What is social justice.

This is a serious question.  I keep hearing people chanting for social justice, but I have never really understood what they were seeking.

Before writing this piece, I sensed that social justice was one of those tools used by members of the political left to claim a higher morality and higher virtuosity so as to implement their destructive ideas.  Remember, when it comes to the political left, it’s not about outcomes but intentions.  Notwithstanding and not keeping the appropriate company who might explain it to me, I decided to ask Professor Google who defined social justice as:

justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.

So basically, and correct me if I am wrong here, what is claimed is that there are people in our society who have wealth, opportunities and privileges and those who don’t; and the role of social justice champions is to equalize wealth, opportunities and privileges across society.  Sounds to me that social-justice is the nouveau expression for social-ism.

Last I checked, socialism is not about creating wealth or opportunities, but redistributing them by taking from one group and giving to another.  From wealth redistribution to affirmative action.  And importantly, those redistributing taking a handsome fee for their services.

Advocates of such policies seem to have no interest in wealth creation or opportunity expansion.

One might think that after watching India and China over the past 20 years it might be obvious that the only way to reduce poverty and increase opportunity is not through redistribution but creation.  Hundreds of millions moved out of poverty, not through government planning, redistribution and regulation, but through wealth creation.

The only way to reduce poverty is to create wealth.  The only way to reduce privilege is to increase opportunity.  And when it comes to who does what, it is the people who create the wealth that reduce the poverty.  It is not the people who redistribute the wealth.

As Abraham Lincoln said:

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.

But the problem here seems to be that the political left claim to want to help people while they are poor when what they really want to go to intimate inner city cocktail parties and say they help poor people.  Sadly, the truth is that their interest is in keeping people poor because otherwise, from where would come their false morality.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

80 Responses to What is social justice.

  1. Nicholas (Unlicensed Joker!) Gray

    Some columnist decided to satirise ‘Social Justice’ by referring to ‘Cosmic Justice’! Why should the dinosaurs have been wiped out? Bring them back! That sort of thing. Mocking laughter can be the best medicine.

  2. Baldrick

    Social Justice is a Marxist social construct.

  3. Boambee John

    Those who claim to seek “social justice” (I will not call them social justice warriors, even as an insult) confuse equality of opportunity with equality of outcome.

    Genuine equality of opportunity cannot produce equality of outcome because people are different. As a simple example, not everyone who wishes to pilot a jetliner will, because not all have the ability. When asked if they would be happy to fly in an aircraft with an “equality of outcome” pilot, I suspect that most would say no.

    Even financial equality of outcome would not really appeal to those campaigners. Ask them if they believe that all staff in a school, principal, school secretary, librarian, classroom teachers, janitor, should all be paid the same, again I suspect that the proposition would be rejected.

    Social justice is just an extreme form of virtue signalling, its proponents would run a mile if it were to be applied to them.

  4. Mark

    Hence ‘global warming’. ‘Fighting’ it is an even more effective way to destroy wealth than socialism.
    My current litmus test for the maddies is the tearful farewell to Castro. A great list, including the Pope. What’s a few tens of thousands of deaths and the destruction of a country’s wealth to a Pope, after all.

  5. social justice is the opposite of natural justice, it is mob rule given wings by marxist c*nts.

  6. Roger

    Sadly, the truth is that their interest is in keeping people poor because otherwise, from where would come their false morality.

    To the casual observer it may seem oddly inconsistent that the same people who bemoan the impact of white settlement on the indigenous folk and champion the environment also demand higher and “non-discriminatory” immigration and refugee intakes. The observer must realise that these “causes” are not ends but means, the means to destroy the British derived culture of Australia – including, of course, capitalism – that their envious souls cannot abide.

  7. Zulu Kilo Die Onuitspeeklike

    “Social Justice” was explained to me, so very earnestly, as meaning that “the gap between the “Haves” and the “have nots “shouldn’t be as wide as it was.”

    Daddy was a barrister, Mummy was a doctor, and she was studying “Yarts” at Curtin University.

  8. Qley

    _______ is just an extreme form of virtue signalling, its proponents would run a mile if it were to be applied to them

    Feel like you could post this in almost any thing here Boambee and it would fit

  9. Dr Fred Lenin.

    Baldrick. Spartacus definition of SJ he found is Pure Narxism in a different hat .marx and engels would be proud of the deviousness of their present day followers ,ulyanov.stalin maon ,polpot ,castro allende guevarra would be envious.

