives and are not aware of all the exceptions to these absolute rules. Life becomes much more complex as adults but if the absolute foundation is basically sound then exceptions to these rules can be more reasonably digested and accepted later on in life.

 

Stealing is one example where a child basically understands that you can own ingus and if someone takes it from you without your consent then it is a form of stealing. There are at least 5 cases where stealing can be justified in the adult world and taxation is one major and very important exception.

 

If taxation is one exception to stealing then it becomes a question of how much taxation should exist to make it just taxation or what minimum percentage should the taxation be to ensure minimal theft. Even the bible taxes or tithes it’s flock of believers at 10% of earned income so this is an important ball park figure to start with in any discussion of just government taxation percentages.

 

Don’t lie is a very important primary moral principle because fundamentally it is stealing the truth. Lie in a marital situation, lie to friends, or lie to anyone and your relationship will disintegrate because trust is broken and without trust in humans no close peaceful interaction is possible. Lying destroys your good reputation. Even the reputation of businesses, the government, and other institutions suffers if humans can no longer trust them if they lie or deceive and their reputation is also in the toilet if they don’t act morally or lie and steal through fraudulent actions.

 

Slander and libel are laws against lying since it is very easy to destroy the good reputation of a moral individual with public libelous affirmations. The vital necessity for trusting relationships in society is why lying is fundamentally immoral in nonemergency situations where life or death is not involved.

 

Now distribution of ingus universally takes place with MONEY even though there are still situations where barter may be used or it could be considered an exchange of ingus. Any discussion of justice must consider WHO has the money in society and WHAT is that money given for?

 

In the real world money must be primarily earned with some kind of a job and if you can’t earn money such as when you are destitute and also unemployed then your survival must be guaranteed with some form of welfare or money gotten from the earning taxpayers in a nation.

 

Yes, next to morality money is of secondary importance in society so any discussion of justice must include a discussion of a just economic system under laws which optimizes the benefits for it’s moral citizens and penalizes the immoral citizens with economic loss and other punishments.

 

The economic historical choices are capitalism, socialism, and communism. Pure communism fails because of an attempt to eliminate private ingus and frankly communism is a colossal failure since no one gives a damn about communal ingus but usually take good care of their own ingus.

 

Communist China is an example of communist ideology mixed with capitalism with all the very rich members being members of the communist party. That China too will fail is inevitable because it doesn’t have a moral code upon which trust can be maintained among it’s citizens and between the party and it’s citizens. If China adopts a just secular moral code and puts it into practice then there is still hope for long duration Chinese dominance in the world.

 

Pure capitalism is also a failure because it devastates the environment with never ending growth, pollution, and wilderness destruction, puts money and power ahead of morality, and offers no realistic choices other than charity for the destitute and also unemployed. I therefore advocate Capsocialism which is capitalism for the working class and socialism or some form of welfare for the destitute and also unemployed.

 

Capitalism encourages financial responsibility in family, business, and organizations and tries to ensure that no organization operates in the red or in deficit mode for very long. Capitalism motivates profit making and some non profit organizations to grow in size, strength, or popularity. Yes, bigness is a danger in the form of monopolies which can charge an arm and a leg for their ingus so laws must be passed to minimize monopolistic corruption if that is even possible with international banks and corporations who have more wealth than most nations.

 

The reality is that Capitalism is a worldwide phenomenon which no one nation can police any longer. International monopoly laws will have to be passed and enforced if international corruption without morality can’t be tolerated in the long duration.

 

Since money primarily determines who is prosperous and who is not we must consider where that money from taxes can be wisely spent. Yes, there are private institutions for the rich and wealthy in education which gives them an advantage in society that the poor do not have so there is inequality of opportunity from the beginning of one’s life. If you are born into a wealthy family then your life has all the modern conveniences or perks and you can receive a first class education if you work or study smart and hard.

 

One fact which seems unfair is the fact that some are born with more natural abilities than others and often it is those from wealthier families. If you have a very good memory and efficient processing ability of inputted information then you have a considerable natural advantage over other members of society from the beginning. Yes, if you are lazy and don’t develop your natural born abilities then you can still fail in living a good life but that is just a testament to the fact that there are no guarantees in life even for the very rich.

