Justice for All

[dukealien]

@JaggedEdge - Repetition can help nail down the comparison, maybe.  Or not.

One is said to have done someone an injustice when one has accused him of something he didn't do; not sure where that idiom originated, and it is admittedly somewhat archaic.  And denied, as a concept, by the woke.

@CRNDLSM -

You're paralleling a group of people who are born into an already disadvantaged state, to a group of people who choose to promote the institution that maintains that disadvantage.  I think your scales are too off balance to start, like comparing the value of wares and goods with the life of the men who were murdered.

Although you are free to interpret the work according to your lights - that's the nature of critique, and interpretation generally even when using the lens of critical race studies - what this work actually compares (or parallels) is attributing bad qualities of some members of a group to all members of the group, to attributing bad qualities of some members of another group to all members of that group.  The parallel is exact, though the closing lines do contain the ethical assertion that refusing to accept that parallel, exact as it is, constitutes an injustice.

Thanks for the read, and your interpretation.