  10. Rob MW

    Social justice is just a twitter feed constructed by a facebook account with images by Instagram charged against the taxpayer dime.

  11. Tim Neilson

    “Social Justice” is the converse of real justice.
    In real justice, your rewards and sanctions are determined primarily on the basis of your acts and omissions, and your demographic identity is prima facie irrelevant.
    In “social justice” your rewards and sanctions are determined primarily by your demographic identity, and your acts and omissions are prima facie irrelevant.
    E.g if a Muslim Imam advocates the killing of gays – cultural sensitivity is required, but if a traditional Christian (after confirming that all Christian duties to others apply to gays as much as to anyone else) points out what the Bible says about homosexual conduct – hate speech!18C! Destroy! Destroy! Destroy!

  12. struth

    It stems from a socialists hatred of the west and everything about it.
    By the way, our schools have actual “social Justice officers”.
    Marxist public servants paid to agitate and brainwash young children into hating the west and themselves.
    They are doing irreparable damage and abusing children.
    This is before we consider safe schools and the rest of the Marxist program.
    Children are given roles as “social justice monitor”
    Hitler and Stalin would be proud.
    It all starts in our schools.

  13. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    When asked if they would be happy to fly in an aircraft with an “equality of outcome” pilot, I suspect that most would say no.

    Indeed. Pilot choice has a way of getting to the pointy end of social justice. 🙂

  14. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Social justice is just an extreme form of virtue signalling, its proponents would run a mile if it were to be applied to them.

    If they label it properly, as charity, freely chosen and given, I would have no objection. Let them pose away, give as much as they can and raise as much money as they can to be used as usefully as any given charity of their choice deems fit. The world abounds in worthy causes.

    It is when they get political about it that celebs and their ilk are laughable in the extreme.

  15. I am the Walras, Equilibrate, and Price-Take

    It’s a euphemism for redistribution of wealth from producers to favoured groups, and oppression of whipping boy groups in favour of expanded rights for favoured groups.

    Just a euphemism for leftist power politics, really.

  16. thefrolickingmole

    Its one of those curiously mutable terms which is boiled down to “gimme dat”…

    Without a source of (usually state) funds how many coursed in feminist social justice vaginal knitting do you think would be on offer?
    In generally most of the people involved have mental issues, thats not an exaggeration, read nearly any snowflakes biography and they cant stick their self appointed stigmata as proof of their victimhood.
    Yet somehow we are supposed to believe a bunch of medicated mad people are the ones best placed to define justice/sex/wealth distribution.

  17. A Lurker

    If you want to support a local business who are the good guys and supply a great product (and are currently being bullied by social justice wankers) then buy Maleny Milk.

  18. kc

    I don’t know if it has been discussed on the Cat before but just today on another conservative (if at little out there at times) website is the r/K selection theory as it (potentially) applies to politics. Easy to find on line but to my mind a fascinating theory of just what is going on in the SJW/socialist mindset. It was , to me, an awakening and I am staring to not only understand, but now feel sorry for them rather than being more of an angry old white guy. Look it up. Maybe some expert on the CAT might even undertake a review. r/K selection theory http://www.xyz.net.au/quote-day-rk-everything-k/

  19. ACTOldFart

    Adding the adjective “social” in front of any noun has the effect of changing the meaning of the phrase to the exact opposite of what any rational person would assign to the noun by itself.

  20. kc

    Just look up r/K selection theory. Pretty much explains everything

  21. john constantine

    Social Justice means never having to say you’re sorry.

  22. Social Justice means never having to say you’re sorry.

    Except when you apologise for crimes which you didn’t commit, mostly as a way of trying to shame others into doing likewise.

  23. J.H.

    What is “Social Justice”….. forcing those who attain to support those who refuse to participate…. About sums it up.

    So when a “Din doo nuffink” mugs people for their stuff, it isn’t a thug attacking a victim. It’s more like a victim taking what is rightfully theirs…. Because Social Justice.

    Simples.

  24. MAGB

    Social justice = equality of outcome = communism. This idea has been tried in a few countries and does not work. Anyone who thinks it ever will is just plain stupid.

  25. Paul

    Yes social justice is socialism and more about equality.
    This is everyone is equally poor through the distribution of wealth, equally bad opportunities, and the total removal of privilege except of course for those in charge of the government.
    Classic examples today are Venezuela and Cuba etc.

