Counter-Racism - Work/Study Project

Secure Donations

FAQ

Memberlist

Profile

Injustice or justice?

Counter-Racism Work/Study Project Forum Index -> Counter-Racism Q&A

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Albert

Joined: 03 Aug 2021
Posts: 115

Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2025 4:32 am Post subject: Injustice or justice?

If a particular person is a sole reason why some people, who need constructive help, are unable to get that help, at the same time, the person is responsible of some and most people being mistreated on a regular basis. Is getting rid of that person, by lets say, execution, a form of injustice to that particular person(executed), and/or a form of justice to the people(being mistreated and/or being denied constructive help by the executed)?

Edward Williams
Site Admin

Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3339
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2025 10:41 am Post subject: Re: Injustice or justice?

Albert wrote:

If a particular person is a sole reason why some people, who need constructive help, are unable to get that help, at the same time, the person is responsible of some and most people being mistreated on a regular basis. Is getting rid of that person, by lets say, execution, a form of injustice to that particular person(executed), and/or a form of justice to the people(being mistreated and/or being denied constructive help by the executed)?

One suggestion, try not to use the term "form of" as practically anything can be a "form of" anything else.

Now to your question. My answer; No. That is not justice as defined in the link below.

https://www.counter-racism.com/cgi-bin/work-study/viewtopic.php?p=12548#12548

I had this conversation with Mr. Fuller...maybe 2003 or 2004...surrounding the term "Maximum-Emergency Compensatory Justice", a term that was in his first United-Independent Compensatory Code/System/Concept book. I told Mr. Fuller that killing a bunch of people is not a just act. Of course this was back when the definition in his book was still "balance between people".

Mr. Fuller was very resistant to changing any part of his book, even though he was in the process of writing a new book. We talked on the phone for about 30 minutes before he actually agreed with me and agreed to change the name of that act to Maximum-Emergency Compensatory Action, a term I suggested. I think James Jones, a black male who used to post here, and I came up with the term during one of our conversations. We came up with a list to present to Mr. Fuller and from that list Mr. Fuller chose "Maximum-Emergency Compensatory Action".

Mr. Fuller redefined justice from "balance between people" to the definition in the above link, and as you can see, by definition, justice does not include killing a bunch of people.

I said all of that to say this...it really boils down to the definition of justice you use. Some people define justice as "an eye for an eye". With that definition, depending on how you interpret what it means, killing someone may be considered justice.

But with this definition of justice you can't mistreat people, which means you have to treat all people the same. This means if you kill someone, in order to not mistreat anyone, you have to kill everyone in the known universe.

Now how do you balance that with the second half of the definition in which you have to guarantee the person who needs help the most gets the most constructive help? Because it may turn out that the people you are killing and are about to breathe their last breath are the people who need the most constructive help. This is part of the balance in the original definition ("balance between people") that people should think about, talk about and act on daily.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?

Albert

Joined: 03 Aug 2021
Posts: 115

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2025 5:53 am Post subject: Re: Injustice or justice?

Edward Williams wrote:

One suggestion, try not to use the term "form of" as practically anything can be a "form of" anything else.

Thank you for the correction. I will most definitely keep this in mind. I am still learning, indeed.

Edward Williams wrote:

Now to your question. My answer; No. That is not justice as defined in the link below.

https://www.counter-racism.com/cgi-bin/work-study/viewtopic.php?p=12548#12548

I had this conversation with Mr. Fuller...maybe 2003 or 2004...surrounding the term "Maximum-Emergency Compensatory Justice", a term that was in his first United-Independent Compensatory Code/System/Concept book. I told Mr. Fuller that killing a bunch of people is not a just act. Of course this was back when the definition in his book was still "balance between people".

Mr. Fuller was very resistant to changing any part of his book, even though he was in the process of writing a new book. We talked on the phone for about 30 minutes before he actually agreed with me and agreed to change the name of that act to Maximum-Emergency Compensatory Action, a term I suggested. I think James Jones, a black male who used to post here, and I came up with the term during one of our conversations. We came up with a list to present to Mr. Fuller and from that list Mr. Fuller chose "Maximum-Emergency Compensatory Action".

Mr. Fuller redefined justice from "balance between people" to the definition in the above link, and as you can see, by definition, justice does not include killing a bunch of people.

I said all of that to say this...it really boils down to the definition of justice you use. Some people define justice as "an eye for an eye". With that definition, depending on how you interpret what it means, killing someone may be considered justice.

But with this definition of justice you can't mistreat people, which means you have to treat all people the same. This means if you kill someone, in order to not mistreat anyone, you have to kill everyone in the known universe.

Now how do you balance that with the second half of the definition in which you have to guarantee the person who needs help the most gets the most constructive help? Because it may turn out that the people you are killing and are about to breathe their last breath are the people who need the most constructive help. This is part of the balance in the original definition ("balance between people") that people should think about, talk about and act on daily.

Mr Fuller had always insisted on people following logic, and if I am correct, your reasoning with him did demonstrate just that. Because by putting the question to him about M.E.C.J. and subsequently offering suggestions on what it could be renamed to, M.E.C.A. showed how you were focussed on the subject of replacing racism white supremacy with justice and not on the person.

If you had been "following" Mr Fuller, instead of logic, you would have just accepted everything he had to present without questions. Thank you, again for this.

Edward Williams
Site Admin

Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 3339
Location: I am from everywhere I've ever been and everywhere I've never been

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2025 10:17 am Post subject: Re: Injustice or justice?

Albert wrote:

Yes sir, that is correct. And unfortunately, many non-white people follow Mr. Fuller instead of following THE LOGIC (Counter-Racism Logic). They accept what he says as being true, and accept what any other people say as being true, without question.

It has always been my position that revealing truth, in a worldwide SYSTEM of deception, is more important than honoring or giving accolades to anyone.
_________________
What is the reason YOU were born into a SYSTEM of INJUSTICE if not to replace it with a SYSTEM of JUSTICE?

Display posts from previous:

	Counter-Racism Work/Study Project Forum Index -> Counter-Racism Q&A	All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum