> You may (obviously do) regard injustice perpetrated against others as
> "justifiable" when you feel some benefit from it. You may (obviously
> do) agree with the "reasoning" of the Wolf in the Aesop/LaFontaine
> fable. What you do not do is deny that the "harsh treatment" is
> unjust, or that you would rightly protest it as unjust if it was done
> to (rather than for) you, or that everyone else similarly victimized
> would make the same protest and be right to do so.
>
> Shane Mage
In fact, I do deny that harsh treatment is always unjust. So you're on the horns of (another) dilemma.
1. You can discount or disregard my viewpoint. This concedes that your notion of "universal" justice is not in fact universal; it can only be implemented by persuading or coercing people like me to accept your viewpoint.
2. You can acknowledge that thoughtful people do not share your conception of justice. This also undermines your claim that your notion of "universal" justice is not universal.
You seem to have painted yourself into a corner; perhaps I don't see your point?
Miles