  26. amortiser

    Here is a song I wrote over 30 years ago, to the tune of Waltzing Maltilda :

    Here’s one I wrote many years ago when a certain Australian treasurer introduced retrospective legislation to curb the loss of extortionate tax revenues. It’s to the tune of Banjo Patterson’s “Waltzing Matilda”

    The Capitalist’s Lament

    Once a budding capitalist started up a business
    Under the impression that initiative was the key
    And he sang as he worked and toiled till his profits flowed
    You’ll be amazed at what’s possible when your’re free.

    Chorus:

    You’ll be amazed, you’ll be amazed you’ll be amazed at what’s possible when you’re free.

    And he sang as the dollars flowed into his bank account
    You’ll be amazed at what’s possible when your free.

    He hired a gang of workers who shared in his prosperity
    Each was dependent on the other you see
    And they sang as their pay increased with more production
    You’ll be amazed at what’s possible when you’re free.

    Chorus:

    Along came the treasurer armed with the Assessment Act
    Down came the social workers one, two, three
    Give us the dollars you’ve got in your bank account.
    You’re now working for us, don’t you see?

    And they sang as they looted the profits of the capitalist
    You’re now working for us, don’t you see?

    The harder he worked, the more they all demanded
    The burden became intolerable to bear
    He tried tax avoidance but they milked him in retrospect
    This is the age of social justice they cheered
    And they sang as they struck the fatal blow against him
    This is the age of social justice they cheered.

    Up got the capitalist and shut down his business
    You will never make me a slave said he
    And his records may be found at the bottom of the harbour
    Initiative is destroyed when man is not free

    You’ll be amazed, you’ll be amazed you’ll be amazed at what’s possible when you’re free.

  27. Muddy

    You cannot be a ‘problem solver’ and market yourself as such, and actually do what you claim you can do: solve problems (real or imagined). You’d do yourself out of a job (money, social status etc).

  28. Leo G

    So basically, and correct me if I am wrong here, what is claimed is that there are people in our society who have wealth, opportunities and privileges and those who don’t; and the role of social justice champions is to equalize wealth, opportunities and privileges across society. Sounds to me that social-justice is the nouveau expression for social-ism.

    I believe you are wrong, to the extent that you have interpreted a statement which describes scope as one defining objectives.

  29. tailgunner

    Social Justice is an amorphous blob of conflicting ideas that can mean anything that SJW’s want it to mean.
    Ugly,overweight, mentally ill people have weaponized themselves through “social justice”.
    It’s time to take out the trash. Medieval style.

  30. amortiser

    Social justice is like pregnant virginity.

  31. Entropy

    Like anything else, putting “social” in front of a word makes it the opposite.

    Justice is blind. The justice system is meant to ensure people get what they deserve. Kindness doesn’t come into it.
    Social Justice is about giving people what they do not deserve, because we are kind.

    In the old days, this was called mercy. But of course that has religious connotations, and being a gift of the the lord or at least individuals, does not have a role for Big Government. So “mercy” is out and “social justice” is in.

  32. Social Justice is all about dividing people into recognizable categories, identifying injustices caused by any one or more individuals in those categories and serving justice on the whole category.
    In other words, social justice is the very opposite of individual justice, which our modern societies are based on.
    It’s no wonder then that white middle aged men are the prime targets even if they have not done anything individually, and individuals from minorities such as blacks and Muslims are forgiven even if they have done something wrong.
    Social Justice Worriers (not a typo) are the useful idiots used by the global elite to break down our social fabric.

  33. alexnoaholdmate

    Social Justice ™ – you have something, I don’t, and therefore I deserve it.

  34. kc

    Have I been blocked for some reason? Posts will not show!

  35. CraftyNipper

    …I have never really understood what they were seeking. Easily explained. Power!

  36. Maggie Thatch

    Until recently my child was attending a private school of Wesleyan denomination. One of their core goals was to ensure children received a strong social justice education. I sat through years of listening to their middle and senior school students lecture parents and other student on left wing ideology. It took a large amount of self control not to vomit and walk out. Looking around the room I couldn’t help but think of the irony. Here was a school (one of the most expensive in Melbourne) peddling this clap trap, how could the parents accept it? Then I realised, a good chunk of the parents were left wing leaners and loved every minute of it.

