Societies globally face diverse challenges surrounding the equitability of resources, opportunities, and privileges. Owing to inequality in the distribution of resources, treatment, rights, and responsibilities among societies resulting in the oppressors and oppressed in diverse societal ranks birthing social injustices, social justice as a dynamic movement traces back from the eighteenth century objectively to ensure the equitable distribution of resources, privileges, and opportunities. Societal institutions often subjected to aspects of social justice include social insurance, taxation, public health, education systems, labor relations, opportunities, wealth distribution, and market regulations. The discussion post seeks to elucidate individual responsibilities on social justice issues, the personal significance of social justice discussions, personal viewpoints on the significance of the debates, and potential objections to the unique views.
Social justice debates are inevitable in the mainstream, and social media post the information age and mutate into the forms gender inclusivity in all societal ranks, inclusivity of the minority populations like the LGBTQ, anti-racial segregations, feminism movements, distribution of economic and social resources across people. The forms of the debates permeate societal fabrics of legislations, organizational cultures, economies, religious and political structures. Consequently, the inevitability of social justice debates in shaping all aspects of populations’ life makes it intriguing for any social elite in the post information.
Social justice movements over the ages mutate to mitigate contemporary social injustices peculiar to the generations. In this viewpoint, perceptions of the scope of social justice reflect pertinent issues to the generations and the prevailing socio-economic intricacies. Consequently, the diverse philosophical, religious, and theological viewpoints on the scope emerge depending on the proponents’ ideological inclinations either in favor of or contrary to societal orientations in the phase of underlying issues. However, individual’s purpose in social justice discussions relatively remains static in the inclusion of self-awareness of the underlying discourse, embracing the concept of non-homogeneity of population constituents for individuality realization and appreciation, seeking individual liberty of conscience or revolutionized thinking, preference of learning through mistakes, and consistency in goal realization. The roles reflect the vision for affordable healthcare for all in healthcare bioethics, absolute liberation of socio-economic, political, and religious oppression as liberation theologians propound, and respect for human life and dignity as Catholics suggest, among other viewpoints.
Considering divergent opinions from reviews concerning the non-precision or non-existence of the definition of social justice with one divide pointing out majority of literary texts failing to define or partially giving the scope of social justice, and the self-contradictory nature of social justice movements in the realization of or otherwise liberty of conscience, critics may argue out on the non-existence of standardized metrics social morality and the vagueness of the scope of social justices thus propelling its dynamic attribute across generations. Notably, statistical evidence affirms the claims of ambiguity and the contradictory themes of the movements. Therefore, I would conduct further inquiries from more reviews to unravel the specificity of generational evolutions of the concept of social justice as a reflection of the underlying circumstances propelling the contemporary viewpoints and any further expansion of the viewpoints.