 

So, a useful education is definitely something which a government should pay for out of taxpayers money to somewhat equalize the seemingly unfair educational advantage of the rich. Some try to live in financially well off neighborhoods and go to school there getting a superior education compared to someone in a poor neighborhood.

 

It seems just to give federal education support to poor neighborhood schools but unfortunately most of the money is wasted because poor neighborhoods have problems with dysfunctional families, drugs, alcoholism, crime, and a resulting discipline problem in schools which impairs the learning process for all students attending a school.

 

Money can help to some degree in helping to improve education in poor neighborhoods but if the moral setting in which a child grows up is bad then no amount of money will offset the bad effects of a bad environment in which the child grows up.

 

Perhaps there is some hope in audio visual interactive computer education for students in middle school and high school not only in the classroom but in a home environment more conducive to learning than bad peer classroom pressure in public schools. Yes, computer technology offers the possibility of a better useful education for poor neighborhoods so federal money could be used to create functional audio visual interactive courses for the poor and disadvantaged in general. Learn at your own pace and learn as much as you can should be the new motto and hopefully successful approach to future education for the poor.

 

Audio visual interactive computer education could be considered a form of educational justice for the poor and disadvantaged.

 

Theoretically and practically speaking if an individual is moral, has integrity, is dependable, trustworthy, competent, friendly, and with a useful education and good job then that person should do well in life and the individual would consider it a relatively just existence.

 

Now social justice in the long duration is only just if the laws are just and the system provides the opportunity for a redress of grievances which might arise in a competitive environment. This is where the constitution comes in with its Bill of Rights and a functional court system with a trial by jury.

 

Yes, here too if you have the money for a good lawyer or you are a wealthy corporation then you will probably win most of the time in court. That is a fact of life and one more disadvantage with which the poor and other individuals have to contend with. Of course, if you are a moral human with a good reputation then your chances with a jury are greatly increased compared to someone immoral who is on trial.

 

With robotization, international trade, and AI or artificial intelligence soon dominating, jobs in the future will be scarce for the technologically disadvantaged and there will be many who will frankly not be educated enough to participate in the job market at high levels of expertise. All this is resulting in more income inequality and an eventual need to expand welfare to cover those that are temporarily or permanently destitute and also unemployed.

 

The question then is how much money should be allocated to those on welfare? If it is too much money then the incentive to work at all will be gone and if it is too little money then you will have armies of disenchanted humans who may riot for more income. What is more likely to happen is a voting crisis where those on welfare will vote to make the working class slaves to their leisure lifestyle of no work. My recommendation is to reduce the voting power to a fraction of the working class vote power. Any nation which does not do so will rapidly bankrupt itself and cause much chaos and anarchy followed by a tyrannical rule to reestablish some sense of order and security.

 

Theoretical justice must give way to actual new laws to deal with the real consequences of international banking, international corporations, and a shrinking job market. Can any one nation pass just laws to deal with an international crisis? Probably not, and this will soon become the realm of international justice and laws to address the international problems. Each nation is struggling against globalism which threatens to impoverish most of humanity in the long duration with the possible exception of the wealthy or the rich and powerful.

 

One final consideration. In order for justice to survive there must be a freedom of moral speech. With newspapers severely dwindling in number and online internet censorship of websites such as Google, Facebook, Bing, Reddit, etc. our ability to spread dissenting views may be imperiled in the long duration. Academia, Celebrities, and the establishment media are all left wing leaning organizations promoting the Democratic Party and there is a danger that soon the whole nation may be a one party propaganda tyranny of information. Traditional justice will have a hard time surviving if one kind of ideology will be necessary for any citizen to thrive in the nation, especially those in the public domain.

 

Conclusion:

Any valid discussion of justice must consider morality, money, and who and what the money will be given for. For a young moral nation of mostly farmers and small businesses the United States Constitution was pretty good. In a worldwide globalist environment with much free trade and powerful international monopolies the US Constitution is inadequate to deal with the new reality. Constitutional changes are necessary and I have offered a suggestion in my book New Constitution of the United States. Also worth reading is New Laws: New Future Laws and Justice.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4600 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/