  37. john constantine

    Not worth the time to intensively google ‘waleed the denouncer’ and ‘wesley’ , but here is a top hit.

    http://www.wesleycollege.net/Galleries/2014/06/Samuel-Alexander-Lecture-2014.aspx

    There was something a wesley old boy mate of mine muttered about ‘the great man’ and the school under his breath but it don’t show on google.

  38. john constantine

    Social Justice demands communal punishment of the proles, for the collective sins of the proles, to be judged and delivered by the Social Justice Aristocracy.

  39. Leo G

    In other words, social justice is the very opposite of individual justice, which our modern societies are based on.

    I believe social justice is the extension of individual justice to groups. I don’t think any society is based on it’s justice system (least of all the various Law Society groups).
    Our leftist ‘friends’ conflate the notion to mean socialist justice, where the exercise of authority in vindication of the right of an elite class obviates the right of each individual (including the non-elites).

  40. Stackja

    Socialist ‘justice’ warriors want socialism.

  41. 2dogs

    “Social justice” is a cover up term, in the same vein as the Left used “climate change” to replace “global warming”.

    It is needed because affirmative action is plainly not “equality”, but it is “social justice”.

  42. Social justice theory is a mandatory narrativistic prelude to marxist diatribe.

    Simples!

  43. I meant “otherwise indigestible” marxist narrative.

  44. kc

    Seems like the “theory which shall not be named” is blocked from mention when discussing politics and/or SWJ’s. Care to enlighted me? 3rd post on same subject trying to even get posted. Have now deleted the name of said “theory”.

  45. kc

    Nope. that didn’t work either! Banned?

  46. When you qualify something, you are making exceptions to it. This is all well and good when trying to avoid broad generalisations, but when you qualify an absolute, you are putting a “but” after it.

    Qualifying justice is taking a peek at who’s in the dock before making a decision.

  47. marcus w

    I love this site .. I get so much ” ammo” for my next dinner party with my smug leftie mates ..
    If anyone is bored/retired/incarcerated could they please collate a list of killer put downs/argument winners that the various cat contributors provide on here .

  48. Andrew

    My view is a just allocation of the wealth I earn (by voluntary paying clients) is all I earn, LESS. a poll tax that reflects my per capita claim on the common wealth. (Policing, defence, roads, operating losses of SOE railways.)

    In the interests of not being murdered by starving unemployed hoards for the $20 in my pocket, I further offer ex gratia a small % to fund welfare for the truly needy and deserving (subject to some mutual obligation undertakings).

  49. marcus w

    In the interests of not being murdered by starving unemployed hoards for the $20 in my pocket, I further offer ex gratia a small % to fund welfare for the truly needy and deserving (subject to some mutual obligation undertakings).

    so …… advocating a protection racket ?

  50. marcus w

    Although I do agree with you Andrew

  51. Michael Cunningham aka Faustino aka Genghis Cunn

    An interesting article on entropy by Steven Pinker at Edge-org includes a paragraph on poverty which should be widely disseminated:
    “Poverty, too, needs no explanation. In a world governed by entropy and evolution, it is the default state of humankind. Matter does not just arrange itself into shelter or clothing, and living things do everything they can not to become our food. What needs to be explained is wealth. Yet most discussions of poverty consist of arguments about whom to blame for it.”

  52. Andrew

    Just defining “fairness” vs “charity” Marcus. Some people incorrectly define “fair” as a flat tax. Of course, that’s wildly unfair. If I earn 10x someone else I pay 10x the tax but receive LESS (I can be assumed to have private health insurance.) Nothing remotely fair about that. Fair is a poll tax.

  53. Zulu Kilo Die Onuitspeeklike

    If anyone is bored/retired/incarcerated could they please collate a list of killer put downs/argument winners that the various cat contributors provide on here .

    Long standing friends of the family (now both gone to God) fled Hungary in 1956, hiding – in the best Scarlett Pimpernel tradition – under a load of potatoes.

    They maintained all their lives that socialism should be the same as any other scientific experiment – tried out on animals, before its use on human beings was allowed.

  54. One might think that after watching India and China over the past 20 years it might be obvious that the only way to reduce poverty and increase opportunity is not through redistribution but creation. Hundreds of millions moved out of poverty, not through government planning, redistribution and regulation, but through wealth creation.

