What is Justice?

[Perhaps]

Ive read Plato's republic. I think Plato is an asshole. He wanted a type of democracy, but only of the "philosopher king" type; physically and mentally fit in a type of council. To get them elected, Plato suggested allowing everyone in the community to toss lots for who they wanted to represent the council. Then, the lots would be counted privately by the philosophers to figure what the public would like. They would then MAYBE take that into consideration as the philosophers voted who they would best represent the society.

Yeah, i know, sounds like the American electoral college.

Plato also wanted a country always ready for war, and to be selective of who was on the armed forces. He wanted strong and intelligent men AND women in the army. He wanted them to bunk together, and he most especially wanted them to shower together to encourage mating and furthering a strong defense.

For everyone and everything else, lets were to be cast to make decisions. Such as wether certain people could get married and what not. the lots were then pulled off and in secret all lots of the people who were stupid, invalid, etc... were removed from the barrel. then lots would be cast. It was his way of making the public feel as if they had a say so, yet they were really being controlled by the lots and votes.

I think the point was missed in this. Regardless of his beliefs and how they interact with yours - he based his state off of his interpretation of justice. I just wanted to provide a quick excerpt which related to the point made prior - that justice is simply what the leaders enact into law. Plato's system does sound strikingly similar to today's system in America, I do agree. And perhaps as a side discussion you could delve into a little more as to why you think it is wrong, or doesn't work (could be a very interesting conversation).

There are many ways of controlling people. Voting is one way. Even Stalin (who I think is a dick head) said that American power lies solely in the hands of those who count the votes. So of course using the idea of justice is a form of control. What did W. bush say? "they hate us because of our freedom." to jump into this decade long war? "Sadam wanted to kill my daddy!" even though Sadam couldnt even come CLOSE to doing that, it was all calls for justice even though the terrorists were mostly Saudi Arabians.

So, from this, can we establish that justice is merely a social control device? If the term is related to a piece of legislature, can we assuredly say that it is merely doing so to create an emotional appeal to said legislature?

An ideal society is made from the ideals of those who created it? LOL, yeah. The words seem to flow and connect very well..LOL...but it is only ideal to those who created it. As time goes by ideals change.

Anarchism in and of itself is rarely used to make a society. Anarchism in and of itself is just anti-authoritarianism. They usually attach ideologies to it. I like Anarcho-syndicalism. Anarcho socialism is fine as well. You can basically call it left wing civil libertarianism. Justice in an anarcho society? Well, it depends on what they ideology attached is about. Anarcho socialists and syndicates consider justice to be equal reward for all members of society. We are in it together, and we all get to share the rewards. Justice to them (and me pretty much) is tearing the fucking banks down and telling the bankers to get a productive job. Kicking the theives in wallstreet out on their asses and tell them to get a productive job. Make all land common ownership. Tell the top 1% they no longer own 40% of America and to get the fuck out and find some productive work instead of being a fucking leech of the people.

Thats for starters.

Well, of course many people will call me a theif. Some may even call for my long term inprisonment and possible execution. Some may even call me a hater of America and even treasonous. They will claim that I would cause a great injustice to the country, the bankers, the paper shufflers, the fucking percentage crunchers and those fucking stock swindlers. "they earned it fair and square and you are suggesting mass theivery".

I argue they fucking played the system, bribed our politicians, stole our welfare and retirement, set the rules and stole as much as they could from honest hard working families and then even went so far as to conspire to pay those hard workers less money for more hours... Returning that wealth to the citizens would be a great justice, and I would celebrate in the streets when that day comes.

Which side is inherently correct?

I always enjoy seeing the deeply held opinions of others. They can often reveal much about the individual's character and thought process. That being said, your statement about ideologies being attached to a supreme ideology is an interesting one. From this, can we say that societies need a certain set of ideologies (although this set may change) to be established? The question then becomes, is justice an ideology which is needed?

justice to be equal reward for all members of society. We are in it together, and we all get to share the rewards.

I don't want to assume a meaning from this definition, so if you could elaborate a bit in a more general sense it would be appreciated. The example you gave about "tearing the fucking banks down" sounds like a one-sided justice. Is justice always one-sided?

Which side is inherently correct?

You wouldn't like my answer

That is currently what is happening world wide. Every country is different. Even in America each state is different, and even towns are run different. People get tired of it and change it, violent or not. Some get invaded, etc...etc...ergo Absurdity...in a circular motion.

I would like to discuss this further, but I feel that it would get off the topic of the OP. From your statements, however, I'm assuming you're a fan of Marxist philosophy? It's interesting that you can pair absurdity with circular motion - almost two ends of the spectrum.

Where is the justice of political power if it executes the murderer and jails the plunderer, and then itself marches upon neighboring lands, killing thousands and pillaging the very hills?
Khalil Gibran

So, true justice cannot be contradictory to its actions? I love the quote, but I'm just trying to get to a fundamental level.