    Spartacus: if you think China’s government hasn’t planned its economy, you might need to check your sources.

    As for the rest of your twaddle, it’s just boring boilerplate tribalism.

    So basically, and correct me if I am wrong here, what is claimed is that there are people in our society who have wealth, opportunities and privileges and those who don’t; and the role of social justice champions is to equalize wealth, opportunities and privileges across society. Sounds to me that social-justice is the nouveau expression for social-ism.

    No. Taking America as an example, worker productivity has continued to grow at much the same rate since WW2 ended, yet wages for all but the 1% have been practically flat since Reagan was elected (see figure 2). How is it that the 1% have captured ALL of the rents from economic improvement in the last 35 years in America? How is that fair? That is what social justice is about.

  55. marcus w

    Thanks Andrew , never knew what a Poll tax was , thanks to you , this site and gooooooogle I am now aware . Thanks to you and all .
    Although I do wonder if the crime rate would climb by withdrawing the dole ? perhaps the “retainer” that welfare recipients receive covers some “core expenses” and crime becomes the “commission” …. just thinking aloud

  56. marcus w

    Monty , would automation be a contributor in raised worker productivity ?

  57. Tel

    Spartacus: if you think China’s government hasn’t planned its economy, you might need to check your sources.

    So tell me what changed going from mass starvation under Mao to productivity and a modern lifestyle in the present day?

    Are you going to claim that Mao was too much laissez-faire?

  58. Monty , would automation be a contributor in raised worker productivity ?

    No. This is worker productivity, not capital productivity.

  59. So tell me what changed going from mass starvation under Mao to productivity and a modern lifestyle in the present day?

    Are you going to claim that Mao was too much laissez-faire?

    It wasn’t by embracing the Washington Consensus, Tel. The Chinese still plan their economy to a large extent.

  60. Tel

    How is it that the 1% have captured ALL of the rents from economic improvement in the last 35 years in America?

    Well they haven’t, most of the productivity improvement went into more expensive healthcare which the majority of Americans got through their employer. Thus, the fringe benefit of ridiculously overpriced healthcare became the economic improvement bestowed on those workers (they didn’t get a choice in this matter). The SJW brigade then refuse to count that by only looking at paid wages and ignoring fringe benefit packages.

    https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/Warshawsky-Earnings-Inequality-v2.pdf

    How is that fair? That is what social justice is about.

    Who gets to decide what’s fair?

    The main reason healthcare is so expensive is thanks to generations of government interference. Hospitals are forced to handle emergency patients who can’t pay and never intend to pay… consequence? Someone else pays, i.e. healthcare for everyone else is more expensive in order to cover the gap. Then there’s the outrageous government-imposed costs of getting new drugs through the approval process which makes a lot of narrowly applicable drugs not even worth bringing to market, thus people with rare but potentially treatable diseases are deprived of medicine even after the suitable medicine has been discovered because of government regulations. How is that fair?

    Then we could talk about how if employers buy you healthcare it becomes tax deductable, but if ordinary workers buy private healthcare it’s not tax deductable (under Obamacare some private health expenses are tax deductable, but like everything from the government, it’s complicated so then you need to hire an expert just to figure out how you are allowed to spend your own money). How is that fair?

  61. Tel

    It wasn’t by embracing the Washington Consensus, Tel.

    Dodging the question then.

  62. Tel

    China’s Great Leap, and what it did to people.

    https://youtu.be/4srwSkD05ws

  63. Leo G

    “Poverty, too, needs no explanation. In a world governed by entropy and evolution, it is the default state of humankind. …”

    It seems that, for economists, entropy is a doctrine of inevitable social degeneration to a state of maximum socialist homogeneity.

  64. FFS Tel, if you’re going to roll out a Dubbya-era inequality denier, then you’re not being serious. Warshawsky’s argument is ridiculous on its face. If all of the productivity improvements have been captured by healthcare costs paid by employers, as he claims, how is it that the 1%’s wealth has skyrocketed? The sums don’t add up.

    In any case, your side is about to gut the ACA which led to drastic lowering of healthcare cost rises, showing that your mob doesn’t care about this issue in the first place.

  65. I’m not an expert in Chinese history, Tel. Google it, I’m not going to do your homework for you. Not sure why you posted that video, I wasn’t praising the Chinese.

  66. marcus w

    #2256809, posted on January 9, 2017 at 8:20 pm

    Monty , would automation be a contributor in raised worker productivity ?

    No. This is worker productivity, not capital productivity.

    Forgive my ignorance on this , but how would we delineate these contributions .? .. would a new fork lift or stapler or broom contribute to productivity and not be counted as a capital contribution ?

  67. Forgive my ignorance on this , but how would we delineate these contributions .? .. would a new fork lift or stapler or broom contribute to productivity and not be counted as a capital contribution ?

    Simplest way to think about it: people are workers, things are capital.

  68. marcus w

    I get that Monty , but if a factory employs 100 people and makes 1000 brooms , then thanks to the new forklift and stapler they make 1200 brooms this year for the same worker ratio that would be seen as a productivity gain but not attributed to the forklift … again , I aint that smart just an observation on my part .

  69. Tel

    I’m not an expert in Chinese history, Tel.

    Nice to see you get around to admitting the obvious.

    Google it, I’m not going to do your homework for you.

    There’s no homework required, the answer was given to you already, here’s the key quote:

    Hundreds of millions moved out of poverty, not through government planning, redistribution and regulation, but through wealth creation.

    Read it slowly (moving your lips is OK, no one is watching), then watch the video.

  70. Tel, here are the salient facts:

    1. China is the world’s largest economy.
    2. China’s economy is still centrally planned for the most part.
    3. China is not an advertisement for unregulated capitalism.

    It’s not a difficult logical train of thought to grasp.

  71. justin

    While the thrust of your article is ok the problem with the centre right is that it is all macro while the Left are more tactically micro. You talk about creating wealth oblivious to how wealth is created in the trenches. In the trenches it is a blood sport. Excess regulation, over inflated labour costs, every hand of government in your pocket, before taxation, sell out trade agreements, government distortion of markets through legislation, taxation and international relations, monetary and fiscal misadventure, budget blow outs, nanny statism, and industrial relations madness. These areas need micro analysis to shut down. Build the case for change brick by brick. High level posturing and complaining is inadequate.

  72. ella answer-key

    Michael Cunningham @ 7.45pm:

    RE Stephen Pinker

    It is a category mistake to contrast cultural and biological explanations of behaviour – a serious error.

  73. ella answer-key

    Spartacus is 177.8cm and short compared to Australian basketballer, Thon Maker, and tall compared to M0nty horse jockey – relativists of the social justice kind would say truth is not absolute.

    The fact is Spartacus is short, compared to Thon Maker. Spartacus is tall compared to M0nty horse jockey. Those are two absolute facts.

  74. Nerblnob

    Qualifying justice is taking a peek at who’s in the dock before making a decision.

    Well put.

    While the thrust of your article is ok the problem with the centre right is that it is all macro while the Left are more tactically micro.

    I agree that this is where the left are tactically superior. They don’t argue a big philosophical agenda except to push vague and subjective concepts prefixed with “social – ”

    Most of their micro-annoyances are just accepted by the public as “fairness”, preventing some social evil , or “the way things are” and are not linked in their minds to creeping state control.

    “Social licence” is actually the most pernicious of these concepts.

  75. ella answer-key

    Nerb.

    Have you noticed this abstraction make an appearance: “intergenerational intimacy”?

  76. I am Spartacus

    Dear m0nty

    1 – China is NOW the world’s largest economy (depending on how you measure). This was not the case 20 years ago.
    2 – Less of China’s economy is centrally planned than 20 years ago. Imagine how big China would be if less of its economy was centrally planned.
    3 – There is no place in the world that has unregulated capitalism – not China, not Australia, not the USA. Your 3rd point is irrelevant.

    You do the maths.

    There is also a difference between regulation and redistribution and regulation and central planning. If you don’t agree, have a look at the differences between North and South Korea and East and West Germany.

  77. Tom

    Is that you, Bird?

    Excellent skills, Mont. Paging Doomlord in Aisle 6.

  78. ella answer-key

    Tom,
    Pour a strong cup of coffee.

    The Doomlord is zzzzzzzzz.

    I’ve seen that nasty ‘abtstacfion’ around. The statement to Nerb was a warning to Nerb and the rest to keep an eye on those using it.

  79. alexnoaholdmate

    That’s Bird, right?

    Can’t wait for a lecture about how the 1% are all evil J o o o s…

Comments are closed.